From Software responds to Dark Souls II graphics downgrade concerns
- Thread starter Poetic.Injustice
- Start date
FROM hates gamers. That's why they make games that are fun to play.
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
I am disappointed in you FROM. Severely.
Liberty4all
Banned
Oh I wouldn't be so sure that the hardware companies aren't listening to customer's complaints. At least one of them is.
I apologize..Perhaps pressured and rushed are the right words.
Overall, Dark Souls the first was tons more polished graphically and artistically.
Perhaps the developers weren't under as much pressure.
I don't mean to offend FROM.They put out a wonderful game still.
Pyramid head
Banned
Awesome work again.
;_;
Christ. Is there any particular reason why they couldn't have at least baked the lighting into the textures if dynamic lights create such an issue for their engine?
I've also no clue why they seem to have drained all of the colour from the textures on the ground. That's not a performance thing, it's almost as if they prefer the grey on grey on grey look.
Why they kept promoting the game as the early versions (in their official published screenshots, all interviews talking about new engine and lighting system) and not showing the huge downgrade till just a week before the release where the downgrade was done months before that. again the misleading and false advertising is the issue here.
Dragon Puncher
Member
Serious question. Would it have been better if Dark Souls 2 kept the lightning effects, but ran like garbage on consoles?
The frame rate isn't even perfect now, I can only image the experience would be much worse without the downgrade.
Edit: Not defending the frequent practice of showing games of in builds that doesn't represent the final product. It sucks no matter which company does it. But I don't come to souls games for the graphics.
The frame rate isn't even perfect now, I can only image the experience would be much worse without the downgrade.
Edit: Not defending the frequent practice of showing games of in builds that doesn't represent the final product. It sucks no matter which company does it. But I don't come to souls games for the graphics.
Paracelsus
Member
I make fun games, therefore I am entitled to make said games look like arse.
Then are developers delivering on both entitled to ask for twice your money?
FROM wasn't advertising shit.
Not from me, but I imagine some people would pay more. I will by fun games regardless of the graphics. I play games with ASCII graphics but with great game play on a regular basis. This is because I love the mechanics of the games, not because of the pretty graphics.
John Rabbit
Banned
what does it say about the marketing/hype cycle of the current industry when i purposely didn't follow anything about this game past it's announcement, and i don't have these feelings of being lied to and betrayed?
am i in the wrong because i didn't buy into whatever From/Namco was apparently selling in the interim? should be outraged despite never being under any assumption that what was shown at the reveal would be the actual game that was delivered? i even thought at the time they were bullshots because this is From Software we're talking about. their games have consistently been graphically undercooked since the original King's Field. i know exactly what to expect from this developer and by that account they've delivered in spades: a technically janky action game rife with fantastic style and artistic vision that's a blast to play.
i can understand being upset about the change, but this reaction has gone from justified and understandable to simply malicious and unreasonable. the game is the game; they aren't going to suddenly release a patch that fixes all your issues. say you're disappointed, let the company know, and then don't buy their product. this incessant comparison of the same images over-and-over-and-over quite literally goes nowhere. it's not constructive, and it's not going to fix whatever problems exist or are perceived with the game. i'm sorry that for a large (or just incredibly vocal) portion of you out there, that this game is not worth playing or purchasing because of the change, but you're missing out on potentially the best release in this series to date.
i respect the decision not to buy it under the pretense that it isn't what you expected, but to go one step further and insinuate that From Software purposely and knowingly spent time, energy, and money to produce assets and technology that they knew would never actually get released is preposterous and signifies a massive misunderstanding of how game development works.
as for this claim that the game looks worse than the first Dark Souls, i advise all of you to book an appointment with an optometrist immediately.
am i in the wrong because i didn't buy into whatever From/Namco was apparently selling in the interim? should be outraged despite never being under any assumption that what was shown at the reveal would be the actual game that was delivered? i even thought at the time they were bullshots because this is From Software we're talking about. their games have consistently been graphically undercooked since the original King's Field. i know exactly what to expect from this developer and by that account they've delivered in spades: a technically janky action game rife with fantastic style and artistic vision that's a blast to play.
i can understand being upset about the change, but this reaction has gone from justified and understandable to simply malicious and unreasonable. the game is the game; they aren't going to suddenly release a patch that fixes all your issues. say you're disappointed, let the company know, and then don't buy their product. this incessant comparison of the same images over-and-over-and-over quite literally goes nowhere. it's not constructive, and it's not going to fix whatever problems exist or are perceived with the game. i'm sorry that for a large (or just incredibly vocal) portion of you out there, that this game is not worth playing or purchasing because of the change, but you're missing out on potentially the best release in this series to date.
i respect the decision not to buy it under the pretense that it isn't what you expected, but to go one step further and insinuate that From Software purposely and knowingly spent time, energy, and money to produce assets and technology that they knew would never actually get released is preposterous and signifies a massive misunderstanding of how game development works.
as for this claim that the game looks worse than the first Dark Souls, i advise all of you to book an appointment with an optometrist immediately.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
The big laugh for me is people being so pissy about graphics on platforms that are basically on their way out. Its like moaning about PS2 graphics in 2007
FROM own the IP and are even publishing DS2 themselves in Japan.
Yeah, usually when they make a PC version they don't make it with _completely_ different assets these days. So, don't count on it.
The PC version is not a port this time though, it's supposed to be the lead platform, so any downgrades they had to made to make it run acceptably on consoles have no reason to be cut from PC at all.
From has been saying over the entire development process that it is PC lead platform and the engine is being designed with PC/next-gen in mind.
I'm inclined to believe them.
FairXchange
Member
The big laugh for me is people being so pissy about graphics on platforms that are basically on their way out. Its like moaning about PS2 graphics in 2007
That's another angle to this whole controversy that I wholeheartedly agree with.
I believe I've said it in another thread, but I'll repeat it here. I'm not upset with From for having to downgrade the graphics based on performance issues. If there's anything to be upset about, it's the fact that From Software decided early on to develop on PS3 and 360 for the Dark Souls sequel and not the next-gen consoles.
It probably made financial sense to develop for the old generation consoles, and they had familiarity with the respective hardware, but it resulted in the cutbacks in graphical effects that many seem to be infuriated about now. That's what you could expect when you develop on last gen hardware, I'm shocked that some are actually surprised.
I definitely believe them on this, I just don't know if they want to release a version that may play completely different like it will if all those grey areas are pitch black on PC. That's why I want footage or at least info on the PC version. I absolutely believe From Software, but that still doesn't mean we're getting the TGS build
IAmRandom31
Banned
Yeah I agree. They had to know their development cycle. I'm sure it has more to do with userbase / profits then anything else.
I would be shocked if the PS4 Dark Souls 2 port doesn't release in 2014.
It looks like they built an engine that was too much for the current gen consoles and had to change it up to fit. Now they can go back to working with the original engine and beef it up a bit for Holiday 2014 release.
You counting those frames, bro?
TriniTrin
war of titties grampa
I think that's supposed to be snow....
I wouldn't get your hopes up. Where did FROM say this? I found an article on IGN that says something similar:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/02/26/dark-souls-2-engine-created-with-next-gen-in-mind
However the article at the end just states they used middleware for the engine that is compatible with next gen hardware. Nothing specific to Dark Souls 2.
*Sorry read your post too fast. You commented on the engine specifically. The engine doesn't mean DS2 is coming to PS4 or Xbone though.
IncandescentPrecept
Banned
So, how many are not happy with this and yet gave Namco your money?
Sure? I mean it's noticeable.
John Rabbit
Banned
there are several locations where the framerate in the ps3 version goes over 30fps. i mean there's plenty of places it's total garbage too.
I thought the PS3 version was v-sync'd to 30.
Metroid-Squadron
Banned
When you look at the empty sky, I'm sure.
snesfanboy
Banned
there are 2 options available to you, which one do you choose (and this is all hypothetical, just as an example)
1) you have just bought a Ferrari through a webshop, it has been advertised with pictures and data files, on the picture it shows the paint job on it is a shiny red color, when you get the car at home, everything is correct, yet it's a pale red color, you contact the vendor, their response : "sorry man, seems like the paint we used looses its shinyness about 3 days after, it's a pale red color, but hey, she really purs, you know?"
2) you have just bought a Ferrari through a webshop, it has been advertised with pictures and data files, on the picture it shows the paint job on it is a shiny red color, 1 month before the car gets delivered, you receive an update on the webshop page, it says "due to the exclusive paint we've used, we can't guarantee the shinyness of the paint job, it's still red but it's going to a pale kind of red"
this also means that the Ferrari will still be a fucking beast on the road
1) you have just bought a Ferrari through a webshop, it has been advertised with pictures and data files, on the picture it shows the paint job on it is a shiny red color, when you get the car at home, everything is correct, yet it's a pale red color, you contact the vendor, their response : "sorry man, seems like the paint we used looses its shinyness about 3 days after, it's a pale red color, but hey, she really purs, you know?"
2) you have just bought a Ferrari through a webshop, it has been advertised with pictures and data files, on the picture it shows the paint job on it is a shiny red color, 1 month before the car gets delivered, you receive an update on the webshop page, it says "due to the exclusive paint we've used, we can't guarantee the shinyness of the paint job, it's still red but it's going to a pale kind of red"
this also means that the Ferrari will still be a fucking beast on the road
swazzyswess
Member
As someone without a gaming PC and hence no access to awesome frame rates, there are parts of Dark Souls 2 in enclosed areas that are so smooth it's almost unnatural to me. I don't know if it ever reaches 60 FPS, but there are a lot of places that are way, way, WAY smoother than anything in the previous two games. And nothing remotely as bad as Blighttown (so far).
Have you played the game yet? Seems like you want it to be bad.
It was around the bonfire and while running through some huts opening a chest, and a couple other random locations.
lazer_bean
Member
The big laugh for me is people being so pissy about graphics on platforms that are basically on their way out. Its like moaning about PS2 graphics in 2007
I'm sure that many people would rather play Dark Souls 2 than any game on new gen platforms though
Windom Earle
Member
Congratulations. Let's lock this thread up then guys.
The game hits higher framerates quite often in self contained areas. Even with enemies running around.
According to the DF article, it is.
Openworldgamer47
Banned
As a certified graphic whore I'm anxious for the game to find its way to next gen. Even if I'm already almost done it on PS3.
If you are a certified graphics whore, then aren't you getting the PC version?
I would be inclined to go with their analysis on that one.
I am watching the DF footage right now and the framerate counter hits mid 40s and above on PS3 for the footage they captured.
In the actual article "Unlike previous games, both PS3 and 360 versions run with no frame-rate cap whatsoever."
Does it? I only remember reading that it was at 30 and below (my internet is pretty bad so I don't watch the videos most times).
Cathedral of Blue is one single room with a boss fight. How on earth can that be one of your favorite areas?
Read the article again.
Lock if more than one side of story is posted?
Because
it's the the Anor Londo castle from Dark Souls 1, making it have god teir exterior design
Beerman462
Member
360 vs PS3 frame-rate Test
PS3 stays at 28-34 fps most of the time. It has some dips down to the 22-26 fps range and occasionally hits 40 fps. 360 is generally 8-10 fps faster, but with some tearing.
hitsugi
Member
uh, what? why is the disc version screwed up? couldn't this be rectified with a patch?
Openworldgamer47
Banned
Seeing as this is not a shooter and were talking next gen there won't be a difference at all really. I'm a graphics whore but can deal with a better experience on a console. Dark souls 2 was said to literally be built for next gen, sooooooo.....
All I really want them to do is patch V-sync into the 360 version, it hurts my eyes so much with all the tearing.
First thing I did was install the game on 360, and I still have all these issues.
First thing I did was install the game on 360, and I still have all these issues.
Beerman462
Member
Yeah I wonder how that would have worked out. watching the comparison video again and both versions hit like 24-26 fps when the player is fighting in water.
Similar threads
- Poll