Rob
Moderator
Hi people,
Over here @Komuflage asked what was troubling with me about Dark Souls on the PC, following application of the 60fps and 1080p hacks, and using the Xbox controller...
Just like @Psychomorph, I gave up with Dark Souls 1, but I'm trying to keep an open mind about Dark Souls 2, given that they've actually designed it with the PC in mind. Fingers crossed and hope for the best!!!
Anyway, ready for a wall of text? You asked for it!!!
Pretty much my only major problem with the Dark Souls port was the graphics. I found the controls on the Xbox controller to be incredibly unintuitive and irritating, but something like that wouldn't have stopped me from playing it enough to really get into it - I know that sometimes it takes some time to get used to controls, a bit like with The Witcher 2 (which is fantastic... apart from the unfortunately poor-quality shadows).
Obviously the graphics were awful before unlocking the higher resolutions, but even at 1920x1200 I thought the game looked awful. Sure, it was being displayed at a higher resolution, but the graphical fidelity just wasn't there. The number of polys was way too low, the textures looked really flat, and the "high res" texture mods didn't really improve things at all. Making a "high res" texture pack for this game seemed a bit like flogging a dead horse, so to speak. I suppose that makes sense, because if Dark Souls was intended to played at low resolution on hardware with limited power (consoles), then why would the devs invest time & money making the graphics better than the game would ultimately be played at? Consequently, it was made with poor quality models and textures.
Further to the 3D graphics, I just couldn't live with the poor quality HUD either. In particular, the text and avatars looked distinctly pixelated and fuzzy. In fact, I think the ongoing annoyance of the HUD is what finally made me put Dark Souls down and never pick it up again.
All in all, I thought the graphical quality was more in the realms of games released around 2006, e.g. games that immediately come to mind are Oblivion and Dark Messiah of Might & Magic. If Dark Souls had been released prior to 2006 then I would have been happy. Alas, it was released in 2011 (or 2012 for PC), which left it way way below par, at least for me. As time moves forward expectations rise and games have to be of better quality in order to stay acceptable to me. To put it in perspective, along with Dark Souls, games such as The Witcher 2 and Deus Ex Human Revolution were also released in 2011. If you look four years back to 2007, we saw the release of The Witcher, Mass Effect and Assassin's Creed. Just thinking about that really puts Dark Souls to shame... at least in my mind.
And that really saddens me. I went into Dark Souls knowing not to expect wonders graphically, given that it's a port, but hoping for a fantastic gameplay experience given all of the rave reviews. I'm sure that it was a great game for anyone who could play it without the graphical and control issues constantly niggling at them.
And I know I'm coming across like my view is that games have to have fantastic graphics in order to be playable. I know that that's not the case. There are loads of indie games out there that have poor graphics, but I think are truly great games nevertheless, because they're not trying to be something that they're not - the fact that they've got poor graphics doesn't matter, e.g. Defenders Quest to name one. And there are good ports too, such as The Last Remnant (2007-2008), which is probably the best example of a console game that was successfully ported to the PC, with appropriately acceptable graphics. I just felt that Dark Souls just didn't stack up, and was a massive disappointment to me. Let's see what Dark Souls 2 brings...
Over here @Komuflage asked what was troubling with me about Dark Souls on the PC, following application of the 60fps and 1080p hacks, and using the Xbox controller...
Just like @Psychomorph, I gave up with Dark Souls 1, but I'm trying to keep an open mind about Dark Souls 2, given that they've actually designed it with the PC in mind. Fingers crossed and hope for the best!!!
Anyway, ready for a wall of text? You asked for it!!!
Pretty much my only major problem with the Dark Souls port was the graphics. I found the controls on the Xbox controller to be incredibly unintuitive and irritating, but something like that wouldn't have stopped me from playing it enough to really get into it - I know that sometimes it takes some time to get used to controls, a bit like with The Witcher 2 (which is fantastic... apart from the unfortunately poor-quality shadows).
Obviously the graphics were awful before unlocking the higher resolutions, but even at 1920x1200 I thought the game looked awful. Sure, it was being displayed at a higher resolution, but the graphical fidelity just wasn't there. The number of polys was way too low, the textures looked really flat, and the "high res" texture mods didn't really improve things at all. Making a "high res" texture pack for this game seemed a bit like flogging a dead horse, so to speak. I suppose that makes sense, because if Dark Souls was intended to played at low resolution on hardware with limited power (consoles), then why would the devs invest time & money making the graphics better than the game would ultimately be played at? Consequently, it was made with poor quality models and textures.
Further to the 3D graphics, I just couldn't live with the poor quality HUD either. In particular, the text and avatars looked distinctly pixelated and fuzzy. In fact, I think the ongoing annoyance of the HUD is what finally made me put Dark Souls down and never pick it up again.
All in all, I thought the graphical quality was more in the realms of games released around 2006, e.g. games that immediately come to mind are Oblivion and Dark Messiah of Might & Magic. If Dark Souls had been released prior to 2006 then I would have been happy. Alas, it was released in 2011 (or 2012 for PC), which left it way way below par, at least for me. As time moves forward expectations rise and games have to be of better quality in order to stay acceptable to me. To put it in perspective, along with Dark Souls, games such as The Witcher 2 and Deus Ex Human Revolution were also released in 2011. If you look four years back to 2007, we saw the release of The Witcher, Mass Effect and Assassin's Creed. Just thinking about that really puts Dark Souls to shame... at least in my mind.
And that really saddens me. I went into Dark Souls knowing not to expect wonders graphically, given that it's a port, but hoping for a fantastic gameplay experience given all of the rave reviews. I'm sure that it was a great game for anyone who could play it without the graphical and control issues constantly niggling at them.
And I know I'm coming across like my view is that games have to have fantastic graphics in order to be playable. I know that that's not the case. There are loads of indie games out there that have poor graphics, but I think are truly great games nevertheless, because they're not trying to be something that they're not - the fact that they've got poor graphics doesn't matter, e.g. Defenders Quest to name one. And there are good ports too, such as The Last Remnant (2007-2008), which is probably the best example of a console game that was successfully ported to the PC, with appropriately acceptable graphics. I just felt that Dark Souls just didn't stack up, and was a massive disappointment to me. Let's see what Dark Souls 2 brings...