PC Version Of Dark Souls II Ain’t No Port

Easy mode.
A word of warning: I have never played Dark Souls, and this information is coming from French website GameKult’s interview with a Yui Tanimura, the Japanese game director of Dark Souls II. I am merely an information conduit. A nexus from them to you, with news that the complaints of the horrible, nasty port job of the previous game was noticed and taken into account. Dark Souls II is being developed as a PC game. Hooray!

I don’t doubt for a minute that the focus of all the advertising and stuff will be on the console ports, but recent demonstrations of the game running have been on the PC. It already exists as a PC game, and according to GameKult it is said to be the “base” of all the other versions. I’m not insulting the TV boxes, but it’s good that the PC version will be dedicated to the platform, because when you simply yank a game from the box of X and clamp it in a GFWL chastity belt, bad things happen. The PC version is up and running at twice the framerate as the consoles, for example.

Adam has already dropped his thought bombs on the small amount of knowledge that’s dripped out so far, and I won’t be offended if you look back at his words, because he is an expert on Dark Souls. He is also from Manchester. Coincidence?

Happier times ahead, then. If you have 12 spare minutes, IGN had the first look at the game running. Which I have stolen. This is a proper Frankenstein’s monster of a post, isn’t it?

Thanks, Tech2.


  1. TsunamiWombat says:

    “I haven’t played darksouls”

    Buy it, get a controller, download DSfix and play ffs

    • SMiD says:

      Yeah, wtf Craig?

    • pakoito says:

      DSCFix too, came out 2 weeks ago and fixes most online connectivity problems. It’s just magic.

    • pRogz says:

      Well with all the fixes you have to do with the first one just to get it to look decent and have fun… its a lot! Plus you even need to buy a 360 controller before even playing the game, so I can understand why someone wouldn’t play Dark Souls 1 and wait for the second. I had this game on ps3 then traded it in, now I’d just wait for the 2nd on PC.

      • BTAxis says:

        A 360 controller connected to your PC can be pretty worthwhile in general though. I have one, and I use it for various games.

        • Derppy says:

          Every PC gamer should have an Xbox 360 controller. If you don’t have one, slap yourself in the face very hard and go to buy one.

          Keyboard and mouse are great for a lot of things, basically anything that requires fast and accurate pointing and/or lots of buttons.

          However, there’s games where you don’t need that and analog input is way more useful, (e.g. anything involving driving or platforming) and leaning back on your chair or couch with a gamepad is simply more comfortable.

          Dark Souls doesn’t really have an excuse to work so badly with keyboard and mouse, but we already knew it was going to be a crappy port. With 60FPS and high resolution it’s such a fantastic game it would be worth it to buy a gamepad just to play it, but you should have one to begin with.

          • GeneralTso92 says:

            Ehh, i wouldn’t exactly say you NEED one.
            In fact, other than Dark Souls, i can’t really think of a PC game that works better with a controller than a mouse and keyboard.

            I suppose ports and racing games would be much better with a controller, but i don’t play racing games and haven’t played any other ports than Dark Souls and RE4.

      • derbefrier says:

        all the fixes? Its literally only one that only takes seconds to install 2 if your one of those stubborn types that refuse to use a controller and that’s it.

        Its one of the best games this generation your a fool if you skip this game based on a few easily correctable problems. it goes on sale on the time hell pirate it if you have to just don’t miss out on a great game for no good reason.

      • bill says:

        Does it specifically need a 360 controller? Or just a controller? Because I already have a controller and I’m not planning to buy another one.

        • DanMan says:

          You can probably use one of the 360 pad emulators (link to code.google.com) to use any old gamepad. Did that with Batman:AA.

          • stupid_mcgee says:

            You can use any controller. It’s recommended to use a 360 controller because, IIRC, the prompts use the 360 controller buttons. I used an old Logitech Dual Action with the x360ce controller emulator.

    • squareking says:

      Heck, you don’t really need a controller. I’m around 50h deep, all M&K, and it’s been beyond tolerable. Enjoyable, even.

      • 11temporal says:

        Yep, I finished it with M&K and it was fucking awesome. DSfix and mouse fix absolutely mandatory though. Without them it’s completely unplayable.

        Can’t wait for DSII :/

      • eclipse mattaru says:


        240+ hours here, currently going through one NG+ and two new NG’s, a bunch of PVP victories under my belt; all with keyboard and mouse (with the fix), and I couldn’t be happier about it.

    • Shazbut says:

      EDIT – Oh no oh noooo reply fail.

      Also, Dark Souls is a miracle

  2. Drake Sigar says:

    It makes perfect sense to turn the PC into Dark Souls II’s primary platform during a time when the old consoles are on the way out. I still didn’t think they’d actually go through with it though.

  3. AlwaysRight says:

    When I heard this news I got out of the bath (I was in the bath at the time) dried myself off (I was wet at the time) scrunched my hand into a fist, pumped it into the air and said out loud –


    • li says:

      You text-to-voice RPS to your bathroom?

    • Isair says:

      Seems like a wasted opportunity not to do the Praise the Sun gesture.

      • finbikkifin says:

        There are more gestures than just Y. How do you expect to be invited to all the cool Dark Souls Dance Parties if you can’t jump around, switch your crossbow ammo, wave your trident and plunge headfirst into the ground with your +5 Chaos Fork?

  4. mehteh says:

    The Japanese are very console-centric and still fumble when it comes to PC games. Their games industry is also falling behind because they wont modernize and to counter that theyre buying western devs(Capcom in it latest bit of stupidity is now blaming the foreign devs they own for declining game quality link to youtu.be ). Ill continue to have my doubts

  5. aliksy says:

    I wonder if the controls will be better. I would like to side- and back-step without locking on, please.

    • nrvsNRG says:

      no thanx

    • Isair says:

      Pretty sure you could backstep whenever.

      • xao says:

        Yep, in fact there’s a tutorial note explaining how to do so.

        • dE says:

          In fact, it’s not the same thing you are talking about.
          Lock-On mode changes movement entirely. The backstep outside of it is a small step. The Lock-On mode allows you to walk backwards and sidewards, in relation to the target. The backstep in the tutorial is a single step, a hop backwards. Also in Lock-On mode, you can’t do such nasty things as pivot backstab (be prepared to get lots of lovely fan-letters though).

      • aliksy says:

        You can hop backwards by tapping ‘dodge’ but that’s different than what happens when locked on. Also, that dodge thing
        a. takes stamina,
        b. lowers your shield, and
        c. I think it makes you vulnerable so you take more damage if hit when doing it.

        When locked on to something you can freely move backwards or sideways without facing that direction. I want to be able to do that whenever, and orient myself with the mouse.

        • finbikkifin says:

          It also kills you, if you’ve been playing games that use the backstep button to operate switches. That Firelink elevator can be deadly.

    • eclipse mattaru says:

      1) Do a youtube search for jblackmel

      2) Watch that guy play

      3) Realize the problem is just you being bad

      4) Profit!

      • aliksy says:

        The controls don’t work how I would like them to. They don’t work like many other games. That guy being good or me being “bad” doesn’t really enter into it.

        • Wedge says:

          The way you want them to work would put a controller at a severe disadvantage and just make the game easier (basically you want it to control like a third-person shooter). Limitations in controls are in fact, a part of game design, and the game is designed to have them work the way they do.

          • welverin says:

            But is that GOOD design decision?

          • Voice of Majority says:

            It is a brilliant design and saying it is slow gives you the wrong impression. It’s not just reflexes you actually have to recognize what the opponent is doing and then react correctly. Not like you can just take it easy.

          • derbefrier says:

            its great design.

          • eclipse mattaru says:

            There, listen to what the Voice of Majority says (lel).

            The thing you need to understand is that Dark Souls might look like a third person hack n’ slash and might play a bit like a third person hack n’ slash, but it’s actually closer to a fighting game (the good ones anyway), where you just can’t go around button mashing and expect to do any good. Studying tells and timings, and learning when and how to take the opportunities to hit, as well as when to block or -preferably- dodge is the key to the whole thing.

          • aliksy says:

            Wow. Do you have a cite, or is this just heavy stockholm syndrome?

  6. Teovald says:

    That’s encouraging, but I don’t have a lot of confidence in their ability to make a good pc game. Dark Souls is by far the worst pc port I have seen the last five years.

    • Thirith says:

      Honestly, with dsfix I didn’t have any problems with it, and from what I’ve heard very few people did. If other candidates for “worst port ever” were that easily fixed, I don’t think we’d have much to complain about.

      • ShEsHy says:

        My candidate for the worst port in the last five years (amongst AAA titles) is Skyrim. It. Has. The. Worst. UI. Port. Ever. Period. (not to mention mouse acceleration that cannot be turned off)

        • Firesaber says:

          Except yes you can. bMouseAcceleration=0

        • engion3 says:

          Yeah right, No could even play Rage the first 2 weeks it came out. Not sure if that was a port issue as much as simply new engine issue.

        • Brun says:

          You should expect to have to modify and/or tweak any Bethesda Studios game to get it into a more “PC-friendly” state, although I thought the basic UI in Skyrim was fine once you figured out its quirks (barring the obvious console-sized font, etc.). That’s the price we pay for such a flexible engine, and fortunately for us Bethesda gives the user (on PC) broad powers to modify the game’s systems to suit him/her.

          EDIT: I accidentally a word.

      • Teovald says:

        It is basically unplayable with a keyboard, and the devs did not even bother to display the correct keys in the UI, instead giving tutorials with pointless xbox buttons.

        • nrvsNRG says:

          you’re pointless :P

        • Firesaber says:

          you know WSAD and the arrow keys navigate the menus perfect right? All you have to do is let go of your mouse and your UI troubles are over! (well…at least that part anyway)..also all the tooltips show PC buttons (push F, push R, push RMB etc)…so not sure where you are getting that part from

          EDIT : NVM you are talking about Dark Souls (i was in the Skyrim mindset from the comment above), just ignore me, my apologies.

      • Ysellian says:

        He is right though, Purely looking at vanilla Dark souls port, it was quite simply atrocious. But one does require a bit of perspective before passing judgement on any future games. First of all from a technical point of view, Dark Souls actually looked worse on consoles than it did on the PC upon it’s release and secondly Dark Souls was ported because of an online petition.

        If you take those points into consideration I feel that we can be happy with the game we got and any future games coming our way. (of course patches have made it the superior version even.)

    • eclipse mattaru says:

      It seems like you haven’t played many bad ports then. Dark Souls isn’t anywhere near the worst port the PC has seen. In fact, I wouldn’t even call it a bad port. Basic, yes; unoptimized, indeed; but not bad: It’s actually a 1:1 conversion of the console original, and that’s already something.

    • Deadly Sinner says:

      Saint’s Row 2, GTA 4, Munch’s Odysee, Stranger’s Wrath, and From Dust are worse, just to name a few.

  7. eroticfishcake says:

    While Dark Souls is one of my favourite games this generation I’m kinda sceptical on this considering the lack of PC experience From Software has let alone most Japanese game developers. I mean 60 FPS with no hitching is a tall order from any developer really. Whatever the case the sentiment is nice and using the PC build as a base is a good idea.

    Technical details aside, there’s no other game I’m looking forward to more.

  8. pakoito says:

    • pakoito says:

      I finished the game this week (70+ hours) and I’m forcing myself NOT to play anymore. A second new character or a NG+ to minmax my current for PvP is just so tempting.

      To everyone who’s reading this. This game is nothing short of amazing. It’s not the combat, it’s not the aesthetics, it’s not the exploring, it’s not the secrets within the secrets, it’s not the PvP and the minmaxing, it’s not the challenge, and it’s not the lore. It’s everything fitting together.

      • AlwaysRight says:

        Amen to that. I have never ever played a game where the tone and execution of every aspect of it fits together so well.

      • bigjig says:

        I’d really recommend doing a NG+ run. It’s fun in a completely different way to your first playthrough where the difficulty is more about figuring out how to overcome the game’s challenges.

        The enemies hit a LOT harder in NG+, but you know all the strategies now, and you’ll need to bring them all out because this mode really tests your mettle. It’s cool to look back and compare to when you first started and see how much you’ve improved at the game. :)

      • liquidsoap89 says:

        Would I – as a person who didn’t like Demon Souls – enjoy this more? I don’t care for games being hard just for the sake of being hard, and I feel I’ve got better ways to spend my time than to try and learn how a game’s mechanics work so that I can progress through it.

        Is it still as hard as the original?

        • Phantoon says:

          It’s harder. There’s less insta-deaths, but things hit harder and are generally more dangerous.

          And why would you like a sequel to a game you didn’t like? No, you won’t like this. It’s more of the same, but better.

          • liquidsoap89 says:

            Just thought maybe there was something there that the original didn’t have. Sorry…

          • sub-program 32 says:

            You can watch a Let’s Play if you want to pick up any differences. In fact, I recommend that anyway, cos blind runs of Dark Souls can be hilarious and heartwarming to watch if edited well or otherwise goodly made.

        • fish99 says:

          Given the things you didn’t like about Demons Souls there’s zero chance you’d enjoy Dark Souls TBH. It’s the exact same thing, it can be brutally hard at times and it’s built around the idea that you need to play sections multiple times to ‘learn’ them, and die a lot to get decent at the gameplay.

      • Phantoon says:

        Tower of Latria was a better environment than anything in Dark Souls, though.

  9. gruia says:

    DS was a great port. All these hipsters complaining

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      Damn that hipster Western media, making up stories about crashes, low-rez textures, minimal K/M support, and sloppy coding. They said similar things about Skyrim, and that goddamn game is fucking perfect. Perfect I tell you.

      • jalf says:

        Are you *seriously* telling us that a a developer needs to produce entirely new textures for a game in order for it to not be a crappy port?

        How would you have liked them to implement mouse/keyboard support better? The game is designed for a controller, and unless the port radically changed the gameplay, that fact would not change.

        Really, I don’t get why people are so furious about the PC port. Sure, I’d have liked to be able to change resolutions reely and for it to support both windowed and fullscreen mode out of the box, and those limitations are just lazy. But other than that? I don’t see what makes it so terrible. It runs more smoothly than many PC ports (and more smoothly than the console version of the game). It’s been rock stable for the 120 hours I’ve played it, and the game looks pretty good to me.

        I don’t know about you, but when a game is ported to PC, I do not expect them to make a completely different game with completely different graphics, controls and gameplay.

        I expect them to port the original game, as is, as well as possible.

        • zeroskill says:

          “Are you *seriously* telling us that a a developer needs to produce entirely new textures for a game in order for it to not be a crappy port?”

          Anybody claiming such a thing obviously has no clue of how textures and most assets in video games are actually created, which doesn’t surprise me really, since lately, the comments of this site have degraded to youtube level.

          Textures, the same as models, are always, in this day and age, created at a very high resolution or poly count. In pretty much all cases, because it’s just simpler to do so and there is no reason not to. The resolution of the texture are then reduced to fit the specifics of a certain machine, to fit a certain game and for optimization. Usually, of course, console games have much lower resolution textures then PC games because of the older hardware. When you then make a PC port, no developer creates new textures. They usually just use a higher resolution version of the textures.

          The reason why we see PC ports having those low resolution textures is because, in the case of From Software, that they just were inexperienced in making PC ports since they never done that before. They also said that they don’t have any clue what they are doing. It surely wasn’t because of them being lazy or just not caring. They just didn’t have a clue because they never made a game for the PC let alone ported an existing version to the PC. It’s forgivable in this case. However in many other cases “bad” PC ports come down to either time constraints by the publisher, or just plain laziness.

          It just strikes me, in the particular case of From Software, that so many people are quick to jump the hate bandwagon. From Software said, from the get go, that they basically have no clue what they are doing here. That they are doing it because PC gamers really, really wanted Dark Souls on their platform.

          All things considered, they meant well, and they were always pretty open about what they were capable of. And they are willing to learn from their mistakes, and that is really all you can ask for. The next Dark Souls games won’t use GFWL. And I’m sure the PC port will also be of better quality.

          • stupid_mcgee says:

            It just strikes me, in the particular case of From Software, that so many people are quick to jump the hate bandwagon. From Software said, from the get go, that they basically have no clue what they are doing here. That they are doing it because PC gamers really, really wanted Dark Souls on their platform.

            All things considered, they meant well, and they were always pretty open about what they were capable of. And they are willing to learn from their mistakes, and that is really all you can ask for.

            Well put, and I wholeheartedly agree. Yeah, there’s some lacking elements of the port, but From Software was always upfront that DS was going to be a quick-and-dirty barebones port. I bought DS because I wanted to play the game, and I was well aware that it would have limitations. Those limitations have not ruined or limited my enjoyment of the game experience at all.

            It doesn’t suddenly ruin ice cream if you don’t put whipped cream, nuts, and chocolate syrup on.

  10. nrvsNRG says:

    Ha! @3.40….goes to do an easy back stab on slow moving enemy. enemy falls backwards ontop of you.

    seriously cannot fucking wait to get my grubby dark souls loving hands on this awesome game!

    • eclipse mattaru says:

      And around the 2:08 mark you can see the guy performing what would seem to be a special dual-wielding move. Being able to combine two weapons like that might elevate an already robust melee system to crazy heights.

  11. kud13 says:

    oh hey, does this mean we can expect KB+M support from the get-go this time, with re-mappable keys?

  12. Shooop says:

    No news though on if it’s still the same “let’s kill the player in the most cheap ways we possibly can so they’ll call poor design ‘hardcore'” mindset though?

    • Azazel says:

      Cracking news, DS is such a tremendously great experience and I’m stoked for the sequel.

    • aliksy says:

      I don’t remember that many “cheap” deaths in dark souls. I might just be too used to it, though. Well, ok, Double Boss Fight in anor londo is made extra hard because the controls are kind of wonky.

      There were plenty of “This probably isn’t the safest… and dead” moments, though.

      The first time I died to an ooze falling on me I really just had to hand it to the game. Got me fair and square. Then I left a message for other players, “Be wary of up.”

      • Mr Monotone says:

        I got a ‘be wary of up’ message there. It was positioned directly underneath the slime, giving me just enough time to read it before being murdered. I was some combination of amused and horrified.

    • xao says:

      One of my favorite things about Dark Souls was that it managed to be challenging without being cheap. Almost every time I died, it was because I screwed up.

    • dE says:

      And like always, I bring up the challenge:
      What cheap deaths, provide specific examples, I’ll point out what you missed.

      To make it easier, I’ll point out the three cheap deaths I know off: Anor Londo Archers, Capra Demon Fog Surprise, Bed of Chaos. Now it’s your turn. Will you be the first one to pick up the challenge?

      • Shooop says:

        The absolutely horrible camera and cramped area for the Capra Demon fight was definitely a case of artificially inflated difficulty.

        The red dragon on the bridge. It’d be different if the stairwell you have to take quick turn into wasn’t so easy to miss.

        The Stray Demon when you return to the asylum – it’s impossible to dodge his physical attack AND the shock wave that follows because the shock wave is purposely timed to hit you right after your dodge finishes.

        The Tomb of the Giants. Unless you’ve successfully navigated the entire catacombs and found the skull lantern you will probably never make it out of this area.

        The fact that the majority of guides for the game highlight exploits to completely bypass some enemies and places doesn’t help either. It’s basically the game punishing anyone for not reading/watching a guide before playing it. I don’t think anyone had to read a guide to beat Super Mario Bros or Doom.

        • aliksy says:

          Oh man that fucking capra demon. That fight is kind of bullshit, I’ll give you that. Those fucking dogs. It’s obviously a do-able fight, but it’s pretty aggravating.

          I’ve gotten pretty good at the anor londo archers. Sprint up, dodge under the one shot he gets off, then parry him when he draws his sword. If your damage isn’t very good you might have to parry-riposte a second time, which is nerve-wracking. Or if you know sorcery use Hidden Body. Or get the ring of fog, but that’s not very easy to find.

          I think someone told me about the dragon-bridge-stairs, so I never had trouble with that.

          With the Stray Demon, if you tap dodge as you land you immediately roll. I didn’t have a lot of trouble avoiding his attacks once I got back on my feet, but I tend to wear light armor. Get behind him, and he’s not so bad.

          For the giant’s tomb, there are 2 other light sources, I think. The sunlight maggot and the call light spell. There’s also another, not-obvious-at-all way to get another skull lantern. Oh, and sometimes they drop from necromancers, but that’s rare.

          • sub-program 32 says:

            It’s worth noting that non-respawning enemies will always drop their rare loot if the last one dies, so slaughtering every necromancer will guarantee at least one Skull Lantern.

        • dE says:

          Alright, let’s begin then.
          The red dragon wyvern on the bridge. The undead merchant warns you about it. He explicitely tells you that there is a Drake up above. Also there are curiously large scorch marks on the ground and there is occasional screeching, plus you were almost smudged on the floor just a few moments earlier and the drake flew right up there in the mini cutscene… If that doesn’t ring any warning bells, I doubt anything can. Also easy to miss staircase? A 10 meter large area easy to miss?

          The Stray Demon, fair enough. If you have not figured out during the previous Asylum Demon what to do there, you will die. A lot. A bit of logic could have told you that standing in front of a huge monster with a huge weapon is a rather silly notion. The tutorial already, literally, hammered that in but yeah. But if you stubbornly insist to not take any inspiration from previous battles and instead opt to take the battering… it’s not a cheap death, it’s a silly death owned to the player. Also when you first leave your cell, you can see the bugger down there AND you can hear him breath constantly. The fall is a surprise, but you should still have been prepared for a fight.

          The tomb of giants has a rather noticeable notification from the Devs, which indicates “There is a shortcut leading back here”. Just before you head into the dark. There are also prism stones littering the path if you go in so you can navigate without the light. Also, are you in all seriousness complaining that you’re not adequately equipped when you sequence broke the previous area that would have equipped you just well? As someone mentioned, the last necromancer to die will guarantee the drop of a skull lantern. If you go through without sequence breaking, you will find all necromancers. Also, yes… there are other means. The Light Spell is a realistic choice at a 14 Int requirement. The sunlight maggot not so much, as you need to have travelled far below and at that point, few have. And again, you enter an area you instantly figure out you’re ill equipped to travel here, you press on and find out… hey I’m ill equipped to travel here, I died… what a cheap death?

          • Shooop says:

            – The camera angle makes those stairs really hard to see if you’re not purposely looking for them. And the merchant doesn’t say anything other than it’s there.

            – The fall alone cripples you which is bad enough. And here’s the thing you’re not getting – even if you dodge his weapon swing, the shock wave which follows it hits you. Of course it’s obvious you shouldn’t expect to eat his club/hammer and survive. When even a dessicated walking corpse can severely hurt you with one hit, that much is already clear to anyone. The problem is it’s purposely designed to kill you even if you successfully time you movement to avoid taking a hit from him. That is pretty much the definition of cheap. “Oh you know how to dodge? Well take that then!”

            – The stones are only on the slopes. There’s platforms you have to navigate too remember? Not to mention the giant reanimated skeletons…

            You’ll only find all the necromancers if you explore the ENTIRE catacombs. Miss any one and good luck backtracking to find him. That is the problem – it’s impossible to navigate it without thoroughly exploring a previous area. Not more difficult, but impossible.

            The combat is what Dark Souls gets right. It’s the perfect balancing act of “risk it and end the battle quicker, but screw up and you get DEEP HURTING”. I love that. Choosing between risking a parry or playing it safe is such a simple yet so effective choice you have to constantly make. But the other aspects of it though I find horribly lacking and shortsighted. Punishing players for mistakes only works if they know they’ve actually even made a mistake.

    • zeroskill says:

      The games market is saturated by games that don’t punish, or even reward, players for being bad at the game. Because elves just want to have fun. Now we have one very successful game on the market that doesn’t hold your hand and you want it to be exactly the same as every other game on the market?

      Dark Souls has been so successful because it fills a very large niche in the gaming market. Games that are actually challenging. Depressing when you think about it.

      I get that most gamers nowadays are aggravated by very hard video games and see it as unfair . Instant gratification is the order of the day. I get it. However nobody forces you to play Dark Souls. Nobody every said it’s an easy game. And that’s perfectly fine because there are enough gamers that value that.

      • Shooop says:

        It’s inevitable that someone uses the “You just don’t like it because other games hold your hand through them!” line. Too bad it just reinforces my point.

        Super Mario World didn’t hold my hand through the game, and it wasn’t cheap. Doom wasn’t a breeze and it wasn’t cheap.

        But I get it. Some people want to feel special and “elite” because they can play a game that purposely designed to frustrate and make you want to stop playing at ever turn. Yes. You are so special and “elite”. Congratulations.

        “Challenging” is not defined entirely by “instant death at every turn”.

        • ResonanceCascade says:

          Actually, I just thought the game was a lot of fun. It constantly uses death as a teaching tool to constantly push you into getting better as a player.

          However, that does mean that you’re going to die a lot, and you inevitably won’t be happy with the circumstances sometimes. The game is called “Prepare to Die Edition” not “We’re Going to Be Really Fair About This Shit Edition.”

  13. JiminyJickers says:

    Hell yeah!! Very happy to hear that they are doing it properly for the PC this time. Will definitely be buying it.

  14. Stevostin says:

    I really understand why Dark Soul is seen as great. I played it a few hours. Then I realised that it was 90% gameplay, and I thought “do I want to spend time beating a challenge designed to be beaten by your average Joe buyer provided he spend time ?”. And the answer was “no”, because I did that too much already.

    Gameplay is the mayonnaise. If it’s a mess, you can’t eat the meal. If it’s good, it may well save it. But if there’s just mayonnaise, you’re gonna be sick :P

    • pakoito says:


    • RedViv says:

      I have no idea what you are on about. Should the game have less gameplay? What? Why mayonnaise? Is this not the core? What?

    • karry says:

      Gameplay is mayonaise to…the game. I wont even bother going further with this.

    • JackShandy says:

      I guess eventually, every opinion that can exist will exist on the internet.

    • fish99 says:

      Gameplay should be at the core of any gaming experience. Everything else is mayonnaise.

      • Thirith says:

        *yawn* Can we drop this sort of fundamentalism? There are games with mediocre gameplay, yet the ‘mayonnaise’ makes them fantastic (e.g. Psychonauts, Grim Fandango). Doesn’t mean that all games should have mediocre gameplay, but neither does it mean those games aren’t really great in spite of mediocre gameplay.

        • fish99 says:

          Well, maybe that’s true of adventure games, and only adventure games, but they are pretty much just interactive movies with puzzle elements. To call gameplay mayonnaise though is just nonsense. What is Stevostin saying, that Dark Souls needs a cut scene every 30 seconds like Max Payne 3? That would detract from the game, not add to it.

      • Don Reba says:

        Gameplay is just one possible ingredient for _an experience_. Many experiences are great with no or little gameplay, where making them more about gameplay would only make them worse.

    • Shooop says:

      …Erm… If a game isn’t about “gameplay” then is it even a game?

      Personally I play a game because I want to play it. Otherwise I would go read a book or watch a movie. The story and other bits are the other aspects that compliment the core – the gameplay.

      Otherwise why not just watch someone else play the game on YouTube? They have HD now.

      • Don Reba says:

        …Erm… If a game isn’t about “gameplay” then is it even a game?

        But of course. Pretty much anything interactive could be considered a game. It does not have to be _about_ gameplay; it only needs to have some gameplay in it. And, in my view, it would be odd to say that as soon as you add gameplay to something, it should immediately become the centrepiece.

  15. Bhazor says:

    Ahem, just want to say I totally called it.

  16. wuwul says:


    Ejaculation in progress!

  17. pakoito says:

    This is a nice piece of journalism from the first Dark Souls reviewers on Xbox 360, and how they struggled with the game before any wiki was available

    link to oxm.co.uk

    • Oozo says:

      Thanks! (Apart maybe from the WW II-simile) it was really a great read.
      It’s actually a thing I’m thinking more and more about: How lately, a bunch of new games give us back the possibility to actually EXPLORE a game. (“Year Walk”, “Starseed Pilgrim”, “La Mulana”, “Fez” et al.) It’s the one thing this medium does better than anyone else, and it’s extremely frustrating to see that so many games don’t even realize it.
      (And it’s actually on of the few good reasons for pre-ordering a game I can think of: the possibility to explore uncharted territory, before GameFAQs gets there.)

      Also: Didn’t Adam tease an article about how “Dark Souls” actually encourages social behaviour? Was this along the lines you were thinking about?

  18. karry says:

    ” Dark Souls II is being developed as a PC game.”

    Just…for one moment…close your mouth and eyes, sit there and recount in your mind ALL the times we were told this exact same thing. Or not even going that far, but just “it will be properly adapted to PC”. ALL the times. In about 15 years. What do we have to show for it ? What ? Two things. Zoom out in Dragon Age (but only the once), and stupid grid in XCOM. Thats it. That all we ever got from “PC version will be special, we heard you and we know just what you want”.

    • kud13 says:

      To be fair, Deus Ex Human revolution had the classic DX item interface, all bound up to number keys and the like.

  19. bigjig says:

    Frankly I’m just glad the first one sold enough copies on PC to warrant a PC version of Dark Souls 2. I fucking love this game :P

  20. sharkh20 says:

    I just want to say that even if it was a bad port, the PC version was still by far the best.

  21. Runs With Foxes says:

    I like how even the developers admit the port was poor, but pre-release when it was obviously going to be a half-assed port, all these fans were saying “you should be thankful for getting it at all, shut up and take it”.

  22. bill says:

    So, if the port had old console graphics, does that mean the game should run well on my old laptop?

    • Voice of Majority says:

      I have been playing it on my laptop. DSfix was too much for it, so I had to settle for the vanilla graphics – the art is still great.

  23. felisc says:

    Not only is it a fantastic singleplayer game, it’s probably my favorite co-op game too. That recently released summoning “fix” makes it just perfect.

  24. Ginga121 says:

    YES YES YES!!! SO much win :D

  25. Crosmando says:

    Dark Souls was a p cool game I thought. My main criticism though is that encounter design was at times generic. The game’s combat engine (in my opinion) shines best in encounters with humanoid (or human-sized) enemies, especially large groups of humanoid enemies. I hope DSII has more encounters with big numbers of smaller enemies, rather than the old “gigantic boss appears” stuff.

    More inspiration from Baldur’s Gate II, less from Metal Slug and Japanese arcade games, imho.

  26. Sparkasaurusmex says:

    That petition was worth a lot more than I thought!

  27. smacky says:

    I liken Dark Souls to straight bourbon, compared to the mixed drinks most video games tend to be. There isn’t any “Press X to cutscene the funnest part.” Some people like umbrellas in their drinks and think that drinking six-dollar wine makes them classy.

    I’m sure I sound somewhat disdainful, but I like games that cater to… well… things that I like. Dark Souls is an apex gaming experience for me, in the same school of the original Legend of Zelda, Super Metroid, Soul Reaver and Shadow of the Colossus, to a degree. All the aforementioned give me an opportunity to explore, not just the given fictional landscape, but the entire experience. Discovering my first dungeon, finding that upgrade necessary to get to the next section, impaling and devouring the soul of my first combatant and finding the giant’s weak spot… all were “Ah-ha!” moments that stuck with me well beyond their respective sittings. Dark Souls is full of “Ah-ha!” moments if you care enough to spend time in Lordran and rummage for them.

    In worlds where death is only a penalty of the time taken to repeat a given section, it becomes your best teacher. And unlike many platformers, repeating the process is never rote. Muscle memory always loses to paying attention.

    It’s a flawed game, sure. But it also happens to be one of my absolute favorites.

    • sidneymcdanger says:

      It’s a flawed game, sure. But it also happens to be one of my absolute favorites.

      Even then, it’s only flawed when compared to some Platonic ideal of a game which we have yet to see. Maybe the second one?

      • Crosmando says:

        Well, I definitely think DS is flawed. As I mentioned above, the encounter design is repetitive and the emphasis of the game on arcade-style bosses (big single enemies) tends to remove much sense of randomness and makes the boss fights more into “puzzles” with solutions, once you figure the best way to cheese a boss, it’s much easier meaning the game has limited re-playability.

        I definitely think a “Souls” game would be better with more large-scale battles with lots of smaller enemies (instead of singular bosses), requiring more tactics, targeting specific enemies, etc. Perhaps they didn’t do this because of memory limitations of current gen of consoles, the PS3 not being able to handle too many enemies all at the same time. Or maybe the “arcade-y” boss battles are too ingrained in the designers philosophy, who knows

        • smacky says:

          I think there’s quite the stark difference between “arcade-style” bosses and “puzzle-style” bosses. To me, “arcade-style” seems to imply frenzied God of War-style button-mashing, while “puzzle-style” implies more of a Soul Reaver bent. Dark Souls seems to fall right in the middle. So your point isn’t making much sense to me.

          As far as bosses go, Capra Demon and the golden duo are the least fair, but still easily weathered depending on your character build. A pyro fight will play out entirely differently than a melee fight as well, so I also fail to see the cheesiness and limited replayability you’re referring to.

          It’s almost as if you’d rather be playing Dynasty Warriors or something like that, which is squad-heavy, very arcade-y and very cheesy.

      • smacky says:

        Even with DS being in my Top 5, I can admit that putting the Capra Demon fight in a broom closet was a misstep.

    • eclipse mattaru says:

      I should probably warn you that I am going to steal your straight bourbon analogy here whenever I next get into a Dark Souls-related discussion, with extreme prejudice and even extremer lack of any shame.

      Also, the comparison with those old school games is spot on, up to Soul Reaver, which was precisely one of the games I felt Dark Souls was closer to in terms of how rewarding it is to explore: It takes a lot of self-confidence and trust in your audience for a developer to hide about 25% of the gameworld so that only the *truly* dedicated players could see it all. And it would seem something unthinkable these days, when heavily exploration-based games like Dishonored or Human Revolution are considered peaks of game design and respect for the player’s intelligence, while having ridiculous, over-the-top item highlighting, minimaps and all manner of arrows and quest markers up the ass.