Dark Souls II Vs PC: On Cheaters, Lack Of Mod Support

I’ve fiddled around a bit with the PC port of Dark Souls II, and I must say, I’m decently pleased. It’s far from a bastion of portly perfection, but it’s a stomping step up from the first Dark Souls‘ wibbly wobbly mess. Ever the malcontent, however, I decided to dig into what’s not there – namely, things like full-blown mod support (the first Dark Souls was basically saved by mods on PC) and a concrete plan for dealing with cheaters. I asked global producer Tak Miyazoe about both those omissions and more.

RPS: The Dark Souls team obviously learned some lessons after turning around an extremely quick and dirty PC port of the first game. What happened there? Why’d you let it into the wild in that state?

Miyazoe: The main focus of the Dark Souls PC version was to deliver the game to the fans as soon as possible. Based on the strong petition created by the fans, we put our main priority around porting the exact same game experience over to the PC platform for PC gamers to experience the true Dark Souls experience. We felt compelled to offer PC players the game as soon as we could even though we had less experience developing on the PC platform at the time.

RPS: So modders kind of stepped in and saved it. Have you considered embracing that and releasing a full-on set of mod tools for Dark Souls II? Or, if not for DSII, then is that something you’d consider for future games?

Miyazoe: We currently do not have any plans for supporting of Mods for Dark Souls II. We understand that there were some positive reactions to some of the fan made mods that were released, but our intent is for players to first enjoy a game experience within the designs that we are able to provide, an experience that is genuine to the Dark Souls franchise.

RPS: How much did you look at mods when you were trying to figure out exactly what shape DSII’s PC version would take? Were things like the mouse control mod a big inspiration for you? I mean, I would say they’re pretty indicative of what players want.

Miyazoe: We were aware of some of the fan made mods that were released but did not reference them very much in regards to designing the PC version of Dark Souls II. Elements such as higher graphics and keyboard/mouse mapping were things that were already considered when we decided to create a PC version, and we hope our implementation will provide a satisfying experience for the PC gamers that purchase the game.

RPS: How much did you focus on optimization for DSII? Will it run well on a broad spectrum of machines?

Miyazoe: We have put a lot of emphasis and focus on optimization for Dark Souls II so that players can have a smooth, in-depth experience on a wide range of platforms including the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. We did our best to allow players with a wide range of PC specs to enjoy the game without cutting away the importance of the high sense of achievement or the connections felt on the online space.

RPS: For which specific reasons did you delay the PC version? What specific aspects of the port required more development time? PC ports tend to get delayed frequently, but no one ever really talks about why. Sometimes there are legitimate reasons. Other times it’s… questionable.

Miyazoe: We wanted to make sure we provide the most important PC centric features such as improved texture graphics, higher frame rates and also keyboard/mouse mapping controls. We tried to incorporate as much feedback from the PC fans, and spent the extra time in development to deliver the genuine Dark Souls II experience on the PC platform.

RPS: There’s a fair amount of multiplayer cheating in Dark Souls’ 1’s PC version. People enabling invulnerability during invasions, etc. While not totally rampant, I’d still say it’s been a deal-breaker for many. What, if anything, will you be doing to keep DSII from falling to a similar fate over time? There have at least been bans on the console side, right?

Miyazoe: We have found that it is difficult to eliminate all types of cheating on the PC platform, and ultimately we hope that players pick up the game and play with honor while enjoying the level balancing and designs that we have implemented. We have put in efforts to secure the game as much as possible, but in the end, we depend on the fan loyalty to enjoy the true experience we have designed.

RPS: Hm. Here’s hoping it works out better than last time. Is Dark Souls II indicative of how From hopes to handle future PC versions of its games? Would you like to take things even further on PC next time around? Embrace things like Steam Workshop, or maybe Early Access?

Miyazoe: I believe the development process on the PC platform, or any platform, is a constant learning process. We are gaining experience in regards to developing on the PC platform and are always looking for great fan feedback. We can’t share any specific details about future PC development plans at this stage, but we will continue to try and develop games on all platforms as soon as possible; with the goal to satisfy fans who enjoy the Dark Souls franchises’ signature gameplay style.

RPS: The console version of Dark Souls II has been out for a little while, and you said you’d be basing plans for DLC around fan feedback. So what’s the feedback looking like at this point? Do you think you’re going to create DLC? If so, what kind? You were pretty adamant about making sure people who bought the main game got the “full experience,” so how do you create additional content outside of that?

Miyazoe: No comment.

RPS: Thank you for your time.


  1. amateurviking says:


  2. aliksy says:

    You didn’t ask about the lighting that was in the previews and removed from the console versions. Why not?

    • Fedaykin says:

      Haha, expecting neoRPS to actually ask some pertinent questions, questions that might reveal some important information about the sorry state of this game and it’s PC port.. expecting actual journalism from neoRPS.
      No.. we only get “game journalism” here, you don’t want anyone to be upset, do you?

      • Viroso says:

        What is even a neoRPS? A horrible answer will follow but I’m too curious.

        • Fedaykin says:

          Unfortunately it’s just a typical “game journalism” website nowadays, one that doesn’t ask questions that might make people uncomfortable, one that readily aligns itself with any PR and Marketing driven industry trend.
          Going off the beaten path is not lucrative anymore it seems.

          • Wisq says:

            Yes, because “no comment” is the sort of thing that interviewees say when they’re completely comfortable with the question and are grateful that their interviewer is completely aligned with their own marketing department.

          • khomotso says:

            Cripes, and here I was thinking that the canned responses to a more incisive set of questions revealed all we need to know about how responsive the developer is to these sets of concerns.

            Or is the problem assuming some sophistication in the reader?

          • Bull0 says:

            That’s bullshit, though. Nathan makes people cry in interviews fairly regularly.

            Now, the only thing that annoys me is the constant asking of questions which are self-evidently not going to get a decent answer. Kind of just feels like a waste of peoples’ time, they aren’t going to announce that they’re releasing mod tools all of a sudden, they’re not going to tell you why they arbitrarily delayed the PC version, so why ask?

        • Tams80 says:

          A misappropriation of the prefix ‘neo’ to mean ‘bad’ which I believe came from The Guardian.

      • Spakkenkhrist says:

        Oh god, do you spell Microsoft with a dollar sign?

        • SuicideKing says:

          No, but he does write Rock, Pap£r, $hotgun.

          • WhatAShamefulDisplay says:

            “Rock, Paplr, Shotgun”?

          • hotmaildidntwork says:

            It’s like anti-capitalist leet speak…

          • The Random One says:

            Paplr sounds like a physical version of tumblr. Maybe for people who think websites are too mainstream.

      • MOKKA says:

        I can’t wait until they announce ‘RPS classic’.

      • Blad the impaler says:

        RPS could have pressed the issue on mods and other items of contention, but had the interview shut down six questions earlier. I think the publisher of this franchise is comfortable enough with its sales to not bother caring whether some pissant from a PC gaming website gets a modding suite or not. Don’t get me wrong, I think the answers given were rehearsed and arrogant. But RPS did ask what it needed to ask. I wish they had’ve been a bit more forthcoming. It’s not like modding is out of the realm of … this realm.

        I propose Blad’s Law: A publisher’s/developer’s desire to foster meaningful dialogue with the gaming press about one of its intellectual properties is inversely proportionate to said property’s sales or a combination of said property’s hype and projected sales.

        Not a particularly original or unheard of belief – yet I don’t think it’s been categorized as such.

      • green frog says:

        Seriously? Nathan’s questions in his interviews are already aggressive enough that he routinely gets vague, canned non-responses that completely ignore his premise. In other words: he’s already asking tougher questions than his subjects are willing to answer.

        What’s he supposed to do, ratchet up the pressure until they refuse to speak to him at all? What practical purpose would that serve?

        This is a very odd accusation to be leveling against someone whose interviews already sometimes read more like a debate than your typical Q&A. Stop expecting that he’s going to get PR reps to essentially talk shit about their own product when that’s the exact opposite of what they’re paid for. It’s never going to happen.

    • Ringwraith says:

      Apparently, the game actually gets darker when you go on New Game+’s, therefore necessitating torches and the like more.

      • CyberPunkRock says:

        Played it on XBOX and no it doesn’t.

        • Discopanda says:

          Yeah but the PC MASTER RACE version will surely have darker New Game+, because we can handle it.

    • Horg says:

      Because is PC website.

      • fish99 says:

        PC version has the same lighting as PS3/360 and also doesn’t compare to the trailers of the game from last year.

    • fish99 says:

      I’ll personally be annoyed if that clearly better looking version ends up being how the game looks on xbone/ps4 while my just as powerful PC has to suffer the ‘last gen’ version (albeit with higher res textures and unlocked framerate). I know the game isn’t even announced for xbone/ps4 yet, but I can see that happening.

    • xilx says:

      I thought the lighting thing was answered before, or at least speculated on by fans, and that at least part of the reason was it caused problems for new players and many playstyles became hindered. It essentially removed your ability to use a shield in many areas, and forced you to survive by dodging (which is hard for newer players, and with the new rolling invincibility frame mechanics, ridiculous to impossible for high weight builds).

      • fish99 says:

        It’s not just the lighting level, it’s the quality of the lighting, and the fact that specular lighting seems to have been entirely removed, and texture variety seems to have taken a big hit as well. The environments look less detailed as well, as in the geometry.

        Here’s the comparison- link to youtube.com

        Clearly this isn’t just a change in the ambient lighting level. The whole game looks very flat now (although still decent IMO).

        Now presumably the 360/PS3 couldn’t run that better looking version with their relatively weak GPUs and limited ram/vram (512mb combined), and had to be downgraded, but why did the PC version also get a downgrade? Also what was that trailer running on?

        • xilx says:

          I’m familiar with the comparisons, but I think what it boils down to is just a combination of the power of the older consoles and “oh crap, playtests show less-skilled players can’t be required to sacrifice their shield for a torch” (look how dark that staircase is in the video, you NEED a torch or to have already memorized enemy placement to get through stuff like that with that lighting system). I mean, the latter is probably a big part of that, ESPECIALLY in DS2 where on average you fight larger groups of enemies at one time than you do in the previous games, people who build their character around a shield need their shield. It’s one thing to want a punishing game, it’s another to make one that’s impossible for people who haven’t mastered the games before it.

          I don’t know why they didn’t use the demo assets for the PC version. It might just be something as simple as all they had created was the Forest of Fallen Giants and a couple sections of Aldia’s Keep and the Dragon Aerie, and realized the consoles weren’t going to be able to handle it, so they created the rest of the world with console-capable assets, and that’s all the PC gets because that’s all that exists for 90% of the game’s world.

          • fish99 says:

            They could light the dark bits better and still have specular lighting. Look at how shiny the armour and some of the walls look in the trailer, and also look at the ugly tiled textures in the final game.

            I guess in the end it was too much work to maintain two different versions, especially when the PC was a low priority for them.

            It’s not that I feel conned or anything, I never even watched that trailer last year, and I think the game still looks pretty decent, it’s just that having seen how the game could have looked, I really wanna play a version that looks like that. Like I said above I’ll be annoyed if it turns out that footage was from an unannounced PS4 version, but the PC never gets those visuals.

          • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:


            It’s exactly as you say, the decision to go simple and easy for all platforms saved them a lot of money and time. My issue is that they won’t admit it.


            Better lighting doesn’t force people with a torch, if they think it’s too dark they tweak it to be lighter. We’re not simply talking about the “mood” of the lighting, but the technical aspect of it. They scrapped modern and great looking techniques for cheaper methods that wouldn’t create another Blightown disaster in console land.

            Issue is that, with doing so, they simply decided to give the short stick to everyone due to various logistic reasons that one may or may not endorse.

        • Urthman says:

          Wow. At 2:00 in that video you can really see how terrible the tiling is on the distant textures in the retail version.

          link to youtu.be

          Compare the distant ground below the bridge in the two versions.

    • dE says:

      Because the lighting question is irrelevant and beaten to death several times over. It’s come in full circle several times already and is probably in its 7.th incarnation by now. It basically boils down to: Unique special snowflakes fail to realize that work in progress means work in progress. Those same folks end up goaded on by trolls with intentionally bad screenshots (motion blur, squashed contrast, intentionally omitting details etc). Shitstorm done. End of Story.

      • Unclepauly says:

        Some people may have cherry picked some bad looking shots for amplification but it still doesn’t change the fact they downgraded the graphics. From Software has already stated they had to downgrade for sake of better fps and because the old lighting was bad for gameplay. I can understand the gameplay part because not being able to see anything would definitely get frustrating (not a stealth game), but they could have kept the higher quality assets and just scaled the performance down like every other pc game does.

        • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

          It still feels like an excuse, like all their PR talk in this interview.

          Lighting is something that can be tweaked, the better it is the merrier. Off course, hand baking ultra simple lighting makes it simpler for them, but you won’t see them word it this way.

          And about the FPS, well… surely it’s not an issue on a tweakable PC version that will sit on varying hardware, and those who don’t have the horse power today might have it tomorrow. I don’t blame them, mind you, because i understand that cutting costly development was something they might have needed, and as such they went for the simple way for all platforms, but again the problem is that you won’t see them wording it like that.

          Oh and that line: “The genuine Dark Souls experience” was the cheesiest PR possible.

      • fish99 says:

        There’s a lengthy video comparison showing the same areas. Scroll up a bit for the link.

    • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

      Then lets spend a moment to contemplate how much textures are worth when the rest of what constitutes the actual presentation is missing.

      Nowadays i see a lot of complaining about PC ports having shitty textures, now there’s all the needed proof that the real problem is the lack of the actual meat around them.

      Sure, low res textures ARE a problem and are arguably the worst offender in most cases, but this should still teach us to ask about something more, not just a sharper and anti aliased 360 clone.

  3. Laini says:

    “RPS: Hm. Here’s hoping it works out better than last time.”

    Is it just me who sees things like that and thinks “Yeah right, like you actually said that in the interview” :P

    TBH some of these answers worry me a bit, the repeated used of the phrase “the genuine Dark Souls II experience” just sounds like PR speak. It’d have been nice if you could have spoken to an actual human being who was passionate about their game, not simply trying to sell it, you know what I mean?

    • Emeraude says:

      the repeated used of the phrase “the genuine Dark Souls II experience” just sounds like PR speak.

      That or something coming from someone firmly entrenched in the game as oeuvre (as opposed to game as service) position – which I can understand; considering oneself as auteur, wanting to deliver *one’s* particular vision being as, if not even more important than economical success.

      Obviously, I have no idea of which position is represented here (could even be both, really, given how all collective creative endeavors tend to happen).

      But it is a possibility worth keeping in mind.

      • InternetBatman says:

        I took as pretty typical of the notoriously closed-mouthed Japanese game industry.

        • Emeraude says:

          Japanese public speech in general, really: what matters most tend to be what is left unsaid rather than what is being uttered.

          But that oeuvre/service divide *has* been something I’ve felt during my few talks with Japanese devs. Purely anecdotal and gut related, but I do think it is worth keeping in mind.

          That and for once I enjoy not being the overly cynical one I guess.

          • Matt_W says:

            But Miyazoe seems to be a native speaker of American English; his accent sounds SoCal to me.

    • Godwhacker says:

      Well- and / or someone whose first language isn’t English, and maybe isn’t too familiar with the work of PC gaming as it exists in the West.

    • SominiTheCommenter says:

      Of course it’s PR speak, it was an interview with a PR person.
      As for the auteur theory, I’m literally laughing out loud.

  4. dongsweep says:

    DS2 is a great game but I can’t help but miss DS1 while playing it. Something about that small contained world of DS1 made it feel like such a triumph opening it all up and seeing how it all connected. Now with DS2 it just feels a lot more linear and like each place was designed by different people and put together. This is not to say the level design is not top notch, it truly is amazing, but that interconnectedness from DS1 is dead and, while probably not important to many, was pretty amazing to me.

    Still bought it again to play on PC instead of PS3, so obviously I liked it.

    • aliksy says:

      Yeah, DS2’s world didn’t feel quite as cohesive as DS1. It didn’t have the thrill of realizing the place you are now, you saw in the distance some hours ago.

      There also wasn’t as good a build-up about the different bosses. DS1, you knew who the great souls were from the opening cut scene. DS2 bosses didn’t have that.

      • Drinking with Skeletons says:

        I’m glad you said this, because after taking down all of the Great Souls, the cat in Majula started giving me their back-stories. Based on the phrasing–she refers to the Rotten as the “one you seek”–it seemed as if they were originally meant to play much earlier but were moved for some reason. That would have provided some context for what you were doing.

    • MykulJaxin says:

      That scares me a little. Some of my favorite moments from Dark Souls were when I looked around and said, “Whoa, that leads back here!?” The environments were a labyrinthine work of genius.

    • XhomeB says:

      Good point, the areas in DS felt so wonderfully organic, I was really impressed with how elegantly interconnected they all were.
      DS2 designers obviously aimed for a feeling much more similar to Demon’s Souls, with bonfire warping unlocked from the start and whatnot.

    • bigjig says:

      Yeah I tend to agree. I really enjoyed my 50 hours with the PS3 version, but after finishing I had no desire to go back and do another playthrough so I sold my copy. Compare that to average games and I guess it’s nothing to complain about, but compare it to Demon’s Souls and Dark Souls 1, which I still play regularly to this day, and I can’t help but feel disappointed.

      I was going to get the PC version at release as well, but I think I’ll wait out for a sale. Hopefully Miyazaki and his team can bring back some of the magic, because I get the feeling that the team that worked on DS2 didn’t fully understand what made the previous ones truly great. :(

  5. Wedge says:

    I have no idea how anyone would’ve expected mod support for a game with a fixed story in a static world and designed around an always online component (technically optional yes, but the game is designed with it to be there).

    • Emeraude says:

      (technically optional yes, but the game is designed with it to be there).

      Glad it’s optional myself, as it’s the games biggest flaw in my opinion. I really don’t get what people enjoy in that.

      I know, to each their own.

    • P.Funk says:

      None of what you said in any way detracts from the interest in mods with the exception of “always online”.

      The mod community for KOTOR has sustained that game for so many years beyond what would have been normal for its “genuine franchise experience”.

      You can mod anything anywhere anytime for any reason. Its not just sandbox games that benefit. Modding is a beautiful emergent thing, sad that its pretty obvious they’re not interested in allowing it so that they can plug us with DLC.

  6. TillEulenspiegel says:

    You’re muddling the difference between mods and simple fan-made patches. They have very little in common

    Proper mod support is extremely difficult to implement, as anyone who has designed any kind of complex API can tell you.

  7. Keyrock says:

    That’s a whole lot of non-answers. Doesn’t make me any less excited about the game, though.

    • wanderjahr says:

      Ya, From makes great games, but their love for their customers is lackluster. Get on the CDProjectRed level support.

  8. BTAxis says:

    Here’s a way to deal with cheaters: block the game in your firewall.

  9. araczynski says:

    man, textbook marketing responses, might as well be asking a politician for an explanation.

  10. Premium User Badge

    wsjudd says:

    An ironically soulless collection of answers. Ah well, you tried Nathan!

  11. derbefrier says:

    maybe i was just lucky or something but i would swear in my month or so of heavy PvP in Dark Souls i never encountered a cheater. I mean I died a lot sure but i never felt like i got cheated and i never enountered anyone that was invincible.

    Lots of PR speak, not a lot good info in this interview which kinda sucks but I dont really care console reviews already tell me this game is excellent. Also I think it was kinda silly to expect modding in a DS game.

    I was also under the impression they were not doing DLC this time around? I guess they changed thier mind.

    • aliksy says:

      I met a lot of cheaters in PvP dark souls 1. There’s a few categories I’ve seen:
      – People playing single player online with cheats. They could be ignorant of offline mode, or they could be assholes that don’t care.
      – People who turn on cheats when they get invaded. They want the perks of online play without the drawbacks, maybe. Or they could be self-righteous fuckers who come up with excuses. “The invaders are too powerful, that’s not fair, waaahhhh.” Fuck them.
      – People who invade with cheats. The worst kind of scum.

    • The Crane says:

      I also played many hours of invasions and don’t recall encountering any cheating hackers, just a few people who’d clearly given themselves lots of valuable items (generally to give away!).

    • XhomeB says:

      I played through Dark Souls 100% offline. Online mode was a neat bonus, but I didn’t feel I was missing out on an important part of the experience when opting to play by myself. Quite the contrary, it felt more immersive for me.

    • Matt_W says:

      There is a currently a hack for save files (called mega-mule) that maxes out stats and inventory without affecting soul level or soul memory. For a couple weeks, there apparently was an epidemic of low-level griefing by muled toons, but it seems to have died out somewhat, probably because it’s dumb and boring. I’m near the end of my NG playthrough and have never seen a cheating character despite several hours of PvP. Of course, modifying save files is more difficult on the consoles than on the PC, so maybe it will be more prevalent there.

      • derbefrier says:

        ahhh yeah didnt know about that. guess i was a bit on the lucky side.

  12. InternetBatman says:

    This is the second surprisingly hostile interview from Nathan. There’s a difference between asking hard questions and being rude about it. “So modders kind of stepped in and saved it” is rude, and I’m not even a fan of the series (never played it either way).

    • Laini says:

      True. That implies the game didn’t function at all until the modders stepped in. Sure it was missing a lot of the fancy bells and whistles PC gamers expect but it was functionally exactly the same as the console versions and no-one suggested they needed saving.

      • karthink says:

        The resolution was locked to 1024×768.

        I think Nathan’s assessment was accurate.

      • CyberPunkRock says:

        I think Nathan was spot on with his assessment. Sure, the game worked out of the box but dsfix saved it commercially because most pc gamers were turned off by the low resolution etc. To this day many people complain about this straight port even though the mod fixed all the problems one day after release.

        • Geebs says:

          I don’t really understand where that whole “mod support” thing was going, really. Durante supported From Software, not the other way around!

          It seems to me that fixing the graphics was all that was needed this time around; that’s precisely what they did.

      • CookPassBabtridge says:

        I like Nasty Nathan.

      • tormos says:

        The game literally didn’t function at all on my machine until I downloaded DSFIX. So I’d say that giving that impression is pretty justified.

    • Stardog says:

      This interview is embarrassing. Nathan comes across as a complete dickhead.

      Mod support? Who’s paying for that? The amount of work required would be incredible. Implementing Steamworks would lock the game into Steam. And Early Access? What??

      The first game was fine if you used a controller. The only other issue was a downscaled resolution which actually gave it a cool look. It was the same as the console version.

      • Wedge says:

        Wow. Just wow. I have never heard anyone refer to a blurry out of resolution mess as a “cool look”. Especially when the game had so much detail even with the console textures that you could suddenly see when running it a proper resolution. Also the game already is tied to Steam.

      • NotToBeLiked says:

        Mod support would be paid by the increase in sales. Plenty of games have sold massive amounts of extra copies solely because of mods. Ever heard of DayZ?
        Implementing Steamworks would make sure the multiplayer would exist for many more years and not untill whatever they run it on now shuts down (see: GfWL, Gamespy, every EA Sports game after 2 years,…)
        “This game looks cool because the resolution sucks, just like on consoles!” Seriously? Despite the fact that a worse resolution NEVER makes a game look better, there is also the slight difference that most people sit quite a bit closer to their PC monitor than to their TV screen.

        Have you ever even played a game on PC or are you some lost console gamer?

      • lovcol says:

        The game looked just fine without the mod. The faded look from the lower res just amplified the game’s atmosphere for me.

    • Emeraude says:

      I was fearing it was just me. I mean without anymore context, a sentence like “Hm. Here’s hoping it works out better than last time” really sounds kinda rude/aggressive to me for example.

      May not be in context, but in current text form there really is something (more than probably involuntary) smug to it. Or am I I totally misreading ?

      • subedii says:

        On the negative, I do agree it seemed a little on the harsh side and trying to make a bit too big an issue out of certain topics. On the positive, it’s also kind of refreshing to see such direct questions asked where most game websties are just plain fawning.

        Although I also have a suspicion that the written interview seems harsher than it actually was when done at the time.

      • Durkonkell says:

        I thought it was an appropriate response to what amounted to “We’re kinda just hoping that people won’t cheat.”

        • derbefrier says:

          what else can you say? no amount of anti cheating software is gonna stop people who are determined to cheat, from cheating. Maybe instead of paying lip service to us by saying something like “we are doing all we can blah blah blah implementing extra awesome cheat detection that hackers will bypass in 10 minutes blah blah” they were just honest and tell it like it is. Its gonna happen we just hope the community is mature enough for it no to run rampant.

          • shadybearfaced says:

            So, because you can’t completely stop cheating, it’s better to just say “Eh, I’m sure people will be honorable or whatever.” What a great philosophy. We should abolish police departments because, you know, determined criminals might get away with crime anyway, so whatever. No point attempting to stop or even control it.

          • derbefrier says:

            ” We should abolish police departments because, you know, determined criminals might get away with crime anyway, so whatever. No point attempting to stop or even control it.”

            because cheating in a video game is equal to letting crime run rampant on the streets amiriiteguys?

            give me a break…

            it doesnt change the fact i am right and you know it. they may have some basic anti cheat stuff I dont know but what are you expecting?

          • shadybearfaced says:

            Obviously I wasnt saying that. I was making a point about the dev’s attitude through an analogy. An extreme analogy, I know, but I’m making the point that theyre just shrugging and saying “We’re sure it’ll be fine.” You know, instead of making SOME attempt to control hacking. Any attempt at all.

            What I expect is an answer aside from “Whatever, people are honorable right guys?”

          • Emeraude says:


            Interesting analogy, but then I’d have to ask: why do you think it is From software’s job to police the way people behave in game ? (Rhetorical question, but I do think there is value in it.)

          • derbefrier says:

            didi he say they were doing absolutely nothing? I must have missed that part. He asked if they were going to do anything extra which sounds good on paper but we all know it wont stop anything.

            Does Dark souls have any kind of anti cheat? I would assume it does since most multiplayer games do these days but if it doesn’t I would be forced to agree with you since i am operating on the assumption it does at least have basic anti cheat protection.

          • shadybearfaced says:


            Fair enough, I guess I just took it to be more of a blanket statement than it really was. Still, it’s not exactly heart-warming to hear a dev pretty much say “We’re relying on the honor system.”


            I wouldn’t pretend to know anything in-depth about the video games business, but I assume it is (at least in some part) the dev’s responsibility to make sure people aren’t breaking the game experience by cheating. I’m not sure though. That’s different than policing the way people behave in the game, however — the way I see it, it’s more like enforcing fundamental rules.

          • tormos says:

            I’d like to point out that “That doesn’t change the fact that I’m right and you know it” is the WORST POSSIBLE ARGUMENT, because even in Bizarro World where it was true, the other person wouldn’t stop arguing (because they presumably would have some deep seated personal reason to randomly lie about what they thought about DS II), and given that it’s not true it’s just going to make you look bad

          • crizzyeyes says:

            @derbefrier Sigh… no, it doesn’t. Please refrain from arguing with someone over an issue you know nothing about. You can use a hex editor to give weapons and items attributes in the game that they could not possibly have otherwise — one of the most people editing a sword such that it instantly curses those struck by it. There isn’t even file consistency checking. They did not bother because they had warned their fans beforehand that they would be getting the quickest, dirtiest port possible and people were totally fine with it.

            On the other hand, Dark Souls 2 does have “soul memory,” which is a decent solution to one of the worst aspects of cheating: twinks who invaded low soul level players. From Software, instead of attempting to implement a system that would prevent using cheating programs such as Megamule (which allows the player to basically edit a save file to give their character whatever items/equipment they choose), decided to implement a system that would guarantee that players would only get invaded / match-made with by players who had played the game to a similar extent that the other player had. Instead of using soul level for matchmaking, Dark Souls 2 uses the sum total of all souls accumulated in the game; regardless of whether or not they were ever spent on something. There was some backlash to this, since players claim they cannot be matchmade with others or find it difficult to find players of a similar soul level, but this is mostly either overblown or complaints from those who choose to stick to an arbitrary soul level such as 120.

    • Philomelle says:

      I found that question less rude and more honest to the point of harshness. Having played the game before and after DSfix, yes, modders have saved it. Dark Souls in its pure unmodded form did things to my graphic card that made it completely and utterly unplayable.

    • aethyrium says:

      Nathan always comes across like that. I don’t typically read the author’s name before the article, but pretty much every time I read through a review and think “Well that’s an asshole question”, or every time I see some knee-jerk click-bait speculation, or every time I stop myself and think “when did this site turn into Kotaku?”, I look up at the author’s name, and every time: Nathan Grayson. I wish there was an option to filter out submissions by authors, because I feel like this guy has dramatically dropped the quality of this site,

      • Advanced Assault Hippo says:

        It’s an awkward one for me.

        I’ve been following the site since the very beginning and on the one hand I don’t want to badmouth the site, because it’s still one of the strongest PC gaming sites out there, but I’m also acutely aware that Nathan is (IMO) simply a step down in quality. I often feel a little sad for the place when reading his articles.

        What I’ve just said will be construed as being nasty or something. But it seems quite clear to me he’s a backwards step for RPS, in the way he comes across and the rather grating writing style.

        I just think it’s a bit of a shame that they plumped for him.

  13. DanMan says:

    We understand that there were some positive reactions to some of the fan made mods

    Understatement of the year. Without DSfix DS1 would have tanked, I’m pretty sure.

    The insisting question about MOD support struck me, too. If they fix their sh…tuff, no big need for MODs in a game like that.

    • XhomeB says:

      Durante – the creator of DSfix – pretty much SAVED the PC port, that much is true – he single handedly made it the best version of the game there is. Without him, it would have been a total disaster in terms of sales, I don’t think anyone can deny that at this point.

      • CyberPunkRock says:


        IMO dsfix is not a mod but a patch. When I hear mod I think Skyrim where whole questlines, weapons, etc. are added/altered. This wouldn’t work in DS for balancing and online reasons. Maybe Nathan should have made that distinction in the interview.

    • Shooop says:

      Pffff, yeah right. Mark my words, people would have bought the hell out of the game anyway. They just would have complained about it a little more because one thing gamers don’t have is self-control, and the two things they have an abundance of are petulance and hypocrisy

  14. LennyLeonardo says:

    There is no some new information

  15. Drinking with Skeletons says:

    Why anyone would expect the developers of an unflinchingly difficult, rigidly controlled franchise to endorse mods is beyond me.

    • Ringwraith says:

      I’m not sure what its supposed ‘difficulty’ has to do with it.
      Although I’m not sure what you mean by “rigidly controlled”.

      • Drinking with Skeletons says:

        The Souls games are all very tightly controlled, carefully balanced experiences. The developers have clear ideas about how the games should work and lace them with a variety of secrets and challenges to gate progress and reward certain behaviors. Mods change that. Whether it becomes easier or more difficult is irrelevant. The crafted experience is irrevocably altered. Throw in the multiplayer aspects woven into the titles and it becomes even more apparent that mods are antithetical to what the developers are trying to achieve.

        • P.Funk says:

          A fascist interpretation of what the end user’s experience ought to be like. Might as well say that authors should receive no mocking wordsif they were to insist on trying to lock the kindle versions of their books to prevent people form reading a later chapter before they’ve finished the ones before it.

          Reminds me also of Oleg’s response to modding in IL-2.

          I am a gamer and I want to game as I see fit. I paid for it.

          Also, just because mods change the game experience, doesn’t mean we aren’t playing the vanilla version first you know. Maybe I got bored with their perfectly balanced experience and want something new. RTS games rely on excruciating game balance but they also have a long history of excellent modding. Go tell the CoH community how the BK mod has ruined the purity of the vanilla experience.

          Bunch of poppycock.

          • derbefrier says:

            “Might as well say that authors should receive no mocking wordsif they were to insist on trying to lock the kindle versions of their books to prevent people form reading a later chapter before they’ve finished the ones before it.

            because this is the same thing

            /rolls eyes

            you do realize 99% of games including PC dont officially support modding in anyway. people do it anyway and they may not try and stop you but that’s a bit different than going through the trouble of giving proper mod tools which is very rare on any platform.

          • Emeraude says:

            A fascist interpretation of what the end user’s experience ought to be like.

            Totalitarian, maybe, but certainly not fascistic.
            Authorial, as I stated up-thread, would certainly be a much more charitable descriptor. Maybe more fitting even.

            Might as well say that authors should receive no mocking wordsif they were to insist on trying to lock the kindle versions of their books to prevent people form reading a later chapter before they’ve finished the ones before it.

            I’d say a developer not giving support to modding tools is more akin to a musicians not giving the base tracks to make your own remixes of their music. Would be better if they did, but frankly they have no obligation to do so, and if they prefer not to, well, it remains their prerogative.

            For sure you can edit any movie or book or song to be experienced the way you see fit, but the authors have no obligation to give you the raw, unedited footage or unedited manuscript to help you do it, do they ?

            I am a gamer and I want to game as I see fit. I paid for it.

            Don’t you think game as a genre is cursed to be forever stuck to being pure entertainment with no other added value because of that position ?
            Still. Your prerogative.

          • apocraphyn says:

            Oh, bugger off. I see the words “privilege” and “entitlement” bandied around an awful lot in relation to gaming, but you’re a prime example of such words being used correctly. “I am a gamer and I want to game as I see fit. I paid for it”? That’s the same damn justification you can see people who hack the game using.

            If they don’t want people to veer too far from the systems that they designed, then they’re welcome to that viewpoint. People are gonna mod the game regardless (Durante has already made some fixes), but hey.

    • HadToLogin says:

      *Why anyone would expect the CONSOLE developers to endorse mods is beyond me.” – fixed it for you.

    • MobileAssaultDuck says:

      It’s not really that difficult once you figure out the primary difference between it and other similar games.

      A lack of animation cancelling and slow animations. That’s pretty much the entirety behind DS’s difficulty.

      Once you learn to play conservatively, it becomes more tedious than difficult.

  16. Dave Tosser says:

    Because the console version doesn’t have any cheaters, silly. No cheaters, hackers or modders at all. Nope, not a single one. ‘Megamule’, you say? Never heard of it.

    Aren’t those cheating PC bastards such a load of bastard-flavoured bastards, with their crunchy bastard coatings and gooey bastard centres? Pirating cheating PC bastards.

  17. serioussgtstu says:

    Only six more hours. Only six more hours.

    *Claws face off*

    *Takes dog for walk*

    • CookPassBabtridge says:

      “Claws face off”

      Thanks. You just brought the Poltergiest Mirror Sequence flooding back.

    • RedViv says:

      Don’t do it in that order, man. Can’t really play Dark Souls 2 once you’re held up for running around with your face scaring the common folk!

  18. altum videtur says:


    Also have to say I enjoy openly hostile interviewers. PR fuckers should learn to cover their asses successfully.

  19. Lobotomist says:

    Amazing how polite and well spoken Miyazoe is. Its really a different culture.
    Relaying on players honor not to cheat.

    Uh-uh 6 more hours to go.

    • Shooop says:

      The fact they don’t see computers as machines to play games on at all helps. It takes more work to cheat on a console.

  20. hideinlight says:

    Ok lets sum up the interview.

    Game done, play with honor, mod support waste of time, we made pc game good, no comment further.

    • Stardreamer says:

      Ok, let’s sum up your comment:


    • Matt_W says:

      Feel free to youtube interviews with Mr. Miyazoe and note he seems to be a native speaker of English, perhaps with the slight swallowing of internal syllables that characterizes the accent of people from Southern California.

  21. Vagrant says:

    You forgot to ask when we are getting armored core on pc

    • derbefrier says:

      now THAT would have been a good question

    • Wedge says:

      But we already can play all the good ones on PC. (Or at least I’m assuming, haven’t tried them on PCSX2).

  22. Stardreamer says:

    We wanted to make sure we provide the most important PC centric features such as improved texture graphics, higher frame rates and also keyboard/mouse mapping controls. We tried to incorporate as much feedback from the PC fans, and spent the extra time in development to deliver the genuine Dark Souls II experience on the PC platform

    …Ubisoft, is that you?

  23. SuicideKing says:

    Wow. They effectively just said “no comment” throughout, didn’t they?

    • The Random One says:

      Until they ran out of ways to say ‘no comment’ without saying it.

  24. Scumbag says:

    “We have put in efforts to secure the game as much as possible, but in the end, we depend on the fan loyalty to enjoy the true experience we have designed.”

    That is either pure naivety or him nicely saying “You want it to be policed? Police it yourself, we cant be bothered.”

    • derbefrier says:

      or just admitting to the fact that no matter what they do they wont be able to prevent cheating and they know it.

  25. mikmanner says:

    I agree this interview seems a little on the blunt side. The answers are pretty obvious too, maybe as a result? Yes DS1 was a terrible PC port, but at least it sounds like they’re trying with this one. Also who knows what the situation was on DS1, maybe they could only get enough funding for what they delivered. Or they made a decision to focus on more content instead. I want From software to feel like the PC is an inviting platform to work on, with receptive, eager and passionate fans, possibly going in guns blazing like this might be a little too agro on a dev with little experience with the platform.

  26. Megakoresh says:

    So what he basically said was “Fuck mods. The guys that saved our game and enabled it to be played on PC did some cool shit, but we don’t care and don’t plan to care.”. Nice attitude. Kinda like BioWare was towards ME3 at first. I never liked Dark Souls, because of it’s abhorrent checkpoint system and huge grind, but was hoping that even if they continue to portray wasting player’s time as “challenge” in this game, that at least mods would fix it. Well that’s one less game I’ll be buying in the near future.

    • Wedge says:

      Errrr, if those are your problems with lack of “mods” there’s going to be plenty out there for you in the form of trainers/cheat engines. I’m all confused these days because a “mod” used to clearly mean custom player created content, but now engine hacks and other graphical tweaking has become so commonplace.

      • Megakoresh says:

        Cheats and trainers do not fix checkpoints and the grind caused by them. You need to have a mod for that. For example a mod that either places the existing bonfires properly, or adds some mechanic to permanently kill trash mobs you otherwise need to grind through to get to the interesting section. You can’t use a cheat for this, cheats are just for battling bad progression systems (which in DS was a bit too grindy, but not enough to warrant cheating) or just flat-out remove challenge from the game, in which case WTF is the point in playing it, considering that this game is mostly about the challenge.

        • Volcanu says:

          I find it a bit strange that on the one hand you want “trash mobs” permanently removed but then also say that cheating is pointless as the whole point of the game is that it is challenging and what’s the point in playing if you remove the challenge.

          To me those sentiments seem almost diametrically opposed. The whole game is designed around the bonfire system deliberately- having enemies permanently die would significantly decrease the challenge and for many (myself included) make the stakes of boss fights far lower. I mean part of the thrill and sense of jeopardy is knowing that if you die, there is a real cost in terms of having to battle back to the boss again. If you could quicksave in front of the boss fog that would hugely diminish the experience.

          One thing you might not know though is that in DSII if you kill the trash mobs enough times they will eventually stop respawning (unless you burn a special item to revive them). That’s sort of a halfway house for people who have to repeat a section many, many times. Perhaps that might make you enjoy the game a bit more? If not, then perhaps it’s just not your cup of tea.

          • Megakoresh says:

            A lot of people are brainwashed by this, being a very clever presentation and appropriate marketing (I mean that’s how governments work too, and it’s a potent effect everywhere). The fact of reality is though that wasting player’s time adds zero challenge to the game. Challenge, the real one, and the point of it is in trying again the exact thing that you have failed. Not wasting time going over the section you have beaten several times once more to get to the part which is the actual stopping point.

            Want proof that you are brainwashed and it’s not me who’s deluded? Consider this: let’s say Half Life 2, being the game you probably played at some point, had one single checkpoint per level. And when you, say, were eaten by alpha Antlion, you had to go through the prison levels, killing the same combine over and over again, solving the same puzzle, knocking down the same turrets. Would you be more compelled to complete the level and beat the antlion, than you would by default with quicksaves, or just more frustrated?

            Just like Dark Souls enemies in HL2 are preset, they behave the exact same way, they are not particularly smart and once you know the best way to do it, the only way you would fail is due to some unforeseen circumstance like your phone ringing or you looked away from the screen at a wrong moment. You are literally just wasting your time on thing you have beaten many times before just to get to the thing which you can’t beat.

            Just in case of HL2, if this hypothetical scenario existed. it would not portray itself as an “extra challenge”, and as a result it would provoke the reaction in you that you and many others are artificially muffling in Dark Souls, shutting out that flaw, and as a result being less affected by it mentally and more passionate about the good things in that game, like bosses, lore or story.

            Don’t take it the wrong way, I mean no offence when I say “you’re brainwashed” or anything like that. It’s just to point out the strong bias in your opinion, that is being exploited by the marketing. Everyone is susceptible to brainwashing, whether by advertisement, politics or media (which combines both), especially in the west.

            I am just saying that checkpoints, the way they are done in DS are objectively a bad decision (because they serve no purpose other than to waste time) and objectively do not add challenge (same reason). The only thing that stands between people hating it and people loving it is genuinely genius presentation. Nothing more.

            Checkpoints must be placed to split up different challenges. Directly between the boss and mob section, directly between long and easy mob section and short and difficult mob section, directly before new areas where you have no way of expecting an attack. They should be more frequent in difficult sections and less frequent in easy ones. Good checkpoints must be designed with an intent to SAVE player’s time, not waste it. And it is something 99% of people will agree with me about on every post that isn’t tagged “Dark Souls”. Kinda proof in of itself.

            And yeah I heard about the burning out thing. Unfortunately I need to kill them 15 times, which in my eyes still constitutes as “grind” :P

  27. OscarWilde1854 says:

    I honestly can’t stand these articles… This isn’t an “interview”.. he isn’t “anwsering” any questions.. it’s just a test of his PR abilities… every single answer is aimed to be as politically correct; as convoluted; as completely empty; as tactical as humanly possible. Meaning in the end he doesn’t tell us anything, he doesn’t hint at anything, he doesn’t accidentally reveal anything, he doesn’t hint that he may in fact have an opinion about life, he doesn’t reveal that he is or is not a robot, and he certainly doesn’t reveal whether or not this port is actually going to be any better than the previous disaster…

    So what was the point? I feel like I honestly could have read the questions and bullshitted the same answers.

    (No offense to RPS on this one, I’m referring to interviews in general at this “level”; not the interviewers lack of skill)

  28. HisDivineOrder says:

    “So what did you learn from mods?”

    “Mods? What are mods?”

    “Modifications… to the game… you know, the only reason anyone ever enjoyed Dark Souls 1?”

    “Oh. We want you to play the game without mods.”

    “But… I… I just said you had to have them to enjoy the first game.”

    “We want you to enjoy Dark Souls just the way we make Dark Souls. You should not be modding.”

    “But… but… whatever. So what did you do with all that extra time between the console release and PC release?”

    “We added graphics, mouse and keyboard support, and extra doo-dads and options. We also played a LOT of Dota2 and Minecraft.”

    “Wait… what?”

    “Yeah. Man, that was some awesome gaming there.”

    “Sooo… any chance you’ll use Steamworks integration to really give players access to mods or what not?”

    “Wait a sec. BOOM! Yeah. Just won my Dota2 match. Did you say something?”

    “Any chance you could use Steamworks integration to let users do–”

    “No. Not a chance. No chance at all. Not even a little one.”

    “And what about DLC? You were adamant that you wouldn’t let DLC be anything that wasn’t included because the full game should be the full game, so–”

    “This interview is terminated. You will be hearing from my lawyers. Good day, sir.”

    “Wait… what?”

  29. Shooop says:

    our intent is for players to first enjoy a game experience within the designs that we are able to provide, an experience that is genuine to the Dark Souls franchise.

    Go-go gadget PR-speak!

  30. Shakes999 says:

    Typical gamer entitlement attitude. Company goes out of their way to improve the PC experience hand over fist from the original and RPS and the peanut gallery does nothing but cry about what it didn’t do to cater to their every need.What the fuck is going on with this site lately? I come here to get away from this type of dipshit mentality and its becoming more prevalent by the day.

    The only thing this interview was missing was a way to shoe horn another jealous crack on Penny-Arcade.

  31. TomA says:

    God this guy is insufferable

    Miyazoe: We have found that it is difficult to eliminate all types of cheating on the PC platform, and ultimately it was too much effort so we didn’t bother. Fingers crossed nobody cheats!

    • Jazzyboy says:

      Heh heh, yeah, exactly what I was thinking.

      Do they really believe the ‘fans’, of which they probably have few on PC after DS1, can all be trusted to avoid cheating? There’s bound to be at least a small portion of hackers.(hell, there’ll probably be a big chunk of children, as there unfortunately is on most adult games due to parental incompetence, and some of them are bound to use hacks)

      • Lazor says:

        I was a bit put off by their pessimistic attitude on cheating… in my mind it translated like this “Well, there’s not much we can do about it, so we’re not even going to bother doing ANYTHING”. That being said, the soul memory system for online play seems like it could get rid of at least some instances of unfair play.

        If they really wanted to stomp on trainers, they could just record the amount of souls players have VS the amount of time they have played. For instance, if a character has over 1,000,000 souls by the time they exit the starting area on NG, there’s clearly a hack being used… As for invulnerability hacks, well…

    • Jenks says:

      I was sure you meant Nathan

  32. Nate says:

    I am really shocked at people’s attitudes that DS would have flopped on pc without DSfix. I may be the exception, but I doubt I’m the only one: I only recently installed DSfix, after playing hundreds of hours of DS. (I wanted to see what it was like. Higher resolutions were kind of nice. Not the kind of game where you need every frame as soon as possible, but 60 fps was nice, when I remembered to re-enable it after problematic ladders. Maybe when people say that DS was unplayable without it, they’re talking about something else?)

    DS was a game that console gamers loved. When I got the chance to play a slightly superior version (in that Blighttown didn’t suck quite as bad), I saw what they were talking about, and I loved it too.

    Which is good, because my impression of DSII so far is that, as far as pc gaming goes, it’s a lot like DS with DSfix. Resolution choices, slightly larger textures, better framerates, but a gamepad is still strongly recommended, and there aren’t any other pc-friendly doo-dads that I can see. Oh, now it says, “Please leave your PC powered on while autosaving.”

  33. Wowbagger says:

    From what I have seen so far, the PC version has the usual better textures and solid 60 fps, not to mention decent optimisation this time around for medium spec machines.

  34. Borsook says:

    I’ve bought a barrel of bad games in my time, DS1 was the worst purchase ever. The fact they have never patched it nor even seen the need to do so is just affronting… Not to mention their really dicky attitude to mods. What’s more when it comes to the actual gameplay, Severance: Blade of Darkness is still much better, ever after all these years…

  35. Jazzyboy says:

    I know some people thought this interview was aggressive, but after reading the PR’s answers, I think Nathan should have been more aggressive. The PR seems like an asshole, just dodging legitimate questions with the generic “You get the experience we intented” nonsense.

    It’s certainly turned me off from the game. I wouldn’t mind if they just admitted they can’t support mods fully with their engine, or they just can’t afford to build an editor for it, but this bs about them delivering the experience they intented for us is just madness. We’re the ones playing the game, their vision should be put on the backburners while they try listening to the people who pay for their salaries.

    Then again, after Dark Souls 1, I wouldn’t be buying 2 for at least another year, and if mod support is so restricted that the people who actually know what they’re doing can’t fix the incompetent mess that these devs are bound to produce again, I might not ever buy it.

  36. Chufty says:

    But the game is amazing.

  37. Halk says:

    What is he talking about? A SINGLE PERSON created an anti-cheating tool for Dark Souls PC (Dark Souls PVP Watchdog). Why couldn’t they manage to do that? Are you kidding?

  38. stupid_mcgee says:

    It’s sad to think that I used to like coming to RPS because it wasn’t filled with the mind-numbing dipshits that are so prevalent in so many other areas of gaming. Now, RPS seems overrun with them.

    “Ooooh, l’m going to be really sarcastic, because I confuse being a smug asshole with being witty.”

    “I’m easily irate about everything! GODDAMMIT!”

    “Stupid losers doing highly complex tasks can’t do complicated things as well as other people. Ergo, the developers are complete imbeciles.”

    “I’m going to project the failings of others onto these guys to drive home the fallacious point that all developers are worthless unless they personally appease my desires.”

    “I want the world. I want the whole world. I want to lock it all up in my pocket, it’s my ball of chocolate. GIVE IT TO ME!”

    It’s a never-ending parade of narcissism, ignorance, self-entitlement, with a heaping dose of the Dunning-Kruger effect. It would be hilarious. That is, if it weren’t so astoundingly pathetic and aggravating.