Support NeoGAF

[Sanctuary]

Combat is more or less exactly the same as DS1. Some people enjoy trying to make drama out of nothing.

You obviously didn't play Demon's or Dark that much, because if you had, you're realize just how entirely off the combat in this game is.
Do a quick search on google about Dark Souls 2 and hitboxes. I mentioned them being bad last week, but was told some shit like "learn to play right" as though I suddenly don't know how to play a Souls game any longer after the 600+ hours put into the previous two.

Lots, and lots of complaining about them in various forums all over. It was actually pointed out too early on too in a gameplay preview, but the people playing were just criticized as "being bad" at the game. Now a lot of people are noticing just how bad the hitboxes are.

I'm guessing they put shit all into Adaptability. Agility has a vast impact on the "responsiveness" of rolling, using items and weapon swings. That's really the only thing I can think of that might cause issues, Having prioritized Adaptability above all else on my sl 178 char I haven't noticed any sluggishness or slowdown compared to DaS1 at all. But then again I also didn't notice too much of a difference when I started my game as a Knight either. I did notice some sluggishness starting as a Bandit though since they have dreadfully low adaptability.

20 Adapt or Attunement (both raise agility, Adapt faster though) doesn't change the problem with hitboxes and it only slightly increases the character speed...which is still way off.

More horseshit. WTF is this? There's a very great difference between using the falchion, the uchi, the longsword, the claymore, the halberd, the spears, the murakumo, the ultra greatswords... hell, even bows have a weightier feel now. Combat is as solid as it's ever been.

I don't want to say "no, they're not serious", but I'm seriously tempted to. I have 70 hours of the game using a dex build and have zero idea what the fuck they're on about.

You wouldn't be you, if you didn't respond to everything that you don't notice, or disagree with as "bullshit".

 

[Broritos]

The hitboxes have always sucked in all Souls games. It just didn't seem like it until DS2 because DS2 has less invincibility frames during the dodge animation.

 

[Sanctuary]

The hitboxes have always sucked in all Souls games. It just didn't seem like it until DS2 because DS2 has less invincibility frames during the dodge animation.

Nah, it's a slight combination of those two issues, but you can tell it's not just a dodge problem when you're getting hit by shit that you definitely should not when circle strafing, or when enemy weapons randomly phase through you.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

You obviously didn't play Demon's or Dark that much, because if you had, you're realize just how entirely off the combat in this game is.

Hundreds of hours in both games. Try again. It's slightly different (the biggest difference is holding circle while locked on) but that doesn't make it "off".

 

[Rambone]

So reading back up to this point, it appears we mostly are still where we left off at in the other thread(s). The only sign of real progress in this thread is that we have requested for some PC screenshots to compare, to hopefully alleviate concerns and put this dog to rest.

*It is established that the game is enjoyable and we already know that graphics haven't been a strong point of the series but have established that it is still important to gamers while others could care less. This argument will probably be endless due to differing opinions.

*Comparing various media, non retail builds are visually superior to the retail build. This is leaving a lot of sore butts, which I can understand as the older stuff looked damn good. It appears that we have established that changes are likely to be made before the final retail build is released but we did not expect the lighting and much touted game mechanics to be gimped so soon after seeing recent builds. We do not have any real answers to this and probably never will but this is constantly being debated.

*First twitter feedback from Bamco regarding the above was pretty generic, answering nothing. I'm not sure we are ever going to get an answer unless somebody does an interview with FROM and pry's for answers. FROM does interviews from time to time, so this still seems feasible.

*Mixed feelings on the developer and publisher. Looks like a lot of blame going on, this is an argument that is pretty much going nowhere till we find out more details which again is more or less unlikely but who is to say?

*Second Twitter requesting screenshots of the PC version highlighting specific areas has not been answered yet. This was a good move, great way to be constructive by making an attempt to get proof/more details rather than speculate more bringing this thread back into an endless downward spiral.

*Many users hoping the PC will not be downgraded and contain original assets/lighting. Its anyone's guess till we get more screenshots to clear up current doubts. Based on the Bamco reply, we will likely not see anything till closer to the release date.

I think the above points pretty much sum it up. It has been an interesting ride but hopefully we can all agree that we love Dark Souls which is why we are posting here and have been disappointed by what appears to be a downgrade leaving some confused or upset by this for various reasons. At the end of the day we are still having fun playing the game or can hopefully agree that Dark Souls II is still an enjoyable product. I for one will be playing on PC as I prefer to have all the bells and whistles along with mod support.

I apologize if i miss-interpreted anything but this is what I got out of it all. Thanks for reading.

 

[B-Genius]

Thanks for posting, Rambone. An intelligent, well-rounded breakdown if ever there was one.

You raised a good point, which is to be constructive while trying to get to the bottom of this. I also like that you aren't swayed by the idea of this being an official statement from From, when Bamco are responsible for reception overseas. It may well have been a joint response, but we don't know how much information From themselves had, or at what point they signed off on Bamco's handling of the situation.

 

[Totobeni]

Well... sound like this thread is finally over/dead. (I'm not sure why people brought gameplay in the last two pages tho).

anyway this is what I've personally learned from all of this.

- Twitter campaigns are highly effective.
- VG Sites and Gaming Journalists will not report a case of false advertising or big downgrade if they like the game. #gamingjournalismintegrity
- Fans of developer/series will be a-ok with any sort of anti consumer practices as long as the gameplay is good.
- There is no saint corporate. your beloved smaller Japanese developer will do bad shit and shady business just like EA or Activision.
- Some actually don't care about the false advertising case but just want the dev to fix the PC version (so it's ok if I get the superior version)
- Dismissive PR responses are not the way to go.
- Giant Bomb is awful and two members should be ashamed of themselves.


Now I hope no other developer does this, Dark Souls 2 downgrade and From misleading people for months was bad and they sadly almost got a free pass. I wish this put an end to this sort of practice and I hope VG sites get better emotional-free and more professional in the future.

 

[Clott]

That was a thoughtful summary toto.

 

[Clarkus Darkus]

Well... sound like this thread is finally over/dead. (I'm not sure why people brought gameplay in the last two pages tho).

anyway this is what I've personally learned from all of this.

- Twitter campaigns are highly effective.
- VG Sites and Gaming Journalists will not report a case of false advertising or big downgrade if they like the game. #gamingjournalismintegrity
- Fans of developer/series will be a-ok with any sort of anti consumer practices as long as the gameplay is good.
- There is no saint corporate. your beloved smaller Japanese developer will do bad shit and shady business just like EA or Activision.
- Some actually don't care about the false advertising case but just want the dev to fix the PC version (so it's ok if I get the superior version)
- Dismissive PR responses are not the way to go.
- Giant Bomb is awful and two members should be ashamed of themselves.


Now I hope no other developer does this, Dark Souls 2 downgrade and From misleading people for months was bad and they sadly almost got a free pass. I wish this put an end to this sort of practice and I hope VG sites get better emotional-free and more professional in the future.

Thats the main gist of the thread to be fair from what i gathered.

Other than that great summary of it all.

 

[QisTopTier]

No the combat feels a lot more delayed and every action you execute takes a lot more to recover.

Never said all weapons feel the same.

I'm chucking lightning spears in about 1.2 seconds a pop. I don't know what delayed is.



Game speed feels fine, level up your adp or attunement, if you want to move around faster wear lighter armor in general, game scales everything you do movement wise based on your weight total. My offensive cleric zips around like lighting while my paladin build is slow and weighty. Just going from 65% to 40% is a major difference in roll distance, stam regen, and movement speed.

 

[UnrealEck]

From responds to PC gamers asking why Dark Souls 2 has been downgraded for their powerful machines.

 

[Ferr986]

I too dont see any difference in the combat of DS2 compared to 1 (mind you, never played DeS).

Enemies tracking you was already awfully present in DS1. I think its more about the AI of the enemies: they come in bigger packs now, and are way more agresive, with less oportunities to drink an estus, this coupled with less invincibility frames for roll and raising your shield its what makes it feel slightly different from DS1 (again, just IMO).

I still think DS1 is better than DS2, for other reasons. Both are incredible games.

 

[Mr.NiceGuy]

- Giant Bomb is awful and two members should be ashamed of themselves.

Didn't read the whole thread. What did GB do to make them awful?

 

[Gbraga]

Come on, Giant Bomb isn't awful, it's just one of the guys' personal opinion, and he didn't even come into a thread about this until now, people were just asking him what he thought of that and he answered on twitter. Not even close to people coming to threads to call everyone idiots for not praising the sun.

I may be wrong, but I think of GiantBomb as a place for entertainment, to know their opinion on stuff and to laugh, I never got the impression that they were trying to do journalism, or whatever. They just like games and are funny and people like them for that. Laughing at them sucking at games or having fun with their waifus in Persona 4 isn't what I'd call journalism.

 

[zma1013]

I too dont see any difference in the combat of DS2 compared to 1 (mind you, never played DeS).

Enemies tracking you was already awfully present in DS1. I think its more about the AI of the enemies: they come in bigger packs now, and are way more agresive, with less oportunities to drink an estus, this coupled with less invincibility frames for roll and raising your shield its what makes it feel slightly different from DS1 (again, just IMO).

I still think DS1 is better than DS2, for other reasons. Both are incredible games.

I agree, combat it is pretty much the same to me. Same combat quirks in both games. Some enemies can track you after certain attacks, sometimes hitboxes are wonky, sometimes there are button response delays. Hey it's Dark Souls.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Some fringe people are taking the whole deception anfgle to far but I dont blame them for wanting Bamco to have been more clear cut on version disparities.

Either way the Network Test and January previews were enough warning for most.

The advertising is all over the place but if the PC version fits the best of it I really dont see it as a big deal.

Launch trailer showed footage from all versions.

Lets just see what April 25th brings to the table

 

[Totobeni]

Didn't read the whole thread. What did GB do to make them awful?

+

+going apologist-mode and defending the downgrade in the last Bombcast

 

[Soriku]

No the combat feels a lot more delayed and every action you execute takes a lot more to recover.

Never said all weapons feel the same.

It felt delayed in the beginning when I was using an axe.

Then I started using a Shortsword, Falchion, and I'm probably switching to Uchi, and they all feel perfectly fine.

Saying the weapons all feel like greatswords in Dark Souls 1 is just wrong.

You obviously didn't play Demon's or Dark that much, because if you had, you're realize just how entirely off the combat in this game is.
Do a quick search on google about Dark Souls 2 and hitboxes. I mentioned them being bad last week, but was told some shit like "learn to play right" as though I suddenly don't know how to play a Souls game any longer after the 600+ hours put into the previous two.

The only strange hitboxes I've encountered is when fighting smaller enemies, like the Crystal Lizards or the wolves. I'd agree with you then. Otherwise, I haven't had an issue, either in terms of attacking or getting attacked.

 

[UnrealEck]

Wait wait wait. Daniel Beltran is European and not Japanese!?

 

[CadetMahoney]

Surprised at all the people who say they aren't going to get this now, or will wait.

Goes to show that graphics truly are what's most important to a lot of people.

Hard to believe some ppl have performance standards (loading times, framerates etc) and are against gutted gameplay mechanics that obviously should be there (lighting - enemies popping in, torches are useless etc.)

Yeah, usually when they make a PC version they don't make it with _completely_ different assets these days. So, don't count on it.

The PC version is not a port this time though, it's supposed to be the lead platform, so any downgrades they had to made to make it run acceptably on consoles have no reason to be cut from PC at all.

this is my take on it:

I think the ultimate troll would be to cut out the lighting from the PC version so as not "expose" the shortcomings of the console version and make ppl who paid $60 not feel like they got a broken game when they see the PC version how it was meant to be and marketed.

For example the lighting is a gameplay mechanic, since it's so bright because of the downgrade you can see enemies pop in, you don't need to light torches to see through the dark etc. putting it into the PC version would expose all the nerfs with no apology or nothing. So I can see them not including it so ppl won't complain outside of "fringe groups" and "troublemakers" no one cares about.

Gaming press will keep up it's wall of silence of course giving credence to it just being a minority of butthurt pussies complaining.

 

[CadetMahoney]

double post delete.

 

[BaroqueSampson]

giant bomb stuff[

Really? Giant Bomb is one of the bastions of respectable reporting.

 

[Deadbeat]

Guys give giantbomb some slack. Its not their job to look into such things anyways.

 

[AdventureMike]

Well... sound like this thread is finally over/dead. (I'm not sure why people brought gameplay in the last two pages tho).

anyway this is what I've personally learned from all of this.

- Twitter campaigns are highly effective.
- VG Sites and Gaming Journalists will not report a case of false advertising or big downgrade if they like the game. #gamingjournalismintegrity
- Fans of developer/series will be a-ok with any sort of anti consumer practices as long as the gameplay is good.
- There is no saint corporate. your beloved smaller Japanese developer will do bad shit and shady business just like EA or Activision.
- Some actually don't care about the false advertising case but just want the dev to fix the PC version (so it's ok if I get the superior version)
- Dismissive PR responses are not the way to go.
- Giant Bomb is awful and two members should be ashamed of themselves.


Now I hope no other developer does this, Dark Souls 2 downgrade and From misleading people for months was bad and they sadly almost got a free pass. I wish this put an end to this sort of practice and I hope VG sites get better emotional-free and more professional in the future.

Terrific summary.

I am flabberghasted at the amount of water-muddying that happened in this and the other thread on this topic. Strawmen arguments, direct ignoring of people's actual concerns, etc. So that what? We could say that the game had no negative opinions at the end of the day? I'm thoroughly astonished at some gaffers, as well as Giant Bomb in particular.

 

[Clear]

Hard to believe some ppl have performance standards (loading times, framerates etc) and are against gutted gameplay mechanics that obviously should be there (lighting - enemies popping in, torches are useless etc.)
this is my take on it:

This is factually inaccurate, which leads me to believe you haven't actually played the game. Go to No Man's Wharf and tell me that torches are useless... lol.

 

[CadetMahoney]

This is factually inaccurate, which leads me to believe you haven't actually played the game. Go to No Man's Wharf and tell me that torches are useless... lol.

"certain parts" may be good enough for some ppl, not others. I do not consider that good enough. There are sections where you do not need to light torches because it's so bright, enemies pop in because it was meant to be dark originally. The game clearly was optimised with certain areas to be dark. Saying "torches are useless" is clearly a legit statement to make, you're just nitpicking.

 

[tengiants]

Guys give giantbomb some slack. Its not their job to look into such things anyways.

The lighting engine was changed on a game from a small Japanese developer of niche games that were never meant to sell well(who is equally corrupt to EA and Activision from what I understand).

The world must burn.

 

[UrbanRats]

Well... sound like this thread is finally over/dead. (I'm not sure why people brought gameplay in the last two pages tho).

anyway this is what I've personally learned from all of this.

- Twitter campaigns are highly effective.
- VG Sites and Gaming Journalists will not report a case of false advertising or big downgrade if they like the game. #gamingjournalismintegrity
- Fans of developer/series will be a-ok with any sort of anti consumer practices as long as the gameplay is good.
- There is no saint corporate. your beloved smaller Japanese developer will do bad shit and shady business just like EA or Activision.
- Some actually don't care about the false advertising case but just want the dev to fix the PC version (so it's ok if I get the superior version)
- Dismissive PR responses are not the way to go.
- Giant Bomb is awful and two members should be ashamed of themselves.


Now I hope no other developer does this, Dark Souls 2 downgrade and From misleading people for months was bad and they sadly almost got a free pass. I wish this put an end to this sort of practice and I hope VG sites get better emotional-free and more professional in the future.

More or less.

GiantBomb is still good at what it was good before though, being entertaining in goofy ways.
Brad has always been kind of dismissive in this sense.

Also, i don't understand why you keep blaming From instead of Namco.
And i'm absolutely not saying this because i think From is amazing or anything, i really don't care about them in any particular way, but i'd say if anyone is in charge of false advertising, it would be the publisher.

 

[Clear]

"certain parts" may be good enough for some ppl, not others. I do not consider that good enough. There are sections where you do not need to light torches because it's so bright, enemies pop in because it was meant to be dark originally. The game clearly was optimised with certain areas to be dark. Saying "torches are useless" is clearly a legit statement to make, you're just nitpicking.

So the only areas where torches matter are just the (unnamed) ones you specify.... riiiight.

/facepalm

 

[JNT]

This is factually inaccurate, which leads me to believe you haven't actually played the game. Go to No Man's Wharf and tell me that torches are useless... lol.

What benefits are there though? I played through that entire area without a torch. I could see perfectly fine. The entire area felt like a cake walk actually.

 

[Cetra]

+

+going apologist-mode and defending the downgrade in the last Bombcast

So basically they didn't go full witch burning mode, like some of you guys.

I see how that works.

 

[georly]

What benefits are there though? I played through that entire area without a torch. I could see perfectly fine. The entire area felt like a cake walk actually.

The black enemies recoil in fear because of the torch. That's all.

 

[Clear]

What benefits are there though? I played through that entire area without a torch. I could see perfectly fine. The entire area felt like a cake walk actually.

Using the torch to intimidate the spider-monkeys is pretty effective, especially before/instead of using a Pharos stone to ignite the big chandelier and push them into hiding.

Its an area that makes use of dynamic lighting as both a visual and combat mechanic. And basically proves that any changes to the lighting system in the game are for gameplay and/or performance-balancing issues and thus entirely legitimate.

 

[Lasthope106]

Really? Giant Bomb is one of the bastions of respectable reporting.

I don't think so. I like the Giant Bomb crew, but most of the stuff they say is noise. Patrick is the only one that tries to approach things with a journalistic angle, but sometimes he also gets caught up in the hype cycle.

 

[Hydranockz]

So basically they didn't go full witch burning mode, like some of you guys.

I see how that works.

Pretty much. They should be ashamed of themselves for not reporting the fact that devs in 2014 still can experience setbacks prior to launch.

 

[georly]

So I can think of 2 reasons why BAMCO hasn't revealed 'actual' pc footage yet.

1. It's as bad as we think and it's going to look like consoles.
2. They are afraid that showing off stuff like that too early might sabotage console sales.

If there's another reason, i'm baffled.

 

[Recall]

The PC version can be saved due to the community, regardless of how it turns out. Console versions not so much

At least the gameplay is still outstanding and for I that is key, sexy lighting is irrelevant.

 

[CadetMahoney]

So the only areas where torches matter are just the (unnamed) ones you specify.... riiiight.

/facepalm

Well the ones affected are the ones ppl are complaining about, or are you saying they have no complaint to make?

/facepalm

. . . any changes to the lighting system in the game are for gameplay and/or performance-balancing issues and thus entirely legitimate.

Wow defending the lighting downgrade like this is hilarious. So what's the explanation for seeing enemies popping in and sections where you can skip lighting torches because it's so bright? Compromising intended gameplay and atmosphere because of performance was so bad is not "legitimate", someone at From obviously made a mistake somewhere.

What benefits are there though? I played through that entire area without a torch. I could see perfectly fine. The entire area felt like a cake walk actually.

Especially if you can see the enemies. . . they practically killed the atmosphere.

 

[PuppetSlave]

Pretty much. They should be ashamed of themselves for not reporting the fact that devs in 2014 still can experience setbacks prior to launch.

 

[Kamina]

"Please understand!"

 

[Gbraga]

Hard to believe some ppl have performance standards (loading times, framerates etc) and are against gutted gameplay mechanics that obviously should be there (lighting - enemies popping in, torches are useless etc.)




this is my take on it:

I can totally see that, and that's why I really want to see the PC version (or at least get some info), because it could totally go either way and we have no idea.

 

[lazer_bean]

Guys give giantbomb some slack. Its not their job to look into such things anyways.

I don't read giantbomb but aren't there any journalists working there ?

The lighting engine was changed on a game from a small Japanese developer of niche games that were never meant to sell well(who is equally corrupt to EA and Activision from what I understand).

The world must burn.

you understand nothing.
and FROM never expected DS would sell so well anyway.

Ugh, I leave it to you to read the few threads on this topic now. Have a good read.

 

[Clear]

Well the ones affected are the ones ppl are complaining about, or are you saying they have no complaint to make?

Don't try and turn this around. You made a factually incorrect statement -that torches are now "useless"- and I called you on it. The areas that were shown in the pre-release footage just used lighting cosmetically, and in the example I provided torches and the dynamic lighting tech provide both cosmetic and mechanical effects - i.e. the presence of light actually changes enemy behaviour.

Wow defending the lighting downgrade like this is hilarious. So what's the explanation for seeing enemies popping in and sections where you can skip lighting torches because it's so bright? Compromising intended gameplay and atmosphere because of performance was so bad is not "legitimate", someone at From obviously made a mistake somewhere.

I've not come across an area where enemies pop-in, and I consider it a positive thing that not every area with torches requires them to be lit in order to get by. As it stands its something you can choose to do, or simply pass on.

Maybe the feedback from test was that the torch-lighting mechanic was tedious and simply not fun. You can't disprove this, and actual experience playing the game supports this view. As I proved with my example, the tech remains there in the game.

If you want a game that does everything you want, just how you want it. Here's a pro-tip: Code it yourself. Otherwise expect the people making the game to have the final say in what they think is for the best.

What's "hilarious" here is the certainty with which you make pronouncements based on presumption and ignorance as if they are fact.

 

[XANDER CAGE]

One enemy type in one area that recoils at the sight of the torch isn't really the same as what the developers were talking up during the reveal and subsequent interviews and I think you know that.

We have 1. The Gutter, which sort of needs a torch, and 2. seven or eight enemies that don't like fire in one area of the game. The torch and sconce mechanic is not as vital as it was originally meant to be. Whether or not you think that change is for the better is irrelevant; the change was made and it's pretty apparent.

 

[Clear]

One enemy type in one area that recoils at the sight of the torch isn't really the same as what the developers were talking up during the reveal and subsequent interviews and I think you know that.

We have 1. The Gutter, which sort of needs a torch, and 2. seven or eight enemies that don't like fire in one area of the game. The torch and sconce mechanic is not as vital as it was originally meant to be. Whether or not you think that change is for the better is irrelevant; the change was made and it's pretty apparent.

The reality of game development means that things need to remain fluid throughout, you can't just dogmatically stick to your initial plans when all evidence from test is showing that it simply doesn't work as well as you hoped in a wide-scale implementation.

This is basic, design 101 stuff.

The big picture is getting the overall playability to the highest standard possible, not satisfying the whims of a horde of intransigent, ill-informed pedants on the internet!

 

[Lalalandia]

So Namco thinks they've settled the argument and they have nothing else to say

Following this week's response from From Software, Namco Bandai has advised VideoGamer.com that it considers the Dark Souls 2 downgrade case closed and that it likely won't be issuing any further comment on the controversy.

They also refuse to offer any comfort to PC users or any additional media that might reassure those awaiting the PC version you can read more of this non-answer at Videogamer.com

 

[Haunted]

I think the ultimate troll would be to cut out the lighting from the PC version so as not "expose" the shortcomings of the console version and make ppl who paid $60 not feel like they got a broken game when they see the PC version how it was meant to be and marketed.

For example the lighting is a gameplay mechanic, since it's so bright because of the downgrade you can see enemies pop in, you don't need to light torches to see through the dark etc. putting it into the PC version would expose all the nerfs with no apology or nothing. So I can see them not including it so ppl won't complain outside of "fringe groups" and "troublemakers" no one cares about.

Gaming press will keep up it's wall of silence of course giving credence to it just being a minority of butthurt pussies complaining.

nooooo

I hope you're wrong.

 

[CheesecakeRecipe]

So Namco thinks they've settled the argument and they have nothing else to say

They also refuse to offer any comfort to PC users or any additional media that might reassure those awaiting the PC version you can read more of this non-answer at Videogamer.com

Seals the deal.

 

[Metroid-Squadron]

So Namco thinks they've settled the argument and they have nothing else to say

They also refuse to offer any comfort to PC users or any additional media that might reassure those awaiting the PC version you can read more of this non-answer at Videogamer.com

Fuck Namco and fuck From.

 

[Grief.exe]

Its frustrating how companies can intentionally keep us in the dark about a product that they are selling.

We have almost no information on the PC version, and they are outright ignoring us on Twitter. Journalists don't seem to give a shit to ask questions, or the real questions get drowned out by the downgrade noise.