Support NeoGAF

[Sephzilla]

I said "unless you know what you are doing".

Give the game to someone who never played a Souls game and tell him to go around without a shield without reading any guides or anything.

Agreed.

If you've played the game multiple times, yeah, a no shield build is totally do-able. A no shield build for fresh meat is a death sentence though.

 

[Sullichin]

I said "unless you know what you are doing".

Give the game to someone who never played a Souls game and tell him to go around without a shield without reading any guides or anything.

..And they'll die whether they have a shield or not. Souls games are hard when you first start them. I would recommend any new player get good at dodging/2 handing a weapon over using a shield/sword. It's almost always the more effective way to play.

 

[MilkManEX]

... Funny thing is I've been forced to play with almost no armor(3 pieces of the very beginning armor before you pick a class) to stay under 25% in Dark souls 2. So I actually have been running around 2 handed no armor with nothing but a falchion.

You can fastroll at anything below 70% equip load.

 

[Havel]

At least fairly recently they described the torch approximately as it functions in the game now. See around 4:12 in here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rB4Ke5F78QQ&t=4m12s

"As a game feature we have implemented a torch, and not just a torch but fire in general. Lighting a torch will create light, but it's not so much to encourage constantly holding the torch, but more to light up certain areas. By doing this, some enemies may try to avoid the fire, and by lighting certain areas, the player may be able to implement changes to the venue itself."

What interests me is that 'not final gameplay' mark at the top right. They talk about all the lighitng and torch stuff, while showing reveal footage with no watermark, but the game had already gone Gold at that point.

 

[Pie and Beans]

The torch is still useful though...

And maybe the playtesters were hardcore gamers who didnt like it. Or Souls fans who didnt like it. Focus testing tests the game on a bunch of different levels, they just dont test the game on casuals.

Okay, time for you to choose you own adventure:

- They took out the dynamic lighting because it was hitting performance and just needed to be chopped out last minute and the torch mechanic has been given the bum deal as a result.

- They wanted to dramatically change the visibility of areas relating to the torch mechanic due to focus testing last minute, but performance of the lighting engine was pretty acceptable.

When you can answer that definitively, you can launch into more "this is what happens in game development".

 

[Toxi]

I said "unless you know what you are doing".

Give the game to someone who never played a Souls game and tell him to go around without a shield without reading any guides or anything.

It's perfectly possible, it's just harder because you're not used to the combat and don't realize the timing for attacks. You're gonna die either way getting used to the mechanics.

The game isn't forcing you to do anything.

 

[Sephzilla]

Okay, time for you to choose you own adventure:

- They took out the dynamic lighting because it was hitting performance and just needed to be chopped out last minute and the torch mechanic has been given the bum deal as a result.

- They wanted to dramatically change the visibility of areas relating to the torch mechanic due to focus testing last minute, but performance of the lighting engine was pretty acceptable.

When you can answer that definitively, you can launch into more "this is what happens in game development".

The more I'm thinking about it and looking into things. I'm thinking Option B is what happened. There are a lot of areas that feel like they just cranked up the brightness a bit to make it easier to see.

 

[ultron87]

What interests me is that 'not final gameplay' mark at the top right. They talk about all the lighitng and torch stuff, but the game had already gone Gold at that point.

Yeah it mixes footage from the opening reveal with the extremely harsh shadows (see Turtle Knight footage at start) with footage that looks like the final game (like all that Deadman's Wharf footage in the torch section).

Due to all that I wouldn't be shocked if it was IGN that spliced all that together.

 

[Steel]

I said "unless you know what you are doing".

Give the game to someone who never played a Souls game and tell him to go around without a shield without reading any guides or anything.

Never used a shield, used only falchion first time I played Dark Souls. Advised my friends who got the game to do the same. Worked out fine all-around.

You can fastroll at anything below 70% equip load.

There's a slight difference in how fast you can repeatedly roll over 25%. Or at least that's how I felt.

 

[atr0cious]

It's perfectly possible, it's just harder because you're not used to the combat and don't realize the timing for attacks.

The game isn't forcing you to do anything.

I've always felt that having a shield makes me subconsciously ok with taking a hit, so I two hand everything. What I liked about Souls is that it felt like you could use each weapon they gave you, and beat the game with it, if you took the time to learn it. I thought that was the tenous link that tied it to Monster Hunter.

 

[Violater]

The YOU DIED screen is all caps. It's a nod, and nothing more.

What is really funny is that the people who seem angry in this thread are the ones who think this is about 'MUH ENTITLEMENTS'.

#WETRIED?

 

[En-ou]

Never felt forced in the first one, and just ran around two handed no armor. I really don't see the point in armor if it slows you down in Dark Souls either.

there is a point if it's a situation where you cannot dodge effectively and you might want to mitigate instead...

 

[Alienous]

#WETRIED?

#LESIGH

 

[Toxi]

Never felt forced in the first one, and just ran around two handed no armor. I really don't see the point in armor if it slows you down in Dark Souls either.

Armor gives poise, which lets you trade hits and avoid getting hit repeatedly while you're in the flinching animation.

It also is nice just to have that safety line.

 

[CadetMahoney]

you know this is what they'll say:

"We had to downgrade the graphical quality to make certain that the framerate was stable in certain areas"

well they cocked that right up didn't they?

23.976 fps is "cinematic" dude.

#WETRIED?

and #WECRIED

 

[Sullichin]

Never felt forced in the first one, and just ran around two handed no armor. I really don't see the point in armor if it slows you down in Dark Souls either.

 

[atr0cious]

Lol, didn't know the bat suit was in there.

 

[Havel]

Well this is embarrassing.

 

[jacksepticeye]

Well this is embarrassing.

heh!

 

[Toxi]

Well this is embarrassing.

 

[Stone Ocean]

So much poise, trés bien.

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

God, poise is so dumb.

 

[Sephzilla]

It's really hard for me to not find a Dark Souls gif funny. But this one is still godtier.

 

[Steel]

God, poise is so dumb.

It's actually sad how easy it makes boss fights like Artorias.

 

[Moral Panic]

Come on folks.

Get hyped

 

[soontroll]

Amazing

 

[pa22word]

Come on folks.

You know if you'd actually read a bit of the thread instead of rushing in here to post that pointless interview you'd know that Namco and Playstation (!) Access demoed a build of the game featuring the full lighting effects + other effects not in the final just 6 weeks ago...

 

[Moral Panic]

In case anyone's curious, Namco PR told me today that they're working with Japan in hopes of saying something next week. It'll be on Kotaku whenever I get it.

Woot. Complaining never fails

 

[GodParticle]

Can someone explain what the number/number stuff with a percentage underneath means on the bottom right under your character?

Edit: Oops, wrong thread. Well, maybe someone can explain it here

 

[Steel]

Can someone explain what the number/number stuff with a percentage underneath means on the bottom right under your character?

Edit: Oops, wrong thread. Well, maybe someone can explain it here

Weight capacity and percent taken up. Max speed is <25%

 

[RK9039]

Can someone explain what the number/number stuff with a percentage underneath means on the bottom right under your character?

Edit: Oops, wrong thread. Well, maybe someone can explain it here

I believe that determines your roll speeds. 70% is when you start getting fat rolls.

 

[zma1013]

Armor gives poise, which lets you trade hits and avoid getting hit repeatedly while you're in the flinching animation.

It also is nice just to have that safety line.

That's fine for PVE, but in PVP poise doesn't mean anything since it's all just one big rollie-pollie backstabathon clusterf#$% that ignores it completely.

 

[GodParticle]

Weight capacity and percent taken up. Max speed is <25%

I believe that determines your roll speeds. 70% is when you start getting fat rolls.

Thanks, guys. I kind of thought it had something to do with weight, but wasn't sure

 

[Steel]

That's fine for PVE, but in PVP poise doesn't mean anything since it's all just one big rollie-pollie backstabathon clusterf#$% that ignores it completely.

Not true if you go 2 handed. It allows you to take a couple hits and stagger the other guy before you get staggered. Lotta people made backstabs/parries their entire playstyle though.

 

[Mkilbride]

You know if you'd actually read a bit of the thread instead of rushing in here to post that pointless interview you'd know that Namco and Playstation (!) Access demoed a build of the game featuring the full lighting effects + other effects not in the final just 6 weeks ago...

What does this have to do with what I posted?

 

[mclem]

What other games have done massive changes like these one month before release?

One minor point of order that's worth bringing up: I can't speak for Dark Souls specifically, but it's quite common for a public showing of a title to use an old build - one that's proven to be stable and reliable, able to stand up to random people stress-testing it. In other words, just because it was *shown* a month ago, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's the *version* from a month ago.

Indeed, I'd hazard a guess it was most likely not the latest version: haranguing the devs to make a showy public demo when they're in the midst of actually trying to get a game submitted is really fucking stupid. Although I have encountered publishers who were blind to that...

 

[Stimpack]

Why was the lighting better in the beta than it is now? Also, it's sad to see, because they clearly designed a lot of the content with lighting in mind.

 

[Bedlam]

Finally we can put to rest the complainst it was just done for mechanics:

The whole lighting engine is considerably downgraded even from versions that ran on consoles.

Lighting is way more flat on retail and way less dynamic.

Don't mix two things that have nothing to do with each other: dynamic shadows vs. the brightening of whole areas in general. The latter has nothing to do with performance and has to be a design decision.

The console version still has dynamic shadows. Whether they are there or not is entirely dependent on the individual light source. The torch always casts dynamic shadows, so do some other lights sources. But it's clear they deactivated dynamic shadows on a case by case basis dependent on how performance-draining the respective environment is.

I remember that the area with the bridge definitely had framerate problems in the network test and they obviously felt that it's better to deactivate dynamic shadows there.

I just made a couple of offscreen pictures of the area often seen in gifs; also in response to Violater's query:

So, after having played the game for about 10 hours now, I am pretty sure the TGS demo and the final game are the same as far as lighting goes. The lighting changes drastically when you light a torch. Everything outside the light radius gets darker and the torch light (and certain other light sources such as bonfires) still casts dynamic shadows. The place shown in the gifs basically looks like the TGS demo when you go down there with a lit torch.

I want to believe, do you have any photos to show us?

Notice how this brazier casts no shadows; wall textures are pretty cool ... so those effects are still there. That's one of those areas that look pretty shitty without direct light sources btw.:

The torchlight always casts dynamic shadows:

In this case the brazier of the same type casts dynamic shadows (notice the two shadows of the brazier):

The infamous .gif-stairs from the final version with a torch; not quite as dark as in the TGS build but also not as grey-ish and dull as without a torch. The dark areas outside the light radius become darker when you light a torch:

Sorry for the bad quality, I don't have capture equipment plus I didn't want to waste too many precious minutes of my torch time.

So, since there were no fundamental lighting engine changes but rather a case-by-case activation of dynamic shadows, I guess we can hope that in the PC version every light source will cast dynamic shadows. But I think that the ambience lighting overall will still be brighter since that has nothing to do with performance whatsoever.

edit: Also, it's probably noteworthy that the brazier in the early demo footage does not cast dynamic shadows; as opposed to the final version where this particular brazier casts shadows. So they probably went back and forth in many of those cases.

 

[Fried Food]

looking forward to hearing what they have to say

 

[Metroid-Squadron]

Are there any regulatory agencies that take complaints for false advertising? Perhaps we should up the ante.

 

[Prince Vultan]

It's meant to be a reference to the game's
"YOU DIED" game over screen, but I do agree it's maybe a tad aggressive.

Actually, I did miss that. That's actually pretty good.

Don't mind me then. Retracted.

 

[CountAntonius]

Are there any regulatory agencies that take complaints for false advertising? Perhaps we should up the ante.

Just wait till next week and see what they say.

 

[Kinsei]

Are there any regulatory agencies that take complaints for false advertising? Perhaps we should up the ante.

There is, but you should wait for their response. I wouldn't be so quick to take an action which could result in people losing their jobs.

 

[Gbraga]

Don't mix two things that have nothing to do with each other: dynamic shadows vs. the brightening of whole areas in general. The latter has nothing to do with performance and has to be a design decision.

The console version still has dynamic shadows. Whether they are there or not is entirely dependent on the individual light source. The torch always casts dynamic shadows, so do some other lights sources. But it's clear they deactivated dynamic shadows on a case by case basis dependent on how performance-draining the respective environment is.

I remember that the area with the bridge definitely had framerate problems in the network test and they obviously felt that it's better to deactivate dynamic shadows there.

I just made a couple of offscreen pictures of the area; also in response to Violater's query:







Sorry for the bad quality, I don't have capture equipment plus I didn't want to waste too many precious minutes of my torch time.

So, since there were no fundamental lighting engine changes but rather a case-by-case activation of dynamic shadows, I guess we can hope that in the PC version every light source will cast dynamic shadows. But I think that the ambience lighting overall will still be brighter since that has nothing to do with performance whatsoever.

edit: Also, it's probably noteworthy that the brazier in the early demo footage does not cast dynamic shadows; as opposed to the final version where this particular brazier casts shadows. So they probably went back and forth in many of those cases.

This looks great, it should be easy for them to patch back the pitch back areas then, right? All they have to do is make dark areas really dark, it seems that now if you want that effect you have to use the torch and pretend it's not gray when the torch is off, and I don't think the PC version would fix that if they didn't on consoles.

 

[FairXchange]

This looks great, it should be easy for them to patch back the pitch back areas then, right? All they have to do is make dark areas really dark, it seems that now if you want that effect you have to use the torch and pretend it's not gray when the torch is off, and I don't think the PC version would fix that if they didn't on consoles.

Seems like they've basically increased the game's gama settings to the extent that dark areas are more grey, making objects within them visible. I'm going to go to that section of the game with a torch and experiment with lighting the sconces and see what it all looks like.

 

[Gbraga]

Seems like they've basically increased the game's gama settings to the extent that dark areas are more grey, making objects within them visible. I'm going to go to that section of the game with a torch and experiment with lighting the sconces and see what it all looks like.

I'll light a torch every time I see a sconce, I want my game looking pretty, don't care if I don't need it.

 

[Grief.exe]

Why was the lighting better in the beta than it is now? Also, it's sad to see, because they clearly designed a lot of the content with lighting in mind.

Performance reasons. Dynamic shadows can drop frame rate.

 

[Ra1den]

I feel like this campaign should have waited until we saw the final pc version.

 

[fallagin]

If the PC version is the same as the consoles then maybe Durante can make a "Dark Souls Dark Edition"

Well, he might be able to. I think it would be alot harder than changing resolution and framerate though. I'm not sure he should even bother anyway. From has to be responsible for making their own game...

 

[Polioliolio]

In case anyone's curious, Namco PR told me today that they're working with Japan in hopes of saying something next week. It'll be on Kotaku whenever I get it.

Thanks, really appreciate it!