http://cdn.steampowered.com/Manuals/211420/DARKSOULS_PC_MANUAL_ANZ.pdf

Of particular note:

LOW FPS FEATURE

To prevent latency issues and frequent disconnections, there is a

low FPS feature implemented where if your FPS drops below 15

for 30 seconds, your game will automatically be disconnected

from the online session and will return to the title screen. To avoid

this, please refer to the minimum/recommended specifications

to have a better configuration.

So basically, with FROM confirming that the PC port is completely unoptimized, "certain areas" that consoles couldn't manage 5 FPS on are going to be literally uncompletable.

Oh and Games For Windows Live is present in all versions.

What the fuck? Goddamnit

if it was going to be literally incompletable then steam wouldn't put it out.

@Animasta said:

if it was going to be literally incompletable then steam wouldn't put it out.

Deus Ex: Invisible War doesn't run on multicore systems.

Still sell it.

You obviously don't get it. In Dark Souls the game itself is the Boss Monster. It is supposed to be gimmicky and cheap as shit in an attempt to stop you from completing it.

The GFWL thing was confirmed shortly after they announced it. Everybody got super mad. 
 
 
As far as not being able to manage 15 FPS, yeah, that sucks, but what are you doing trying to play a current gen game on PC hardware that can't pull 15 FPS on the lowest graphical settings? The current console hardware is like 7 years old at this point.

@Terramagi said:

@Animasta said:

if it was going to be literally incompletable then steam wouldn't put it out.

Deus Ex: Invisible War doesn't run on multicore systems.

Still sell it.

where's the evidence of that? I've never heard that before. I've heard plenty of people bemoan invisible war for killing their dog or something, but none that it doesn't run on multicore systems.

and if I recall correctly, they've said they were going to patch it.

@ajamafalous said:

The GFWL thing was confirmed shortly after they announced it. Everybody got super mad. As far as not being able to manage 15 FPS, yeah, that sucks, but what are you doing trying to play a current gen game on PC hardware that can't pull 15 FPS on the lowest graphical settings? The current console hardware is like 7 years old at this point.

Have you ever played Saints Row 2 on PC without installing the numerous fan patches to make the game playable?

That's what unoptimization does.

This PC port is going to be a massive train wreck. I just know it.

Guess I'll just get the PS3 version then, oh well, still need to beat Demon's Souls.....maybe I'll get neither version until then

@Animasta said:

@Terramagi said:

@Animasta said:

if it was going to be literally incompletable then steam wouldn't put it out.

Deus Ex: Invisible War doesn't run on multicore systems.

Still sell it.

where's the evidence of that? I've never heard that before. I've heard plenty of people bemoan invisible war for killing their dog or something, but none that it doesn't run on multicore systems.

and if I recall correctly, they've said they were going to patch it.

Invisible War doesn't run correctly, the original Deus Ex doesn't run correctly, many of the older Star Wars games (Dark Forces) don't run, Beyond Good and Evil hardly runs, so on and so forth. Steam sells games that don't work on all systems because they still work on some.

didn't they already came out and say "hey guys, we're just putting it out"?

@The_Nubster said:

@Animasta said:

@Terramagi said:

@Animasta said:

if it was going to be literally incompletable then steam wouldn't put it out.

Deus Ex: Invisible War doesn't run on multicore systems.

Still sell it.

where's the evidence of that? I've never heard that before. I've heard plenty of people bemoan invisible war for killing their dog or something, but none that it doesn't run on multicore systems.

and if I recall correctly, they've said they were going to patch it.

Invisible War doesn't run correctly, the original Deus Ex doesn't run correctly, many of the older Star Wars games (Dark Forces) don't run, Beyond Good and Evil hardly runs, so on and so forth. Steam sells games that don't work on all systems because they still work on some.

I suppose, but that's hardly relevant in this case; This is a new game, after all. if it was actually that no one could complete it, they wouldn't put it out.

I must say I don't get this thing though.

@ajamafalous said:

The GFWL thing was confirmed shortly after they announced it. Everybody got super mad. As far as not being able to manage 15 FPS, yeah, that sucks, but what are you doing trying to play a current gen game on PC hardware that can't pull 15 FPS on the lowest graphical settings? The current console hardware is like 7 years old at this point.

Have you ever played Saints Row 2 on PC without installing the numerous fan patches to make the game playable?

That's what unoptimization does.

@Terramagi said:

@Animasta said:

if it was going to be literally incompletable then steam wouldn't put it out.

Deus Ex: Invisible War doesn't run on multicore systems.

Still sell it.

Wait, I've played the Steam version of DE:IW. Not for very long, but it did run perfectly fine.

@Animasta said:

@The_Nubster said:

@Animasta said:

@Terramagi said:

@Animasta said:

if it was going to be literally incompletable then steam wouldn't put it out.

Deus Ex: Invisible War doesn't run on multicore systems.

Still sell it.

where's the evidence of that? I've never heard that before. I've heard plenty of people bemoan invisible war for killing their dog or something, but none that it doesn't run on multicore systems.

and if I recall correctly, they've said they were going to patch it.

Invisible War doesn't run correctly, the original Deus Ex doesn't run correctly, many of the older Star Wars games (Dark Forces) don't run, Beyond Good and Evil hardly runs, so on and so forth. Steam sells games that don't work on all systems because they still work on some.

I suppose, but that's hardly relevant in this case; This is a new game, after all. if it was actually that no one could complete it, they wouldn't put it out.

I must say I don't get this thing though.

I think the issue is that it's looking to be a poorly-ported game, and that'll cause problems for all but the highest-of-end PCs. They can still sell it because it works, technically, but if your PC isn't up to snuff, you won't be able to finish it.

It sounds like it's just saying that if your PC can't handle Dark Souls to the point where you drop below 15 fps, then it disconnects you. Not saying that the game will drop to 15 fps on standard gaming quality PCs. So doesn't seem like a big deal to me if that's the case.

@MiniPato said:

It sounds like it's just saying that if your PC can't handle Dark Souls to the point where you drop below 15 fps, then it disconnects you. Not saying that the game will drop to 15 fps on standard gaming quality PCs. So doesn't seem like a big deal to me if that's the case.

Exactly. I don't see what the problem is here.

I imagine it'll be fine if your PC isn't too old...

Interesting.

@The_Nubster said:

@Animasta said:

@Terramagi said:

@Animasta said:

if it was going to be literally incompletable then steam wouldn't put it out.

Deus Ex: Invisible War doesn't run on multicore systems.

Still sell it.

where's the evidence of that? I've never heard that before. I've heard plenty of people bemoan invisible war for killing their dog or something, but none that it doesn't run on multicore systems.

and if I recall correctly, they've said they were going to patch it.

Invisible War doesn't run correctly, the original Deus Ex doesn't run correctly, many of the older Star Wars games (Dark Forces) don't run, Beyond Good and Evil hardly runs, so on and so forth. Steam sells games that don't work on all systems because they still work on some.

My steam copies of Deus Ex, Invisible War, and everything from Dark Forces to Academy work perfectly fine on my system. I can't name a single game on steam that hasn't worked for me. And I've got hundreds of them.

@The_Nubster: and if that happens, and for a large amount of people, wouldn't steam just go ahead and refund them?

I guess we should wait for news on how it actually plays before getting all angry or defending it, I suppose.

Awesome I love GFWL I will play this now.

Ugh.

Well, I suppose that's better than the severe lag-fest that multiplayer is on the consoles.

@MiniPato said:

It sounds like it's just saying that if your PC can't handle Dark Souls to the point where you drop below 15 fps, then it disconnects you. Not saying that the game will drop to 15 fps on standard gaming quality PCs. So doesn't seem like a big deal to me if that's the case.

Exactly. I don't see what the problem is here.

Soon I can ignore Dark Souls on three platforms.

@Spoonman671 said:

Well, I suppose that's better than the severe lag-fest that multiplayer is on the consoles.

I think there is something fucked up with your connection bud.

Blight Town will be fine. Nothing to worry about.

Shame it uses GFWL, that piece of shit service made me lose my Batman saves, I changed my gamertag on my 360 and now my PC saves of Arkham City are dead.

WAY TO GO.

@CL60 said:

@Sooty

@MiniPato said:

It sounds like it's just saying that if your PC can't handle Dark Souls to the point where you drop below 15 fps, then it disconnects you. Not saying that the game will drop to 15 fps on standard gaming quality PCs. So doesn't seem like a big deal to me if that's the case.

Exactly. I don't see what the problem is here.

Yeah me neither.. If your game is running at 15 fps in the first place, I doubt you'll play through it anyway. How about we wait until it comes out to see how it runs before crying or heads off?

FROM has already admitted that all the framerate drops (read: Blighttown) still exist on PC. The thing is hard-locked to 30 FPS. All signs point to this being a horrible port, and this "feature", coupled with the fact that the game ALREADY drops below 10 FPS on the console it was MADE to run on, point to this being horrible.

Are you one of those people who call PS3 players entitled because their copy of Skyrim that they paid 60 dollars for (and was deliberately not reviewed by the press) doesn't work? Because you certainly sound like the type.

My system can run The Witcher 2 on High. It can't run Saints Row 2. This is the difference optimization, something that is not being done on Dark Souls, makes.

@FourWude said:

BEST ON CONSOLE. SUCK ON IT PC BITCHES.

I laughed. +1 irony

@PlasmaBeam44 said:

This PC port is going to be a massive train wreck. I just know it.

Didn't they kind of admit as such? I remember them saying they pretty much had no idea what they were doing with the port and were really just doing it because so many fans had asked.

EDIT: Ah, found it. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-06-07-from-software-having-a-tough-time-porting-dark-souls-to-pc-frame-rate-issues-remain

@Terramagi said:

@CL60 said:

@Sooty

@MiniPato said:

It sounds like it's just saying that if your PC can't handle Dark Souls to the point where you drop below 15 fps, then it disconnects you. Not saying that the game will drop to 15 fps on standard gaming quality PCs. So doesn't seem like a big deal to me if that's the case.

Exactly. I don't see what the problem is here.

Yeah me neither.. If your game is running at 15 fps in the first place, I doubt you'll play through it anyway. How about we wait until it comes out to see how it runs before crying or heads off?

FROM has already admitted that all the framerate drops (read: Blighttown) still exist on PC. The thing is hard-locked to 30 FPS. All signs point to this being a horrible port, and this "feature", coupled with the fact that the game ALREADY drops below 10 FPS on the console it was MADE to run on, point to this being horrible.

Are you one of those people who call PS3 players entitled because their copy of Skyrim that they paid 60 dollars for (and was deliberately not reviewed by the press) doesn't work? Because you certainly sound like the type.

My system can run The Witcher 2 on High. It can't run Saints Row 2. This is the difference optimization, something that is not being done on Dark Souls, makes.

It probably will be a horrible port, hopefully some way to bypass the cap comes about though.

This seems out of context. The way I read it it's talking about "connected" sessions only, as in if someone in a session with other people and is having frame rate issues he's booted from the sessions to not ruin others experience. You should still be able to play any part of the game by yourself.

@Ares42 said:

This seems out of context. The way I read it it's talking about "connected" sessions only, as in if someone in a session with other people and is having frame rate issues he's booted from the sessions to not ruin others experience. You should still be able to play any part of the game by yourself.

Problem of course being that the game is always-online, so it's unclear at best what that refers to.

Plus, even if you're right, you're going to run into the problem where you're in Blighttown and get invaded and then the game kicks you to the title screen (because the game is a straight port and won't break 10 FPS if you're lucky) and you wind up back at your last bonfire.

@Terramagi said:

@Ares42 said:

This seems out of context. The way I read it it's talking about "connected" sessions only, as in if someone in a session with other people and is having frame rate issues he's booted from the sessions to not ruin others experience. You should still be able to play any part of the game by yourself.

Problem of course being that the game is always-online, so it's unclear at best what that refers to.

Plus, even if you're right, you're going to run into the problem where you're in Blighttown and get invaded and then the game kicks you to the title screen (because the game is a straight port and won't break 10 FPS if you're lucky) and you wind up back at your last bonfire.

why would it kick the person who was being invaded? surely it would kick the invader, because he's the one connecting to YOU.

I get that you're angry but we don't know how well it runs so stop assuming the worst.

Did anyone really expect to the port to be good? 

@Sooty said:

Shame it uses GFWL, that piece of shit service made me lose my Batman saves, I changed my gamertag on my 360 and now my PC saves of Arkham City are dead.

WAY TO GO.

Thats weird I did the same thing and my saves are still there.

@Animasta said:

@Terramagi said:

@Ares42 said:

This seems out of context. The way I read it it's talking about "connected" sessions only, as in if someone in a session with other people and is having frame rate issues he's booted from the sessions to not ruin others experience. You should still be able to play any part of the game by yourself.

Problem of course being that the game is always-online, so it's unclear at best what that refers to.

Plus, even if you're right, you're going to run into the problem where you're in Blighttown and get invaded and then the game kicks you to the title screen (because the game is a straight port and won't break 10 FPS if you're lucky) and you wind up back at your last bonfire.

why would it kick the person who was being invaded? surely it would kick the invader, because he's the one connecting to YOU.

I get that you're angry but we don't know how well it runs so stop assuming the worst.

Yeah, wow. Some gamers just love to assume the worst and spread their negative views online. Do you really think they'd be stupid enough to implement an instant kick-to-menu whenever someone joins your game in a laggy area? Especially when they admit they haven't fixed the fps issues.

I'm not even gonna argue about how stupid it would be to be kicked when in singleplayer. I really doubt these developers are complete morons.

Sounds like this will really only affect the people that have shit computers and shouldn't really be playing this game on the PC any way. If this was a PC only release, than I could see the rage-fire, but when there is a perfectly good alternative for those without the cash to dish out for great computer, it's a little bit "gimme gimme."

Also, aren't we past the GFWL hate yet? I thought that was all said and done for.

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Sooty said:

Shame it uses GFWL, that piece of shit service made me lose my Batman saves, I changed my gamertag on my 360 and now my PC saves of Arkham City are dead.

WAY TO GO.

Thats weird I did the same thing and my saves are still there.

Tons of hits about it on Google, will probably never finish it now.

@Loafsmooch said:

@Animasta said:

@Terramagi said:

@Ares42 said:

This seems out of context. The way I read it it's talking about "connected" sessions only, as in if someone in a session with other people and is having frame rate issues he's booted from the sessions to not ruin others experience. You should still be able to play any part of the game by yourself.

Problem of course being that the game is always-online, so it's unclear at best what that refers to.

Plus, even if you're right, you're going to run into the problem where you're in Blighttown and get invaded and then the game kicks you to the title screen (because the game is a straight port and won't break 10 FPS if you're lucky) and you wind up back at your last bonfire.

why would it kick the person who was being invaded? surely it would kick the invader, because he's the one connecting to YOU.

I get that you're angry but we don't know how well it runs so stop assuming the worst.

Yeah, wow. Some gamers just love to assume the worst and spread their negative views online. Do you really think they'd be stupid enough to implement an instant kick-to-menu whenever someone joins your game in a laggy area? Especially when they admit they haven't fixed the fps issues.

I'm not even gonna argue about how stupid it would be to be kicked when in singleplayer. I really doubt these developers are complete morons.

Oh I'm sorry, bad console ports aren't a thing. I forgot. I must have dreamed all those times that Assassin's Creed 2 kicked my ass back to title screen every time my internet connection hiccuped. I must be completely misremembering GFWL wiping my saves. Everything I said is completely baseless.

Yes, I do think they're that stupid. When every news story says something along the lines of "we have no idea what we're doing", prior experience tells me this is going to be a horrendous port that will be slammed after launch, to the surprise of no one. Then - again, prior experience talking here - after the game is slammed, the publisher will blame piracy instead of their crappy port job and PC gaming will be set back again.

@Terramagi said:

@Loafsmooch said:

@Animasta said:

@Terramagi said:

@Ares42 said:

This seems out of context. The way I read it it's talking about "connected" sessions only, as in if someone in a session with other people and is having frame rate issues he's booted from the sessions to not ruin others experience. You should still be able to play any part of the game by yourself.

Problem of course being that the game is always-online, so it's unclear at best what that refers to.

Plus, even if you're right, you're going to run into the problem where you're in Blighttown and get invaded and then the game kicks you to the title screen (because the game is a straight port and won't break 10 FPS if you're lucky) and you wind up back at your last bonfire.

why would it kick the person who was being invaded? surely it would kick the invader, because he's the one connecting to YOU.

I get that you're angry but we don't know how well it runs so stop assuming the worst.

Yeah, wow. Some gamers just love to assume the worst and spread their negative views online. Do you really think they'd be stupid enough to implement an instant kick-to-menu whenever someone joins your game in a laggy area? Especially when they admit they haven't fixed the fps issues.

I'm not even gonna argue about how stupid it would be to be kicked when in singleplayer. I really doubt these developers are complete morons.

Oh I'm sorry, bad console ports aren't a thing. I forgot. I must have dreamed all those times that Assassin's Creed 2 kicked my ass back to title screen every time my internet connection hiccuped. I must be completely misremembering GFWL wiping my saves. Everything I said is completely baseless.

Yes, I do think they're that stupid. When every news story says something along the lines of "we have no idea what we're doing", prior experience tells me this is going to be a horrendous port that will be slammed after launch, to the surprise of no one. Then - again, prior experience talking here - after the game is slammed, the publisher will blame piracy instead of their crappy port job and PC gaming will be set back again.

no, they'll blame the crappy port job because they publicly said the port job was bad.

also wow you are really paranoid.

I thought this would turn the game into Plumbers Don't Wear Ties. WHERE THE HELL IS THAT!?

And this is news how? Everyone knew the game isn´t being optimized. It´s just a fucking port people. If you don´t like to play the same game then don´t buy it. Also, as someone previously stated, it may be FROM SOFT just going "Hey bro, your pc sucks? Too bad man shits going down yo."

@Animasta said:

@Terramagi said:

@Loafsmooch said:

@Animasta said:

@Terramagi said:

@Ares42 said:

This seems out of context. The way I read it it's talking about "connected" sessions only, as in if someone in a session with other people and is having frame rate issues he's booted from the sessions to not ruin others experience. You should still be able to play any part of the game by yourself.

Problem of course being that the game is always-online, so it's unclear at best what that refers to.

Plus, even if you're right, you're going to run into the problem where you're in Blighttown and get invaded and then the game kicks you to the title screen (because the game is a straight port and won't break 10 FPS if you're lucky) and you wind up back at your last bonfire.

why would it kick the person who was being invaded? surely it would kick the invader, because he's the one connecting to YOU.

I get that you're angry but we don't know how well it runs so stop assuming the worst.

Yeah, wow. Some gamers just love to assume the worst and spread their negative views online. Do you really think they'd be stupid enough to implement an instant kick-to-menu whenever someone joins your game in a laggy area? Especially when they admit they haven't fixed the fps issues.

I'm not even gonna argue about how stupid it would be to be kicked when in singleplayer. I really doubt these developers are complete morons.

Oh I'm sorry, bad console ports aren't a thing. I forgot. I must have dreamed all those times that Assassin's Creed 2 kicked my ass back to title screen every time my internet connection hiccuped. I must be completely misremembering GFWL wiping my saves. Everything I said is completely baseless.

Yes, I do think they're that stupid. When every news story says something along the lines of "we have no idea what we're doing", prior experience tells me this is going to be a horrendous port that will be slammed after launch, to the surprise of no one. Then - again, prior experience talking here - after the game is slammed, the publisher will blame piracy instead of their crappy port job and PC gaming will be set back again.

no, they'll blame the crappy port job because they publicly said the port job was bad.

also wow you are really paranoid.

http://www.gamefront.com/epic-admits-bulletstorm-was-a-bad-port-but-blames-piracy-for-poor-sales/

It's only paranoia if it isn't true.

Invisible War doesn't run correctly, the original Deus Ex doesn't run correctly, many of the older Star Wars games (Dark Forces) don't run, Beyond Good and Evil hardly runs, so on and so forth. Steam sells games that don't work on all systems because they still work on some.

@CL60 said:

@Sooty

@MiniPato said:

It sounds like it's just saying that if your PC can't handle Dark Souls to the point where you drop below 15 fps, then it disconnects you. Not saying that the game will drop to 15 fps on standard gaming quality PCs. So doesn't seem like a big deal to me if that's the case.

Exactly. I don't see what the problem is here.

Yeah me neither.. If your game is running at 15 fps in the first place, I doubt you'll play through it anyway. How about we wait until it comes out to see how it runs before crying or heads off?

FROM has already admitted that all the framerate drops (read: Blighttown) still exist on PC. The thing is hard-locked to 30 FPS. All signs point to this being a horrible port, and this "feature", coupled with the fact that the game ALREADY drops below 10 FPS on the console it was MADE to run on, point to this being horrible.

Are you one of those people who call PS3 players entitled because their copy of Skyrim that they paid 60 dollars for (and was deliberately not reviewed by the press) doesn't work? Because you certainly sound like the type.

My system can run The Witcher 2 on High. It can't run Saints Row 2. This is the difference optimization, something that is not being done on Dark Souls, makes.

@Terramagi said:

@Animasta said:

@Terramagi said:

@Loafsmooch said:

@Animasta said:

@Terramagi said:

@Ares42 said:

This seems out of context. The way I read it it's talking about "connected" sessions only, as in if someone in a session with other people and is having frame rate issues he's booted from the sessions to not ruin others experience. You should still be able to play any part of the game by yourself.

Problem of course being that the game is always-online, so it's unclear at best what that refers to.

Plus, even if you're right, you're going to run into the problem where you're in Blighttown and get invaded and then the game kicks you to the title screen (because the game is a straight port and won't break 10 FPS if you're lucky) and you wind up back at your last bonfire.

why would it kick the person who was being invaded? surely it would kick the invader, because he's the one connecting to YOU.

I get that you're angry but we don't know how well it runs so stop assuming the worst.

Yeah, wow. Some gamers just love to assume the worst and spread their negative views online. Do you really think they'd be stupid enough to implement an instant kick-to-menu whenever someone joins your game in a laggy area? Especially when they admit they haven't fixed the fps issues.

I'm not even gonna argue about how stupid it would be to be kicked when in singleplayer. I really doubt these developers are complete morons.

Oh I'm sorry, bad console ports aren't a thing. I forgot. I must have dreamed all those times that Assassin's Creed 2 kicked my ass back to title screen every time my internet connection hiccuped. I must be completely misremembering GFWL wiping my saves. Everything I said is completely baseless.

Yes, I do think they're that stupid. When every news story says something along the lines of "we have no idea what we're doing", prior experience tells me this is going to be a horrendous port that will be slammed after launch, to the surprise of no one. Then - again, prior experience talking here - after the game is slammed, the publisher will blame piracy instead of their crappy port job and PC gaming will be set back again.

no, they'll blame the crappy port job because they publicly said the port job was bad.

also wow you are really paranoid.

http://www.gamefront.com/epic-admits-bulletstorm-was-a-bad-port-but-blames-piracy-for-poor-sales/

It's only paranoia if it isn't true.

since when was bulletstorm a bad port?

and that's different, considering that that was announced after the game was released, not before.

also just because one company did it doesn't mean all companies would do it.

ALSO ALSO PC gaming will not be set back again because of a bad dark souls port, that's fucking dumb.

you are acting super whiny for a game that you have no idea how well it runs (NO, saints row 2 is not a good metric for this). Stop fucking whining and wait until the game is actually out before crying foul.