Eurobum

@CptBedlam: A game or anything really that can be ruined by spoilers isn't worth watching in the first place, and clearly the fact that one could play this game to new game 7+, attests to that. Isn't there more to Dark Souls than the outer shell of grinding it out by trial and error, with only a vague notion of the significance of stats or mechanics.

A state of being a blank slate, complete innocence and ignorance is undesirable to me. It offers nothing but the cheapest of thrills. Take the joy of discovery and contrast it to the feeling of discovering something complex. If the intensity is multiplied by the complexity, learning how to cheese a boss AI for the first time should pale in comparison. Or do you rather think of it as that joy of discovery being the first high that the player is henceforth chasing without ever being able to experience it again?

@CptBedlam said:

@Eurobum said:

If would be irresponsible to vote with my wallet for a product like this, even though I love the let's plays.

Yeah watch all these people having fun despite a few technical drawbacks while you go and rage on forums.

Seriously, the game was already technically flawed on consoles but that didn't stop it from becoming a true gem of videogaming. Some PC gamers really need to get their head out of their ass and start playing games because they're good games and not because they showcase their beloved hardware.

Both things have merit playing games and watching others play. Although the desire for immediate gratification is highest just after release, when everyone is playing and they hype is eclipsing, the game experience doesn't actually change even a year later, at least if the multiplayer isn't big part of it. More often by that time the game is properly patched. So it's just like that experiment where a child can have one marshmallow now; or two marshmallows if he waits 5 minutes, generally it's an empowering trait of character to be able to delay gratification a little, not indefinitely.

Players just want stuff to work to specifications, nobody is expecting graphical fireworks out of an 8 year old DirectX 9 API.

@envane:

Saying that PC players get the same or better experience as on console isn't right or fair, simply because console players tend to sit further away from a bigger TV, to the point where muddy resolution up-scaling isn't visible, and low frame rates can be masked with motion blur. On the PC, with the monitor on the desk, it's harder to accept any kind of blur and anything below native resolutions, because of the close proximity to the screen. As I write this, I can clearly see the 3 pixels that form a comma by leaning forward just a bit. Witnessing how crisp and smooth that 1080p 60fps video looks is just incredible. With only the depth of field blur in the distance looking a bit less sharp than need be. In conclusion, this method of porting is really just for people who hook up their PC to a 32+ inch television and treat it like a console.

Granted bad performance optimisation is also an issue for ports, especially at the beginning of a console cycle. But "bad port" typically describes the badly adapted controls with mouse and keyboard. Bad ports usually struggle with low res menus blown up to / or dwarfed by desktop resolutions; often having smudgy fonts as a result of that. From Software's commitment to one resolution seems like a sort of reasonable quick and dirty way out.

We've seen games like Rage (id tech 5 engine), reduce the resolution of the internal frame buffer on the fly in order to maintain a certain FPS. However the decision for the Prepare to Die Edition to eliminate the performance benefits of a low resolution, just seems absurd. It now turns out, they WANT PC-players to have a 30 FPS experience for no good reason.

Reducing the game to a low fixed internal framerate (and resolution), that is unprecedented AFAIK in the long and sad history of ports.

Turns out ALL the excuses given to gimp the PC version, were bullshit. If would be irresponsible to vote with my wallet for a product like this, even though I love the let's plays. One day I would like to read the story of what has gone so horribly wrong at From Software. Was it maybe one guy, working 12 hour shifts six days a week, who made the PC port in his free time? Or did they want to make a point about piracy on the PC, laggy multiplayer, GFWL, et voilá. Did they made the version so shitty that only the most dedicated fans would gobble it up?

Not to mention that Durante is hesitant to include the frame rate fix into his DSfix in fear or Games For Windows Live - hacking retributions, because it changes the executable.

@Lysergica33 said:

Using Durante's Res Fix I'm rendering at 1.5x the size of 1080p and downscaling it.

This makes no sense (to me), what's your screen resolution? Is it 2,880px × 1,620px like in the screen shot above, which is by the way 2.25x the size of 1080p, considering graphics rendering scales to total number of pixels.

Isn't the whole point to avoid the blur/artefacts caused by scaling from one resolution to another, by rendering the game at the same resolution as your screen?

There are new fixes coming out every other day, maybe it's worth to hold off the purchase for now, the multi player doesn't work all that well anyway, and PvP is said to be plagued with cheaters.

It's such an overrated game, so overly simplistic and completely superficial and cheap (indie). With so much fan pandering, like the Mario suit, or Light Sabres. It feels a lot like the Chinese Apple Store.

It's a descent game for kids, a well made genre mash-up. But just spawning enemies infinitely off-screen isn't exactly amazing game design. Terarria would benefit a lot from smarter AI, and more realistic physics and robust multiplayer matchmaking.

Obviously selecting and assembling PC parts is not the problem, they need an OS, a graphics API, both of which is property of Microsoft, who happen to have their own console, their own DRM and soon their own windows store.

A "steambox" wouldn't be PC compatible (= backwards compatible) without Microsoft. This is the dilemma, which will make or break steam.

It would be like building a console from scratch, maybe they can port Source engine games and use their UI and E-shop experience, but will it be enough?

Maybe you just picked a class that comes with heavy armor, they appear incredibly sluggish. In that case just take off some pieces, until you reach half of your max capacity.

You said "just started", so don't get offended. ;D

@essi2: The maximum consumption of modern hardware didn't change, what did drastically change is the consumption in idle states, such as even the largest AMD graphics card consumes 3W if you turn the monitor off. A good supply is thus increasingly more important.

Depending on how much you pay for electricity and how much your PC is running, a gold or platinum PSU is bound to recuperate the costs in 5 or so years, and you get a silent fan and more reliable parts as a bonus.

I'd buy this one. http://www.komplett.no/k/ki.aspx?sku=757473

I remember when the tennis craze died off a little in the late 90s, indoor tennis was partially replaced by badminton courts, just because you could fit four fields onto one tennis court.

Just like volleyball and table tennis, it is a bit of a pussy sports which requires little risk taking to play and exceed. Not like cheerleading, which is the activity with the highest chance to leave the participants injured or permanently crippled.