Modder Saves Dark Souls PC Port from Crappy Resolution Restriction



+ Add a Comment


just found out that the mod that lets you play in higher resolution also lets you play at 120hz, and apparently 3d vision is working and looks quite good. Bought on steam and going to give it a try when it downloads...


Bullwinkle J Moose




is this the first one or the sequel? I remember trying the first game in my PS3 and found it too unforgiving. Basically, you kill a bunch of mobs for like 20 minutes, then comes a boss (there is no save game) that kills you and you go back to the starting point and have to kill them all over only to try the boss again. I don't mind tough boss battles (though if I still fail after like 10 attempts it's game over for me), but having to redo 20-30 minutes of content to have another try, forget about it.
At least in the PS3 version when I played it online, you could see notes left from other players saying like 'be careful, red dragon around the corner' (which was voted up/down by other people I think) and also you could see ghosts of how other people died before you, that was pretty cool.


Peanut Fox

This is the sequel. It's still about as unforgiving as the first game, but they've added campfires which act as save points.

I've been on the fence about trying a Dark game. I don't mind a hard game, or even replaying lots of content. I've played through plenty of Megaman and Megaman X titles to prove that point. But the thing that turns me off is that the Dark games are very much a learn by dying experience. You'll die because you didn't know the rules, or there's a trap, or you just don't know the best way to handle a situation yet. At least Capcom was always nice enough to give you a subtle hint on what not to do.

I think I may end up picking it up, but it'll have to wait for a while. 40 bucks is a bit of a gamble when I can spend it on some guaranteed fun.



Wow, a PC game that doesn't allow you to change the resolution? Even PC-gaming-hater Yahtzee has considered graphical options to be an essential component of any and all PC games.

1024*720 is crap. No wonder the game looked like such when I played it on a friend's PS3 hooked to a 1920*1080 47" TV. I have an ancient Acer LCD monitor which still runs fine at its native 1280*1024 resolution. That monitor predates the release of the PS3 and, if memory serves, the 360 as well. For shame.

Not providing a framerate-lock option is horrid.

This sounds like the PC port followed Ubisoft's guide on how to make a PC port :(



For me it's not the locked resolution that's the big problem but the locked framerate. Being forced to play at 30 fps is pretty ridiculous when you have a pc that can do 120 with no problem. 30 fps always looks jerky to me, plus it pretty much assures it won't run 3d vision. :(

Too bad, because from what i've seen and read it looks like an awesome game. Maybe one day (not too far away) I will play it on a windows 8 tablet, but not on my gaming computer.


Peanut Fox

I think the frame rate is locked because it's one of those games whose speed and animation is reliant on the 30FPS speed.


Bullwinkle J Moose

Sounds like a DRM violation

Is there a cheat sheet somewhere that tells us what DRM restrictions we can violate without getting into trouble?

Or will visually impaired people start getting sued for "Modifying" what everyone else see's on the screen?

SURE, it sounds stupid, but exactly where are the limits to what we can do with the software and hardware that (in the opinion of Corporate Attorneys) is no longer ours?

The only real option for Corporations creating closed source software is DRM as far as I can see

For example, I personally do not respect or adhere to licencing agreements that are one sided and designed to protect Copyrights or Software Patents for closed source Operating Systems

The reason is simple

Microsoft has been sued and lost a good number of cases in the past for using "a 3rd party's" code in its products without consent and without compensation to the real owners of that code

To honor a one sided Licensing Agreement that violates the rights of a third party without their consent is Illegal and the end users cannot be held to such an agreement
This makes DRM the only option for Software Corporations to protect "what is actually theirs" or "what they stole from others"

This is "my" personal opinion as to why DRM exists in the first place

Violating DRM is considered a crime regardless of whether or not the software is actually the sole property of the Corporation in question

In other words, Microsoft or any other Corporation that makes closed source software may not have legal justification to force consumers into a one sided Licensing Agreement unless they can prove to those consumers that the software is actually their's in the first place

DRM restrictions bypass this problem by making it a crime to violate the DRM itself regardless of whose software it really is

Ironically, Microsoft lost a lawsuit for using the DRM of a 3rd party for its activation technology itself

Do YOU honor one sided Licensing Agreements for closed source software?

And how do the readers here know with such certainty that Windows is not a Gov't sponsored spyware platform if the code is hidden from them?

Closed source Operating Systems are security threats "REGARDLESS" of whether or not they are actual spyware platforms due to the fact that you are not allowed to find out

Open Source software is equally protected under the law and we can see whether its a spyware platform or who's code it really is

THIS is why closed source should be banned from internet access under International Law

It is a security threat to everyone!



Where's the craigslist button for miscategorized?


Bullwinkle J Moose


It's right there ^




Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.