X and Pro are pretty much locked 30fps.Anybody care to summarize? Can't watch video from where i am. How is the framerate on pro? Thanks
Hell yeah
You are right, just tried it out. apparently it wasnt there at launch.But ultrawide is supported just fine? (at least, from my brief experience with the game, still need to watch DF's video)
It's world is chopped up into tiny sections, with tunnel/door load screens all over the place. There's often almost nothing outside your immediate area visible. Fromsoft wants you looking two, sometimes three areas ahead.Looks and runs better than any from soft game and it's a budget title.
So the latest patch seems to have removed the HDR that wasn't working to replace that with no HDR on Xbox one?
Thanks for the response! I searched the Mortal Shell website for patch notes but could not find any. Maybe you have a link? Also anywhere where players can provide feedback? Great game btwIt's still being worked on. We found some issues when certain things happen. (e.g picking up and returning glands). It will be fixed and patched. Bear with us.
lmao, i know right? not even close.
Nice try, but Souls has never been known for its performance. In fact, MS not only matches DS in performance, it beats it in every way. No constant frame pacing problems on console like every From game has, and its PC version actually has an unlocked framerate, so you can get over 60fps easily without having to use mods or hacks to do it.Digital Foundry has done a performance test. A new performance competitor emerges... they aren't reviewing the game and saying Mortal Shell is a gameplay competitor to Souls. I'm consistently surprised by Souls fans ultra thin-skin.
I agree with you. Not sure how you were taking my comment. I just meant DF was comparing performance when saying that a competitor emerges. Meaning the performance in MS was comparable or better. But people read it as MS as a game was a competitor. While it is good and is much better than most other Souls-like games, it's not really competition. But give this team some more money, people and time and I think they can be. They did pretty damn well with very little.Nice try, but Souls has never been known for its performance. In fact, MS not only matches DS in performance, it beats it in every way. No constant frame pacing problems on console like every From game has, and its PC version actually has an unlocked framerate, so you can get over 60fps easily without having to use mods or hacks to do it.
I agree about the thin skin, though. It's one thing to half-ass a Souls-like, where FromSoft diehards can laugh at its puny attempt, but when another game actually does a pretty good job at the formula (and MS does), they get all bent out of shape. It's the same argument as any other game. If you don't like it, don't play it. I fail to see how me playing MS and enjoying it would stop someone from enjoying the DS games.
Yeah, I don't think MS is doing enough original stuff to really be called a "competitor", and there's a lot that it doesn't do as well as DS does. Lore and art style first and foremost come to mind, but MS really nails the "dark and dreary dying world" look that DS1 had, and bumped up to modern graphical levels to boot.I agree with you. Not sure how you were taking my comment. I just meant DF was comparing performance when saying that a competitor emerges. Meaning the performance in MS was comparable or better. But people read it as MS as a game was a competitor. While it is good and is much better than most other Souls-like games, it's not really competition. But give this team some more money, people and time and I think they can be. They did pretty damn well with very little.
Titles in online media are all vetted for business purposes, including engaging and clicks. It is what it is. For discussion purposes, It is more engaging to focus on the content, not just the title. It happens a lot here.
We have to understand the realities of the internet. Even long time print first media institutions are not immune.
I'm exactly the same. I've played all Souls games, Nioh 1 and 2, Sekiro and never beaten any of them. But I still feel like I get my money's worth. I play them longer than many other games. I just never can finish them. But I appreciate and respect what they do. So I just keep going back. I have about 3k tar sitting out somewhere, waiting for me to get it back tonight. I can't wait.Yeah, I don't think MS is doing enough original stuff to really be called a "competitor", and there's a lot that it doesn't do as well as DS does. Lore and art style first and foremost come to mind, but MS really nails the "dark and dreary dying world" look that DS1 had, and bumped up to modern graphical levels to boot.
But as far as Souls-likes in general go, MS is really damn good, a lot better than some of the other schlock we've gotten over the years. For fans of the genre as being more widespread than just stuff from a single developer, it scratches that itch and makes a perfectly good addition to the library, IMO.
I still can't figure out why I keep buying these games, though. I've got four of the FromSoft games, and Mortal Shell, and I absolutely suck at all of them.. lol.
The only issue folks are having is the "competitor" label. It's fine. "Soulslike" is very awkward and not SEO friendly.understanding something & approving of it are 2 different things. you can completely understand the point of clickbait, yet still despise it...
The only issue folks are having is the "competitor" label. It's fine. "Soulslike" is very awkward and not SEO friendly.
One of the big issues on ERA is the lack of awareness of the importance of marketing today. It's gaping. And it derails threads all the time.
LOLCan you imagine if Digital Foundry did real clickbait?
You won't believe the performance of this Dark Souls killer! This game didn't just kill From Software, they got murdered. *Ecchi fanart in thumbnail*
"Dark Souls Competitor" is not a BS at all. I wholly disagree.again: there's 'marketing', & then there's pure, obvious, unadulterated, bullshit. & most people don't particularly likes pure bullshit...
"Dark Souls Competitor" is not a BS at all. I wholly disagree.
It helps me understand very quickly that this is a Soulslike game.
Have you seen the layers and layers of detail in the Souls games? From tends to go overboard with their world design and I think it hurts the fps in the end (on console, at least)Looks and runs better than any from soft game and it's a budget title. I've always said from should stop using their own tech unless it allows them to shit out games faster than third party middleware.
Are you joking? I've never seen anything in a From game that couldn't be handled better in a more capable engine. Yes, their worlds are very rich. But it's known they don't have the best engine running it.Have you seen the layers and layers of detail in the Souls games? From tends to go overboard with their world design and I think it hurts the fps in the end (on console, at least)
Nah the games just don't look good on a technical level, the art direction and stuff is good but the underline engine that they use sucks and this small game borderline indie game is proof. I dont mind it if it has some workflow that allows them to pump out games faster, I'd take that over better tech.Have you seen the layers and layers of detail in the Souls games? From tends to go overboard with their world design and I think it hurts the fps in the end (on console, at least)
Any game released in the same genre is a competitor, whether you think it's competition or not is irrelevant.
understanding something & approving of it are 2 different things. you can completely understand the point of clickbait, yet still despise it...
Am I joking? Why do people say stuff like this lol, I wouldn't have made my comment if I wasn't joking. Load up bloodborne and check out the amount of geometry in Yharnam. The amount of detail in that game is ridiculous. Could they use a more optimized engine? I'm sure. But that doesn't change the fact that From managed to cram an intense amount of detail into a game that came out like 5 years ago now.Are you joking? I've never seen anything in a From game that couldn't be handled better in a more capable engine. Yes, their worlds are very rich. But it's known they don't have the best engine running it.
it gets better later on, but I do find it a bit on the easier side.I have played this for 2 hours and it plays like a bona-fide kusoge, from its movement, controls, hit animation and response. People who completed this, does it have good encounters and enemies for me to continue?
As it is right now, feels extremely cheap with almost no tightness to its mechanics.
Yes, nobody here every jokes or throws in some copypasta. The engine doesn't just need some optimizing. It's at best mediocre. From would benefit greatly from something better. And the idea that From's amazing artwork, detail and richness is just too much for a game engine to run well is incorrect.Am I joking? Why do people say stuff like this lol, I wouldn't have made my comment if I wasn't joking. Load up bloodborne and check out the amount of geometry in Yharnam. The amount of detail in that game is ridiculous. Could they use a more optimized engine? I'm sure. But that doesn't change the fact that From managed to cram an intense amount of detail into a game that came out like 5 years ago now.
Your problem seems to stem from some place where you don't have the capacity to realize that "Dark Souls Competitor" doesn't mean anything other than a competing game to dark souls. I'm really not sure what the confusion is here for some of you. This entire "clickbait" discussion seems fairly off the rails and it's sad that people would take the time to argue that using a word correctly constitutes a clickbait title. Some of you gotta wisen up and cut the bull.yeah, well, let's just say we've reached an impasse, then. because what 'a dark souls competitor emerges' helps me understand very quickly is that i'm being bullshitted...