Tales Of Symphonia Launches On PC But Its Locked At 720p 30FPS

Written by Neil Soutter on Tue, Feb 2, 2016 4:15 PM
System Requirements Optimum 1080p PC Build Low vs Ultra Screenshots GPU Performance Chart CPU List That Meet System Requirements GPU List That Meet System Requirements

If you’ve been browsing Steam and contemplating picking up the newly release Tales of Symphonia port, you might want to hold fire. At least for a little while. Initial impressions are suggesting this port from Bandai Namco is a hot mess, with NeoGAF user Chairmanchuck highlighting many of the issues.

Right, where to begin. First of all, Tales of Symphonia’s resolution is locked at just 1280 x 720p resolution. I’m getting flashbacks of Dark Souls here. That 720p is an absolute lock, so there’s no option to raise it or lower it whatsoever. That’s just the start of Tales of Symphonia’s problems though.

It’s also locked at 30 frames per second, with no native support for anything higher. But, some users are reporting there’s is running at 40 fps, which isn’t good for anyone involved and leads to uneven frametimes unless you’ve got a Gsync or FreeSync monitor.

The seemingly hurried port has broken language support, and some of it’s using the wrong font so the words don’t even appear. This leads to some strange spelling and blank spaces appearing in the interface. Somehow there’s even new typos that weren’t present in the Gamecube original. And all of these changes are just saved in a tiny text file.

Then there’s the interface. It’s a mixture of Xbox 360 controls and PlayStation 3 symbols, which can be very confusing. Chairmanchuck also says opening up the options or save menus can take upwards of 30 seconds.

Finally there’s the DRM Tales of Symphonia employs. Called VMProtect, this generates a new executable each and every time you boot the game.

It all sounds like a bit of a logistical nightmare, and it’s begging for the sort of fix Durante helpfully put together for the original Dark Souls. Obviously it hasn't gone down too well on Steam, currently sitting on a Mixed rating with 45% negative reviews.

Anybody taken the jump and given this a download? What's your thoughts on poor PC ports?

What do you think of the port?

Login or Register to join the debate

Rep
60
Offline
00:44 Feb-04-2016

I opted for the ps3 version instead of getting it for PC.

0
Rep
23
Offline
12:19 Feb-03-2016

Expected it..

3
Rep
104
Offline
admin approved badge
00:10 Feb-03-2016

I've love BandaiNamco for giving me Tekken. Hearing news like this is just sad to me. I feel like they're better than this, and I'd prefer they act like it.

2
Rep
44
Offline
00:02 Feb-03-2016

Guess namco missed the whole Final Fantasy 13 debacle, oh well enough negative reviews and low sales will wake them up.

2
Rep
0
Offline
21:13 Feb-02-2016

Latest version of GeDoSaTo works with the game: http://blog.metaclassofnil.com/?p=824

0
Rep
139
Offline
admin badge
21:02 Feb-02-2016

Good game, bad port

0
Rep
9
Offline
20:53 Feb-02-2016

VMProtect 3.x smells undeniably a lot like Denuvo DRM.

0
Rep
15
Offline
admin approved badge
21:13 Feb-02-2016

Denuvo itself is not DRM but an anti-tamper like a suit of armor for DRM if you will.

0
Rep
15
Offline
admin approved badge
20:29 Feb-02-2016

Played the game for 40 minutes, and requested a refund. Seriously, WTF Namco?!?!!!!

1
Rep
11
Offline
18:12 Feb-02-2016

I could forgive it the 30 fps lock. Hell I could even forgive that resolution. But those UI typos are downright insulting to the PC community. I could probably get a better experience with an emulator.

8
Rep
96
Offline
admin approved badge
17:07 Feb-02-2016

Well I was pretty hyped for this since it's in my opinion the best game ever made, but now it looks like I need to dust my old GameCube to enjoy it w/o puking at the screen. :/

0
Rep
92
Offline
16:56 Feb-02-2016

Idc. Tales of Symphonia is one of the best JRPGs ever made imo. So what if you have to play it in 720p. The game is incredible and if you're willing to avoid it simply because of graphics, then you need to reevaluate why you became a gamer.

-5
Rep
47
Offline
18:37 Feb-02-2016

There's a bit of a difference between a game with a lot of rough edges, and a port that transcends into unknown levels of lazy and poor. The subject at hand is the latter.

4
Rep
569
Offline
admin approved badge
18:41 Feb-02-2016

You aren't getting the point. It isn't just about the graphics. We as PC gamers expect the best/definitive version of the game experience. I don't care about having the best graphics, but what I do care about is having a functional port. Having to figure out the controls because they have ZERO KB+M support is just ridiculous. It's lazy, it's frustrating and downright absurd that in this day and age, games ported to PC are done so this back-asswards.


Was that a rant? That was a rant. I also have no care to play this game. It's just a bummer to everyone else that wants to.

7
Rep
92
Offline
19:30 Feb-02-2016

If there are technical issues with the game, then yes, I'm all for people expressing their anger. But the majority of the comments I've been seeing, especially on Steam, are about the game running at 720p. Maybe its just me, but I care more about gameplay and story than graphics, especially when the game is from 2003.

0
Rep
6
Offline
20:16 Feb-02-2016

Locking resolution is a whole step up from locking the frame rate. The visuals will have to be stretched out to fit on the screen since its not native res. Or, hell, on the off chance you have a panel that somehow doesnt support that one single res they chose. Even if its a good game, no one'll notice that when it runs in a tiny box in the middle of their screen. Also, PC is a platform defined by choice, this game isnt offering a choice by setting both res and framerate.

2
Rep
47
Offline
16:25 Feb-02-2016

Sounds like an ordinary Japanese PC port then.

5
Rep
262
Offline
admin approved badge
16:23 Feb-02-2016

1999 called, they want their Resolution back...

9

Can They Run... |

| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Ryzen 7 5800H 8-Core 3.2GHz GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile 16GB
| 30FPS, Medium, 1080p
Xeon E3-1230 GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Gigabyte G1 Gaming 4GB 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 30FPS, Low, 1080p
Core i5-3470 3.2GHz GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Gigabyte G1 Gaming 4GB 12GB
| 60FPS, Medium, 720p
Core i3-10100E 4-Core 3.20GHz GeForce GTX 750 Ti Asus OC 2GB Edition 16GB
Ryzen 5 3500X 6-Core 3.6GHz GeForce GTX 1660 Super 6GB 16GB
| 30FPS, Ultra, 1440p
Ryzen 5 3500X 6-Core 3.6GHz GeForce GTX 1660 Super 6GB 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 60FPS, Medium, 1440p
Ryzen 5 3600 6-Core 3.6GHz GeForce RTX 2060 Asus Dual OC 6GB 16GB
100% Yes [4 votes]
| High, 1080p
Core i5-10400 6-Core 2.90GHz GeForce GTX 1660 Super 6GB 16GB
100% Yes [2 votes]
| 30FPS, Medium, 1080p
Athlon II X2 245 GeForce GTS 250 4GB
| 60FPS, Ultra, 1080p
Ryzen 7 2700X Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB 16GB
| 60FPS, High, 1440p
Core i7-10700K 8-Core 3.8GHz GeForce RTX 2080 Super 8GB 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
Phenom II X6 1100T GeForce GTX 1050 EVGA Gaming 2GB 8GB
| 30FPS, Low, 1080p
Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core 3.7GHz Radeon RX Vega 8 16GB
100% Yes [2 votes]