With the remaster will I be able to transfer my progress from the original on to it

[Eliotindubai2014]

I'm really hoping for a yes but I wouldn't mind too much if it was a no

[Moondawg]

The characters may be transferable to the enhanced edition, but what's the point?
This isn't Mass Effect or Witcher. You can finish Dark Souls in a few hours.

[gackie]

Maybe actually. You'll habe to wait for official word. I can see this being a thing though.

[CazadorDeLobo]

It's not coming out until May 24th. Are you really going to value that one save for that long?

[gackie]

Originally posted by Wulf Hunter:

It's not coming out until May 24th. Are you really going to value that one save for that long?

Maybe he's doing an NG+999 run.

[Ganger]

I highly doubt you be able to transfer saves. You couldn't transfer saves between DSII and SoTFS.

[gackie]

Originally posted by Ganger:

I highly doubt you be able to transfer saves. You couldn't transfer saves between DSII and SoTFS.

They were two different games.

[Ganger]

Originally posted by Hat Skeleton!:

They were two different games.

Yes and no... same game but scholar was remastered as will be Ds1, so again it will be highly doubtful you can transfer saves. But then again, until they state it offically, nobody knows for sure.

[gackie]

Originally posted by Ganger:

Originally posted by Hat Skeleton!:

They were two different games.

Yes and no... same game but scholar was remastered as will be Ds1, so again it will be highly doubtful you can transfer saves. But then again, until they state it offically, nobody knows for sure.

Yes, but Scholar had different content, enemy placement, item placement entirely, so it makes sense that saves weren't compatible. A simple remaster is way more possible for save transfering.

[Ganger]

Originally posted by Hat Skeleton!:

Yes, but Scholar had different content, enemy placement, item placement entirely, so it makes sense that saves weren't compatible. A simple remaster is way more possible for save transfering.

I know what your saying and I agree, but in my own opinion I don't think it will happen. But time will tell on this, I just wish they would give more information out instead of all these rumors that are doing the rounds. But hey... im off to bed now, good night.

[The Icecream Snowman]

It's probable that the saves won't be compatible, what with engine changes etc. If there are changes to items and enemies it won't work. The amount of work required to make the saves compatible is more than the time you put into said save, anyway.

Starting a new character is fun. You're not going to lose your existing DS1 saves, either.

[CazadorDeLobo]

Originally posted by Ganger:

Originally posted by Hat Skeleton!:

Yes, but Scholar had different content, enemy placement, item placement entirely, so it makes sense that saves weren't compatible. A simple remaster is way more possible for save transfering.

I know what your saying and I agree, but in my own opinion I don't think it will happen. But time will tell on this, I just wish they would give more information out instead of all these rumors that are doing the rounds. But hey... im off to bed now, good night.

What rumors? There's completely factual information out right now that everyone is basing their very expressive feelings on, as well as a buttload of comments saying "I hope for X in remaster". Hopefully you can parse the difference between that and someone making baseless claims(claims which don't survive very long on this forum without someone coming in and delivering the unanimous wisdoms).

Also, to the dialogue between Hat Skellie and Ganger: SotFS was a remake, and a hastily pushed one at that. It added more content than it sought to change or update. Not sure why they had to go that route, or why they couldn't just program a "master quest" thing into the vanilla game to make item/enemy placement much alike SotFS. It honestly seems like BamCo wanted to keep investors happy/sales up, so they did a slapjob of a re-release.

If you think that is what this will be, you're clearly only pulling the basis of such an assumption from a perceived pattern of events that isn't actually real. This is a remaster, a polished and long overdue update to the game so that it actually seems like it belongs on a computer instead of on a console. If you knew anything of the initial release of the PC version of the game or the troubles during it's life cycle on here, you'd very clearly see what the remaster seeks to accomplish.

[Ganger]

Originally posted by Wulf Hunter:

It honestly seems like BamCo wanted to keep investors happy/sales up, so they did a slapjob of a re-release.

This is the real world. Devs and publishers are there to make a profit, simple as and if a game fails then the publishers and dev studio can go under like many have done in the past.

[CazadorDeLobo]

Originally posted by Ganger:

Originally posted by Wulf Hunter:

It honestly seems like BamCo wanted to keep investors happy/sales up, so they did a slapjob of a re-release.

This is the real world. Devs and publishers are there to make a profit, simple as and if a game fails then the publishers and dev studio can go under like many have done in the past.

Thanks. Cpt. Obvious. I absolutely did not know any of that information until I just read your comment. I thought I was living in a dream world of fantasies where nothing exists until a guy on the internet says something about it.