Nathaniel Chapman

As far as we're aware, that issue should be resolved. Please provide additional details if you are still encountering the issue, along with a DXDiag if at all possible, to bugs at obsidian dot net. Thanks!

Yeah, I actually had the same problem with F-Secure and The Witcher 2 on Steam. Temporarily disabling F-Secure (or disabling the feature that interferes with steam, forget the name) fixes it.

By the way, we do cache and try to reward your achievements when you reconnect, so you should be good on any ones you missed.

That fight is very difficult in Hardcore difficulty. It took me a long time too!

Just a quick question: It's 2011. This is released on PC. Why does it need a patch to have this most basic of all functions since the beginning of time? To be fair, Starcraft 2 came out last year, was PC exclusive, and implemented keybinding in a post-release patch.

Hmm, gas powered games and the emperor's tailor? I am thinking that may be a transcription error.

Hi Everyone, I wanted to announce one of those "bigger features that we didn't have an ETA on". Soon, we'll be releasing a patch which adds keybinding to the PC version of the game. We want to make sure we don't introduce any bugs, which is why we don't release it immediately, but it shouldn't be long now. Again, there are still more updates/improvements we're looking at for the PC version, but I wanted to give you all a heads up that this is one of the big ones since it's something that you all have been asking about. Thanks!

Hey everyone, I just wanted to make a post to let you all know that we're reading everything (yes, even Matt-C's posts) that's being posted and we're working to fix some of the issues that people have brought up for the retail release of the game. Here's some things we're working on now: First, with regards to the PC Version: We're looking at making it so that A and D rotate the camera in the same direction regardless of whether you walk forwards or backwards. We're looking at defaulting the Camera Auto-Orient option off, since many players report that this is frustrating. It will still remain as an option in the menu for those of you who like it. We've fixed a few startup crashes that happen to people running the game while running windows in specific other locales (Czech, Ukrainian, etc.) not specifically supported by localizations of the game. This fix has already gone out for the demo and will be included in the release version. We're working with AMD on an issue reported here that causes graphical issues when forcing AA on via the Catalyst Control Center on AMD cards. A temporary workaround is to use Application Settings for AA rather than overriding them. We're also considering some other, larger control improvements for the PC version, but I don't have an ETA on them yet. Second - as Jean-Eric posted in one of the threads on the game, we've identified and fixed a last-minute bug that was causing our textures to appear blurred out. This should dramatically improve the visual quality of the released game. Third, there are some structural and plot criticisms related to the demo that aren't as much an issue with the "real" game, so I wanted to highlight some differences between the demo and the full game: In the demo, many of the sidequests were removed from Raven's Rill as compared with the full game. This is partly what contributes to the sense that the game is ultra-linear. This is specifically related to the demo, obviously. Note that this is in addition to the things that actually *say* they were removed from the demo. The demo levels your character up higher than normal to show you more abilities, which has the side effect of making combat *really* easy. The story is substantially more complex than what you're lead to believe from the demo. You learn more about the complexities of character's motivations later in the game, and while the story does begin with a relatively simple, uncomplicated goal (stop JEYNE KASSYNDER!) there's a lot more complexity revealed later. So I wouldn't really judge the story of the entire game from what you see in the demo. Thanks for your feedback, positive or otherwise, and we're listening and fixing what we can. We hope you guys enjoy the game when it comes out (soon, now!) Edit (6/16): We're planning on adding Keybinding support in a patch, due soon. See page 2 for full post.

Jeyne herself is well-conserved for a 50 years old woman I think. Her armor is nice too! She's pretty special.

Nope ;________; Yeah, I really enjoyed doing this. The interviewer asked good questions and had really clearly played through the game.

Hello polish friends! I have been greatly enjoying your nation's latest addition to the gaming world!

Yeah, this isn't what I meant. There's something else you get, though it may not be accessible in the demo. I would guess that we would receive some sort of Deed bonus at some point after what's shown in the demo.

Yeah, this isn't what I meant. There's something else you get, though it may not be accessible in the demo.

You get something and it isn't restricted to the epilogue.

The Bosses in the demo don't have anything on the main bosses in the game. Some of them are huge and get their own custom camera angles, even

Guys, I appreciate discussing the other games, but it's probably best to do that in the other (non-DS3) forums

I'd be interested in knowing what have you been checking, just for the sake of comparison. Most impressions I've read so far weren't terribly positive (mostly because the niche that plays Hack'n'slash games sees multiplayer as a core pillar of the experience, but there were also complaints about stiff combat, exploration, lack of character development options compared to its peers, graphics and dialogue/voice acting.. basically everything, although multiplayer was the most prevalent). Now, of course you can't make everyone happy, but aren't you afraid of pigeon-holing yourself by focusing too much on the positive feedback (which, I can understand, as a developer is most gratifying than reading personal insults and accusation of being a lazy fat money-grubber)? If you ask 10 people about a game, they'll say 10 different things, so I've mostly been focusing on common points of feedback, and on reviews, since those are the people who have been able to play the entire game. There are some portion of people for whom this is not what they want, and that's not really a huge surprise.

Retribution is really, really good. Note that you can still reflect damage even when you are blocking. Warding (the stun chance on damage) also works when you block attacks.

I understand and I wasn't saying anything about the the value, it's just that $60 games get bunched in with other $60 games regardless of any other qualities. It would be very interesting to actually see average playtimes for different games. On one hand you have stats that say that only ~50% of people finish games like Mass Effect and Gears of War, on the other hand you have people putting hundreds of hours into Oblivion, Minecraft, Diablo and the like. Value is about as subjective as you can get, Have you ever considered self-publishing or more budget-oriented side-projects? As for big questions in terms of Obsidian's strategy, that's a better question for someone like Feargus. I will say that 1) I think there is a market for lower-budget games at lower price points and 2) I think that there is even a market for 50/60$ niche games as long as you control scope. I also think that things like Steam and the various App Stores really help lower the barrier of entry for self publishing, which make it even more attractive. And yeah, you're definitely right that value is subjective. I spent 50 bucks on Portal 2 and I walked away completely happy, even though I spent about 6$ an hour on the game. Whereas I'd be upset to pay 60 bucks on a bad game - even if it lasted hundreds of hours

This is a large part of the problem for the current AAA-driven industry. If you(I guess it was the publisher's decision, but still) make a $60 game that doesn't quite live up to other $60 games you'll get crushed in reviews and have meager sales as 80%+ of those games do. Now look at Torchlight, it's a fun self-published $20 game(now down to $15) that got near universal praise, sold well and almost no one complained about its shortness or other minor flaws(well, they did want multiplayer and they're getting in in the sequel...). My point is that moving away from the status quo, focusing on your strengths and innovating can go a long way sometimes. I agree with you. I think there are a lot of alternatives to the 60$ AAA, console market that are really interesting. On the flipside, the value proposition of DS3 versus (some) other AAA games is quite good. Not every RPG, or even every ARPG, is an infinitely replayable online grinding game, nor do they have to be. Some very well reviewed and well loved AAA ARPGs don't have local or online co-op at all. So I guess I just inherently reject the idea that DS3 is somehow not providing value for the price. The reality of development is that time spent on X means less time spent on Y. Some of those decisions were based on technology and development resources, some on what we do well as a company, and some on what Square-Enix wanted. But we always keep in mind what we think gamers want, and it's also critical to remember that gamers are a complicated bunch. If you go over to some unnamed RPG superfan forums, they can barely agree what an RPG even is, let alone what makes one good - and that's about the most concentrated group of gamers you could imagine. When you expand it out to the broad gaming community, there's a huge diversity of tastes. So just because you don't want something doesn't mean that there aren't a million+ people who do. In this case, we made specific decisions to focus on some things (responsive action combat, an RPG and loot system with deeper and more interesting character development choices, story and dialog, interesting quest content, buddy based co-op) and not on other things. Some people will be happy with that, and some won't, and that's something that we understand and live with as game developers. Also the honest truth is that DS3, more than any other game I've worked on, has had people coming up to me after playing it, saying, "this is exactly the game I've been wanting"! It's true that those people aren't necessarily Dungeon Siege superfans (though some are) or internet forum posters. But their opinions count just as much as anyone else's, and the verdict is still out on whether or not there are more of them, or more people upset with our direction.

ty for your answer. What about helmets? All items have an associated model with them. Not every character has a helmet slot (e.g. Lucas doesn't), but the ones who do will have the model change based on the tier and some other factors (some uniques have special appearances, for instance).

Yes maybe my criticism went a little too far. There are plenty of things in my life I poured my heart into that turned out to be complete failures. You learn and become better from things like this, but only if you actually realise your mistake and accept it. I think it's premature to presume that DSIII is a failure. It's also arrogant to assume that, because it's not the game you wanted, it's not a game that anyone wants. Honestly there's really nothing else to say about this - everyone who reads this forum can understand that you're not happy with the direction of the game and repeatedly posting it isn't going to achieve much other than giving you carpal tunnel and annoying people who want to actually discuss the game.

Outside of the... rarefied air of the forums, the reception to the demo's been pretty positive. So I'm happy about that. I'm not unsurprised that our multiplayer is disappointing to some people here, but I think that there are also a lot of people (who are not likely to coincide with the hardcore players on the board) that will appreciate how multiplayer works. I'm not saying that I wouldn't like to have done things to make everyone happy, but I also have a clear understanding of what the realistic alternatives were in actually developing the game, which is a benefit of knowledge that a developer gets that fans don't. Not that it should matter to you guys, since you pay 60 bucks for the game regardless of the development circumstances. As for the hardcore player's reaction here, again, it's understood and I appreciate both the positive and negative comments. I'm also reading other forums where the comments skew more positive, and that's encouraging. I think the only thing that's a little disappointing is seeing people here who don't like the demo personally insulting the team (many of whom spent countless 12+ hour days working on the game), but what can you expect, it's the internet We knew from the start that we weren't making Diablo 3 and we chose a different path. The core game wasn't designed to be played with randoms, and it just wasn't feasible or smart from a quality perspective to include a bunch of different modes for different styles of play (a PvP mode, a "go game with no story, no C&C, with random players" mode, etc). The kind of co-op that we knew went well with our core gameplay was playing through the game, from beginning to end, with family or friends. We included online because we felt that would let people who were physically separated to play together. Our goal wasn't to make Borderlands, or Diablo, and while I appreciate that there are people who wish we did, I'd argue that there are also people who will appreciate how we've done co-op in a way that makes it really, really easy to play through a story-driven ARPG with your buddies. On the flipside, I think even if you leave out multiplayer and co-op entirely, a 15-20 hour single player ARPG with good combat, loot, and story is a good value. For people who like the core game, I think they are getting a really good value. For people who don't, that's okay and they are entitled to their opinions. I don't have really strong opinions on the reviews because 1) I haven't been able to read the source text and 2) I don't speak the native languages, so it's hard to really make a judgement on them. I don't really know that it matters what I think of the reviews, since everyone's entitled to their opinions, though, regardless of what I think

Yeah, there is loot that changes the visual appearance of your character. We probably could have done a better job distributing those armor pieces, but it's definitely there and it's not a small amount.

Two different magazines reported this though. Problem with the review code? Not every piece is unique, but there are a lot of variations. Could be an issue, I'll look into it.