Azilis

Aside from the multiplayer issues, this would be the single biggest improvement to the game for me. On the PC, the camera would be much easier to control with a WASD control scheme. Think The Witcher 2. Overall, the combat mechanics of DS3 are similar, but IMO are held back (on the PC) due to the camera and combat controls (which aren't really that bad IMO, but compared to The Witcher 2 . . . ). That said, it would necessitate a complete rework of the camera and combat controls . . . and I have a feeling the game world isn't built to be viewed from an angle that's not top-down. I'd assume most of the environments would have to be somewhat reworked. I might be wrong about that last part, but I think it's too late for such a drastic change.

I think it's harsh to say the game has none of the defining elements of DS1 and 2, because I think the biggest defining element of those games is the art direction. DS3 does an excellent job in that department. I've always been a big PC gamer (never owned a non-handheld console until 2 years ago), so my biggest problem with the game is that it was clearly designed for consoles first and PC second, but that doesn't really impact my enjoyment of the game. I enjoyed DS1 but had some major issues with it. The character development system was boring, mainly due to it being an 'open development' system IMO. I thought DS2 was considerably better, and I consider myself a fan of the series. DS3 is clearly quite different from the first 2 games in the series, but I honestly think Chris Taylor wanted to take the series in this direction anyway. He's on record as saying that he wanted future games in the DS series to focus on a single character for the player to control. He tried to do this with Space Siege, but failed pretty miserably. Obsidian went a different route from Space Siege while still focusing on a single character, and IMO, they did a pretty good job. They made the single-character combat intense and interesting, while giving the player a decent amount of control over character development (I'd have preferred more control, but I can live with it).

This is pretty subjective, because I have a very different opinion of DS1. The game had a massive, beautiful map, as you point out. That's the main reason I enjoyed the game on my one playthrough . . . journeying through the various environments was a fantastic audio-visual experience (the sound effects and music were every bit as great as the visuals and art design). But then there was the gameplay itself. Despite having a large party, the strategic combat was underwhelming. So much of the combat was based on having everyone auto-attack, with the player simply picking individual targets for each party member (though that last part wasn't really necessary if you didn't turn the party AI down). The character customization system may have been innovative for the time, but it was incredibly dull, and didn't actually allow for much customization at all. There was a large variety of spells to choose from (which did occasionally make combat interesting), but most of the time, you could get through any encounter by having your mages auto-attack with your chosen attack spell. Not to mention that the game pretty much lacked a story. I don't mean to imply that I hated the game (I actually did enjoy my one playthrough of the game), but to call it a masterpiece is laughable. DS2 was considerably better (with better character customization and more interesting combat), but it had it's own problems. The more prominent 'story' was terrible, and it forced the player to wade through sometimes extensive uninteresting dialogue trees. The game also included considerably more puzzles than the original (can't remember if DS1 had any), but like the story, they were terrible. I've only played the demo of DS3 so far, but I can already tell that I much prefer the more intense single-character combat to that of DS1. Character customization looks to be lacking (due to the apparent ability to pick up every skill by the end of the game and only customize them in 1 of 2 ways), but still far better than in DS1. I don't mind the multiplayer restrictions (other than the camera, which I have to assume will be patched on the PC), but maybe that's because I've known for a while what I would be getting with this game (I read lots of previews). To me, it looks like the game has a pretty good story with some meaningful choices, nice graphics and art design (much in keeping with DS1 and DS2), and fun combat. That's enough for me. . . . not that I would ever shatter a disc of a game I didn't like. Seems like a bit of an overreaction.

The UI definitely needs some work . . . having to wade through several menu screens to get to where I want to be is irritating. They clearly designed the menus for consoles and didn't rework them much for the PC. The PC controls, though . . . I'm a little mystified at the problems people have had with them. I played the demo pretty much the same way I played Sacred 2. Point and click to move, 'a' and 's' to rotate the camera and space bar for dodging and blocking (rather than for drinking potions in Sacred 2). Worked fine after adjusting to using the right mouse button to move instead of the left. As you get deeper into the full version of the game, the directional aiming of skills could possibly prove troublesome, but I had no issues in the demo, playing as both Lucas and Anjali. Before playing the demo, I assumed I'd end up buying a 360 controller for my PC just for this game, but I'm starting to think that won't be necessary. This did bug me somewhat, though honestly DS2 wasn't much better in this regard. I hope things open up a bit more later in the game (I'm not talking open world here . . . just wider areas along the main pathway), but honestly, I don't see this being a major turnoff for me due to the actual gameplay being enjoyable. All in all, the demo only confirmed to me that this is a game I'm going to like.

Bringing this topic back up because it's something that seemed kind of vague in the previews I've read. So I'm right in thinking that this game won't control anything like NWN2? I was hoping that we'd have at least some sort of option for direct control of the other party members in single-player. Being able to control the entire party was a big factor for me in preferring NWN2 to the original (though the story was probably the biggest fator). In the gameplay footage I've seen, the player character is actively dodging quite often, so it looks to me like there will only ever be direct control of 1 party member (per player). Definitely not a deal breaker for me, but still a bit disappointing. I just have to come to grips with the fact that this isn't going to be the game I originally expected. I'm still assuming that 4-player groups will be possible in multiplayer, but I'm interested to see how the party mechanics work in single-player. (Inventory control? Tactics?)

Well, from a single-player perspective, I loved DS2 whereas DS1 basically just impressed me with its pretty graphics. The combat and very basic freeform class leveling systems got monotonous after a while. (I tend to dislike freeform leveling systems, though.) Skill trees (which I believe are not going to feature in DS3) IMO, are a lot more fun because you're always working towards something. Knowing where you're going to place your next skill points makes it boring? Seriosuly? If the choices are extremely limited, maybe you're right, but I remember the skill trees being pretty extensive in DS2.

Well, the thing about Sacred 2 was that it looked absolutely beautiful when zoomed out, but the further you zoomed in, the worse it looked, even with the high-res textures. A lot of these screenshots are from a closer viewpoint, and I think they still look quite good.