Matt-C

Summary: You Obsidian fanbois are saying we didn't get a Dungeon Siege 3 that was faithful to the original due to Obsidian focusing on the non existent story of Dungeon Siege, and they couldn't even get the story/dialogue/cut-scenes decent.

Quoted for truth

Both are true. Although some may try to argue the first and say the save file stays with the host. This however means that other people can join the hosts game and play as 'your' character while you are offline. So it's not really your multiplayer character in any sense... So you only keep items/progress if you are the host.

Can a developer take time out of their busy schedule to answer this important question for me. The answer to this question will help me decide whether to buy Dungeon Siege 3 or not.

It's pretty terrible hey... all the Obsidian fanbois going on about how great Obsidian are for this sort of thing and god damn it's so bad...

Would love to talk about fun stuff, but when Obsidian lacks to provide a fun experience in this game, it becomes somewhat difficult.

sorry about having quoted you, this isn't directed at you, but at every DS fan out there. this seems to be a common misconception. 1) the original Dungeon Siege was a mediocre game, that appealed to those gamers, that tend to play anything that "lasts" (and for all the wrong reasons), no matter how bad it is. fact 2) Dungeon Siege 2 was a piece of trash that only got picked up by said gamers. fact 3) Obsidian tries to save the franchise (not their original intention of course, they're trying to exploit your weaknesses), and you start to go on about how they're ruining a "great concept". pah-lease there was no core gameplay. Diablo 2 had core gameplay. neither of DS did. and coming here saying that the ability to play over the Net is more important than story and proper implementation of RPG mechanics - just makes you people look like fools, seriously. haven't played the demo, and I don't need to in order to see flaws in your argumentation. at least think a little before posting, sheesh. 1) Dungeon Siege was by no means the greatest game ever or anything. However it appealed to a certain type of people. At the end of the day it was just a fun game you could play with your mates. 2) Dungeon Siege 2 was pretty bad compared to Dungeon Siege. I didn't enjoy it anywhere near as much as the original. 3) Obsidian aren't trying to save anything, other than their own jobs. Obviously their publisher realises that they are a bunch of failures when it comes to new IP so they are trying to ride the cash train of already existing IPs they have no history / experience with. At no point are we claiming the original Dungeon Siege to be a master piece... it was simply some mindless awesome fun. However here are Obsidian and their fanbois going on about Obsidians deep story that involves you to sit through 90% dialogue for a game... I mean where is the game part of the... you know computer/video game? Obsidian should write books, not video games, that way they don't risk terrible graphics, lack of gameplay and game breaking bugs to ruin their product.

From the demo experience and all the very wise design choices Obsidian has made I would say that this game will be less than half price after a month. They delay the game to fix nothing, so I vote we delay our purchase by a month and get it for less than half price!

I would just like to thank you Alvin Nelson for taking the time out of your busy schedule to provide answers on such a pressing topic such as 'Tanking in an ARPG'.

Just noticed this. Again, where is that developer PR speak I'm supposendly parrotting from? Would be nice if you have a link before baseless insulting me. Everything I've posted so far are my own beliefs and words. The logic is thus: I don't like this game, therefore nobody can like this game, therefore anyone who says they like this game must be a "fanboi", "company stooge", or some other derogatory term (or term meant in a derogatory manner). It's rooted in believing that one's opinion is "correct" while ignoring the fact that it's an opinion, not a fact. In terms of Obsidian I'm actually pretty much a fanboy. Still I have my own beliefs and react on them even regarding Obsidian. (I'm actually myself disappointed in some aspects of DSIII. Nothing to do with Multi or graphics and not a gamebreaker though.) Can you tell me why you are a fanboy? From what I can tell they honestly make the most boring games around... I understand the market they cater to though... the 'im **** at video games and would rather sit through an interactive movie' type people. I really tried to play Fallout: New Vegas, I looked past the **** bad graphics that literally made we want to vomit, but god damn the game was so boring I just had to turn it off after an hour. I'm surprised this development studio is still in business in all honesty.

Facts of life: No matter how good looking the game is, someone will call it a PS2 game. I wish every gamer would be forced to start their gaming "career" by playing C64 games for few years and from there slowly move to Nintendo/Sega Megadrive games. Maybe that would stop the unneccary bitching about voice over, music and graphics. Yes because typically when someone compares a current generation title to the graphics of a PS2 game they mean it literally... It's usually an over exaggeration to get the point across that the graphics are not up to the standards of this generation. See people instantly identify that PS2 = bad graphics by today's standards. If I were to use the current worst title graphics wise of this generation as a comparison there would be a lot of people that would not get that link. I am by no means stating that graphics make a game. However when a company can't even make a game look nice then you seriously wonder about the 'talent' that the rest of the company is made up of. I would like to see how DS3 looks on my tv before I actually comment about the graphics on the game, however going by the youtube videos of the demo and also Obsidians last game (Fallout) I have very little hopes that it's going to look any better... Obsidian from what I can tell is a company that typically has pretty terrible graphics (going from the past two titles they have released, I have no further knowledge about the company prior to that).

There fixed it for you

Maybe if the company fails at making a decent multiplayer experience. Blizzard is literally built around how great they have made the multiplayer experience of their games to be.

Yes I've changed my mind too, this game will be in the bargain bin after a month, will pick it up then for lols.

and left 'Dungeon Siege' out of the title.

No, just something that I hope the developers end up reading. I then hope the realise why there has been a lot of negative feedback and incorporate some, if not all of these features in the next Dungeon Siege game (if they continue with it). Then some sort of suggestion thread would be better suited. VS threads end nearly always in pointless flamewars and have a lower chance of beeing looked at by the dev or taken seriously at all. There were suggestion threads when this forum was first created with people explaining what they loved about the original. Clearly Obsidian took no notice of them then. Maybe they will take notice of a debate topic?

The single player may have been an 'interactive screensaver' however this thread is about the multiplayer of the game. There are quite a few of us that really loved the original Dungeon Siege for what it was. I understand that with Dungeon Siege 3 you have two vastly different types of people who have expressed interest in the game, those that played and liked the original, and those who are followers of Obsidian. Unfortunately how Obsidian do things isn't anywhere close to what 'Dungeon Siege' is. So while people like yourself are looking for the next Obsidian game, I was looking for the next 'Dungeon Siege' game... I figured Obsidian may have stayed faithful to what 'Dungeon Siege' is, I was wrong.

No, just something that I hope the developers end up reading. I then hope the realise why there has been a lot of negative feedback and incorporate some, if not all of these features in the next Dungeon Siege game (if they continue with it).

Dungeon Siege 1: + Ability to import a member of your single player party to multiplayer + Up to 8 players local or online + Persistent characters across multiple games + Entire multiplayer world separate from that of the single player campaign (you could play the single player map in multiplayer too) + 3 world levels (aka new game+, diablo's nightmare and hell mode, etc) + PVP + Not limited to the hosts field of view + Large amount of custom maps to play + Character customization - Large modding/hacking community, usually had to create 'Legit Only' games if you wanted to enjoy playing how it was intended to be played. Dungeon Siege 3: - 4 players, hosts keeps save, only has the life of one play through - More than one of the same class cannot be played (The class system in itself I see nothing wrong with, the fact that multiple of the same class cannot be played in a single game is bad) - Limited to the hosts field of view - No PvP - One play through + Unlikely to see a large amount of hacked characters with the best of everything Some may argue that this is story centric game, but the original Dungeon Siege had a completely separate online mode with it's own world/map/whatever you may call it. Why couldn't the same be done for this? How is it that the original, almost 10 years ago seemed to have an enjoyable single player experience that was then extended greatly by a wonderful multiplayer experience, and yet this one can't? No doubt at some point the Obsidian team would of had a meeting going over all the aspects that made Dungeon Siege the game that it was, does anyone else think that someone happened to bring the wrong game into that meeting? This game was not designed for multiplayer, it should of been kept at singleplayer rather than doing a half assed attempt of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fP8McaPyuk 00:30 - 00:45 shows that the demo has online play, however they don't actually play it. If a lot of people are saying this is how the online is (shared screen) then it's most likely true.

As far as a video? no I don't believe so, but I'm sure there will be one on youtube soon. The demo features online play.

It's been mentioned by a few different people on other forums so far... so I'm guessing this is true... it seems as if online play is just a port of the couch co-op mode... just a quick addition to be able to advertise having up to 4 players online

C2B you seem to be quoting only the positive responses. From what I've read on many other forums (and this one), comments to news posts about the demo release, etc the majority has unfortunately been negative feed back... many of the issues ranging from terrible music, outdated graphics (as in 6+ years), weak storyline, many of the armors have no cosmetic change, and same screen co-op (as if the co-op of this game didn't need another blow...). I am currently at work so have not yet played it for myself... while I still want to have faith that this may be a good game... it really isn't looking good =(

The topic creator mentions the same screen in online play. You know four different monitors/tvs yet the other 3 players are restricted to movement within the current screen of the host. Absolutely terrible =(

Then either you had the right version for your console or that game was region free. Software released for NA audience will be aimed at a NTSF standard and while there is a possibility that the demo isn't region restricted it is something to think about. Oh yeah I understand region lock for retail copies, just confused me in the context of a demo... as I have never heard of that.