Frankie Godskin

Heard about the Obsidian layoffs and remembered this thread. Someone high up at Obsidian is making consistently poor decisions, such as the omission of proper multiplayer in DS3 and awarding bonuses based on Metacritic scores. It's no surprise people are losing their jobs, and I wonder if the company will survive long enough to get its poorly-implemented South Park RPG out the door.

Saying this is not an "online-focused-RPG" is a lie. All the videos are highlighting 4-player co-op. It's what drew me to the game in the first place. Doing something half-assed and then claiming "it wasn't our intent to do it right" is just silly logic. As for getting a character to max level and using them again...yes, that's the point of these games. Showing off your character to friends, helping newbs out, trading your great gear, these are all things you do with a maxxed out character. Hear, hear. No. Actually a lot of people will be really pissed off. Obsidian has made a classically stupid decision. For no real reason either. Its not like Diablo 2 didn't have a story. There was a way to make everyone happy here and Obsidian just decided to make what they wanted to make and not deliver to fans of the genre. Big mistake always. Still no. And yes they had a reason and they made good on it. I the only thing for which there is no reason is your blindly defending a stupid design decision. Play the demo and tell me that full online co-op wouldn't have been awesome. I'll play it but I can still tell you already. No. Its not designed that way. Some of the reasons are already posted in the other thread. You're incorrect. And if I'm coming off as the new guy who only created an account to complain, you're definitely the devout fan who's blindly defending a horrible design choice. If someone is uninformed about the backwards nature of this co-op and buys the game, they will feel duped and deceived. This could cause ill will towards future Obsidian games. I've been looking forward to this game for months. Every time it seems like a title's going to "get it right," it falls short. Two Worlds 1 and 2, Fable 2, Daggerdale, now Dungeon Siege 3, etc.. I don't want an MMO, I want Oblivion with 4 player co-op. And since there have been a ton of advances in the past 5 years since Oblivion released, I don't think I'm asking too much. And yet, instead I keep getting let down by titles that can't even touch a 5-year-old game that's rusty by today's standards. Even simpler, I want a fantasy Borderlands. That game hit every note right with its levelling, abilities, weapons, and design.Just model off of that, change the art style and make it a fantasy game, and you'll get my cash. But this? This is just a train wreck. The ONE THING that made me want this game is gone. That's two potential new customers lost. What a waste.

IMO this is the absolute worst decision you could EVER make in a online arpg. Everyone knows people don't want to be forced to play a character they cannot build and play with ALL friends ANYTIME they want. Making us play with ONE player the entire campaign is complete garbage. Why not just make it like D2, sacred2 and probably countless others where you jump in a multiplayer game, do a couple qustst and take your character. Then you can simply join, or start another game anytime you want as long as the game is isnt farther than you are in the campaign you can get credit and continue. WHY CAN'T YOU DO THIS? It wouldn't be a problem if you had a free play mode or something as well but forcing players to play like this is just bad. I'm gonna rent it, and if i like it i will probably buy it but it still doesn't make sense to do this. It leads me to believe the devs COULDN'T pull it off. Anyone who says this is a design decision is a fool imo. They know what players want in their multiplayer rpgs, and the MAIN thing is persistant characters they can build and play with friends. You're taking a leap of faith renting it. I haven't bothered downloading the demo because of this news. I'm writing this game off. IMO this is the absolute worst decision you could EVER make in a online arpg. Well then its a good point that it isn't an online focused ARPG, isn't it? It has co-op with friends and thats it. Your whole argument is based on a assumption that just isn't fact. And yes, thats why its also a design decision. And thats also why not WE are the fools but YOU are. Don't you mean co-op with FRIEND? The host? OK i'll play along. So if it's co-op focused who thought i'd be a good idea to FORCE players to play with one host the ENTIRE campaign and have him keep OUR characters and not allow us to play CO-OP with ANY friend at ANYTIME with custom built characters? I'd love to have heard that board meeting. (hey guys today we want to talk about core gameplay features and what we want in our co-op experience. Any ideas? Yes, we want to play the entire campaign with friends....ok ofcourse. (guy in the back)..we want to build awesome characters we can play cooperatively with all our friends. And jump in their games and help when they need it, and keep items and xp when we leave yeah!! (answer).....ummmm noooooo...i don't think we want that in our game, we want drop in drop out co-op but we think it's best if the host keeps all saves and characters......lmao REALLY!! You actually think they thought this? And all agreed it was a good idea? No way. I hear you. Did someone who's played an ARPG before have a voice in these meetings? Doesn't sound that way. e.

Incorrect. It's a gamebreaker for my friend and I, both of whom are new to the franchise and are the target demographic. How often does your friends lose HDs, also easily avoided by doing back-up save (on PC atleast) in case you are really that worried... Do they live in a rural area where Internet is down all the time? The game can be finished in 15 to 25 hours according to reviews, doesn't take a huge commitment if you ask me. Unless you play with some really casual players. But then again why would you choose someone like that as the host if you know how the multiplayer works. Maybe Nathan or someone could tell if it's possible for the host to send the save file to someone else in case the host decides to quit playing. You're missing the point, which is that for whatever reason the hosts stops playing, I only mentioned some possibilities but there could be many more, maybe he just went on vacation for a few weeks, maybe he has a busy project at work and won't be able to play for a few weeks, whatever the reason, everyone who was the part of that game who may have put 15-20 hours into the game are held hostage and have to start over. This is a terrible system. There is no justifiable defense for it, and with a little bit of effort and creativity they could have avoided such a flawed system, they were either too stubborn or too lazy to do it, and neither speaks well of them. I'm not a fan of calling things "retarded," but I feel your frustration. But this? This is just a train wreck. The ONE THING that made me want this game is gone. That's two potential new customers lost. What a waste.

I don't want to be that guy who signs up to a forum and complains for his first post, but I'm so heartbroken about this design choice that I wanted to vent in a forum that might allow my voice to be heard by those responsible. This is exactly how I feel. I've been looking forward to this game for months and now the rug's been pulled out from under me. You realize a diablo-style multiplayer framework simply doesn't work for a mainly story-driven game, right? It sort of breaks any sense of immersion or balance to have a level 30 friend bring his character into the early stages of your game. I've never understood this argument. Maybe someone wants to break the balance early in his game. So what? Maybe some people like power-levelling their tiny friends. So what? Is it really worth breaking a system to try to stop people from playing the game the way they want? I just don't get it. Exactly. Let me play the game the way I want. If there's no PvP, then what's the difference if the game's a little imbalanced? It doesn't hurt anyone, and as long as I'm enjoying myself, that's what matters. And also, that's what'll keep me around to buy DLC and the next installment in the franchise. And Drebbin--you hit the nail right on the head. Not necessarily - if you play on without your friend, then he/she comes back, they will be able to 'jump back' into their character, which will be auto-levelled to match your character. They just need to take a couple of minutes to distribute their newly gained points. While this means they miss out on a part of the game, that would have happened anyway in any system - it just means you don't have to waste time helping them level up and they doesn't have to give up playing with you because you're too far ahead. In other words, your actions in the world have no lasting ramifications. You're completely expendable and are basically AI stand-in. As a matter of fact, you're so useless that if you leave and come back, there's no discernable difference. This will certainly hurt sales. I prepaid this game in full and my friend pre-reserved it. He already got his money back and I'm transferring mine to a different title. Not necessarily - if you play on without your friend, then he/she comes back, they will be able to 'jump back' into their character, which will be auto-levelled to match your character. They just need to take a couple of minutes to distribute their newly gained points. While this means they miss out on a part of the game, that would have happened anyway in any system - it just means you don't have to waste time helping them level up and they doesn't have to give up playing with you because you're too far ahead. But you can't play on if he's the host and all the progress is saved on his console. I can have a group of 4 dedicated players, and the host either loses interest in the game or maybe or HD crashes, or his internet is out. Now none of us can continue the game. This is seriously retarded, and the sad thing is they could have gotten around this problem if they just gave it a little more effort. But it seems Obsidian is more about stubbornly making their game rather than a game for players to enjoy. This game has gone from day one purchase to maybe I'll pick up from the bargain bin, which I have no doubt it will end up in fairly quickly. Yup. This is awful for every reason you described.