Jubileet

Um - errrrr more people complained and you still implemented the same thing?

Other than the multiplayer points, it pretty much looks like I'm just not DS' target audience as most of those features I don't care about. -Character creation: It wasn't very impressive in DS 1 and I'd rather have speaking fleshed out premade characters than a character you can design BUT NEVER UTTERS A SINGLE WORD let alone a grunt. -Weapon/Item versatility: Dealing with all that garbage in DS 1 was a massive pain and I hated it. While its true you are stuck with the sword and can't equip a mace or axe etc., I'd gladly lose that ability in favor of the much easier to deal with inventory management of DS 3. -Why should an action RPG have more than a few controllable party members at once? Having up to 8 characters in DS 1 made the game a mess... furthermore an extremely easy 'auto-attack' mess. This ties in with control over multiple characters & party formation points. -More variety of active/passive abilities MUST be refering to DS 2. Cause DS 3 beats the crud out of 1 as far as that goes. Sure DS 3 has more spells, but most of them are upgrades to lower versions. IE you can summon a skeleton, now you are up a level and you can summon a wolf! Nice but not a big deal IMHO. -Less story is a big no-no for me, action RPG or not. The only points I agree with: -Less linear world/towns. For me the other strong points have helped this issue, but the game would have benefited from more open areas to explore, no question. -Camera. Yup... it sucks. At best its OK in single player. Better camera in first game no question. You did at least make sense about why someone might prefer those elements. I just don't think DS 1 was my type of game. Since when am I a new arrival? You should try to look at that list again and see it more towards what DS3 could have been if was truely "evolved". You're basically comparing DS3 to DS2 and 1, of course the graphics and such will be subpar in the earlier games. 1. Well, the point here is that the game had character customization and DS3 does not. You could easily introduce this into DS3, it would just be simliar to Dragon Age. Leave out your name from dialogues and have a number of voices to choose from (lets say 4 since there is 4 different voices in DS3 already). You could have character customization & you could hear your characters voice. Premade toons is one step into a linear direction, I was hoping for more originality I guess since the previous two games offered it. I would think this is what the fanbase would have expected to see in the third game. 2. What do you mean by inventory mangement? I also would expect to see the same versatility with gear and weapons that I saw in the first one. Theres just as much inventory management in DS3 that there is in the third, infact you could argue that its worse now because you have less characters to control. So basically, you're getting junk gear from the start of the game for characters you could even encounter or can play yet and you end up just selling it all anyway. If you're referring to organization, then I'd say DS3 is better than DS 1/2, but like I said before, instead of the dev's keep versatility and adding organization they choose another linear path and restricted players to 1 type of weapon / armor and added organization. 3. I believe 8 players were playable at the same time in multiplayer, I think it was 4 or 6 in DS2 and 4 in DS1 for single player.. can't remember. I'm not a very big fan of micromanaging but this is a feature I really loved about DS is that you had the ability to try out different classes and jump around toons based on the fight and most importantly if your main toon died you had more control over the situation rather than leaving it up to the AI to save you. Which I have to say is HORRIBLE in DS3, AI ignores all enemies and tries to res you repeatedly even if he/she is being attacked which ultimately ends up in their death. This is my personal preference, I feel like this is a key factor in what also defines the game. Lastly, inregards to the previous statement, all characters in DS talked besides your toon so it wasn't complete silence. Hell, all characters in DS3 are monotone, voice acting is terrible. 4. Yes, I was referring to DS2 on that statement with a side of DS1 in it in regards to spell casting. DS2 had trees / branches you could go down to make your character more unique. DS3 is going in the right direction but, they basically give you all abilities by the end, so meh you're basically no different from joe smoe. In DS3 it doesn't really matter though since you can't take your own toon into anyone elses game anyway so.. bleh. Game will get dull after everyone beats it, where as in DS1/2 you coudl play it again on a more difficult level and get better gear / tough mobs. 5. I agree RPGs should have a story, but I feel like "Hack N Slash" games are its on genre, the story doesn't really matter too much its about Dungeon crawls with friends. Like I said before, DS3 is more Dragon Age ish in this retrospect. It steers away from everything the original games were defined by and made its own entity. The point of my list was to compare functionality and gameplay of the original games to DS3 and how they differ. I wasn't expecting a clone of the previous too games, I was hoping for an expanded upon game of the first too. Get rid of some of the boring crap from the second one, add better graphics, multiplayer features, and mechanics. Basically bring Dungeon Siege up to modern day gaming standards, unfortunately they didn't do that at all. I was disappointed to say the least, I think its a decent game I just don't agree with it being called Dungeon Siege since the name was clearly just bought out and used for marketing. But, oh well nothing I or anyone can do about it now anyway.

I'm on the same side of the fence that I was on when Fallout 3 came out. I loved the old versions and I love the new version. 'Course in Dungeon Siege's case I only have been enjoying the new version. I don't have a lot of pity for DS fans. Previews have been out for ages, the demo was out for weeks that I played multiple times and was a clear indicator the game was nothing like the previous one... which is a very good thing IMHO. Everyone's favorite franchise goes through changes and you either go with it, or you ignore the new versions and move on to something else. Something I've done with franchises that have gone bad (for me) in the past. The thing I keep driving at because I've yet to see a DS fan put in a coherent manner is what was so great about the originals that is lacking in this one? Its all been this game sucks because its not like the original. From what I can think up off the top of my head... Dungeon Siege 1 & 2 (some features are only available in the 2nd) Character Customization (Cosmetic) Character weapon / armor / skill versatility (Ex. Not limited to a single weapon/skill/armor type) Camera versatility Not limited to 1 playable character (up to 8 if I remember right in the 2nd) Control over multiple characters at once Not as linear more of an open concept party formations towns were towns (not corridors) more variety of active / passive abilities less story (imo, hack n slash games shouldn't have a huge story and dialogue every 5 minutes) Multiplayer supported up to 8 people was not limited to a shared camera did not share the same gold could use / save your own character Mods & Modding tool kit LAN

I'd say that's a pretty clever marketing strategy, no? Agreed, in the end a company's main goal is to make the most profits possible. One can argue that it is not ethical, but /shrug from a business standpoint I don't see why they would care about this. In a world where the bottom line outweighs customer satisfaction, a players expectations will never be 100% fulfilled. I can understand why some old fans of the series might not like the complete change. What I can't understand is why people would be fans of the old series in the first place. I personally loved Fallout 3 and New Vegas despite them being drastically different form the originals. Think of it this way, the series was dead and this new incarnation may result in a sequel more true to the 'beloved' originals, just as New Vegas was closer to the original Fallouts than 3 was. I also find it odd you enjoy '****ty Dragon Age clones. I'm enjoying DS 3 more than DA 2 so far. If Dungeon Siege 3 is a clone/spiritual successor to anything it is the Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance games. I don't doubt that there are fans out there that love DS3 more than the originals. I can't really speak for Fallout / New Vegas series as I never player so I can't comment / compare. However, I don't agree on your logic that if a series is "dead" remaking a new completely new game with zero focus/feedback/research into the original series is the solution. Honestly, why would you bother? Personally, I feel creating your own game (which is what I feel they did here) is the more logical approach. A classic example is a horror film series, originals are always the best but for profits sake it they keep making ****ty sequels. From a consumer standpoint, when you watch a sequel and it sucks, you feel like you've wasted money. If there was never a sequel the movie you probably would have a much higher opinion, but instead for the sake of making a profit the industry loses credibility. That is just my opinion, though. Lastly, I enjoy it because there really isn't any good 4 player + co op's out there at the moment. Its certainly the best release in the recent years, however by modern standards its still a sub par game. I agree that I find it more enjoyable than DA2, I didn't even buy DA2, just played the demo and hated it. DS3 feels like a crappy clone because the story is very similar.. Legion = Warden, need to find more Legion / Wardens etc. and so forth. Well to be technical, they took the lore from the DS series and evolved the game in a different way. The fact that the games have the same lore is why its DS3 I understand what you're saying but I don't think its fair to say its an evolved game of DS1/2. Its not "evolved" in anyway, its a new game. Gameplay, character customization, multiplayer, co-op, camera, etc. etc. is all different and by different I mean in no way similar. You can't even control the second party member! The name was used and some lore, thats all. Nothing else was brought back / evolved into DS3.

Yes different developers have different visions, that's why they make their own game. Regardless, of what the developers vision is IMHO, you should at least stick to the series. In this case all they did was use the name to market their original game. It's not based off of anything from its predecessors. The fan base of DS1/2 come here expecting a DS 3 game, but in reality its like naming Call of Duty Dungeon Siege 3, of course all the COD fans are going to buy the game but as soon as they get it they are going to be like WTF is this? Not saying its a terrible game, I enjoy it - it def needs some revamps in some areas but you can't say this is part of the Dungeon Siege series because they took absolutely 0 game play from the original, all they did was buyout the name and use it on their own product, because lets face it.. if they didn't have Dungeon Siege for a name this game wouldn't be as successful. Its just a ****ty Dragon Age clone, with multiplayer. Oh well!

Meh, I wouldn't consider it the best game. It was certainly pretty good. I guess I agree with you on DS2, it was pretty boring, I think you just need to get out of the lame tree city then it picks up a lot.

DS2 is the only game in my memory that I quit half-way through simply because I got bored to tears. And I played tons and tons of Diablo/Titan Quest/etc. Something about this situation is suspicious. Well, I don't think I ever beat it, actually I probably quit halfway through too. But, with higher reso + patch, its a little better. You can respec / change game speed / new graphics spells, etc you get the idea. Fun if you have friends you can LAN it with.

All they did was by out the Dungeon Siege name and create a game of their own. They used the name & story and created a completely different game. Its like McDonalds buying a Gym, its advertised as Micky D's but then when you go inside to eat all you get is fat chicks on treadmills... disappointing. Nothing about this game is Dungeon Siege - like, oh well. The only good thing about this game is that it got me into an original DS1 and DS2 mode, go back and play those games with the Hotfix mod (for DS2 anyway) and run it in 1920x1080 and you will love it all over again more than DS3!