XxTaLoNxX

Are you trying to imply that DS3 has a good storyline? It doesn't. Subjective. That's your opinion, but I doubt it's the majority opinion from the gamers who played the game. Again, subjective. But I find your comment odd because DS3 had good gameplay as well as a good story.

Yeah, but it would be less problematic, since apparently not a lot of people even get to the actual level cap. A new story-mode could also be simple accompanied by new abilities for the characters, which is something that is a lot more easy to design and balance than tweaking the entire game, from the encounter system to the loot tables, in order to have a good NewGame+. Look, I'm not really trying to start a debate. But as an apprentice programmer myself, I've worked on some Indie projects and some large mod/conversion projects for other games. I've also been a QA tester in the industry for various companies for the last 5 years. As well as I am working on a Bachelor's degree in Gaming and Simulation Programming. So with that background and that much experience in the field.... I can tell you that both are equally difficult but not as much as you think. Although personally I would rather modify existing code and content as opposed to completely starting from the ground up in regards to new story content, new characters, a lot more 3d models and textures, new enemies, new maps that cover vast amounts of new areas. There really is a lot more work involved in creating new and original content rather than modifying existing content.

While you are correct, you seem to forget that all this that involves the small factors that would have to be rebalanced and "tweeked" would ALSO have to be worked on if they add new story content and extend the amount of play via storyline. Even in Arena they would have to consider progression otherwise the gameplay would stagnate and as much fun as it may be to use the same 9 skills at the same level, killing the same waves over and over... it would get old quick. So with all do respect... I could eat a bowl of alphabet soup and leave a better argument in the pot. (that's supposed to be dry humor, but a lot of truth is said in jest)

Hmmm... I doubt any kind of DLC will be released like that for this game, but I have to admit that it would be pretty damn awesome if it was, heh. Modes like NewGame+ and Arena are easily designed and easily implemented. There is little to no story to write and only a small fraction of existing code would need to be modified. And I am sure if the asking price was reasonable a lot of fans would pay for them. So that would be a payoff vs. man hours. Little work for more money. And the other dozen ways to simplify the business concept. Think about it... as a Lead Producer you answer to higher company positions on budget management and maximizing profit potentials. Would it be more profitable to release products that require little in the way of production costs? OR Would it be more profitable to risk a large project that costs a considerable amount of money to design and develop, which could possibly fall flat?

*facepalm* I'm glad that you enjoy the game enough that you want it improved (that is a good thing!). But I think you need to broaden your scope of understanding. Read some developer notes and comments as well as listen to this PodCast http://ia700500.us.archive.org/11/items/Cl...Episode_056.mp3. The game was designed around consoles and then ported to computer. Which means they have a console focus for this game. Normally PC gamers would complain to high heaven about this but Obsidian did a decent job of making the average PC gamer feel like they considered them and their style of gaming as well. Although they sort of botched the Keymapping issue but only because they ran out of time and had to hand the game over to SquareEnix to publish the game. Which is why Obsidian is doing damage control and giving the PC gamers a "hotfix patch" in order to lessen the blow-back ire from the PC crowd. Most of the other issues are shared across platforms so you can rest assured your console issues are being fully considered by Obsidian.

Yes. I know that. Which is why I said there should be a better system for reviewing games based on it's own merits and it's flaws. But that system should also give a few points to the reviewer to express his/her opinion as well. As it is many reviews and scores are based entirely on opinion. And I have seen some good games get railroaded while bad games have gotten some oddly high scores. Most of the time (sadly) when a game that is bad gets good reviews there is some incentive for the company to do so. The good games with bad scores can be a matter of the reviewer not liking the series or the developer. Here is the ultimate problem. Good game reviewers know that they need to leave opinion out of it as much as possible as this adds a wide variety of opinions to the score such as. Well Obsidian messed up KOTOR 2 so I dislike them as a studio as such I am going to already have a thought in my head that this game may not be that great. So when I review a game I try to avoid opinion and focus solely on the facts of the title. Opinions is something you DON'T want in a review.. trust me. As a professional I really hope your work ethic is based on this mantra and you practice it. Because far too often I am seeing reviewers like Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw, or reviewers that use their lack of gaming skill to railroad games. In fact there was a review for DS3 that was bad and the score was low because the reviewer couldn't understand how to use the stances and was getting the shaft on Casual mode... dude if you are that weak as a gamer YOU DON'T NEED TO BE IN THIS BUSINESS! (btw this is not aimed at you, just the poorly skilled reviewer) And these "publications" that publish the reviewers articles need to have a screening that INCLUDES the reviewer showing that he is skilled in certain genres of games and they need to stick to those games as review subjects.

If you're going to add your voice to the discussion, it's usually wise to voice a suggestion that is at least reasonable. Think about what you are asking for compared in scope of the baseline game. It was never designed to be open world or even sandbox. It's an unreasonable request and you would have added nothing to the discussion. However I think it's already been mentioned but I campaign for modes like NewGame+ and Arena. Easily designed and easily implemented. There is little to no story to write and only a small fraction of existing code would need to be modified. And I am sure if the asking price was reasonable a lot of fans would pay for them. So that would be a payoff vs. man hours. Little work for more money. And the other dozen ways to simplify the business concept.

Never gonna happens this forums have a big haters audience that hang around in the forums more than the gamers that really enjoy Obsidian games,. Yeah, your telling me. As an Obsidian supporter you get called "fanboy" or something else equally foolish and retarded. But here's the thing IF I am a "fanboy" or anything it would be video-games. I don't care who they come from, if it's a good game I'll like it and support the company for a job well done and I'll be likely to buy their games in the future. Hanging around to hate just for the reason of hating shows that you have no life. But we are supposed to be talking about the patch... so to get back on topic. I'm glad that they are listening to fan/buyer feedback and we are getting the patch. I wonder if they heard the request for NG+ and/or Arena modes. I've seen modes added as DLC (both free and paid for) before, one example would be Ninja Gaiden (XBOX) when they got Mission mode.

They've released one game on this engine and that's what I base my impressions on. As does everyone else, for that matter. OP wants IWD3 on this engine because "graphics are just beautiful, sound is awesome", which makes zero sense, and resident fanboys concur. I remain skeptical until proven otherwise. Certainly it's possible that the engine is good for more than simplistic casual corridor crawlers, but then why is DS3 one? Squenix forced them, no doubt. Sorry, but you don't speak for me or anyone else besides yourself. I agree with sorophx. It is stupid to assume. Developer companies don't invest time and money into an engine if they don't plan to use it in the future. It's cheaper to lease the license to an existing engine and modify it to meet your requirements for a game. Leasing an engine is also time efficient. The most work that goes into a game is into the engine of the game if it is built from the ground up. The upside is that when you build an engine and have a game to showcase it is advertising your engine to prospective companies that would lease it from you. That is why Epic is still in business... solely on the back of the Unreal Engine*, another example (although they don't depend solely on their engine for income) would be CryTek and the CryEngine from... Crysis franchise. Trust me on this... I know what I'm talking about. But if you insist on arguing the points I made ANYONE CAN GOOGLE!!!

Ah, my bad. I'm glad you explained that though. I thought you were talking about me I and I was confused as to how you made connections. Just a misunderstanding. I apologize.

I take it you might not like movie review forums, then. Talk about a tendency to spend lots of time over-analyzing things. I really don't get what you are getting at. Nonetheless I find your post somewhat insulting and completely off base. In fact, you don't know me, and speaking of my tendencies is both beyond your limited understanding and quite frankly obvious that you don't have very good reading comprehension. I was explaining that he is not part of the minority, because most people just don't over-analyze things. You then go on to tell me that I over-analyze things and then find some odd correlation to movie forums? What? How do you even get that from me explaining a topic of psychology that pertains to this topic? Actually... nevermind. You just lost any amount of respect I may have had for you when you decided it was cool to go for my throat when you had no provocation or reason. In fact, I'll just report you instead. Tired of haters and flamers.

No. I doubt you are the minority. In fact if you take psychology, you will learn that the majority of people actually accept things for what they are and don't over analyze things. It's the minority that question things and look beyond what is given. In a way that's kinda sad, but in other ways if you think about it, it really just shows that most people have more important things to do or think about rather than dwell on things of little to no consequence.

Shaver I can respect your opinion. You have some valid complaints. Although I don't agree that the final boss battle was anti-climatic, I think it fit well within the story and I knew from an early point that I would eventually have to deal with what happened at the end. However I did feel a yearning for more... more story, more items, just more and to me that speaks more about the game then random complaints. I really want more from DS franchise now, in just about anyway I can get it. HOWEVER I believe I don't just speak for myself when I ask you this... PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD CHANGE YOUR FONT SIZE DOWN TO NORMAL

Can't as in can't be arsed, not as in doesn't have the money. That's definitely not how I read that comment by GuruChaz. As in they can't be arsed, well yeah, even though I like Alpha Protocol as an IP, it failed on many levels. The most important of which was success. The game just didn't do well enough to warrant any patches or DLC and from a business perspective SEGA decided to cut their loses and drop the IP completely. Sad really because there was some really cool things about AP that I would liked to have seen in another "better" game in the future. And perhaps we will eventually.

I do agree that the VO is a bit off. Maybe bad even. But as for some of it, explained as being Archon. The pacing and monotone of it however is a bit, meh.

I 100% agree. And that is why games like Halo do so well. A flaw. That's how I see it. Although missing just one of those wouldn't really bother me to the extent of calling a game bad. It just may not be for me. And then I move on. Well said.

Yes that's exactly the issue. There are many people on here dissatisfied with the game that simply post suggestions on how it could be improved either now or in the future. However the majority of the "haters" have only come here and flamed. What gets accomplished by saying "this game sucks" and leaving it at that? Nothing. Yes there are a lot of people here "whining" mostly because this game isn't exactly like DSI and II. When you moan and complain without and deliberation on how to improve the game or maybe even a simple suggestion of "hey you could change this, or implement this" that's all you're doing is whining. And these are exactly the people I am referring to. And these individuals are the same people who can't just accept anything in life and like it. Or they only like one type of game and anything beyond that "sucks" to them.

Yes. I know that. Which is why I said there should be a better system for reviewing games based on it's own merits and it's flaws. But that system should also give a few points to the reviewer to express his/her opinion as well. As it is many reviews and scores are based entirely on opinion. And I have seen some good games get railroaded while bad games have gotten some oddly high scores. Like Too Human, that I thought was awful, actually scored higher than some games I thought were pretty good. That could be a matter of opinion and not a measure of bugs/glitches etc. Still, a company like Gamefly is a godsend to gamers. I don't care what the title is, if you have the option to try before you buy, you should do so. In the case of DSIII, we were treated to a lovely demo that allowed you to test 2 of the 4 characters and mill through the first section of the game. More than fair i'd say especially as a free demo with no strings attached. Exactly, and that is just a small fraction of the offenses I have seen. And I can respect people that come here and give their opinion on why they didn't like DS3, when they explain. Coming here and saying, "Oh this game isn't DS1 and DS2 rehashed so it SUCKS" and offer nothing else than that... yeah, it bugs me a bit. What do these people expect? Final Fantasy hasn't been the same from game to game since FF3 (American Release)... you don't hear anyone really complaining about that. Other prime examples are Mario and Sonic games... they evolved since the days of side-scrolling platformers, no one complained that those games weren't more of the same. Zelda, Need for Speed, and GTA are all prime examples of games that evolved from their humble beginnings. I really can't take the complaint that DS3 isn't more DS1 and DS2, seriously. As for MP camera, no NG+, no separate MP characters/loot/gold, no persistent MP characters, etc, etc... those are valid complaints.

Yes. I know that. Which is why I said there should be a better system for reviewing games based on it's own merits and it's flaws. But that system should also give a few points to the reviewer to express his/her opinion as well. As it is many reviews and scores are based entirely on opinion. And I have seen some good games get railroaded while bad games have gotten some oddly high scores.

Yeah those are pretty odd words for very basic names and skills. But of all the poor reviews I was actually able to agree with some of the points and quantify others from the OP's perspective.

She's an Archon. As you progress through the game you will find other Archons and they sound very similar. It's just how they talk. I have to admit I was a bit... meh about it as well. But at least it is explainable.

In my opinion as pertaining to RPGs... yes. RPG gameplay is pretty rudimentary, in fact the hack n' slash of DS3 is still leaps and bounds from say Ninja Gaiden or God of War. In other genres gameplay would weigh more. I couldn't imagine playing a platformer/adventure game that had sluggish or awkward controls when the action really started heating up. As for DS3 the lack of being able to continue to build and play my character after the very short story was a big negative against the game in my eyes. But I still would give the game somewhere between an 8 and 9 out of 10. Although you completely missed the part of my post that said "example". I've never agreed with this idea. It always seems to be confusing academic grading systems with reviews. Your usage of "graded" seems to imply the same. It just implies that you can seek a formula and milk it for 10s. It's a far more subjective matter than that. Individual elements can't be specifically quantified and properly attributed. Yeah, I don't care if you agree with it or not. Everything in life should be handled academically in my eyes. There is more organization, explanation, and clarity when things are handled academically. In fact it weeds out all the bullcrap opinionated garbage that is applied to many fields. They don't judge gymnastics based on opinions, they don't judge ballroom dancing on opinion. No. They instead subtract and add points based on a system, and when the judges notice or don't notice the flaws in a performance. However those systems are very rigid and I can find a flaw in the fact that they are almost excessively strict. My point is that too many people hold their own opinions as the only opinion. When critics (that's a joke) watch and review a movie they purposely find flaws or things in the movie that they don't like, they go into the movie with the mindset that they are going to tear it apart bit by bit and display it's carcass publicly. Gamers and game reviewers do the same without any REAL justification other than they didn't like the game. At least with a system games could be judged FAIRLY and THEN the reviewer could give his opinion and details about the game, you could even tie opinion into a point or two. But I am really getting tired of seeing good games given bad scores based on nothing but opinion, as well as horrible games that get excellent scores that are obviously bought or given based on the name of the publisher/developer.

There are these things called publishers who usually call the shots on such things as patches. Obsidian can't patch the game without the consent and resources of Sega. Sega can't even fund patching for Alpha Protocol. SEGA is a joke. Riiiiiiiight. SEGA is the joke here, nevermind that they are still a Fortune 500 company.

Opinions aside. Because 3/10 means the game is unplayable not only due to bad design but bugs and a complete failure on multiple fronts. If you are going to give a game such a low score then you really need to explain why. An example... 10 - As a rule all games should start here and then be graded on merits. -1 - No New Game + -1 - No Keymapping -1 - Multiplayer camera is bad Those are my complaints against DS3, at the moment... that sets it at a 7/10. That's passing. But there is more! +1 - I liked the story. Short as it was I was very immersed and at the end... I craved more. +.5 - The gameplay was solid. +.5 - I had fun That brings it back up to a 9/10 in my opinion, and I just illustrated why. As I said with such a low score... you really should illustrate it further. Explain why you scored it so low.

No. Our assessment isn't very different. I agree that there are features that become industry standard. I agree that New Game+ should be in almost every game, as I agree that Keymapping is a standard. What I don't agree with is people calling foul when the game doesn't meet their expectations and then go on to bad mouth the game... IF it's a good game even without such features. Yes, those features add a lot. I want them in DS3, but I can also say that DS3 is a good game. Even though it's not 9/10 or 10/10 caliber. I think my point is that I am just getting tired of spoiled gamers. As a person who has worked in the game industry as a QA tester and now as an apprentice programmer I take offense. Because I know how much work, love, blood, sweat and tears go into game development first hand. I have tested some horrible games and some great games, I have sat up for nights on end contemplating algorithms for fixes and just for regular programming. It's literally brain melting. Once you start to go down that rabbit hole you start to see things you take for granted in games differently.