RogerWilco

I agree. No continuation after beating my first play through? Was like a slap in the face to someone who has played DS and DS2 for 300hours each. You basically streamlined this game so much it has very little replay value (replay it once more, maybe). The story was short, but still eventful and engaging. I enjoyed the game's story very much later on, lots of interesting moral decisions. However the impact of such choices was in the credits with a bunch of gold tone pictures. Bad. But the least of my worries in a game like this. (Keep reading) Audio was below average for me, failed to deliver, reduced music volume to 50% if I recall. But the sound effects for weapons and such felt in line with previous dungeon siege games. Graphics/Visuals was on par for current generation consoles/tech, stylized and felt "similar" to Dungeon Siege except for all the scantly clad women running around. So decent in this regard. Armor appearances could've been better. Gameplay was linear like all dungeon siege games, anyone who complains about a linear hack n slash doesn't know the formula for success if they don't realize it will always be present for pacing reasons, to keep the action rolling. Some parts of the game looked obviously LINEAR, which annoyed me. Dungeon Siege 1 did well in areas from avoiding this, it was more of a linear pathways interconnecting large rooms of treasure and loot. But outside of dungeons DS3 looks like; follow the yellow brick road. I felt there was too much backtracking for such a linear game. Loot! I love loot and this game delivers on filling your appetite of all things shiny. But... there's a cog in the wheel. I enjoyed the variety, but typically there's only a few stats people are going to be looking for, you should've narrowed it down a tiny bit more. Expanding the amount of drops, modifier range, loot tables, and scaling monsters to player level and adjusted their loot tables accordingly would've been a MASSIVE BOOST TO THIS GAME, which would've went perfect with CONTINUATION. The talents, abilities, and proficiencies felt right, simple and elegant to keep the player from spending too much time tweaking like in Dungeon Siege 2. DS2 had too many talent options that meant nothing. You guys did it right in this game in terms of "feel". The 4 characters were varied enough to be interesting, but I think character development could've been much better. You could've made the game two characters from the start, male/female, and presented players with more options and branching paths for their archtype. Dungeon Siege was always about "you decide" what you want to be good at. The 'lore abilities' or whatever were a nice touch, adds replay value I suppose from all the decision making. I like this game, but it seems too watered down for me. . If you had spent all that time trying to implement coop instead on the single player campaign I think you would've had a much better game to start with. Later releasing coop DLC which would've forced some people to buy the game. I think you guys may have killed this franchise for me though. Unless you work your asses off fixing the core issues of the game and releasing them to the public as free DLC, you won't be earning anything as far as PAID DLC goes. If you manage to fix most of these issues, I would gladly fork over $15 each time for a new 3-4 hour quest that's replayable as part of the main campaign. This game has the potential to consume many hours of people's time but it can't in its current state. So as I've said, you may have killed it.