BobSmith101

Personally I found the game totally enjoyable. Loved the characters, the story was very "human" almost wasted on an action RPG. On the down side , the view felt very outdated and while I liked the book format, I can't help but see my friends side of things when he called it cheap. If you take FF XIII and its shinyness , but having one button gameplay. DS3 is the opposite end of the scale, the gameplay is absorbing, but the game is lacking in production values. Never underestimate just how much shinyness can have people overlooking any number of faults. Especially once you step into the more general market. I think it was the same with FO3 and FO:NV. FO:NV had a much more involving and complex story , but built on the same engine as FO3 and not having the same wow factor. Bugs never help either, but I never actually came across any in DS3 (maybe I was lucky I don't know). Unlike Alpha Protocol and FO:NV. As an action RPG DS3 pushed all the right buttons (maybe a tad too hard for the ultra casual though) but as a game in todays market I think if you want big numbers then you need to push the production values as well. That way even if your "game" sucks people will still be captivated by the cinematics and overlook it. Of course I have no idea of the cost vs profit of the game so it could have done well in that respect.

I think after playing War in the North (Buggy but had a lot of potential) thats more the direction I'd like to see DS 3 go in. The overhead view just feels so restricted compared to WitN and the levels get quite repetative and feel overlong. That said I found the DS3 characters more interesting (as someone mentioned I think being able to talk to them in a camp of sorts as you gain influence would be a good step) and the game system more varied. I think DS3 with the WitN engine (minus bugs and with fixed save points) would just about be my ideal for an action RPG. But rather than have 3 characters on screen I'd stick with 2 and allow them to only be switched at a camp of somekind. The AI just can't do the workload of 2 actual people, but it's far easier to just "carry" one relatively inefective (compared to you) character. Of course if you want 3 on screen for MP only, that's fine and dandy. I just don't want to see the game designed around an AI "party". I'd also like to see the loot system overhauled far too much random junk.

It depends if you mean fun as watch everything die in one shot, or fun as in enjoyment. Reinhart hands down for the first one, never really needed anything outsdie of geometry of annihilation and the support abilities. Shield up, roll into a group trigger enpowered spell till everything is dead, even heals you. For pure fun my Pistoleer Katarina makes things very interesting ( I do dip into the rifle skill for chosen pray for boss battles but otherwise just the pistol and support tree). Curse makes up for any short fall in damage and against groups shes deadly. Boss fights require a different way of thinking.

Dodge the lightspots and the flames. In most boss fights its all about dodging like a maniac. The middle area seems the safe spot. Katarina can just stand there and spin in whichever direction she pops up. With Lucas I just used the heal with life absorb and got in her face and out healed her damage (unlikely to work on hardcore). With Reinhart I just used geometry of annihilation and planted clockwork traps on areas she might appear. The most difficult part of the battle is the field itself. It's small and littered with obstacles. Once you get the hang on it, it's not that bad. I found teleporting Jeyne far more annoying,you need split second timing to roll under her teleport charge (as Katarina). That build was a bit on the delicate side though (my first) the ones that stack healing have had it much easier all around.