Dream

That looks like the stuff I made with a 3d modeling program while bored in shop class.

Or maybe I was hoping that someone had direct experience about this topic, if they played a game where what I asked was proven or disproven. It would certainly be more conclusive than a bunch of confusing posts on random forums on the Internet, which is what a preliminary Google search gave me before posting. Just a thought. Maybe the fact that no one has should tell you something.

Probably because we're not game developers? Just a thought. Or did you want one of us to search through google to find the answer for you because, you know, you can do that too.

The better question is how many actually give a ****. Pretty sure I've had steam running non stop for the past half decade.

Valve isn't out to get you bro; they aren't going to steal your soul and/or financial information and sell it to shady Russian ultranationalists.

The Bros. They sit in their Castle of Bro and do it big.

Except those games are what Diablo would be like with a controller, and if you put them on a PC the only sane control scheme would be Diablo's. How exactly is DS3 fundamentally different from any number of other Diablo clones? Do you honestly Diablo on consoles would play as a point and click game? Really?

Fun ones.

So, once again, the reason it's not point and click is because it's not point and click. They chose to make it so you manually direct the character; nothing about the gameplay dictates a necessity for that. Actually that's exactly what a control scheme is. Delinking block and dodge would allow the player to block and dodge at any moment as opposed to making it a context sensitive command that's dependent on whether or not they are moving. That type of contextual sensitivity was created specifically for control schemes with limited numbers of buttons (such as controllers). The game uses the mouse as a direction controller because they ported the thumbstick function directly to the right mouse button; not because holding down the button is somehow better for this type of game.

How exactly was it different outside of the control scheme? I guess you could say it had a free camera and Diablo didn't, but there have been other Diablo clones with rotating cameras. Left click move (hold down shift or click directly on enemy to attack), hold right click to rotate camera, and everything else bound to keys. That's a Diablo clone. Also, even if it was a completely different genre the fact that they just ported the controller layout was beyond obvious; block/dodge bound to same button, interact key in a game with a mouse pointer, etc.

All the Diablo games had a teleport skill; the dodge mechanic just made it baseline and gave it to every class.

So the control scheme was different because the game was no longer point and click except the only thing that made it no longer point and click was the different control scheme. Got it. DS3 was the definition of a Diablo clone; changing the control scheme didn't suddenly turn it into a brand new genre. What you (and everyone else who's saying 'just use a controller') are basically saying is that a port of a game in a genre that is predominantly PC based that's impossible to play without a controller because the developer didn't bother to implement a proper m/kb control scheme is just fine. I suppose that's a reasonable attitude to have, but to me that screams of lazy development just as much as a buggy as **** release does. We'll see how Obsidian does with P:E once it no longer has the "blame the publisher" crutch to explain away all the **** that's wrong with its games.

The point and click aRPG genre hasn't change since Diablo; how hard was it to just rip the control scheme from that game(or one of it's dozen or so clones). DS3 was the most direct example of a straight console to PC port I've ever seen; they did the absolute bare minimum to make it playable on the PC and called it a day. Hell, it makes Borderlands' awful menu system look like it was lovingly handcrafted for the PC.

They took a genre that started on the PC and has had the same control scheme for 15 years and made it unplayable without a controller. I can get requiring a controller for the PC version of Devil May Cry or something, but for a point and click aRPG? That's about as lazy a port job as you can get. From a PC perspective DS3 was Obsidian's worst offering yet. You're a sissy. And the patch made it better. The patch was a joke and did nothing to fix the underlying issue of the control scheme being awful; it just let you rebind the awfulness to different buttons.

Except DS3 was "clean" at the expense of the PC release which was one of the worst port jobs I've ever seen in a game.

Yea we've all heard how it's the publisher's fault why X Obsidian game has Y issues, but there's only so many times you can blame the publisher.

Not this again. You know, I've bought boxed copy of KOTOR 2, played the game and finished it, and I encountered only one serious bug (when you meet Handmaiden on Telos). The game has bad reputation not because of the bugs, but because of the ending. Key word is serious. I managed to play through New Vegas without running into anything too serious as well, but I'd hardly say that means the game is bug free. But you're right; Obsidian has a special relationship with lazy development in general, and bugs are only a part of that.

I wonder if it'll match kotor 2 in the amount of bugs department.

Again, there's no letting here; it simply happens. I can't control how I feel about something short of getting a lobotomy and forgetting it. Anyways I feel kind of bad about derailing the thread so lets get back to the news. New viral site for SC2 (pass is Y7_$0>0k_3<$m). Probably has to do with HotS.

You say that like people have a choice. No one actually wants the ending to ruin the entire experience for them; it simply does.

I don't know if "what the **** did I just watch" and "that just made **** all sense" qualifies as "making me think." It's like saying the ME3 ending made people think. But that's just me.

DS3 isn't Diablo. You can't play Dungeon Siege 3 with a finger up your nose. So because Crysis wasn't Doom that means Crytek should have come up with a brand new control scheme for that game? It's not that DS3's control scheme was a little different; it's that it was by far the worst control setup I've ever experienced in my life (which was made all the more egregious by the fact that it was in a genre with such a well established control scheme that hadn't changed in over a dozen years).

I've gotten to the point where I think this guy must be trolling. I've met people who could barely speak English and had better spelling.

As long as they look badass then I'm down. Also this guy is like a poll version of Osvir.

Infinitely more than the Planescape: Torment game. The setting itself may be new, but it was validated by Fargo as being acceptable for a Torment game. This means that the decision to go with it meant that the idea had to be related back to the original game, so that it passed the game's standard. It won't just be "new characters" it will be "new characters that we feel are sufficiently Torment." It's not just a new story, but a "new story that we feel is sufficiently Torment." These restrictions don't exist with brand new game ideas, but in the big publishing world that also makes them more risky. For reference, see the amount of people who said that they would have been perfectly ok with Dragon Age 2, had it been called something else. And if anyone says that DAO has anything of the emblematic value that Torment does, they're crazier than I am. Also if you look at what they've released about the game it's already looking like they just took a Torment shaped stencil and started copying ****. Deep question at core of story? Check. Weird sorta-alive city? Check. Said city connected to other planes/dimensions throughout universe? Check. Same composer (who was probably told to make it sound like PS:T)? Check.