Obsidian making Dungeon Siege III

[Hurlshort]

Why does everyone keep saying this is going to compete with Diablo III? Did I miss some release date talk? We don't even know when Diablo III is coming out, and Dungeon Siege III will likely be released afterward.

[Llyranor]

Not that it actually matters. Icewind Dale and Diablo 2 came out a few days apart as well.

[Purkake]

Why does everyone keep saying this is going to compete with Diablo III? Did I miss some release date talk? We don't even know when Diablo III is coming out, and Dungeon Siege III will likely be released afterward.

Blizzard is making it, chances are it will come out after DS3.

 

It's going to compete because they are both hack and slash RPGs, unless Obsidian radically changes the formula, which I doubt.

 

@Llyranor: IWD was not a Diablo clone, Dungeon Siege was.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Purkake

[Amentep]

IWD was a party based dungeon crawl, which I remember a lot of people feeling that it was overshadowed by Diablo 2 at release.

[LadyCrimson]

Well, I like both Dungeon Sieges (yes, sue me), so I wouldn't mind a third game. Although made by Obsidian, that surely is a strange choice.

 

Although I guess it can't fail for me, liking DS and OE.

This would be my opinion as well. Sure the 1st two were hack n slash Diablo clones, but they were fun.

 

Just because you may not like/respect a genre of a game they're making doesn't mean it's a company disaster. They might alter it just enough to make it something more interesting too (but probably still hack n slash, I'd guess) and in this economy, a job is a job. Obsidian can be pickier about projects, if they wish to be, when the economy becomes more robust again.

[Humodour]

I'll just leave it here and leave this forum for good. Obsidian is truly dead, it's obvious.

 

FFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU...

 

Sounds good to me! You don't seem to have much to add besides negativity, after all.

[Humodour]

You know what? This will be good.

 

Seriously, think about it. I thought both Dungeon Sieges were horrible crap, but that was mainly due to the complete and utter failure the story, writing, setting and characters were. And boring quests. And Obsidian is always, always awesome at these.

 

Ironically this is the perfect franchise for Obsidian to take up. It's a fairly big franchise, it'll get good sales, and it'll get a lot of interest. I'm sure they will be able to use their Onyx engine, since the last game is from 2005 and they can't use the engine again. Because the game itself was so, SO bland and colourless in almost every department, from backstory to art style to even gameplay, this is actually like a license to create whatever game they want.

 

To me, combined with the concept art, do you know what this sounds like?

 

A single-character Icewind Dale in a non-D&D fantasy setting with co-op.

 

Not bad at all.

 

Exactly!

 

Although you have to admit that DS1 and 2 were pretty.

[Purkake]

Nothing like beating some goblins with a hoe.

[Gromnir]

To me, combined with the concept art, do you know what this sounds like?

 

A single-character Icewind Dale in a non-D&D fantasy setting with co-op.

 

Not bad at all.

 

concept art? you didn't seriously point to the concept art as a reason to be having faith in ds3... much less suggesting that such stuff makes one thinks ds3 will resemble iwd.

 

...

 

is perfect reasonable to assume that if you liked past obsidian products you will like a new obsidian product. even so, to point to concept art as a meaningful parallel 'tween iwd and ds3 is... amusing.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Slowtrain]

Regardless, its a lot less pressure trying to make a good sequel to a dull, uninspired, mostly forgotten game than it is try making a good sequel to a cherished game.

 

Regardles of how bad DS was, it wasn't Obsidian's fault and they have nowhere to go but up!

[Purkake]

Regardless, its a lot less pressure trying to make a good sequel to a dull, uninspired, mostly forgotten game than it is try making a good sequel to a cherished game.

 

Regardles of how bad DS was, it wasn't Obsidian's fault and they have nowhere to go but up!

Not exactly inspiring.

 

"If we make less ambitious game, people will care less if we fail!"

 

At some point trying to make something big and failing is better than crapping out one mediocre game after another.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Purkake

[Slowtrain]

Regardless, its a lot less pressure trying to make a good sequel to a dull, uninspired, mostly forgotten game than it is try making a good sequel to a cherished game.

 

Regardles of how bad DS was, it wasn't Obsidian's fault and they have nowhere to go but up!

Not exactly inspiring.

 

"If we make less ambitious game, people will care less if we fail!"

 

 

hmmm.

 

Not quite the way I intended it.

 

 

Still, the point is that Obs didn't make the first one (or the second for that matter), so they cannot be faulted for the quality of those games. And I don't think any development company can be faulted for taking on paying gigs like this in today's economic climate. I mean, better to make DS3 than go out of business, right?

 

Might it be a terrible game? Sure. But, otoh, maybe Obs can take the broken pieces and put them together in a much better way: better, faster, stronger, etc and so forth.

[Purkake]

Yes, but getting the DS license is worse than making an original IP, considering all the baggage that the DS license comes with. Maybe if Obsidian didn't try to make a third person shooter/stealth game/RPG, they would come up with something cool and unique...

 

I guess it's mostly the publisher's decision, but still.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Purkake

[Slowtrain]

Yes, but getting the DS license is worse than making an original IP, considering all the baggage that the DS license comes with.

 

I absolutely agree that purely from a gamer's POV, definitely I'd rather see Obs spend their time on an original IP. Much more potential to make something really interesting. But, if you think about it, DS was such a mediocre game that Obs can do pretty much whatever they want to it and nobody's going to really complain. They basically have an opportunity to reboot a crappy IP, which is almost like getting the chance to do something brand new. If they were taking on a sequel to a bettrer IP, they woudl probably have less freedom to change things.

 

Maybe if Obsidian didn't try to make a third person shooter/stealth game/RPG, they would come up with something cool and unique...

 

I guess it's mostly the publisher's decision, but still.

 

 

Depends who you listen to, I guess. Some people do feel that a lot of AP is pretty cool and unique. Haven't played it myself though, so I can only go by what others are saying.

[Humodour]

Creating a new IP is a very big job. Obsid can instead take the DS setting and run with it, HOPEFULLY allowing them to put out a polished game (for once).

[Purkake]

Creating a new IP is a very big job. Obsid can instead take the DS setting and run with it, HOPEFULLY allowing them to put out a polished game (for once).

The punchline is that it doesn't really have a setting beyond "generic fantasy" so if they want to make something out of it, they will pretty much have to make it from scratch.

 

@Slowtrain: I'm not really complaining about the DS setting, other than it being yet another generic fantasy world, but about the baggage that the DS IP has. There are two mediocre Diablo clones, one horrible spin-off in space and a horrible movie attached to it. The name doesn't really have any positive connotations associated with it, the best you can hope is that no one will remember those any more. Having the Obsidian name on it will probably help a bit, but most people don't know/care who Obsidian is.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Purkake

[Humodour]

Creating a new IP is a very big job. Obsid can instead take the DS setting and run with it, HOPEFULLY allowing them to put out a polished game (for once).

The punchline is that it doesn't really have a setting beyond "generic fantasy" so if they want to make something out of it, they will pretty much have to make it from scratch.

 

@Slowtrain: I'm not really complaining about the DS setting, other than it being yet another generic fantasy world, but about the baggage that the DS IP has. There are two mediocre Diablo clones, one horrible spin-off in space and a horrible movie attached to it. The name doesn't really have any positive connotations associated with it, the best you can hope is that no one will remember it any more. Having the Obsidian name on it will probably help a bit, but most people don't know/care who obsidian is.

 

The DS setting is actually pretty developed, Purkake. It has a lot of backstory that was written into the tomes littered around the games, and has since been expanded by books and movies and whatnot. Obsidian have something to work with if they want to, or they can forge ahead with something new. It's the ultimate freedom.

[Purkake]

I guess I played it too long ago to remember most of it. Will read up on that.

[Siamese Cat]

The game is going to be released on consoles. One of the devs have already come up with an example of FO3. Also, the system lead, who is assured to be a good designer by two of his co-workers, was talking of GTA in his blog entry here. Furthermore, most of us know what the creative lead could do with FR setting.

 

It's too early but how much of the franchise name would end up with being related with the game?

[Hurlshort]

Creating a new IP is a very big job. Obsid can instead take the DS setting and run with it, HOPEFULLY allowing them to put out a polished game (for once).

The punchline is that it doesn't really have a setting beyond "generic fantasy" so if they want to make something out of it, they will pretty much have to make it from scratch.

 

@Slowtrain: I'm not really complaining about the DS setting, other than it being yet another generic fantasy world, but about the baggage that the DS IP has. There are two mediocre Diablo clones, one horrible spin-off in space and a horrible movie attached to it. The name doesn't really have any positive connotations associated with it, the best you can hope is that no one will remember those any more. Having the Obsidian name on it will probably help a bit, but most people don't know/care who Obsidian is.

 

I think you are overestimating the critics of Dungeon Siege. Sure, the more hardcore RPG fans may not have a lot of respect for the IP, but it sold well and even managed to attract a major motion picture. Not only will it garner more attention than a new IP, Obsidian gets a chance to work with Gas Powered Games and Square-Enix, two very successful players in the video game world. In fact I see the whole GPG advising as a very nice complement to the skills of Obsidian.

[Gromnir]

Creating a new IP is a very big job. Obsid can instead take the DS setting and run with it, HOPEFULLY allowing them to put out a polished game (for once).

 

am thinking that your observation is part o' the reason some folks got a problem with this game. a developer brought up fo3 as an explanation as to why ds3 would be a good idea, but am thinking that most folks who read these boards would agree that one of the real strengths o' fallout is the setting. bethesda, for all the complaints we seen directed at them, managed to capture the "feel" of fallout; the Best character in fo3 were the setting itself. a post apocalyptic world as imagined by 1950's era expectations and heavily influenced by road warrior? the setting were kewl. the ds setting, on the other hand, is meh at best... so what is the point? why constrain self with the limitations o' someone's setting if it ain't particularly intriguing? why ds?

 

compare fo and ds fails, 'cause ds setting is... lame.

 

ds were popular for what reasons? surely not story and setting. addictive, diabloesque game play? sure. mule loads o' phat 10075? yeah. original and intriguing setting? not hardly.

 

HA! God Fun!

Edited June 8, 2010 by Gromnir

[Whipporwill]

What bizarre, out of left field IP will Obsidian announce next? Who hasn't been hankering for an Avonlea RPG?

[Tigranes]

concept art? you didn't seriously point to the concept art as a reason to be having faith in ds3... much less suggesting that such stuff makes one thinks ds3 will resemble iwd.

 

Heh. I don't mean that the concept art looks like IWD, I mean put everything together (mostly Obsid's past history and how much of a 'blank slate' they get with DS3), and I get a strong gut feeling that it will be a spiritual half-child.

 

compare fo and ds fails, 'cause ds setting is... lame.

 

I'm hoping this will be sort of like BG3 (though not quite so unrelated, obviously).

[Humodour]

The fact that it's going to be on consoles makes me sad. Can we expect a dumbed down interface Obsidian?

[Hassat Hunter]

I guess I played it too long ago to remember most of it. Will read up on that.

 

Soooo... basically you went onto the "bash DS" bandwagon without having a clue what you were talking about? Classy...

 

Why don't you join the AP bashing bandwagon too... "It's a bugridden piece of crap with 2003 graphics! Never played or seen it, but the reviews said it, and they can't be wrong, right!"