DS3's "new" combat system.

[Monokli]

WARNING: Insane big wall of text follows:

 

I'm a big fan of the Dungeon Siege series. It was the first game ever where I completed the campaign as a 9 year old kid. Ever since then I played DS1 campaign five times over, and many more times I played in multiplayer mode to explore the hidden reaches of the Utraean Peninsula, and had a jolly good time. In 2005 I played through Dungeon Siege 2, and became immersed in it's world editor. It may not be a very outstanding editor by itself - though it is very good - but it led me into the neat structure of the game itself, though my first impressions were undoubtably influenced by my overally positive feel towards the game. Later I completed Broken world and I enjoyed the heck out of it, it was so much more! Proper multiclassing and reagent recipes on a world that despite it's destruction-riddled theme looked gorgeous. DS2 took what was good in the first game, then added Systems like properly branching dialogues, pets, and even powers to shake up the combat system a bit, so that's unquestionably an improvement upon what they had.

 

In terms of the combat system it was originally autoattacking for melee and ranged, and - mostly - autocasting offensive spells as nature and combat mages, occasionally switching to healing when the situation demanded it. For those who don't know what Nature and Combat mages are - it's obsidian forum after all, so I don't expect everyone to care about the previous games, though it is recommended as they are both great pieces of art - they are the two spellcasting lines of the original games. Combat is the offensive one(lots of damage types and curses), while nature is a bit more defensive (buffs, armor, more healing). In DS1 the difference was less visible, but it was there nevertheless. Mages used mana, warriors and archers didn't(which was a bit of a shame though: warriors could have had some nice special attacks while archers could have laid traps).

Mages also had access to useful buffs and curses, which they cast from their always regenerating (BIG POINT HERE IS THE REGENERATING) mana pool, where certain spells could be used for temporary improvements of regeneration. (In future I will refer to it as classic spellcasting for clarity)

 

Spells were bought at vendors, so they could be considered part of the "gear" the characters had. Spells also benefitted from both magical weapons and armor with certain bonuses. To add some variety on top of that, Dungeon Siege 2 added the system of specialties to the mix, where specialties also affected how powerful certain spells, attacks, you, and even powers were, and governed special mechanics such as ricochetting, critical hits, arcing, ignition and freeze. Specialties had dependency trees, so you could only put points into a speciality after you put some on it's requirements. Specialties were also tiered, so some could only be obtained at a specific skill level. You could put more than one points into specialty, which made it's effects more powerful. A specialty could have an all-time maximum level of 20(even with item bonuses). Broken World set the maximum point level to 20, but allowed item bonuses to surpass that up until 30 points. Specialty or Skill points were earned one per level, maximum level was 100, and there were quite many specialties to play with, even inter-character class ones such as Natural Bond and Arcane Renewal for Nature Mages, and Brilliance and Quickened Casting for combat mages. Any of these four were VERY useful for the other type of mage: Brilliance added more to the hungry mana-pool of the Nature Mage, Quickened Casting allowed faster use of slow-casting Iceballs and heals. Natural bond on the other skill class, could be vital for fire mages who wished to continue chucking expensive fireballs at things they didn't like, while Arcane Renewal sped up both nature magic power and combat magic power recharges, and needless to say the combat magic powers were really, really destructive and being able to be a bit more liberal about using them could never ever hurt the party. This (and the shared intelligence stat) made combat mages likely to take a few and some more levels in nature magic and vice versa, for the benefits more than surpassed the drawbacks of having one or two less levels in any of the two. Not to look like I'm all for the mages, even though I totally am as evidenced by one of my recent projects being "rock DS2 with a mage-only party!", I would mention Toughness on the warrior side which grants some health to anyone who spends points in it (And really who doesn't like to be a little less squishy?), and Dodge and Survival skills in ranged, where the former gives a percentage to dodge attacks (very useful on a melee character or anyone casually wading into the fray) and the latter boosts resistances to magical attacks which is also very VERY useful, pretty much for anyone (and don't mind the random harvested health potions).

 

In ds2 powers had their requirements in specialty levels, and were special abilities that were charged by dealing damage. Some powers had recharge rates which determined how long it took to fill your power orb(resource) with the power selected. A filled power orb then could be used to release any kind of power. The system was unfortunately flawed as one could switch to a filler power with fast recharge, fill the orb, and release a deadly blast of doom which would have otherwise been inactive for much more time.

 

Previews of Dungeon Siege 3, and commentaries both showed what the combat system looks like. It's basically punch people with one of the two autoattacks you get, then use the energy gained this way to release special attacks. To add to the mix, you added power orbs that can be used for releasing more than simply awesome powers, at least that's what you guys say. You also gain health from monsters you kill or from life orbs you find between the heaps of gold under those determined pants (ie. your loot). There is no natural health or energy regeneration, so you are hard pressed to continue slaughtering creeps.

 

It is a frustrating system because one can run out of energy, and the boss/miniboss he is fighting is a little too strong for his liking. He has no backup systems to help him through the fight, and no regenerating resource to permit him to bide his time and try a different tactic or combination. It is also somewhat like DS2's Power System, but with powers having completely taken over classical spellcasting, no regenerating health, so god save your mouse and keyboard from getting contact issues, accidental coffee/any_drink spill, the nice purring cat in your room, a phone call, or even a little kid. Because when your health gets low after(or worse while fighting) a small group of monsters, you really got no way to get it up. The monsters will eat you for breakfast no matter how great micro you have. You can even be the best micro-ing protoss player who won the highest-level starcraft world championship, if that boss/miniboss/group gets even a single blow at you, you are dead,( taken out, sleeping with the fishes, killed, slaugthered, murdered, TERMINATED... mind the parrot). When you can not escape from a bossfight, and you can not possibly get enough blows at it to activate some form of self-healing, you are doomed. Surely, you may be able to dance around it for like 4 hours, but it doesn't matter how good you are, you are ****ed up. Severely.

 

This is a problem with any similar system. It generates unnecessary pressure on anyone who played and enjoyed the first two dungeon siege games, where you could sit in a corner if needed, recuperate your wounds, restore your mana, and after switching some equipment (including spells) you could have another run against the bad boss who gave you a nasty surprise before. And even if such retreat is not possible, (see Gom fight) you can always draw him away from the unconscious party members while evading him, as they automatically regenerate. Hard tactic but possible, and can save a situation where players of the third game would give up, reload, and even possibly ragequit yelling "why did they even introduce this crap in?" and "****'s sake they made the game powers only? I hated that stuff in DS2 and what that game had was lightweight compared to this piece of garbage!" and I'm discounting the numerous cluster-f-bombs including the titular f-word many times with the name of the developers and the word "mother" or "mom" interjected in almost artistically (in a negative sense) picked way.

 

It's a problem with FNV's ammunition: Sure you can buy what the stores have. Then you can manufacture, but what if you run out of that ammo as well? Your 1337 skills in guns/energy weapons won't do you much when it comes to that.

 

The main point of this "new" and "improved" system is that it provides incentive to the player to move forward and continue on. This is completely unfounded, as experience points, loot, the environmental varieties (see you in the arctic caves - Jeriah!) and the story which is said to be your (Obsidian) forte. Adding a restricting system while removing classical spellcasting is will not make this game any better, instead, it will only cause frustration to the player, who usually plays to get the frustration OUT of his or her system, not vica versa.

 

To solve that problem, in my opinion, the good old tactical way of classical spellcasting has to be brought back with a somewhat good variety of spells so you are not restricted to like 3-4 abilities where you can choose the ratio of two possible bonus effects. Classical spellcasting is not limited to mages, though the term "spellcasting" is indeed limiting. Warriors (melee people such as Luke) should get.. what they seem to have now: PBAoE attacks, mobility skills, melee Crowd crontrol and short duration defense boosts, and the others, well they really got what they need (except for Katherina to get herself proper combat footwear)

 

I'm not telling you to scrap everything you have worked on for who knows how much time (It's 23:13 when I'm writing this and I had a pretty tiring day), in fact nothing could be further from the truth. the current system of normal powers can be quickly changed to accomodate a few more options in the forms of more powers and a simple regeneration variable would do it. You can even leave the energy gain for autoattack/button mashing, and by the way please PUT AUTOATTACK IN! I don't want to wreck my LMB again!!! For managing the new and by now Actually improved power system, you can add in either multiple spellbooks (like in the previous games), or something like an ability selection which you can only change at a specific type of but otherwise quite common NPC (take bed or campfire for example: great places of meditation). Beyond that I'd like to see powers of the same class(like Reinhart's class) interacting with each other: As an example, create a Fire Aura spell in the dynamic magic tree, which can add fire damage and AoE ignition around punched foes, but when you cast lightning orb while it is active, [fluff]it will cause the orb to explode from the heat energy contained in the electric field of the orb [/fluff] [crunch] dealing some fire damage over time (ignite) to enemies nearby to where the lightning orb exploded.[/crunch]

 

As for the awesome orbs of purpliness (or is that purply orbs of awesomeness?), you can switch them to an accumulating resource like adrenaline, which fades over time, and when you chose to release them it boosts the next power/spell dependant on how much energy or something you accumulated into these awesome purple sparking balls. After than you can add fluff like names such as elliptic affinity which is related how elliptically the heat of battle and dealing blows warps the flow of magic in the world, bending it to an elliptic path around the caster (for the math-obsessed Reinhart - oh how I like punching him for no other apparent reason than his kung-fu-santa art and animation style) or elemental shift for Anjali, which tells how much she has faded into the elemental plane (she is an elemental duh), where Katherina gets something related to her nice ornamental guns (runes accumulating the energy for example).

 

In theory the empowering effect of releasing the orb powers is directly dependent on how much of it you filled: the empowered power's effect recieves percentage bonus to a maximum of +75% (or it should vary between empowered skills) with an exponential curve of progress (small energies get small bonus, but after 75% attained, the power curve would rise sharply) to reward those who go quickly instead of punishing those who decide to keep themselves on the cautious side of the game.

 

As for the superpowered superstances, they should consume a fixed percentage of the accumulated orb power. As for storing these if you are really into these ds2 power-wannabe stuff, you could use one type of spell which is also using this adrenaline stuff as a resource, but instead of spending it right away, prepares a spell/ability for later quick-launch.

 

What you get as a result is something that is finally NOT what ds1 fans absolutely HATE in ds2, (the powers as you have it now) as all the resources are dynamic and it is quite hard to get them lost. The game does no longer punish you for having the accidents mentioned far above, and you get a much more tactical and a lot less frustrating game to play with.

 

I understand that a month before release is not the best time to change the roots of some of the core combat mechanics, and I believe that you do not wish to create a frustrating and restrictive game for the community, but these are problems from my and many dungeon siege fans' points of view, especially because the most disliked feature of ds2 -powers- got become the core of the combat system. Again, it should be fairly straightforward to switch it to classical spellcasting with regen and variety, and revamping the purple jelly balls of power should not take more than a script change and possibly adding a new float variable to the spells' templates: empowerment_bonus (doc = "value between 0 and 1 defines the amount of maximum percentage to add to the spell's 100% effect: 1 for +100% means the spell is cast at 200% power");

 

Closing the insane wall of text (I haven't written anything on this scale for quite a time by now) I would like to see at least your opinions on the points mentioned above. (Both the fans here and if the devs find some time to respond, then them as well too!)

 

PS: Don't introduce the inn bug.

[pmp10]

All I understood is that you are looking for a completely different game.

DS3 by all accounts look like a console hack and slash not a far off diablo cousin.

And is your first complain really that you are pressured not to die in combat?

If challenge frustrates you just ask for a no-dieing solution, not some nonsensical regeneration while you are running in circles around a boss.

[Tigranes]

I'd recommend some party-based D&D RPGs if you're looking for that kind of stuff - DS3 for good or bad is from the outset very different, but DS1/2 were designed off, and are derivative children of, the BG / NWN serieses, etc. that are still out there for playin' if you haven't yet.

 

Again, it should be fairly straightforward to switch it to classical spellcasting with regen and variety, and revamping the purple jelly balls of power should not take more than a script

 

It takes a lot, lot, lot, lot more than a script, unfortunately. System changes require everything else to be changed.

[Monokli]

My problem is not that it's not 99.99% like Baldur's Gate or NWN, my problem is that it's not like Dungeon Siege at all. The strong points of Dungeon Siege are the beautifully implemented combat systems with a variety of auto-attacking (at least on the mage side) and a constantly regenerating mana pool that made retreating and re-evaluating your strategy a viable choice, as there were no artifical incentive elements added to propel you on the storyline. You were simply pointed towards the general direction you needed to go, got told that there are monsters and loot, got your party members, then nothing more was needed. The variety of environment to break up the constant hacking and slashing also worked to get you moving, simply to have a sightseeing tour.

 

What you "added" was an artifical mechanic with no natural regeneration (and it is really adding a few lines to the source code/script here and there, which I'll explain in c++ if you don't get it), which essentially took the most hated element of dungeon siege 2, and made it a basis of the combat system, where you can get to unwinnable scenarios which is a frustrating experience to encounter, and is the polar opposite of the game's goal (to entertain).

 

And no pmp10 your distance from understanding my previous text is astronomical, I suggest reading it whole, not just the first and last few paragraphs. The problem with dungeon siege 3 is that it looks a little TOO MUCH like one of the diablo series. Again I expected the a dungeon siege game to be a dungeon siege game, not some random console hack and slash with weaboo mathfag mages and poorly thought out combat mechanics. I'm not complaining about being pressured not to die in combat, I'm talking about the lack of mechanics that let me consolidate should things not go as planned, where consolidation itself should be a challenge on it's own. I'm complaining about the lack of the systems and mechanics that made the previous games great.

 

I'm also talking about how Obsidian essentially made the combat system "Dungeon Siege... for dummies", a.k.a. devolving it to a much more shallow and much less interesting system DS2 had.

[WorstUsernameEver]

I'm glad they didn't put a regenerating mana pool in. Retreating and waiting in a spot for your mana to be replenished is something that shouldn't be allowed, never mind encouraged in a 2011 game. Of course, your opinion may vary, but yeah, I have no complaints on that or the removal or potions. Haven't played Dungeon Siege 2 so I don't know about the complexities of the system but I haven't really heard many good things on it (most people seem to have been turned off by the first one though, so go figure if they're just biased or not).

[Monokli]

Then tell me what you do when you encounter a nasty boss who chips your health down a little more than you would prefer and to up that has life stealing? Hope you got more damage in the end than his life steal could heal up AND at the same time heal yourself from your quite abused energy pool?

 

Or what happens if you play Lucas against a strong melee boss?

 

If you do not know then let me tell you: You die. And if you like dying, then fine by me, as long as you don't actively encourage game difficulty to be plunged up to levels where playing the game is commonly known as a masochistic occupation. If you like feeling you are ****ed because the last fight wasn't exactly good for your health, and comes a bad mini-boss with minions, then it's your problem. Maybe seek out a psychologist, or play something where you can see the text "Defeated" every ten seconds despite your gaming skills are on par with the best players of the world.

 

If you don't, then you will want some way to re-think the situation. A slow health/energy regeneration with keeping the punch to gain energy would be an ideal system, because it let's you learn from your mistakes without having to see some more or less creative game over screen, and/or loading a previous save.

 

I am also against potions despite the clear differences between our opinions, and would keep the attack to fill up energy bar system (with a slow natural regeneration which would be an extra safety net).

Edited May 15, 2011 by Monokli

[WorstUsernameEver]

Then tell me what you do when you encounter a nasty boss who chips your health down a little more than you would prefer and to up that has life stealing? Hope you got more damage in the end than his life steal could heal up AND at the same time heal yourself from your quite abused energy pool?

 

Or what happens if you play Lucas against a strong melee boss?

 

If you do not know then let me tell you: You die. And if you like dying, then fine by me, as long as you don't actively encourage game difficulty to be plunged up to levels where playing the game is commonly known as a masochistic occupation. If you like feeling you are ****ed because the last fight wasn't exactly good for your health, and comes a bad mini-boss with minions, then it's your problem. Maybe seek out a psychologist, or play something where you can see the text "Defeated" every ten seconds despite your gaming skills are on par with the best players of the world.

 

If you don't, then you will want some way to re-think the situation. A slow health/energy regeneration with keeping the punch to gain energy would be an ideal system, because it let's you learn from your mistakes without having to see some more or less creative game over screen, and/or loading a previous save.

 

I am also against potions despite the clear differences between our opinions, and would keep the attack to fill up energy bar system (with a slow natural regeneration which would be an extra safety net).

 

You're highlighting exactly why the mechanic is good: it encourages you adapting to the situation and playing better instead of, you know, not playing. Because that's what you do when you retreat and stay in a spot waiting for your health to regenerate. You don't do nothing at all. There's nothing tactical about that. It's cheap. You enjoy it? Fine. But don't sell it to me as good design, there's a reason Blizzard move away from it (and action games don't use it in the first place).

[Oner]

If you do not know then let me tell you: You die.

You dodge. There's enough combat videos to see: bosses don't just spam unavoidable auto attacks, they use sweeping attacks every once in a while that are easily dodged if you pay attention.

[Monokli]

I am starting to like the pte method, but the problem is that while it is indeed "encouraging", the encouragement comes from punishing the player instead of rewarding, and everyone knows positive reinforcement is a stronger motivator than punishment, and "encouragement" from punishment is known as "forcing", which is not something most people like. Adding a back-up passive regeneration, or even a free regeneration skill with only a recharge timer (20-40 seconds) would give the players a different method to manage energy other than one of the 2 types of auto-attacking. On a personal note I'm behind the free regeneration skill to make that backup system a little more active.

 

I'm not all for cheapness, but being restrictive not only in story, character creation, but in gameplay so hard that you can only do 2 types of autoattacks (because maces won't ever appear in this game, so much for weapon variety), and possibly use powers from the accumulated pool.

 

To prevent retreating and using the free regeneration skill, it can only be effective if within range of an enemy mob: You just have to dance around it to get the regen, and that takes skill to pull off!

 

On a different topic:why are there only 2 types? Shouldn't the greatsword have both a wide arced swing attack and an overhand stroke attack(crowd and single-target)? Shouldn't a 1h weapon have both a 1h weapon attack and a shield bash as normal attacks? (different attack speeds are a must have in these cases). The shield bash would sacrifice protection for the disorienting/stunning effect it could potentially do.

 

_________________

 

If you do not know then let me tell you: You die.

You dodge. There's enough combat videos to see: bosses don't just spam unavoidable auto attacks, they use sweeping attacks every once in a while that are easily dodged if you pay attention.

 

What is the cost of dodging? is that a free maneuver? and what do you do with Lucas against a Melee boss where inevitably you have to go toe to toe with it? Even worse with only a small amount of health and minimal energy from a previous battle.

Edited May 15, 2011 by Monokli

[Tigranes]

If we're getting into whether DS3 is "Dungeon Siege" enough, or more accurately, whether it has lost some of the charm / enjoyment that the DS system provided, well, it's hard for me to say - I was utterly bored with DS1 after a few hours and thought it was a horrible game, and after a short go with DS2 I felt it was definitely better, but not enough.

 

The trouble is that as far as I can see, the only truly unique appeal the DS1/2 systems had (different not only from DS3 but BG/NWN/etc) is that it was, well, easy and unpunishing. Regeneration. Auto-attacking options. Generally very easy encounters. That's not necessarily 'bad' - but my point is that DS1/2 were unusually geared towards this kind of laid back gameplay, to the point that some people still reference it as a game that plays itself. I think it's difficult to expect that from DS3, especially when you want the game to be more fast-paced, actiony and when you put an even bigger focus on combat. Even if you were happy with DS1/2, it's a lot more boring / tedious if you only have one character, a smaller selection of abilities and most of the time you're fighting rather than talking. Every game sets its particular kind of 'pace'.

 

The good part seems to be that DS3 has made sure that Easy mode is really very easy, and when you make mistakes you still have time to bounce back, and you have the time to try a few different things and see what you should do against said boss. Retreating, holing up in a corner and waiting for mana regen isn't the only way to play strategically - it's much more fun to be dodging the boss attacks, maybe take a few hits, but from those hits learn what you should and shouldn't do, without dying multiple times. And then they've put in the hardcore difficulty for people who do like a challenge (which is different from 'masochist' enjoyment: you can't really condemn people who enjoy difficult games as 'crazy' - that would be the same as me simply saying DS1 is only for idiots and you should learn to game. Point is that there are different types of gamers that want different things.)

 

Now, in the end, DS3 is nearly complete and it is what it is. So leaving aside whether it should have been designed more like DS1/2 to start with, I don't think the issue here is one of difficulty, or one of punishing / not punshing the player. I think the main difference will be one of pacing. And the good news for you, I suppose, is that from watching gameplay trailers (and there is speciffically one out there that we know is on Easy difficulty), you really dont have to jump and roll around like a maniac in order to not die. There's plenty of time and HP room to take a few hits, learn what works/not, make a couple of mistakes, and pick things up along the way then apply those solutions.

 

the encouragement comes from punishing the player instead of rewarding, and everyone knows positive reinforcement is a stronger motivator than punishment, a

 

This is a common misunderstanding. Positive reinforcement is indeed good, but nothing tell us that positive reinforcement to the exclusion of all negative motivations is beneficial. Especially in a game environment, you need to have an appropriate mix of punishments and rewards. Because it's not enough to just encourage the player to solve the problem, or to make him anticipate the rewards of solving the problem - you also want him to dread what might happen if the problem is not solved, and dread the various roadblocks and what they might do to him on the way. Because overcoming obstacles and achieving victory is all the sweeter when it comes after failure, or you know the punishments you have been able to avoid. The only problem is when the balance is off, and the player is too frustrated.

 

(btw, I thought we had mild regeneration in DS3, at least in lower difficulties? No?)

 

and what do you do with Lucas against a Melee boss where inevitably you have to go toe to toe with it? Even worse with only a small amount of health and minimal energy from a previous battle.

 

That's what makes it more exciting and fun, isn't it? I mean, we dont' enjoy watching a movie where James Bond/whoever always has exactly the right tool to defeat his opponent. We like situations where he has to kill 3 guys with 2 bullets, or forced to go toe to toe with someone bigger and meaner. Again, the only problem would be if Lucas was so handicapped against the boss it is much harder than usual (which would be a flaw with the encounter design, not the combat system), or if globules of health didn't drop like flies all the time like we've seen in previews.

 

Hell, every character has a defensive stance where they regain health! I really think you're exaggerating the extent of the problem.

[Monokli]

In Dungeon Siege, you will have to try playing a multiplayer type game (LAN preferable) solo, there you will see some interesting challenges around the time you reach glacern (playing with combat or nature mage is preferred for they are micro intensive). Those Ice Archers deal high damage which your robes barely reduce, (It's less problematic with ranged players, but it's still there) and you have to dodge those shots if you want to survive.

 

Your assessment of Dungeon Siege's difficulty is somewhat incorrect. While you can indeed steamroll through it with a strong and well-equipped party, it is more because of the monsters themselves not the variety of options to deal with them. The monsters will only come to attack range, and fire away, until you or they are dead. In dungeon siege 2 there are trickier sorts, such as those who summon are more often encountered, there are those who conjure curses on you, life stealers, ambushes, and exploding melee mobs (note: they hurt).

 

It is also possible in the system to generate challenges that require very good use of the party to overcome.

Potions can be restricted and even removed. No drops of tear from me.

 

Like I said before the passive regeneration which is something you oppose so fiercely, can be replaced with active health and energy management, which can and should take skill to use.

 

One point you apparently skimmed over is the problem of variety: Are you really fine with 10 or so skills per character and fixed autoattacks for each mode? when you had so many spells/powers/specialities/gear to choose from?

[Lord Elvewyn]

My problem is not that it's not 99.99% like Baldur's Gate or NWN, my problem is that it's not like Dungeon Siege at all. The strong points of Dungeon Siege are the beautifully implemented combat systems with a variety of auto-attacking (at least on the mage side) and a constantly regenerating mana pool that made retreating and re-evaluating your strategy a viable choice, as there were no artifical incentive elements added to propel you on the storyline. You were simply pointed towards the general direction you needed to go, got told that there are monsters and loot, got your party members, then nothing more was needed. The variety of environment to break up the constant hacking and slashing also worked to get you moving, simply to have a sightseeing tour.

 

What you "added" was an artifical mechanic with no natural regeneration (and it is really adding a few lines to the source code/script here and there, which I'll explain in c++ if you don't get it), which essentially took the most hated element of dungeon siege 2, and made it a basis of the combat system, where you can get to unwinnable scenarios which is a frustrating experience to encounter, and is the polar opposite of the game's goal (to entertain).

 

And no pmp10 your distance from understanding my previous text is astronomical, I suggest reading it whole, not just the first and last few paragraphs. The problem with dungeon siege 3 is that it looks a little TOO MUCH like one of the diablo series. Again I expected the a dungeon siege game to be a dungeon siege game, not some random console hack and slash with weaboo mathfag mages and poorly thought out combat mechanics. I'm not complaining about being pressured not to die in combat, I'm talking about the lack of mechanics that let me consolidate should things not go as planned, where consolidation itself should be a challenge on it's own. I'm complaining about the lack of the systems and mechanics that made the previous games great.

 

I'm also talking about how Obsidian essentially made the combat system "Dungeon Siege... for dummies", a.k.a. devolving it to a much more shallow and much less interesting system DS2 had.

 

I thought the defensive mode (3rd stance) allowed regen? Am I mistaken? If it's only health then that only helps melee\ranged units, well in DS1\DS2 it would. No idea about this.

[Tigranes]

Like I said before the passive regeneration which is something you oppose so fiercely, can be replaced with active health and energy management, which can and should take skill to use.

 

I don't see passive regeneration as something horrible - it all depends on how the system as a whole fits together. But as Lord Elvewyn says, my point is - afaik all of DS3's characters have a defensive stance related skill that allows them to regain health one way or the other, then we know Katarina for instance has life-steal abilities. You certainly should never be stuck with 2 health with a boss around the corner with no way around death.

 

Are you really fine with 10 or so skills per character and fixed autoattacks for each mode? when you had so many spells/powers/specialities/gear to choose from?

 

This is a different question altogether, really. I always like more variety in skills in my games, but I understand why they went with this model for DS3. Again it comes down to a question of pace and the structure of the game as a whole. Because DS3 has you control a single character and is meant to be a very fast paced, collide-with-enemies sort of game, you want to become intimately familiar with your skills and use them very quickly, hand fits glove - that works better with a smaller array of skills. It also ties into co-op where you still want that fast paced single character experience, but also build characters with specific styles that complement other styles. So it seems that instead of making 50 skills, for instance, they've made 10 skills with 2-3 variations for each skill plus various proficiencies or whatever they are called, so that you have fewer but very customisable skills.

 

Gut feeling before playing the game is that they could still have offered a bit more than what they're giving us now, and I think it'll be a bit too simplistic, but the general direction makes sense. Certainly at least they seem to have tried to make those skills quite imaginative and cool, instead of Fireball, etc.

[lychee26]

Are you really fine with 10 or so skills per character and fixed autoattacks for each mode? when you had so many spells/powers/specialities/gear to choose from?

 

Well it's technically 9 skills with 2 types of proficiencies, 1 mastered version (depending on how often you use that ability), and 1 powered up version using the purple orbs. And then some of the Talents also seem to affect some of the skills. And you have two basic attacks which can also be powered up. So while there may not be as many skills as the first two (though I don't remember there being that many truly different abilities in the first one) there is still quite a few variations within those skills depending on how you play your character.

 

I mean, I seem to remember that in the first two, a lot of the different spells a lot of them were essentially the same thing with slight differences.

[pmp10]

And no pmp10 your distance from understanding my previous text is astronomical, I suggest reading it whole, not just the first and last few paragraphs.

I actually read them but they are little more than senseless wish-list for a different type of game all-together.

You simply try to impose RPG mechanics on an action game in addition to a terrible combat cop-out system.

Again I expected the a dungeon siege game to be a dungeon siege game, not some random console hack and slash...

And I expected Fallout 3 to be isometric and turn-based.

Guess how that turned out.

[Monokli]

And the defensive stances use the rare purple orbs up, so it also suffers from the same problem as the powers now... Or did I miss them telling us that they are free?

 

Did you try dodging those Ice Archers while occasionally stopping to throw a grenade? that's pretty fast paced right there. I wish the rest of ds1 was like that.

 

Magic without fireball is meh. Firerain, Fireball Rain, Meteor Shower, Fireshot, Firespray, Explosive Powder, Bomb, Cluster Bomb, Fireblast, Meteor, Flame Blades, Cyclone of Fire, Summon Black Dragon Those were a variety: They can be added as prefix skills: example is where you throw explosive powder at first, but you can either spec it to bomb for big bang, or cluster bomb for the many bang effects.

 

being dungeon siege enough will depend on how moddable the game will be: If done right, then returning the game to it's roots won't be much of a problem. Custom Character creation is much needed just like a way to add the old DS spells back in.

[Lord Elvewyn]

If we're getting into whether DS3 is "Dungeon Siege" enough, or more accurately, whether it has lost some of the charm / enjoyment that the DS system provided, well, it's hard for me to say - I was utterly bored with DS1 after a few hours and thought it was a horrible game, and after a short go with DS2 I felt it was definitely better, but not enough.

 

The trouble is that as far as I can see, the only truly unique appeal the DS1/2 systems had (different not only from DS3 but BG/NWN/etc) is that it was, well, easy and unpunishing. Regeneration. Auto-attacking options. Generally very easy encounters. That's not necessarily 'bad' - but my point is that DS1/2 were unusually geared towards this kind of laid back gameplay, to the point that some people still reference it as a game that plays itself. I think it's difficult to expect that from DS3, especially when you want the game to be more fast-paced, actiony and when you put an even bigger focus on combat. Even if you were happy with DS1/2, it's a lot more boring / tedious if you only have one character, a smaller selection of abilities and most of the time you're fighting rather than talking. Every game sets its particular kind of 'pace'.

 

The good part seems to be that DS3 has made sure that Easy mode is really very easy, and when you make mistakes you still have time to bounce back, and you have the time to try a few different things and see what you should do against said boss. Retreating, holing up in a corner and waiting for mana regen isn't the only way to play strategically - it's much more fun to be dodging the boss attacks, maybe take a few hits, but from those hits learn what you should and shouldn't do, without dying multiple times. And then they've put in the hardcore difficulty for people who do like a challenge (which is different from 'masochist' enjoyment: you can't really condemn people who enjoy difficult games as 'crazy' - that would be the same as me simply saying DS1 is only for idiots and you should learn to game. Point is that there are different types of gamers that want different things.)

 

Now, in the end, DS3 is nearly complete and it is what it is. So leaving aside whether it should have been designed more like DS1/2 to start with, I don't think the issue here is one of difficulty, or one of punishing / not punshing the player. I think the main difference will be one of pacing. And the good news for you, I suppose, is that from watching gameplay trailers (and there is speciffically one out there that we know is on Easy difficulty), you really dont have to jump and roll around like a maniac in order to not die. There's plenty of time and HP room to take a few hits, learn what works/not, make a couple of mistakes, and pick things up along the way then apply those solutions.

 

DS vanilla was probably easier but that's easily tweaked. I don't think you can have more focus on combat than DS. The difference is how it works. DS1 controls what attack you perfom and who you perform it on. DS3 seems to be more controlling each punch you throw and where you throw it.

 

One characters not the big issue. That's just solo-multiplayer. Nerfed abilities\spell casting is an issue.

 

Retreat and regen's just an alternative to die-respawn strategies. It has the positive you can have a break get a coffee (or whatever you drink) and give your hands\wrists a break. Tactics strategy is how you take a boss\enemy down. If foes regen as well retreat regen streategies only mean you rethink your strategy it doesn't give you any benefit as in DS1 where foes don't regen.

 

Agreed that it's too late for radical changes.

 

the encouragement comes from punishing the player instead of rewarding, and everyone knows positive reinforcement is a stronger motivator than punishment, a

 

This is a common misunderstanding. Positive reinforcement is indeed good, but nothing tell us that positive reinforcement to the exclusion of all negative motivations is beneficial. Especially in a game environment, you need to have an appropriate mix of punishments and rewards. Because it's not enough to just encourage the player to solve the problem, or to make him anticipate the rewards of solving the problem - you also want him to dread what might happen if the problem is not solved, and dread the various roadblocks and what they might do to him on the way. Because overcoming obstacles and achieving victory is all the sweeter when it comes after failure, or you know the punishments you have been able to avoid. The only problem is when the balance is off, and the player is too frustrated.

 

(btw, I thought we had mild regeneration in DS3, at least in lower difficulties? No?)

 

 

Yes I thought regen existed. May only be health - mage penalty?

 

 

and what do you do with Lucas against a Melee boss where inevitably you have to go toe to toe with it? Even worse with only a small amount of health and minimal energy from a previous battle.

 

That's what makes it more exciting and fun, isn't it? I mean, we dont' enjoy watching a movie where James Bond/whoever always has exactly the right tool to defeat his opponent. We like situations where he has to kill 3 guys with 2 bullets, or forced to go toe to toe with someone bigger and meaner. Again, the only problem would be if Lucas was so handicapped against the boss it is much harder than usual (which would be a flaw with the encounter design, not the combat system), or if globules of health didn't drop like flies all the time like we've seen in previews.

 

Hell, every character has a defensive stance where they regain health! I really think you're exaggerating the extent of the problem.

 

That's not really an issue. mages often get penalised in games. Something that penalised a melee character would be a welcome change. The issue is if every encounter penalises a class.

[Tigranes]

Can't remember if they're free or not, anyone else?

 

Anyway, we're getting into personal preference territory here. One thing I will say is that sorry to be a sourpuss, but there's a very small chance you'll see a "DS1/2" mod for DS3, no matter how mod-friendly they make it. You're talking an entirely new character creation system, entirely new classes, entirely new sets of skills, abilities, magic, entirely new interface to accommodate them, entirely new encounter balance, new animations, new items, new store lists, new loot generation... in other words, more like a whole new game than a couple of scripts. Hell, if you want pack mules and a full party too, you've just built up a literal mountain of work that requires a team of developers.

 

What would be nice if DS3 went for a bigger DLC / full xpack thing where they would add in new characters with, again, a new set of unique skills.

[Oner]

And the defensive stances use the rare purple orbs up, so it also suffers from the same problem as the powers now... Or did I miss them telling us that they are free?

IIRC the purple orbs only extend the effects of defensive skills to the whole party.

[lychee26]

And the defensive stances use the rare purple orbs up, so it also suffers from the same problem as the powers now... Or did I miss them telling us that they are free?

IIRC the purple orbs only extend the effects of defensive skills to the whole party.

 

Actually I think all defensive abilities do use 1 purple orb. You use 2 if you want it to apply to the whole party. But it didn't look like it took that long to charge it up in the videos.

[Monokli]

And the defensive stances use the rare purple orbs up, so it also suffers from the same problem as the powers now... Or did I miss them telling us that they are free?

IIRC the purple orbs only extend the effects of defensive skills to the whole party.

 

 

How do you acquire these orbs? Experience/damage a'la ds2 powers?

[C2B]

And the defensive stances use the rare purple orbs up, so it also suffers from the same problem as the powers now... Or did I miss them telling us that they are free?

IIRC the purple orbs only extend the effects of defensive skills to the whole party.

 

Actually I think all defensive abilities do use 1 purple orb. You use 2 if you want it to apply to the whole party. But it didn't look like it took that long to charge it up in the videos.

 

No, I'm pretty sure Oners right. Didn't they say this in the Giantbomb Quicklook. Or am I remembering that wrong?

[Oner]

How do you acquire these orbs? Experience/damage a'la ds2 powers?

Dealt+received damage I think.

 

 

No, I'm pretty sure Oners right. Didn't they say this in the Giantbomb Quicklook. Or am I remembering that wrong?

Wasn't it in the Reinhart walkthrough?

[Sannom]

How do you acquire these orbs? Experience/damage a'la ds2 powers?

 

Through the use of the special abilities I think.

 

No, I'm pretty sure Oners right. Didn't they say this in the Giantbomb Quicklook. Or am I remembering that wrong?

 

No, the Reinhart video is the one where people remarked for the first time that the healing power used one orb, and then someone asked Nathaniel how exactly the orbs were used.

[C2B]

No, I'm pretty sure Oners right. Didn't they say this in the Giantbomb Quicklook. Or am I remembering that wrong?

 

No, the Reinhart video is the one where people remarked for the first time that the healing power used one orb, and then someone asked Nathaniel how exactly the orbs were used.

 

Ah, yes. I remember. Thanks.

 

@Tigranes: This entire thread is in personal preference territory.

Edited May 15, 2011 by C2B