Reviews

[rc deaths agent]

I've been playing the Dungeon Siege series since it was released and Dungeon Siege 3 felt like I was spat at as a hardcore fan. In my opinion a game like this should not be designed for consoles, that is what turned me off from Dragon Age 2. The cinematic cut scenes felt very out of place and the facial expressions are... off-putting. Multiplayer is extremely awkward, it caused a nasty headache after only five minutes of attempting to play. The female characters seem a bit "overdeveloped" for my tastes, but I guess you have to appeal to new male players some way, especially if you want to pull new players from games like Call of Duty or Halo. I do not like how the combat system felt "dumbed down", I liked being able to use multiple skills/spells tactically.

 

What I miss most from Dungeon Siege and Dungeon Siege 2 is the Character Customization and the open feeling of the environments. I'd rather not be playing a Dragon Age 2 clone. I've discussed the game with several friends and they all feel the same way.

 

On a less negative note, I'm curious to who did the music, it does not sound like Soule (who did the music for DS, DS2, and Guild Wars).

 

Dude, it was stated from the outset that this was a reboot. Get over it seriously. The game has great combat mechanics, a rich graphical engine and a well written story line. It's a different game sure, but unlike DA2, it was not created by some marketing focus group. Obsidian has tried hard to put hardcore stat driven gameplay in with a story driven semi cinematic experience, and I think they've pulled off the middle ground quite well.

 

Really hope the scores don't hurt it so much that it doesn't get an expansion or DLC. That would suck because I'll be wanting more for sure.

Yeah they screwed the pooch right out the gate didn't they? I think that is his point. IMO they shouldn't even have named it Dungeon Siege period. I'm playing the DS LoA right now and it's great. Nothing like DS3 at all. And aren't reboots supposed to reflect the original in some ways? I mean it's NOTHING like it.

 

DS games are party based a/rpgs and it's been turned into nothing but a hack&slash, with poor customization, no tactical options and bad multiplayer.

[MechanicalLemon]

Yeah they screwed the pooch right out the gate didn't they? I think that is his point. IMO they shouldn't even have named it Dungeon Siege period. I'm playing the DS LoA right now and it's great. Nothing like DS3 at all. And aren't reboots supposed to reflect the original in some ways? I mean it's NOTHING like it.

 

I hate to be that guy, but:

 

 

All joking aside, I believe Obsidian wanted DS3 to be a spin-off title but Square-Enix pressed them to go with DS3. Meh.

[greylord]

Ouch, these are very harsh scores from Gamespot & IGN. I understand the PC version getting a lower score than the consoles, but honestly I feel 6.5 and 6.0 are far too low. I would never, ever give this score a lower rating than Dragon Age 2. Quite shocked by these actually. I am loving the game so far, playing with my girlfriend and we haven't had this much fun playing a game since Dark Alliance 2. The game is not without it's problems, too frequent enemy respawning and poor camera controls being the major ones for me so far, but all in all it is a very fun adventure through gorgeous environments peppered with interesting dialogue and good writing.

 

Honestly, compare it to DA2, how can you possibly say it is worse?!

 

That was pretty harsh review. It's pretty stupid how he goes on about how the controls aren't fine for PC, but I didn't see him mention once how you can use a bloody controller on the PC as well and the controls will be just as fine as on consoles.

 

Maybe if Dungeon Siege 3 lasted 50 hours (20 of those using same maps over and over again) the game would have gotten a better score.

 

Both reviews are sad. They show how out of touch Gamespot and IGN are giving horrible games like Dragon Age 2 8's and above, while giving this very solid, well written game with excellent combat mechanics, 6.5 and under. It seems like the expectations for an ARPG are so set in stone, and if they don't get what they want, ie. Diablo style multi player, then it's just not good. Well this game is something different, but it's still very good and it's sad to see the major sites ignore this. Worse still, this will hurt sales in North America badly. I would have loved to see it get an 8 from both these sites, because imo, that's what it deserves.

 

Dragon Age 2 on the other hand...5 or 6 would have been more appropriate.

 

That's because the PR firm didn't pay as much for them to praise DS3 as the PR firm for DA2 paid them. Next time the PR firm will cut them out (bad idea) or pay higher (like EA did for DA2).

[MechanicalLemon]

That's because the PR firm didn't pay as much for them to praise DS3 as the PR firm for DA2 paid them. Next time the PR firm will cut them out (bad idea) or pay higher (like EA did for DA2).

 

I'm still reeling over The Escapist's review of DA2.

 

A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics and excellent story-telling, Dragon Age II is what videogames are meant to be.

 

*snort*

[HoonDing]

If Gamespot gave Hunted: Demon's Forge a 4.5 on PC, Dungeon Siege 3 should be below that.

[Bendu]

Maybe if Dungeon Siege 3 lasted 50 hours (20 of those using same maps over and over again) the game would have gotten a better score.

I think that would be not enough. Dungeon Siege 3 should have a more pseudo uber-dark, gritty and brutal fantasy world, with romanceable emo characters, more badass looking enemies, and more of a cinematic approach.

[Flouride]

Maybe if Dungeon Siege 3 lasted 50 hours (20 of those using same maps over and over again) the game would have gotten a better score.

I think that would be not enough. Dungeon Siege 3 should have a more pseudo uber-dark, gritty and brutal fantasy world, with romanceable emo characters, more badass looking enemies, and more of a cinematic approach.

 

You forgot the ending that makes pretty much no sense at all.

[ShadowScythe]

And everyone needs to gib in a fountain of blood. Even if you just slightly tapped them. NO EXCEPTIONS!

[pmp10]

It seems like the expectations for an ARPG are so set in stone, and if they don't get what they want, ie. Diablo style multi player, then it's just not good. Well this game is something different, but it's still very good and it's sad to see the major sites ignore this.

There are certain industry standards for ARPGs and DS3 simply fails to adhere to them.

Add to that the name that suggest continuation of an established series it's only natural that there will be disappointed expectations.

[HoonDing]

Ironically, with Dragon Age 2 BioWare made a game closer to Dungeon Siege than Dungeon Siege 3.

 

The party based action combat and skill trees are there all already, they should just add multiplayer and change "Kirkwall" to "Stonebridge", "Templars" to "Azunites", "Thedas" to "Ehb".

 

Oh, and cut 90% of party banter, voice-over that's even worse than Dungeon Siege 2, and all romance BS.

[rafoca]

IGN review is out and... OUCH

A dungeon crawler without good loot, like Dungeon Siege III , is missing something essential. If the prizes that pop out don't feel valuable, there's no slot machine appeal of opening chests, busting apart wooden barrels or slicing up monsters. Dungeon Siege III's bits of loot come with all kinds of statistical bonuses, and a multitude of special effects like elemental damage or chance to stun. But it's rare to ever get a strong sense that swapping one item for another has a significant effect, many items have near identical visual designs, and no piece is moddable. After not too long, scooping up loot begins to feel like garbage collection instead of treasure hunting.

http://n4g.com/news/clickout/790874

[Pidesco]

IGN cannot into games, anyway.

[sorophx]

clearly, he can't even understand how to combine his different pieces of equipment to make a certain build. what a retard

 

Ironically, with Dragon Age 2 BioWare made a game closer to Dungeon Siege than Dungeon Siege 3.

the most important part of DS was its multi-player, as we've been instructed here

Edited June 21, 2011 by sorophx

[Flouride]

I guess I played a different game than the reviewer at IGN.

For the loot selling problem... Isn't there a buyback option that you can use in case some ***hole sells your loot?

There's no lasting appeal? How about playing it with hardcore and different chars. 6.5 for sounds? Really? He doesn't even mention the great looking lighting when he discusses the graphics. Dull story? Gameplay gets 7.0 because he dislikes the loot.

 

Dragon Age 2 got 8.5 :D

Edited June 21, 2011 by Flouride

[Wombat]

Kinda ironic situation. For story-telling wise, it would have been probably better suited to something expected for Alpha Protocol but the veterans failed to catch up with the modern game-play (To say nothing of Conviction, I think it was even behind Chaos Theory...). On the other hand, while the younger designers were arguably successful in making the game-play part right, the reviewers say that story-telling is not wanted in this genre.

[JabbaDaHutt30]

Ouch, these are very harsh scores from Gamespot & IGN. I understand the PC version getting a lower score than the consoles, but honestly I feel 6.5 and 6.0 are far too low. I would never, ever give this score a lower rating than Dragon Age 2. Quite shocked by these actually. I am loving the game so far, playing with my girlfriend and we haven't had this much fun playing a game since Dark Alliance 2. The game is not without it's problems, too frequent enemy respawning and poor camera controls being the major ones for me so far, but all in all it is a very fun adventure through gorgeous environments peppered with interesting dialogue and good writing.

 

Honestly, compare it to DA2, how can you possibly say it is worse?!

 

That was pretty harsh review. It's pretty stupid how he goes on about how the controls aren't fine for PC, but I didn't see him mention once how you can use a bloody controller on the PC as well and the controls will be just as fine as on consoles.

 

Maybe if Dungeon Siege 3 lasted 50 hours (20 of those using same maps over and over again) the game would have gotten a better score.

 

Both reviews are sad. They show how out of touch Gamespot and IGN are giving horrible games like Dragon Age 2 8's and above, while giving this very solid, well written game with excellent combat mechanics, 6.5 and under. It seems like the expectations for an ARPG are so set in stone, and if they don't get what they want, ie. Diablo style multi player, then it's just not good. Well this game is something different, but it's still very good and it's sad to see the major sites ignore this. Worse still, this will hurt sales in North America badly. I would have loved to see it get an 8 from both these sites, because imo, that's what it deserves.

 

Dragon Age 2 on the other hand...5 or 6 would have been more appropriate.

 

That's because the PR firm didn't pay as much for them to praise DS3 as the PR firm for DA2 paid them. Next time the PR firm will cut them out (bad idea) or pay higher (like EA did for DA2).

 

Golly, yes! How could a small and insignificant publisher like Square Enix possibly deal out enough bribe money in time to appease the boundless appetites of big, corporate video game journalists, surely obsessed with destroying what reputation Obsidian has left with their acrid, depreciative Dungeon Siege III reviews? You, to have unthreaded their dark scheme so skillfully, are a single bastion of light in a sea of infinite darkness.

 

I kneel in awe before you, sir.

Edited June 21, 2011 by JabbaDaHutt30

[C2B]

Golly, yes! How could a small and insignificant publisher like Square Enix possibly deal out enough bribe money in time to appease the boundless appetites of big, corporate video game journalists, surely obsessed with destroying what reputation Obsidian has left with their acrid, depreciative Dungeon Siege III reviews? You, to have unthreaded their dark scheme so skillfully, are a single bastion of light in a sea of infinite darkness.

 

I kneel in awe before you, sir.

 

Uhmmmm, Square Enix may be a well known publisher but you can't really suspect them of giving out bribe money. Their recent games aren't exactly known for scoring too high. Also, yes. There are journalists that have a personal feud against Obsidian as evidenced by a recent escapist article.

Edited June 21, 2011 by C2B

[JabbaDaHutt30]

I guess I played a different game than the reviewer at IGN.

For the loot selling problem... Isn't there a buyback option that you can use in case some ***hole sells your loot?

There's no lasting appeal? How about playing it with hardcore and different chars. 6.5 for sounds? Really? He doesn't even mention the great looking lighting when he discusses the graphics. Dull story? Gameplay gets 7.0 because he dislikes the loot.

 

Dragon Age 2 got 8.5 :D

 

Maybe, you know... Dragon Age 2 was better than Dungeon Siege 3? I don't like the game myself very much ( Dragon Age 2 ), but I can't imagine Obsidian having much higher standards for failure.

[Oner]

SE lost too much street cred in the past 2-5-10 years to influence scores with it's name.

 

Maybe, you know... Dragon Age 2 was better than Dungeon Siege 3?

Bwahahaha, good one mate. Edited June 21, 2011 by Oner

[Volourn]

"Honestly, compare it to DA2, how can you possibly say it is worse?!"

 

Easy. DA2 is very likely better than DS3. if the combat, graphics, character system, and story are as poorly done in the main game as theya re in the demo... yup, it's definitely worse.

 

But, looks like most people agree that DA2 is better than DS3. Their opinion shouldn't effect yorus though.

 

I'm crossing my finegrs that the main game of DS3 is better than the demo of DS3.

Edited June 21, 2011 by Volourn

[JabbaDaHutt30]

Golly, yes! How could a small and insignificant publisher like Square Enix possibly deal out enough bribe money in time to appease the boundless appetites of big, corporate video game journalists, surely obsessed with destroying what reputation Obsidian has left with their acrid, depreciative Dungeon Siege III reviews? You, to have unthreaded their dark scheme so skillfully, are a single bastion of light in a sea of infinite darkness.

 

I kneel in awe before you, sir.

 

Uhmmmm, Square Enix may be a well known publisher but you can't really suspect them of giving out bribe money. Their recent games aren't exactly known for scoring too high. Also, yes. There are journalists that have a personal feud against Obsidian as evidenced by a recent escapist article.

 

I'm not suspecting them of giving bribe money. I'm saying they probably have the means to, just like EA. I also don't automatically suspect EA of dealing out bribe money if their games happen to score a little higher. An 8.0 from Gamespot compared to the 9.5 Origins got from Kevin VanOrd is hardly flattering for Dragon Age 2.

 

What is this 'evidence'? Why would anyone 'have it out for Obsidian' in the first place? Sounds absolutely ridculous.

[Tale]

I never find comparing review scores to be very informative. Unless they're coming out in the same month from the same publication. Opinions vary with time and not necessarily always in the same direction. I just take them on their own.

 

But saying that, I'm not intimate with the review industry. They may have ways of eliminating the fluctuating biases and making sure their scores are clear and objective. But I'll be skeptical about that.

[C2B]

Golly, yes! How could a small and insignificant publisher like Square Enix possibly deal out enough bribe money in time to appease the boundless appetites of big, corporate video game journalists, surely obsessed with destroying what reputation Obsidian has left with their acrid, depreciative Dungeon Siege III reviews? You, to have unthreaded their dark scheme so skillfully, are a single bastion of light in a sea of infinite darkness.

 

I kneel in awe before you, sir.

 

Uhmmmm, Square Enix may be a well known publisher but you can't really suspect them of giving out bribe money. Their recent games aren't exactly known for scoring too high. Also, yes. There are journalists that have a personal feud against Obsidian as evidenced by a recent escapist article.

 

I'm not suspecting them of giving bribe money. I'm saying they probably have the means to, just like EA. I also don't automatically suspect EA of dealing out bribe money if their games happen to score a little higher. An 8.0 from Gamespot compared to the 9.5 Origins got from Kevin VanOrd is hardly flattering for Dragon Age 2.

 

What is this 'evidence'? Why would anyone 'have it out for Obsidian' in the first place? Sounds absolutely ridculous.

 

I didn't really say anything about EA............... Just defended Square.

 

Also about "some" (I'm not saying its the majority. Far from it)journalists having it out against Obsidian.

 

Behold glorius game journalist

 

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/v...ditors-Note-DIY

Edited June 21, 2011 by C2B

[vault_overseer]

I didn't really say anything about EA............... Just defended Square.

 

Also about "some" (I'm not saying its the majority. Far from it)journalists having it out against Obsidian.

 

Behold glorius game journalist

 

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/v...ditors-Note-DIY

 

I still can't wrap my head around the drastic difference in reception between F3 anf F:NV. Why was one praised for its mediocre writing, flat dialogs and nonexistant C&C while all of the game stopping bugs were nearly completely ignored and the other one had all of its great writing ignored and instead became a scapegoat for inherited bugs :/

 

I also don't get why everyone seems to have their panties in a bunch over Skyrim, the game that looks like a very slight improvement over Oblivian. Where are those amazing graphics everyone is seeing, how can anyone believe into anything radiant anymore?

 

I weep for the souls of modern gamers.

[Bos_hybrid]

Just defended Square.

 

Who bought Eidos........

 

Behold glorius game journalist

 

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/v...ditors-Note-DIY

 

 

So one journalist has a silly rage, (even then he's still entitled to his opinion, even if you don't like it) and now game journalists have some vendetta against Obs? A best it's one guy blowing of steam, at worst it's one with an axe to grind.

 

No secret conspiracy to bring Obs down.