To forum visitors, don't fall for the glowing reviews, by pc gamesites/users.

[Labadal]

DS3 is now in 7th place on Steam's sales chart. Last week it was in 20th or something. I'm guessing people are taking their demo experiences, and acting upon them.

 

Shut your dirty mouth! I dare you to make sense again! I double dare you!

[greylord]

"DS2 was NOTHING like DS1"

 

What planet are you living on? There's were a few changes that were controversial, but the two games are extremely alike.

 

The entire gameplay was different...but I suppose you can try to ignore that difference between DS1 and DS2.

 

DS2 only had it so that you could have multiple people in a party...other than that the entire gameplay was more Diablo 2 than Dungeon Siege 1. Even the skill system of DS2 was like D2.

 

Then you go to the story, and the story was even fashioned a little after D2 and had more similarities than DS1, DS2 was a dark fantasy inclusive of the end overall.

 

As for the planet, I live on planet Earth.

 

You?

[Renevent]

"DS2 only had it so that you could have multiple people in a party"

 

Say what? They both had multiple people in a party...it was a party based game.

 

And yes, DS2 ADDED skill trees but it also retained the open form "use to level" stats...as well and the spell system.

 

World design was practically the same. Controls were the same. They used the same core engine. The inventory screens were very similar (sans a few ui updates and a few added screens).

 

Hilarious you claiming the "entire gameplay was different"...they have way more in common they have differences. You may live on earth, but something is wrong with your perception.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Renevent

[hopfrog16]

"DS2 was NOTHING like DS1"

 

What planet are you living on? There's were a few changes that were controversial, but the two games are extremely alike.

 

The entire gameplay was different...but I suppose you can try to ignore that difference between DS1 and DS2.

 

DS2 only had it so that you could have multiple people in a party...other than that the entire gameplay was more Diablo 2 than Dungeon Siege 1. Even the skill system of DS2 was like D2.

 

Then you go to the story, and the story was even fashioned a little after D2 and had more similarities than DS1, DS2 was a dark fantasy inclusive of the end overall.

 

As for the planet, I live on planet Earth.

 

You?

 

Eh... There are big differences between 1 and 2, but for me the core mechanics of what DS is stay the same.

 

Easily accessible editing tools.

Great persistent multiplayer (with characters you can import from single player).

The ability to level up your class depending on what weapon you use.

Customization of appearance (although DS2's customization was much different than DS1).

The ability to have a group of however many people you were allowed (1-8, depending on the difficulty).

Self sufficient party members.

 

There are many more similarities, but those are the big ones for me that make Dungeon Siege, well... Dungeon Siege. =P That's not to say that DS2 isn't a lot different than DS1, but to say that they are nothing alike is just not true.

[Renevent]

Claiming DS1 is "nothing like" DS2 is flat out ridiculous. There are some differences, but the core of the game is very much the same.

[TheDFactory]

Not to offend anyone in here, but why all the push for sameness? Personally, if I'm ready to buy a new car I don't want to buy the exact same car I just had with a different paint job. That would be useless because I could just repaint the car myself. Games and cars are different I know, but all I'm seeing is a bunch of people saying they want more of something they already have. Take my advice or not, either embrace some refreshing change or go play series such as Call of Duty that's the same time and time again.

[Renevent]

The problem with that analogy is people don't want the exact same thing, but they do want similar things to what they like about their previous car. It would be like loving your F-150 truck and going to buy the new F-150 but finding out it not even a truck anymore...it's now a economy sized hatchback and everything you liked about your old truck isn't there anymore...it's a F-150 in name only.

 

To make it more clear, I personally wouldn't just want Dungeon Siege 2.5 and I don't mind if there are significant changes. But there is a core to what I consider Dungeon Siege and pretty much everything isn't present in the new game. Only the name and some of the lore remains.

[hopfrog16]

Not to offend anyone in here, but why all the push for sameness? Personally, if I'm ready to buy a new car I don't want to buy the exact same car I just had with a different paint job. That would be useless because I could just repaint the car myself. Games and cars are different I know, but all I'm seeing is a bunch of people saying they want more of something they already have. Take my advice or not, either embrace some refreshing change or go play series such as Call of Duty that's the same time and time again.

 

You bring up some good points. Try to understand, though, that many fans were expecting some of the core elements of what made Dungeon Siege what it is to transition to the third game. That's not to say DS3 won't be a good game... I like it, and I think it will succeed. There are many improvements on what DS 1 and 2 had, also (I love the combat in DS3). It is still disappointing for me, though, that all the things about the franchise that I loved have been removed. =P Heh... I guess that I'm also hoping that maybe if the game is successful enough for a sequel, Sony/Obsidian will listen to what the fans have been saying and reintroduce a few of the core elements DS fans liked. That's doubtful, though.

Edited June 14, 2011 by hopfrog16

[TheDFactory]

To both above, I tried to come up with a good analogy but alas nothing quite explains it. But I do see something similar right now in the form of Duke Nukem. Nothing but the quotes in Duke is the same. The difference being that DS3 is actually fun and DN is well pretty bad by all standards. My point is that DS3 is good and should be given a chance. I would hate to come back home to find out every bit of furniture I picked out was gone but I would also try and find some new things that were better. Obsidian did miss the balance between new and old but now it's up to us to try it out before we judge.

[hopfrog16]

To both above, I tried to come up with a good analogy but alas nothing quite explains it. But I do see something similar right now in the form of Duke Nukem. Nothing but the quotes in Duke is the same. The difference being that DS3 is actually fun and DN is well pretty bad by all standards. My point is that DS3 is good and should be given a chance. I would hate to come back home to find out every bit of furniture I picked out was gone but I would also try and find some new things that were better. Obsidian did miss the balance between new and old but now it's up to us to try it out before we judge.

 

Hmmm... The problem with your furniture analogy, however, is that when you go to buy your replacement furniture you have a choice in what you refurnish your house with (with DS3 we get what we get). that's besides the point, though...

 

The point is that whether or not the game is better than it's predecessors, or vice versa, really doesn't matter. They are in two different genres now, I feel. It would be like if they made Diablo 4, the turned based RPG. To be honest, I like turn based RPGs, and I probably would like that game. Many of the Diablo fans would probably be disappointed, however. That doesn't mean it's a bad game, or that it shouldn't be given a chance... That just means that the fans of the older Diablo games might not like the change in the game mechanics, or turn based RPGs.

 

In the end, though, this conversation really is pointless, heh. =) The sales for DS3 will be high, regardless. I plan on getting this game, too, when the price drops (after all, I love me some BG DA style goodness).

[TheDFactory]

To clarify, I mentioned that you didn't choose the new furniture but instead found what you liked in the new. But you're right the game will sell well and play well, I would just like to see some real core criticism. When the game releases I will make my final judgement, and if it is similar to the demo then there will only be good things coming from me.

[greylord]

All these replies about how much DS2 was like DS1, must not have been in the furor over DS2's differences. DS1 I mocked when it first came out, though I do admit the MP was pretty good for those that liked it.

 

DS2 was totally a Diablo2 ripoff, but perhaps the best one of them ever made. It had more similarities with Diablo2 than the original DS1. I loved DS2. That game was awesome.

 

But the copied and pasted Diablo 2 almost to some of the pieces of the story line even.

 

DS1 was rightfully called the game that played itself. DS2 at least had some evidence of you having to make choices and play. The changes were pretty drastic. There are probably more similarities between CoD and Battlefield games than DS1 and DS2 (you probably should think that over before simply saying that's a false...you might surprise yourself with how much more similar CoD and Battlefield are than at first glance).

 

I remember DS1 fanatics thrashing on DS2 for the differences when it came out, and a whole bunch of them swearing so many things against it, the entire commentary about DNF vs. the original DN, or even what we've seen thus far with those crying foul about DS3 vs. the other DS games...pales in comparison.

 

For those who claim it wasn't so, I'd say you weren't there...or you have a short memory.

[Renevent]

There's a difference between the game having some controversial design decisions and being "nothing alike". I know people like you would rather flail your arms and use hyperbole, but the things you are pushing are simply based on emotion rather than reality.

[greylord]

There's a difference between the game having some controversial design decisions and being "nothing alike". I know people like you would rather flail your arms and use hyperbole, but the things you are pushing are simply based on emotion rather than reality.

 

As is all the flailing around about the differences between DS2 and DS3. I would imagine that would be point made if you actually feel that way?

[TheDFactory]

I'm in the boat with those who do not mind the change, and thanks to a brand new story and much more dialogue I won't have to worry about getting bored. At least the used the same world as the previous games, whether or not it should be called Dungeon Siege III or some other name, really isn't my place. I understand that people like what works back but it's nice when a company refreshes a series. At least they didn't destroy it from a gameplay and fun perspective like Duke Nukem: Forever.

[Alpha]

new story and much more dialogue I won't have to worry about getting bored.

Sadly , the gamers of this gen find that boring. They only care about co-op /MP no matter if the game have a weak plot/story. Ex. L4D games. I rather 100 times buy a RPG with a good story than a game focused in co-op /MP with weak story.

[TheDFactory]

Sadly , the gamers of this gen find that boring. They only care about co-op /MP no matter if the game have a weak plot/story. Ex. L4D games. I rather 100 times buy a RPG with a good story than a game focused in co-op /MP with weak story.

Yeah that is terrible to find out. If I honestly cared only about multiplayer, I could have much more fun paintballing, or (I hate to say) Live Action Role Playing. Then you don't have to worry about whether to buy a gamepad or whose connection is better.

[Tale]

new story and much more dialogue I won't have to worry about getting bored.

Sadly , the gamers of this gen find that boring. They only care about co-op /MP no matter if the game have a weak plot/story. Ex. L4D games. I rather 100 times buy a RPG with a good story than a game focused in co-op /MP with weak story.

This is not a new phenomenon. Wolfenstein 3D wasn't played for the story. Doom and Quake had their online success. Counter-Strike. That's the continuation of an old trend.

[Jorian Drake]

new story and much more dialogue I won't have to worry about getting bored.

Sadly , the gamers of this gen find that boring. They only care about co-op /MP no matter if the game have a weak plot/story. Ex. L4D games. I rather 100 times buy a RPG with a good story than a game focused in co-op /MP with weak story.

This is not a new phenomenon. Wolfenstein 3D wasn't played for the story. Doom and Quake had their online success. Counter-Strike. That's the continuation of an old trend.

it all goes back to tetris and arcade games like TRON

[hopfrog16]

new story and much more dialogue I won't have to worry about getting bored.

Sadly , the gamers of this gen find that boring. They only care about co-op /MP no matter if the game have a weak plot/story. Ex. L4D games. I rather 100 times buy a RPG with a good story than a game focused in co-op /MP with weak story.

This is not a new phenomenon. Wolfenstein 3D wasn't played for the story. Doom and Quake had their online success. Counter-Strike. That's the continuation of an old trend.

 

Aye... Even before those games, multiplayer games (that were weak on story, heh) were growing in popularity.

 

In 1980 a small 6 player game called Dungeons of Kesmai (text based RPG) was created... From that came Island of Kesmai (1985, text based RPG) along with a "pay to play" service, and from that came Legends of Kesmai (1996, graphical RPG, ended in 2000) which continued that tradition. That's just one of the old MUD franchises, and there were a LOT.

 

For those of you who play using a gaming service or play on MMOs... This is your history.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZgEtoOBr0k

[dai]

Sadly , the gamers of this gen find that boring. They only care about co-op /MP no matter if the game have a weak plot/story. Ex. L4D games. I rather 100 times buy a RPG with a good story than a game focused in co-op /MP with weak story.

 

Agree with you,these days almost all games have a poor story/plot because of the MP