Beat the game - a bit short :-(

[Lexx]

Yes, I felt the same. Better than other generic stuff, but not *that* good.

[Mirage]

So not the best story Obsidian's done? (or even close, I take it). So, just so I have an idea, what game would be most comparable to DS3 story-wise, as far as quality goes? I suppose I expected more considering the mastermind behind MOTB was at the helm.

 

But back on topic, nearly 20hrs isn't bad. AP took me less.

Edited June 20, 2011 by Mirage

[Tigranes]

Well that's quite subjective - because I have my own opinions on which games have good stories, for instance. My personal answer would be that you can definitely tell it's an Obsidian story, and that means there are no cringe-worthily bad lines or implausible plot solutions, and you sometimes get interesting takes on 'typical' things. But these interesting setups aren't developed in the same way that the best story-based Obsidian games do. i.e. at one point you get a clever parallel to European armies stranded in native 'Indian' (or Mezo-American) lands, but in the end you just beat up all the natives then they decide to be your friends, cos, you know, it's a beat-them-up ARPG. Hell, Lucas makes a snide comment to that effect when you're done. So in the end you get something that is quite interesting but never deep or moving.

[Mirage]

Oh, yes, I agree there is plenty of subjectivity in my previous question. I suppose I wasn't expecting anything spectacular from an ARPG in the story department, just hopeful. Can I at least have lesiurely conversations with my companion?

 

I just want an RPG with a story I can sink my teeth into a little bit, I know even the devs stated it won't have as many lines of dialog as say New Vegas, or AP, but in terms of sheer dialog length is it on par with KOTOR II? I probably sound like a big story nerd, this is a secret obsession of mine I only let out on internet forums.

[C2B]

Alpha Protocol

 

KOTOR2 and MOTB. Yes. Alpha Protocol? .......... As much as I love it. If you take away the C&C Part its pretty generic spy fiction. Well done spy fiction but I wouldn't sell it above DSIII. And AP is my favourite Obsidian game.

 

Also I disagree on the deep and moving part. DSIIIs charachter motivations/actions are easily some of the best and most releatable Obsidian has ever done. In itself this is already deep. Also everything related to the Mob Killings

Dapper Old Gent/the non combat quest where you decide if you press charges)

in Stonbridge. Also what exactly wasn't expanded on about the Archons? I got tons of lore related to Anjali herself and the other archons.

 

Also.... fighting through enemies before you (can) make friends with em is pretty much a staple of the rpg gerne in general. Don't really see the problem there. AP as mentioned does the same. (Shaheed)

Edited June 20, 2011 by C2B

[Mirage]

AP had a complex story, but it lacked much-needed color in its characters, its strength was the vast possibilities in which the characters would respond to you. DS3, I'm hoping is a satisfying romp through a decently told story. Honestly, I thought Jade Empire was a well told story (I know this is Bioware, but still), yet I know not everyone appreciated it. So this is true that there is an element of subjectivity at play here. But, if DS3 has a mildly engaging plot, with characters that possess some depth, I'll be sated. Really, the personalities of characters can over-ride flaws in the general story.

[C2B]

AP had a complex story, but it lacked much-needed color in its characters, its strength was the vast possibilities in which the characters would respond to you. DS3, I'm hoping is a satisfying romp through a decently told story. Honestly, I thought Jade Empire was a well told story (I know this is Bioware, but still), yet I know not everyone appreciated it. So this is true that there is an element of subjectivity at play here. But, if DS3 has a mildly engaging plot, with characters that possess some depth, I'll be sated. Really, the personalities of characters can over-ride flaws in the general story.

 

AP was "complex" in the same manner DSIII is "complex" in its lore. Its still somewhat generic (though good/very good for a videogame). Also actually the charachters in AP and conversations were my favourite part of the game. Thats probably personal preference though

 

If I had to compare DSIII to Obsidians other games regarding writing.

 

>NWN2OC,SOZ

<=F:NV,AP

<KOTOR2, MOTB

 

F:NV is actually a pretty good comparison. F:NV is somewhat complexer yet it does the shades of grey worse than DSIII (Cesar vs. Jeyne). Sidquests vary strongly in F:NV and while DSIII never reaches some of the heights it also doesn't reach some of its lows.

Edited June 20, 2011 by C2B

[Flouride]

Each one of Obsidian's games have their own strengths and weaknesses. So to get the "perfect action rpg" from Obsidian we would need:

 

- Conversation system, Heck and perks from Alpha Protocol

- The amount of excellent writing (story and dialogue) from Kotor2, AP and Mask of the Betrayer

- Combat system/gameplay mechanics and engine from DS3

- Faction mechanics and the huge world from New Vegas

 

Or it might turn into a complete disaster

[Lexx]

I don't really care about the faction mechanics in FNV nor do I think they are so super cool. What I personally think is the best thing in FNV is that everything makes sense and is explained in a logical way. Nothing is there for the lulz or sake of it, which is very important to me. The same goes to DS3, imo. I didn't found anything in the game so far that made me think "wait, what? Why the hell is *that* happening now?" Especially regarding motivations of npcs, the game is pretty detailed, I'd say.

[hopfrog16]

Each one of Obsidian's games have their own strengths and weaknesses. So to get the "perfect action rpg" from Obsidian we would need:

 

- Conversation system, Heck and perks from Alpha Protocol

- The amount of excellent writing (story and dialogue) from Kotor2, AP and Mask of the Betrayer

- Combat system/gameplay mechanics and engine from DS3

- Faction mechanics and the huge world from New Vegas

 

Or it might turn into a complete disaster

 

Hmmm... I would have to disagree (except for the combat/gameplay mechanic)... but only a little.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think that stuff sounds great... But, at least for me, I would like to see some better core statistical/level developments that would support Newgame+ and persistent multiplayer (as is more traditional with console ARPGs). If it had the elements both you and I suggested, however, I feel it would probably be one of the best console ARPGs in a very, very long time (if not of all time)...

 

Seems rather unlikely, though.

[ShadowScythe]

Persistent multiplayer is a completely different game and genre imo. AP's dialogue options and New Vegas's faction mechanics wouldn't fit in that kind of setting since people after multiplayer have no interest in stuff like that and just want the loot and exp.

 

So no, adding multiplayer to this theoretical ultimate RPG of all time would just leave it completely unfocused and a mess.

 

On the other hand, this theoretical game could come with co-op + easy to use modding tools so that the players themselves could craft the multiplayer experience instead.

 

In fact, I reckon if DS3 came with a toolkit + level editor that'd probably make up for whatever complaints about multiplayer people were having.

Edited June 20, 2011 by ShadowScythe

[hopfrog16]

Persistent multiplayer is a completely different game and genre imo. AP's dialogue options and New Vegas's faction mechanics wouldn't fit in that kind of setting since people after multiplayer have no interest in stuff like that and just want the loot and exp.

 

So no, adding multiplayer to this theoretical ultimate RPG of all time would just leave it completely unfocused and a mess.

 

On the other hand, this theoretical game could come with co-op + easy to use modding tools so that the players themselves could craft the multiplayer experience instead.

 

In fact, I reckon if DS3 came with a toolkit + level editor that'd probably make up for whatever complaints about multiplayer people were having.

 

Those are great points, and I agree. =)

 

DS1 had some great player made conversions that integrated great story with great multiplayer. =) It CAN be done, and they can be made to work just fine with each other (gaming communities can be pretty damn creative).

[Labadal]

Beat the game at 19,5-20 hours. I m an extremely slow player, but that's how long it took me. Did everything and read every piece of lore I found. I left the game on sometimes to go eat or whatever(1 hour at most) so that means 18,5-19 hours. I think the game never overstayed its welcome, it ended before I felt like I got tired of it.

[MonkeyLungs]

Persistent multiplayer is a completely different game and genre imo.

 

I believe he meant persistent character saves. So you could take your version of Anjali into a friend's game.

[Bendu]

Finished the game, playing with Lucas. It took me more than 20 hours and I enjoyed the game a lot. The dungeons are really awesome. They all are diverse, with a great color palette, lighting and atmosphere, but I wish there would be more puzzles. Loved the endgame and the final encounter and the choices you could make there. The combat was a lot of fun and this game does have the best boss encounters of an Obsidian game. But Story and characters could have been more elaborated, to be honest.

[AddziX]

Finished the game, playing with Lucas. It took me more than 20 hours and I enjoyed the game a lot. The dungeons are really awesome. They all are diverse, with a great color palette, lighting and atmosphere, but I wish there would be more puzzles. Loved the endgame and the final encounter and the choices you could make there. The combat was a lot of fun and this game does have the best boss encounters of an Obsidian game. But Story and characters could have been more elaborated, to be honest.

I haven't finished it yet. Got to Stonebridge and realised I'd made some bad decisions with Lucas's levelling, so I restarted. Still loving it.

 

I couldn't agree with you more about the dungeons. They are fantastic.

[MonkeyLungs]

Most people seem to really like the dungeons. It's good to hear that they are well done.

[AddziX]

Most people seem to really like the dungeons. It's good to hear that they are well done.

They are very well done. In fact it's always sad when you come to the end of one, although then you get to sell your loot and buy stuff ready for the next one! DUNGEONS RULE!

[AnjyBelle]

Well, the game wants to be a A-RPG.

 

For me, RPG means "epic".

 

When DAO came out, my first run counted 80 hours and I have not even entered the capital city! I thought, the old days will return, when RPGs lasted 200+ hours (Wizardry 7, Ultima 7 etc.).

Of course I remembered DS I and DS II. For both I needed IIRC ~70 hours or more for my first runs.

 

Alas, DAO seems to be an exception and everything after it returned to the standards of the last years, 15-30 hours and that's it.

 

I finished DS III after about 26 hours and was VERY disappointed about this (for me) ultra short gametime.

 

Nevertheless, I love the game for anything else and hope, there will be plenty of DLC in a near future.

Edited June 21, 2011 by AnjyBelle

[Alpha]

^^^

 

Agree with you about RPG's of this days being so short if this continue that way playing RPG's will end being so short like playing a FPS campaign. RPG 's replay value , freedom , big world/dungeons , + new game, big bosses , challenges , long interesting main quest , lots of side quest and Full customization should be together in every RPG's. IMO.

Edited June 21, 2011 by Alpha

[AnjyBelle]

^^^

... RPG's will end being so short like playing a FPS campaign...

 

That's what I'm worried about. We buy a high-priced "RPG" and get five hours game-time with *stunning* grafics but close to zero content.

[MonkeyLungs]

The Obsidian Defense Squad are big giant cheerleaders for streamlining, those 6 hour RPG's will be loved around here.

Longer story? "Not the focus of the game"

It felt like it was over too fast "Not the focus of the game"

I can't choose what abilities to level up? "The game does it for you to keep your character in line with the lore of the awesome story and Obsidian dialogue, the focus of the game is to have your character be what the developers want at any time so you can fit in with the story better. "

I kind of want a more in depth experience ... "Not the focus of the game!"

Edited June 24, 2011 by MonkeyLungs

[Flouride]

Annoying troll is getting annoying.

[LadyCrimson]

So I'm just curious when people state hours until they finished, are they counting all the time spent staring at their inventory and making gear or skill decisions? Because the time stated on the save games doesn't reflect that at all. The game timer pauses when you're doing that stuff. So for me actual walking/combat/dialogue stuff has, I guess, been so far about 15 hours....but I know my arse has been glued to a chair for at least 5-6 hours longer than that (I've been keeping track of the clock on my desk, not the savegame notation) simply because of all the time I tend to spend looking at merchants & inventory/skill screens or just admiring the scenery etc. But I spend way more time than average doing that sort of thing I suppose - at least the first time or two through a game when I'm unfamiliar.

 

For me the length, taking into account the way the game is designed, feels about right. If it goes on too much longer I'm going to get bored I think. It's too linear and there's not quite enough item variety/skill complexity or story/character depth to keep me going for 60+ hours. And I didn't expect it, honestly. It's not Fallouts or even the less complex KOTOR & was never meant to be. It feels a good length for a high-octane-rpg romp where most of the length comes from replaying w/all 4 chrs rather than sticking with one character for weeks.

Edited June 24, 2011 by LadyCrimson

[C2B]

For me the length, taking into account the way the game is designed, feels about right. If it goes on too much longer I'm going to get bored I think. It's too linear and there's not quite enough item variety/skill complexity or story/character depth to keep me going for 60+ hours.

 

I never have really experienced a game that has story depth for 60+ hours. For RPGs 20-30 hours is pretty perfect to keep up a well written story. This was actually pretty much the problem with NWN 2 OC that could have been better if you cut majorly from it. (Like, most of Act 1)

 

For DSIII I recommed reading as much of the lore ingame as possible and then view charachters and story in that light. It gets quite deep then. Plus points if you actually know the refrences and insperations it draws from.