Beat the game - a bit short :-(

[LadyCrimson]

I agree about story depth - games aren't exactly novels, so to speak...but it's the combo of deeper character development/choices + an open world to explore + hunting for unique, hard to get/find items etc. that turns a game into a 60 hour one for me. DS3, as fun as it is, has none of those, imo. Mostly it has some fun/challenging combat, some funny companion lines, and a decent/passable dialogue concept with important chrs. to move the story along and get some background.

 

DS3 reminds me more of Overlord...where I loved it very much while playing it, but the desire to replay it is rather low. Altho I must replay to record all of Lucas lines. And maybe the mage guy, he's funny too. They should include voice files with all games, imo, darnit. :D

[C2B]

I agree about story depth - games aren't exactly novels, so to speak...but it's the combo of deeper character development/choices + an open world to explore + hunting for unique, hard to get/find items etc. that turns a game into a 60 hour one for me. DS3, as fun as it is, has none of those, imo.

 

I disagree on this. At least it doesn't compare badly to other (earlier) Obsidian RPGs IMO. But I respect the opinion and I can definitly see where you are coming from.

[LadyCrimson]

I agree about story depth - games aren't exactly novels, so to speak...but it's the combo of deeper character development/choices + an open world to explore + hunting for unique, hard to get/find items etc. that turns a game into a 60 hour one for me. DS3, as fun as it is, has none of those, imo.

 

I disagree on this. At least it doesn't compare badly to other (earlier) Obsidian RPGs IMO. But I respect the opinion and I can definitly see where you are coming from.

Well, if you took the game's story/chrs. and put it into novel form, I'd like it much better. I did read most of the Lore and all of that, along with being patient enough to read the dialogues and it's nice (especially the references to the past games) but eh, didn't reach me I guess.

 

In a game, it's hard for me to be emotionally touched when no matter what dialogue choices I pick, the outcome is the same. Which is what happens in DS3 far as I can tell. I reloaded several key dialogue points and in the end, it's still the same outcome/I have to do the same thing. I feel like my chr has no influence what happens in the game as I play it - well, beyond "influencing" a companion. So while the story may be potentially good, I don't "feel" it. Actually, as much as I love FNV, I feel the same way about 80% of what goes on in that game, too. Or most games, which is why I probably am not very into "story" in games to begin with. In a novel I'm not expecting to be an influence so the telling of the story has more impact. Or something. I'm not sure really. I'm not easily moved by most stories themselves to being with...tho there are a few basic themes that tend to get to me a lot, if presented in a way that I relate to.

[Sasha_Je]

+1 AnjyBelle RPG should last 100 hours minimum...we are not playing Need for Speed or some Adventure game where we finish it in 10 hours. Dungeon Crawler games are all about leveling up/items and stuff like that, this is the reason there are many types of rpgs out there but from an ARPG i expect NewGame+ and common factors tot his genre. If i connect to battle.net and play Diablo II LoD i can still kill some monster/champion/boss and get exp/loot. In Diablo II LoD every patch came with new items ( Runewords, Unique Charm Annihillus, Special Boss for Torch ) i simply don't understand why do i need to pay for a DLC. So i can add features that where supposed to already be there? I hate DLC, gives me the impression that devs are lazy and they just want to rob me for some lol content...let's just look at Dragon Age Origins, tons and tons of DLC that where worth like 1h gameplay...silly. Anytime i would buy an Add-on/Expansion but DLC hmm...

[C2B]

I agree about story depth - games aren't exactly novels, so to speak...but it's the combo of deeper character development/choices + an open world to explore + hunting for unique, hard to get/find items etc. that turns a game into a 60 hour one for me. DS3, as fun as it is, has none of those, imo.

 

I disagree on this. At least it doesn't compare badly to other (earlier) Obsidian RPGs IMO. But I respect the opinion and I can definitly see where you are coming from.

Well, if you took the game's story/chrs. and put it into novel form, I'd like it much better. I did read most of the Lore and all of that, along with being patient enough to read the dialogues and it's nice (especially the references to the past games) but eh, didn't reach me I guess.

 

In a game, it's hard for me to be emotionally touched when no matter what dialogue choices I pick, the outcome is the same. Which is what happens in DS3 far as I can tell. I reloaded several key dialogue points and in the end, it's still the same outcome/I have to do the same thing. I feel like my chr has no influence what happens in the game as I play it - well, beyond "influencing" a companion. So while the story may be potentially good, I don't "feel" it. Actually, as much as I love FNV, I feel the same way about 80% of what goes on in that game, too. Or most games, which is why I probably am not very into "story" in games to begin with. In a novel I'm not expecting to be an influence so the telling of the story has more impact. Or something. I'm not sure really. I'm not easily moved by most stories themselves to being with...tho there are a few basic themes that tend to get to me a lot, if presented in a way that I relate to.

 

The Rajani Choice is one that has a "big" impact later in the game and allows for even more if you take Anjali as a companion with you. You also have quite the bit influence on other things even if it isn't immediatly apparent. Though, I get what you are saying.

 

So, full on branching path like The Witcher 2 does it would be better for you? Or anything in between where you see the result of your actions more direct?

Edited June 24, 2011 by C2B

[AnjyBelle]

I'm aware, that - due to the the design of DS III - many things are quite impossible:

 

1) replay+ because characters are maxed out after the first run

2) Much longer gametime for the same reason

3) In depth character development with only 9 skills as a tribute to the consoles. In the end, all Katarinas (as example) of all players will be at least very similar

4) Despite some exceptions dialogue options have no impact; so every ending is about the same (perhaps an addon later will take some descisions into account)

 

With the current concept anything beyond 30 hours would feel artificially lengthened. But IMO that does not necessarily mean, that this *new* DS-concept is good.

[funcroc]

Annoying troll is getting annoying.

 

Just ignore and love him like I do.

[LadyCrimson]

The Rajani Choice is one that has a "big" impact later in the game and allows for even more if you take Anjali as a companion with you. You also have quite the bit influence on other things even if it isn't immediatly apparent. Though, I get what you are saying.

 

So, full on branching path like The Witcher 2 does it would be better for you? Or anything in between where you see the result of your actions more direct?

Not at the actual end of the game yet, but so far Rajani's choice (I'm playing Anjali) only = small a dialogue reference later, but it had no effect on what I actually had to do.Maybe it makes a bigger difference in the endgame, I'll find out soon I guess.

 

Haven't played the Witchers, or many story-RPG's of the past 5 years or so (got tired of the formula for a long while), so can't remark on those either. But I'm probably not typical to begin with - I said to an acquaintance once that what motivates me to keep going in cRPG's now is usually companions/party member related. Thus stuff like Oblivion falls flat because there are no companions while FNV grabbed hold & won't let go. I like to feel like I made a difference on NPC development during gameplay ... not just my own chr's stats or the ending slides.

 

 

 

I'm aware, that - due to the the design of DS III - many things are quite impossible:

 

1) replay+ because characters are maxed out after the first run

2) Much longer gametime for the same reason

3) In depth character development with only 9 skills as a tribute to the consoles. In the end, all Katarinas (as example) of all players will be at least very similar

4) Despite some exceptions dialogue options have no impact; so every ending is about the same (perhaps an addon later will take some descisions into account)

From what I've seen so far, at least...agreed.

 

But IMO that does not necessarily mean, that this *new* DS-concept is good.

Disagree to an extent. Taken on it's own merit, DS3 is an enjoyable, fun, & often humorous game. Once I realized DS3 was not going to have the same sort of more-direct-Diablo-clone gameplay, I just tried to see how I liked it as a game in general. I like it quite a bit and think there's nothing wrong with having a sub-genre of RPG games that go like this.

 

But I do agree that I wouldn't want all cRPG's made to be like it. Just like I wouldn't want them to all be like Diablo, or all be like Oblivion, or Fallout etc. either. That would be boring.

Edited June 24, 2011 by LadyCrimson

[C2B]

I like to feel like I made a difference on NPC development during gameplay ... not just my own chr's stats or the ending slides.

 

Well then it probably depends on taste. I for myself thought that DSIII had lots of NPC development and you had an active role to determine it. Especially related to

Dapper Old Gent, Jeyne and companions (all of them if you bring them to certain NPC interactions) and Odo

 

 

I for one didn't feel all that invested in F:NV actually since it seemed to me I was just some random guy who helped them and used little artifical skill checks to suddenly change their opinion in certain cases. I still enjoyed the writing related to this.

 

Of, course. IMO. Like I said, I see where you are coming from and you have valid opinions related to it. Just a matter of viewpoint.

 

 

Also I have played two times so far and I got vastly different ending slides. So I'd disagree strongly on actions having no effect on the ending. @ Anjybelle

Edited June 24, 2011 by C2B

[AnjyBelle]

Ok, I agree... there ARE different endings in a certain way.

 

Perhaps my definition of "different ending" is different from yours

 

Let's see:

We have to beat Jane, right? All of us, no matter what we "decided" to do before the last fight.

And we have to be allies with the royals, right?

We can neither change sides nor can we take Jane's place and be "the incarnation of treachery and evil", right?

 

Remember Jade Empire? THAT was a different ending.

[C2B]

We have to beat Jane, right? All of us, no matter what we "decided" to do before the last fight.

And we have to be allies with the royals, right?

We can neither change sides nor can we take Jane's place and be "the incarnation of treachery and evil", right?

 

1. Yes, you have to beat the boss. Like in JE. Except there you had a third option regarding her you can make. However you also have several options to deal with Jeyne AFTER the fight in DSIII.

2. No, at least not how someone would define "real" allies.

3. Jeyne was none of that. She wasn't treachurous nor was she necessarly evil. And yes, you can be in a certain way. You can lead the legion into many ways. Just in a lot greyer ways than black and white ones.

 

Your last two questions make me wonder if you "got" everything that happened in the games backstory and the Legions role in it. No offense.

Edited June 24, 2011 by C2B

[AnjyBelle]

We have to beat Jane, right? All of us, no matter what we "decided" to do before the last fight.

And we have to be allies with the royals, right?

We can neither change sides nor can we take Jane's place and be "the incarnation of treachery and evil", right?

 

1. Yes, you have to beat the boss. Like in JE. Except there you had a third option regarding her you can make. However you also have several options to deal with Jeyne AFTER the fight in DSIII.

2. No, at least not how someone would define "real" allies.

3. Jeyne was none of that. She wasn't treachurous nor was she necessarly evil. And yes, you can be in a certain way. You can lead the legion into many ways. Just in a lot greyer ways than black and white ones.

 

Your last two questions make me wonder if you "got" everything that happened in the games backstory and the Legions role in it. No offense.

 

I didn't say, that Jeyne was "evil". But I would be, if I'd change sides and do anything for my advantage at the cost of the legion.

 

But I guess, this all leads away from the original topic. If you want to discuss this further, I'd happily respond to a your PM.

[C2B]

We have to beat Jane, right? All of us, no matter what we "decided" to do before the last fight.

And we have to be allies with the royals, right?

We can neither change sides nor can we take Jane's place and be "the incarnation of treachery and evil", right?

 

1. Yes, you have to beat the boss. Like in JE. Except there you had a third option regarding her you can make. However you also have several options to deal with Jeyne AFTER the fight in DSIII.

2. No, at least not how someone would define "real" allies.

3. Jeyne was none of that. She wasn't treachurous nor was she necessarly evil. And yes, you can be in a certain way. You can lead the legion into many ways. Just in a lot greyer ways than black and white ones.

 

Your last two questions make me wonder if you "got" everything that happened in the games backstory and the Legions role in it. No offense.

 

I didn't say, that Jeyne was "evil". But I would be, if I'd change sides and do anything for my advantage at the cost of the legion.

 

But I guess, this all leads away from the original topic. If you want to discuss this further, I'd happily respond to a your PM.

 

I don't, really. but your right it differs from the original thread topic.

 

Just to close this though and you don't need to answer. Just a question thrown in the room.

 

What exactly makes the legion "the good guys"? What makes any such organization "the good guys"? And why should going against them be "evil" in return?

Edited June 24, 2011 by C2B

[AnjyBelle]

Just to close this though and you don't need to answer. Just a question thrown in the room.

 

What exactly makes the legion "the good guys"? What makes any such organization "the good guys"? And why should going against them be "evil" in return?

 

Ok, this last one.

 

No offense meant, but I have the impression, you interpret too much

 

Of course I can only speak for myself. When did I write things like "the legion is good"? I'd say, that the "new legion", refounded by my Avatar, Odo and the other persons are "good",

because they fight against someone who ravages the land.

"Good" in a certain way: Do I kill the "Gentlman"? That would translate to "lawful good" in old D&D-terms. I let him alive and make him work for the legion = chaotic good.

The same with that Archon: I kill her = lawful good, because she killed civilians and seized a city. I simply let her go could be neutral, to send her away with a message for Jeyne again chaotic good.

Perhaps you agree so far, when I say, that all these actions make me "good" in a certain way, but won't make the legion as a whole "good" or "evil".

One might see the "new legion" as an organization with tendencies to "good", though, because for the moment they want nothing but to end this war.

 

But...

When I suddenly turn against them and betray anything for what I was originally "hired", then I would certainly be "evil", especially when I do it for *my advantage* with not the least interest, what consequences this might cause.

 

This kind of discussion you can see on old Bio-boards, when people talk about the old AD&D-rules, the actions of their characters and the pre-built "baddies", like good old Irenicus and the like.

A never ending discussion, I can tell you that.

[C2B]

No, I'm not interpreting too much. At all. The game also makes constant refrences to it in dialouge and is aware of it.

 

To give an example by Odo: "If we we win this war, Jeyne will be dead. Her words become lies and ours become truth"

 

Also if you are thinking about moral situations only in D&D terms. Well,..... Yeah, I'm a little bit different wired in my worldview.

 

 

The entire story has actually (as usual with Obsidian) quite a bit of depth and commentary.

Edited June 24, 2011 by C2B

[MechanicalLemon]

Just beat it with an in-game time of 13 hours whereas Steam says 19 hours played (wtf?). Great game.

 

Played as Lucas with Anjali on Normal difficulty and didn't run into too much trouble during my playthrough except for the boss fight (

Dapper Old Gent

) in Stonebridge. I can't wait to dive in again as Katarina. Hopefully the game does well enough to warrant DLC and an expansion or two.

 

Minus the one bug that I encountered in the Heroes Crypt and Gunderic Manor (most likely a hardware issue on my end), I didn't get one bug. DS3 is definitely a solid, polished Obsidian game.

 

Kudos to the DS3 team!

[rc deaths agent]

Beat it in 18 hours on hardcore. All quests done. It was fun though. To bad i can't continue to build my character now though that the story is done.

[Crazee_gamer]

Just beat it with an in-game time of 13 hours whereas Steam says 19 hours played (wtf?). Great game.

 

Played as Lucas with Anjali on Normal difficulty and didn't run into too much trouble during my playthrough except for the boss fight (

Dapper Old Gent

) in Stonebridge. I can't wait to dive in again as Katarina. Hopefully the game does well enough to warrant DLC and an expansion or two.

 

Minus the one bug that I encountered in the Heroes Crypt and Gunderic Manor (most likely a hardware issue on my end), I didn't get one bug. DS3 is definitely a solid, polished Obsidian game.

 

Kudos to the DS3 team!

 

Minus the bugs, this is my statement almost spot on. I just killed the forst big boss person.. level 12, and It's got me wanting more, I don't want to put the controller down.. please keep this game going with at least dlc please.. or else.

[AddziX]

I beat it at around the 15 hour mark. Only quest I didn't do was 'Free the Krug' because of a bug. I'm gonna give it a rest, play Alpha Protocol for a while and come back to it with another character.