Couldnt be more disapointed.

[RichAlmighty]

Well, after buying two copies of this game for me and my wife to play together as we have done with DS1 & DS2 I couldn

[TormDK]

Well, after buying two copies of this game for me and my wife to play together as we have done with DS1 & DS2 I couldn

[metamag]

The game is excellent, don't exaggerate the importance of the online aspect, it will be addressed soon anyway.

[TormDK]

The game is excellent, don't exaggerate the importance of the online aspect, it will be addressed soon anyway.

 

That depends entirely on the reasoning behind buying it. Both the OP and I bought it to play it with others and in it's current state the camera kills our enjoyment. I'm having a really really hard time understanding why this camera design choice was allowed to go through the QA process.

 

Single player wise the game is decent, but even there the camera can be annoying since it only has two settings.

Edited June 18, 2011 by TormDK

[C2B]

The game is excellent, don't exaggerate the importance of the online aspect, it will be addressed soon anyway.

 

That depends entirely on the reasoning behind buying it. Both the OP and I bought it to play it with others and in it's current state the camera kills our enjoyment. I'm having a really really hard time understanding why this camera design choice was allowed to go through the QA process.

 

Single player wise the game is decent, but even there the camera can be annoying since it only has two settings.

 

I'm with you. I don't have anything against it in 2 player co-op but even then. The camera is too close. They don't even have to tilt it. Just move it further away from the charachters.

[Lexx]

I tried some mp a few hours ago as well and yeah, with 4 players, it's a mess. I wouldn't mind a limited walk radius, if at least every player could have his own camera / view without group limitation.

Edited June 18, 2011 by Lexx

[Mem]

The game is excellent, don't exaggerate the importance of the online aspect, it will be addressed soon anyway.

 

 

I disagree since I've been a long term DS fan but feel DS3 is the worst,its not the story or graphics thats bad but camera angles,control and spam fest of dying every few seconds with Bosses(this is on easy mode) .I now feel this game was rushed out with lot of issues and I don't like the way they made DS3 as a game.

 

 

Very disappointed in this game,I'm fighting the controls,AI as well as balancing issues.

[C2B]

The game is excellent, don't exaggerate the importance of the online aspect, it will be addressed soon anyway.

 

 

I disagree since I've been a long term DS fan but feel DS3 is the worst,its not the story or graphics thats bad but camera angles,control and spam fest of dying every few seconds with Bosses(this is on easy mode) .I now feel this game was rushed out with lot of issues and I don't like the way they made DS3 as a game.

 

 

Very disappointed in this game,I'm fighting the controls,AI as well as balancing issues.

 

Never really had much issues with the Balancing and Bosses. You just have to learn the system. AIs also quite good (compared). Though if you play with the pc controls and don't get the hang of it I can understand.

 

There are already people that manage to best certain bosses without losing life in hardcore mode. Though, it takes skill.

Edited June 18, 2011 by C2B

[Mem]

The game is excellent, don't exaggerate the importance of the online aspect, it will be addressed soon anyway.

 

 

I disagree since I've been a long term DS fan but feel DS3 is the worst,its not the story or graphics thats bad but camera angles,control and spam fest of dying every few seconds with Bosses(this is on easy mode) .I now feel this game was rushed out with lot of issues and I don't like the way they made DS3 as a game.

 

 

Very disappointed in this game,I'm fighting the controls,AI as well as balancing issues.

 

Never really had much issues with the Balancing and Bosses. You just have to learn the system. AIs also quite good (compared). Though if you play with the pc controls and don't get the hang of it I can understand.

 

You can't remap PC keys since I normally use arrow keys rather then WASD so hit the wrong keys sometimes(not a big deal but annoying) no heal potions so you have to rely on your tank if you get killed but when he goes down thats it game over,my heals are not that great considering you get swamped by mobs etc more times then the tank so end up taking more damage then you can possibly heal,never played a game where you die so fast.

 

Mouse cursor can sometimes appear to disappear from screen too especially if lot of action is going on.

 

 

One word sums the game up for me,pure frustration,I want to get pass the boss but keep dying so nothing I can do,for the record I have completed games like DA,DA2,ME,ME2,Witcher 1 and 2 , even old classics like BG2 etc...

Edited June 18, 2011 by Mem

[AddziX]

I think the game itself is fine, though, the multiplayer aspect is a real let-down. I can't believe Obsidian thought that the community would be happy with a shared screen and no saved character for player two!

 

I hope it's not too late for them to address this, as I think this has huge potential on the Xbox. Of course, I understand why PC players are hating it as it was obviously developed primarily for the consoles.

[MonkeyLungs]

The game is excellent, don't exaggerate the importance of the online aspect, it will be addressed soon anyway.

 

Nobody is exaggerating anything. The online aspect is important and it's gimped. It might not make the game bad overall but it certainly detracts from it and for those who wanted to play pure co-op it is a game killer.

[Alpha]

Gamers are always so demanding...no matter how good and enjoyable a dev made a game there will always be haters ; specially if the dev is obsidian , I am very sure that if Bioware were the dev that changed the things Obsidian did with the franchise they were praising them.

 

To the OP why you bough the game after play the demo or read the lot of info about the co-op online the devs confirmed in old interview/recent interviews.

 

The main focus on DS3 is the story not play with nannies to watch my back online.

 

the co-op is a bonus..at least this RPG support it , not like DAO , DA 2, ME 1 and ME 2.

Edited June 18, 2011 by Alpha

[MonkeyLungs]

Did you miss Bioware's latest release Alpha? Bioware got a much differernt reception than they expected. Fans were really let down. I'm not sure if I will even buy DA3, won't touch TOR with someone else's 10 foot pole, and I am sincerely worried about Mass Effect 3. Times are tough so people are pumping out simpler titles with shorter dev cycles, I understand. I'm still going to criticise the direction of games and I won't pay full price for half quality products. I want FEATURE RICH games. I hate streamlining. If I have to I'll just go back to PC gaming and just only play old games.

[RichAlmighty]

Gamers are always so demanding...no matter how good and enjoyable a dev made a game there will always be haters ; specially if the dev is obsidian , I am very sure that if Bioware were the dev that changed the things Obsidian did with the franchise they were praising them.

 

To the OP why you bough the game after play the demo or read the lot of info about the co-op online the devs confirmed in old interview/recent interviews.

 

The main focus on DS3 is the story not play with nannies to watch my back online.

 

the co-op is a bonus..at least this RPG support it , not like DAO , DA 2, ME 1 and ME 2.

 

I didnt play the demo or go trawling around looking for interviews. Even if I did play the demo it wouldnt have changed anything. I'm not saying its buggy or a crap game on single player, but single player is not what I bought it for. Its usualy a safe bet that if you've played all pervious version as co-op only when you buy the next you get an improved version not this. And co-op isnt a bonus its a requirment since they advertise it as co-op so I'm paying for the ability to co-op.

 

Its not being demanding and I would complain no matter the company that develops it thats just an odd comment, why would anybody not complain just because of who developed it? odd. Anyway, take a look around. If it was just me complaining I could maybe see your point but its pretty obvious its an issue. If you dont think so then fair enough, everybodys opinion can differ so go and enjoy the game. For me, its on hold indefinately in the hope that my 2 licences wont go to waste and they will develop it further to bring it up to scratch.

Edited June 18, 2011 by RichAlmighty

[AddziX]

Gamers are always so demanding...no matter how good and enjoyable a dev made a game there will always be haters ; specially if the dev is obsidian , I am very sure that if Bioware were the dev that changed the things Obsidian did with the franchise they were praising them.

 

To the OP why you bough the game after play the demo or read the lot of info about the co-op online the devs confirmed in old interview/recent interviews.

 

The main focus on DS3 is the story not play with nannies to watch my back online.

 

the co-op is a bonus..at least this RPG support it , not like DAO , DA 2, ME 1 and ME 2.

 

I didnt play the demo or go trawling around looking for interviews. Even if I did play the demo it wouldnt have changed anything. I'm not saying its buggy or a crap game on single player, but single player is not what I bought it for. Its usualy a safe bet that if you've played all pervious version as co-op only when you buy the next you get an improved version not this. And co-op isnt a bonus its a requirment since they advertise it as co-op so I'm paying for the ability to co-op.

 

Its not being demanding and I would complain no matter the company that develops it thats just an odd comment, why would anybody not complain just because of who developed it? odd. Anyway, take a look around. If it was just me complaining I could maybe see your point but its pretty obvious its an issue. If you dont think so then fair enough, everybodys opinion can differ so go and enjoy the game. For me, its on hold indefinately in the hope that my 2 licences wont go to waste and they will develop it further to bring it up to scratch.

You have a point. DS3 was heavily advertised as co-op in all of the marketing. It is a let down, but I'm very happy with the single player. I sincerely hope there's something that Obsidian can do to work out the multiplayer issues, but I'd also be happy with some DLC...

[VeryAngry]

funnily enough, i did a direct compirson from dungeon siege 1 to whats is apperantly "dungeon siege 3" before i shattered the disk into tiny pieces, and my god it truely shocking.

 

DS1 had a massive beautiful map filled with enemies and secrets and very very good system of customizing the charictor the way you want it by using the weapons you prefer. in short its a masterpeice of the highest value.

 

This new so-called game, only had better graphics (like its the only thing that matters these days). the map was so linear, you had to chose at the beginning between some ****ty premade charicters with badly though up skills and perks, i found no secret of shoots on in the woods there was a lack of weapons and unexplain weapon/armor stats and the era is a stupid choice (fable 2 onwards, poncy pathetic period) meaning the sword man charictor in his armor doesnt fit the time line and last but not least ou removed different weapon types (Bows) yet the enemy use them.

 

So my summary in terms even a retard can understand the Original Dungeon Siege is a Formula one racing car, and "Dungeon Siege 3" is a Robin Reliant.

[Horrorscope]

The game is excellent, don't exaggerate the importance of the online aspect, it will be addressed soon anyway.

 

To fix things like locked camera, all players on one screen, shared inventory and gold. Those are fairly major changes. I'll be amazed that they fix those to give the game proper co-op mechanics. I'll make you a pay-pal wager we don't see these fixed. If they gave each person freedom to move that means other things they could rely on you being locked to the same area would have to be reprogrammed as well. The game was designed for these rigid standards they set forth here.

[Horrorscope]

the co-op is a bonus..at least this RPG support it , not like DAO , DA 2, ME 1 and ME 2.

 

To you it's a bonus, to me it's the reason to buy it. This genre imo demands multiplay, it also demands imo closed servers. But somewhere almost the entire industry forgot about that one.

[Alpha]

And co-op isnt a bonus its a requirment since they advertise it as co-op so I'm paying for the ability to co-op.

I got your point . I would like like the DS 3 to let me join random game with my own chars , no tethered coop etc but i see it as a bonus because they advertised that long time ago. Hopefully next time ,if SE decide to work on DS4 with Obsidian they please the gamers that are/were disappointed to keep a fair balance between online co-op and good story.

 

Monkey - DA was not so deep like DAO but i found it better in term of combat mechanics...i hated the change they did with ME 2 because seems like i am playing Gears of war with RPG elements.

 

I would like to know why the devs can't change the online co-op/ camera issues to please the gamers that want to enjoy the game that way. Is not a big deal for me because i like the way DS3 was made but just wondering.

[Co-op Player]

And co-op isnt a bonus its a requirment since they advertise it as co-op so I'm paying for the ability to co-op.

I got your point . I would like like the DS 3 to let me join random game with my own chars , no tethered coop etc but i see it as a bonus because they advertised that long time ago. Hopefully next time ,if SE decide to work on DS4 with Obsidian they please the gamers that are/were disappointed to keep a fair balance between online co-op and good story.

 

Monkey - DA was not so deep like DAO but i found it better in term of combat mechanics...i hated the change they did with ME 2 because seems like i am playing Gears of war with RPG elements.

 

I would like to know why the devs can't change the online co-op/ camera issues to please the gamers that want to enjoy the game that way. Is not a big deal for me because i like the way DS3 was made but just wondering.

 

So when you say "advertised" how long ago do you mean, I guess you never read this then?

 

The whole no multiplayer XP in Dungeon Siege III thing was a bit of a miscommunication, according to associate producer Nathan Davis, and has its roots in the game

[pmp10]

The game is excellent, don't exaggerate the importance of the online aspect, it will be addressed soon anyway.

Source?

Seems like a major thing to handle post-release.

[Azilis]

DS1 had a massive beautiful map filled with enemies and secrets and very very good system of customizing the charictor the way you want it by using the weapons you prefer. in short its a masterpeice of the highest value.

 

This is pretty subjective, because I have a very different opinion of DS1. The game had a massive, beautiful map, as you point out. That's the main reason I enjoyed the game on my one playthrough . . . journeying through the various environments was a fantastic audio-visual experience (the sound effects and music were every bit as great as the visuals and art design).

 

But then there was the gameplay itself. Despite having a large party, the strategic combat was underwhelming. So much of the combat was based on having everyone auto-attack, with the player simply picking individual targets for each party member (though that last part wasn't really necessary if you didn't turn the party AI down). The character customization system may have been innovative for the time, but it was incredibly dull, and didn't actually allow for much customization at all. There was a large variety of spells to choose from (which did occasionally make combat interesting), but most of the time, you could get through any encounter by having your mages auto-attack with your chosen attack spell.

 

Not to mention that the game pretty much lacked a story.

 

I don't mean to imply that I hated the game (I actually did enjoy my one playthrough of the game), but to call it a masterpiece is laughable. DS2 was considerably better (with better character customization and more interesting combat), but it had it's own problems. The more prominent 'story' was terrible, and it forced the player to wade through sometimes extensive uninteresting dialogue trees. The game also included considerably more puzzles than the original (can't remember if DS1 had any), but like the story, they were terrible.

 

I've only played the demo of DS3 so far, but I can already tell that I much prefer the more intense single-character combat to that of DS1. Character customization looks to be lacking (due to the apparent ability to pick up every skill by the end of the game and only customize them in 1 of 2 ways), but still far better than in DS1. I don't mind the multiplayer restrictions (other than the camera, which I have to assume will be patched on the PC), but maybe that's because I've known for a while what I would be getting with this game (I read lots of previews). To me, it looks like the game has a pretty good story with some meaningful choices, nice graphics and art design (much in keeping with DS1 and DS2), and fun combat. That's enough for me.

 

. . . not that I would ever shatter a disc of a game I didn't like. Seems like a bit of an overreaction.

[metamag]

I'm with you. I don't have anything against it in 2 player co-op but even then. The camera is too close. They don't even have to tilt it. Just move it further away from the charachters.

 

 

Did you disable camera auto-orient?

[LordDelmar]

I just wanted to add my voice to that of the OP.

 

After playing the demo, and yes I read the feedback sticky, I found that I enjoyed the game in its single player aspect. While the keybind problem was an issue, it is being addressed and I am thankful that you (Obsidian) is listening to its players. This is the ONLY reason I registered on the forums, to give you all my own feedback about what must change in order for me to purchase the game. Before I go any further; I will say I am a PC gamer, my son is a PC gamer, and most of our friends are PC gamers and tend to have small LAN parties a few times a month. Dungeon Siege 1 and 2 have both been on our list of games we regularly play when we want to do some dungeon crawling.

 

1. The inability to keep your characters in multiplayer. This might have been a good thought for console players, but NOT for PC players. RPG means that players tend to get attached to "their" characters. They build them the way they want. If I have to think about starting over each time I play the game, I'll play through it once and that is it.

 

2. The shared camera has to go. Again, this was likely due to the programming for a console and the console not having the resources, but this is unacceptable for a PC game. I really and truly feel I should not have to elaborate on why this needs to be changed. Just play Dungeon Siege 1 or 2 for a bit over a 4 person LAN and I am sure you will see why this should be done.

 

That is it. Honestly, just two things are preventing us from purchasing and highly endorsing this game. Myself, I do enjoy the singleplayer game, but that is not why I would purchase it. Dungeon Siege is a game that always evoked fond gaming sessions with friends and sadly, I feel that without the above changes, will be a game that fades from memory.