Dungeon Siege 3 is not a real Dungeon Siege game...

[Jubileet]

let me guess, DS1 is the greatest game ever, right?

 

Meh, I wouldn't consider it the best game. It was certainly pretty good. I guess I agree with you on DS2, it was pretty boring, I think you just need to get out of the lame tree city then it picks up a lot.

[athlondude]

let me guess, DS1 is the greatest game ever, right?

 

Actually hands down the best action RPG since Diablo 1 and 2 yes.

[sorophx]

I think you just need to get out of the lame tree city then it picks up a lot.

I don't remember what chapter that is, I quit after finishing the desert area, there was no story in that game, no purpose to move forward, nothing. I didn't feel like I was doing something important. at least Diablo had great interface and co-op, DS had nothing other than small groups of enemies scattered around big empty areas

[Purkake]

Fallout 3 wasn't a proper Fallout game. but that's because Fallout 1 and 2 were out of this world, and following up on those two was a pretty tough task. DS 1 and 2, on the other hand, were really light on the lore, so making a "proper" game in that universe was easy

You are aware that opinions are, in fact, subjective, right?

[sorophx]

yeah, and you're quoting me stating my opinion, which is subjective. your point?

[Purkake]

Being down on people who dislike DS3 because it is "unfaithful" and being up in arms about FO3 would make one hypocritical.

[sorophx]

are you talking about me? "up in arms"? I'm not posting on Bethesda's forums every day saying that FO3 is a piece of crap. it's an ok game. but I don't like it, and I don't think it's a good Fallout game.

 

so yeah, I feel completely in my right to slap some faces for spamming every thread here with their nonsense about how Obsidian destroyed their favorite game, which is BS.

 

because as much as I find FO3 bad, I'm still grateful to Bethesda for picking up the franchise from Interplay and giving it a new life. and I don't know why I have to repeat myself either

[Sasha_Je]

@Lucasla i don't know what kind of Dungeon Siege fan are you and to be honest i am not sure how many people played all the series of Dungeon Siege.

Dungeon Siege I / Legends of Aranna was not about skill trees, if you remember you just used Normal Attack as a Warrior/Archer only the Mage had a few spells, the biggest + was doing level 250 and looting monsters, Dungeon Siege I/Legends of Aranna was a Dungeon Crawler!

Dungeon Siege II came with a "wide" variety of skills but in reality there where a bunch of Passive Skills that where useless, in the end you would end up with 3-4 ACTIVE SKILLS and of course loot. My problem with Dungeon Siege II was the same as with Dungeon Siege III, you had no monster re-spawn, you had no possibility of getting all the unique items and stuff like that. The purpose of this kind of games are to go in-game, kill monsters and get new loot. o.O by the way Dungeon Siege III has 9 active skills + another 9 Overpowered witch are different because you have different effects and consume Power Spheres. This game can use some tweaks and i hope that Square Enix will take action! I am saying this because at the moment only Jap devs have the ideea of post-game gameplay...

[Purkake]

I'm talking about the general principle behind some of what is happening on this board.

 

Whatever you think about DS1/2 is subjective, just as what you think about FO1/2. If people can be mad about an "unfaithful" sequel to one, they should also be allowed to be mad about an "unfaithful" sequel to the other.

 

I do not support spamming that "in every thread", but that is hardly limited to this one issue at the moment.

[sorophx]

it's ok to be mad, it's not ok to make my experience here miserable because of that. I like to read constructive posts, not some BS about how their childhood is ruined by Obsidian

 

all you Obsidian haters, have some courtesy. here in Soviet Russia you'd get your head split in two for a single hateful post, you're being obnoxious

[athlondude]

I think you just need to get out of the lame tree city then it picks up a lot.

I don't remember what chapter that is, I quit after finishing the desert area, there was no story in that game, no purpose to move forward, nothing. I didn't feel like I was doing something important. at least Diablo had great interface and co-op, DS had nothing other than small groups of enemies scattered around big empty areas

 

Yes as much as I hate to admit it, DS 2 did have its fair share of BS to it. While I still found it enjoyable, some of the quests were confusing, and the save game feature blew goat ass. I still think it was a great game, just not as good as the first. And true DS multiplay was less than impressive when you compared it to the DS 2 game which allowed for coop. Thats where I was hoping that DS3 would take the good elements of both improve upon them.

[rc deaths agent]

I just don't think it sould have been called Dungeon Siege 3 because it's not like the other games.

 

Maybe if they called it The 10th Legion or something it would've been better and more acceptable i dunno.

[Purkake]

Go the Space Siege route.

 

Legion Siege? Jeyne Siege? Boob Siege?

[Bakercompany86]

I've never played a previous Dungeon Siege game, so perhaps i'm a nice fresh perspective on DS3.

 

I would say its okay to judge DS3 based on its previous entries if it were being done by the same developer, but its not.

 

Obsidian has handled a lot of different RPGs, some good some bad, but all vastly different. Alpha Protocol, FO:NV, and DS3 are RPGs at their heart, but very different from each other.

 

DS3 to me is an excellent game. It's beautiful, the sound is excellent with a good musical score, and the gameplay mechanics are solid, fun, and challenging. On Hardcore, its a great blend of tactical combat and teamwork. The environments are standard fare for a fantasy RPG, but they are beautiful on the Xbox 360 (can't imagine a PC). The story is pretty generic, but thats not a bad thing. Often when RPG developers try to think too far out of the box they end up ruining the game by focusing too much on story and failing on every other front.

 

When I first started playing Diablo I, if you told me i'd be running through deserts and jungles in Diablo II, I would have thought you were nuts. But not only were we doing that in D2, it was fun.

 

Complaining that DS3 isn't a updated carbon copy of the other DS games is like complaining about a bands new album sounding different. If they all sounded the same, why release new albums?

 

So from a newer DS players perspective, DS3 is a great game. As I mentioned in my other Suggestion thread, there are 2 minor issues i'd like addressed and DS3 would be perfect in my opinion.

 

I understand the Keybinding for the PC guys is a big issue, but Obsidian has already promised a fix! That's far better customer service than i've seen out of most developers lately *coughsplashdamagecough*

[sorophx]

When I first started playing Diablo I, if you told me i'd be running through deserts and jungles in Diablo II, I would have thought you were nuts. But not only were we doing that in D2, it was fun.

heh, interestingly, that's one of the things that makes D2 so good. I agree though, the transition from Diablo's art style and design to what we see in D2 was a bit unexpected, and it had felt wrong at first

[Bakercompany86]

When I first started playing Diablo I, if you told me i'd be running through deserts and jungles in Diablo II, I would have thought you were nuts. But not only were we doing that in D2, it was fun.

heh, interestingly, that's one of the things that makes D2 so good. I agree though, the transition from Diablo's art style and design to what we see in D2 was a bit unexpected, and it had felt wrong at first

 

Blizzard is so talented they could fart into a fan and a good smelling game would be the result.

 

One of the things I loved about Diablo was the dark, gritty, hopeless feeling it had. When you first step into the cathedral, you are immediately immersed in one of the best stories of struggle ever conceived. I still loved Diablo II, and they maintained the hopeless feeling even through a jungle and desert.

 

I guess what i'm saying is that was such a drastic change in venue, and it was the same developer (with the same guy writing the story).

 

Dungeon Siege 3 was handed to a completely different developer, and the resulting product in my opinion is fantastic. Definitely leaps and bounds over the garbage that has been released this past 6 months.

[Lord Elvewyn]

@Lucasla i don't know what kind of Dungeon Siege fan are you and to be honest i am not sure how many people played all the series of Dungeon Siege.

Dungeon Siege I / Legends of Aranna was not about skill trees, if you remember you just used Normal Attack as a Warrior/Archer only the Mage had a few spells, the biggest + was doing level 250 and looting monsters, Dungeon Siege I/Legends of Aranna was a Dungeon Crawler!

Dungeon Siege II came with a "wide" variety of skills but in reality there where a bunch of Passive Skills that where useless, in the end you would end up with 3-4 ACTIVE SKILLS and of course loot. My problem with Dungeon Siege II was the same as with Dungeon Siege III, you had no monster re-spawn, you had no possibility of getting all the unique items and stuff like that. The purpose of this kind of games are to go in-game, kill monsters and get new loot. o.O by the way Dungeon Siege III has 9 active skills + another 9 Overpowered witch are different because you have different effects and consume Power Spheres. This game can use some tweaks and i hope that Square Enix will take action! I am saying this because at the moment only Jap devs have the ideea of post-game gameplay...

 

Say what? Monsters do respawn in DS2. It's only DS1 they don't. Passive skills weere actually of significant benefit in DS2. You can also get all the unique items in DS2.

[deteego]

I can't believe the amount of people that say DS3 is crap over DS1/DS2

 

The only good thing I can really say about DS1 is the fact that it brought 3D into APRG type of games. The actual gameplay however was very monotonous, something with D1/D2 did a lot better then DS1/2. If you can basically put your party on "auto attack" and play the game, something is wrong

 

If you want a game with plenty of party customization that you are seeking, play something by BioWare (NW,NW2,BG, Dragon Age). I like what Obsidian has done with the series, it has enormous potential and the actual gameplay is quite fun, its not boring at all

[TRYER]

Games evolve and change, different developers have different visions.

 

What happened to Evolving with this game. They took a DS game, cut all the great features and put ported it. I think that's called Regressing.

[GreasyDogMeat]

Games evolve and change, different developers have different visions.

 

What happened to Evolving with this game. They took a DS game, cut all the great features and put ported it. I think that's called Regressing.

They did evolve it.

-They added a combat system that doesn't suck, the boss battles are actually a lot of fun and even the small ones aren't tedious.

-They added an actual story. I'm actually interested in what happens next in this game.

 

What are all these great features people keep talking about in DS1? I'm playing it back and forth between DS3 and DS1 (I wanted to wait until I finished the classics before playing the third, but I just couldn't wait so started 3) and I find DS 1 tedious while DS 3 has me glued to the game for hours at a time. The ONLY thing I can think of that I'd want from the original is the more open game world. Most of DS 3 has been a narrow path so far with few open environments. Everything else is an improvement in DS 3.

[HoonDing]

They didn't evolve DS2.

[deteego]

Games evolve and change, different developers have different visions.

 

What happened to Evolving with this game. They took a DS game, cut all the great features and put ported it. I think that's called Regressing.

They did evolve it.

-They added a combat system that doesn't suck, the boss battles are actually a lot of fun and even the small ones aren't tedious.

-They added an actual story. I'm actually interested in what happens next in this game.

 

What are all these great features people keep talking about in DS1? I'm playing it back and forth between DS3 and DS1 (I wanted to wait until I finished the classics before playing the third, but I just couldn't wait so started 3) and I find DS 1 tedious while DS 3 has me glued to the game for hours at a time. The ONLY thing I can think of that I'd want from the original is the more open game world. Most of DS 3 has been a narrow path so far with few open environments. Everything else is an improvement in DS 3.

 

Yeah I completely agree, DS1/DS2 are simply put, boring. This game is actually fun in terms of gameplay

[soomon]

DS1 like MP plz...

[Jubileet]

Yes different developers have different visions, that's why they make their own game. Regardless, of what the developers vision is IMHO, you should at least stick to the series. In this case all they did was use the name to market their original game. It's not based off of anything from its predecessors. The fan base of DS1/2 come here expecting a DS 3 game, but in reality its like naming Call of Duty Dungeon Siege 3, of course all the COD fans are going to buy the game but as soon as they get it they are going to be like WTF is this?

 

Not saying its a terrible game, I enjoy it - it def needs some revamps in some areas but you can't say this is part of the Dungeon Siege series because they took absolutely 0 game play from the original, all they did was buyout the name and use it on their own product, because lets face it.. if they didn't have Dungeon Siege for a name this game wouldn't be as successful. Its just a ****ty Dragon Age clone, with multiplayer. Oh well!

[Purkake]

Yes different developers have different visions, that's why they make their own game. Regardless, of what the developers vision is IMHO, you should at least stick to the series. In this case all they did was use the name to market their original game.

I'd say that's a pretty clever marketing strategy, no?