I cannot detect Obsidian in Dungeon Siege 3.

[Quetzacoatl]

Obsidian isn't some Midas figure that can turn shit to gold. It's Dungeon Siege, you get what you got before.

 

[markec]

Game is a chore to finish but its still a better game then first two parts. It was funny seeing Dungeon Siege fans (yeah there are actually fans of this piece of shit games) bitching how Obsidian declined the series. The only good part of DS3, beside abundance of jugs, was few seconds long ending slide of what happened to Jayne after you choose to imprison her, which I thought was a nice touch and I was disappointed that entire game was not made in that tone.

I will never replay this game, but it was worth few bucks I spend on it while on sale.

If you think that DS3 is better than DS2 than you're either stupid or from Croatia. DS and DS3 are shit games, but DS wins that contest if only for its engine which was brilliant at the time. DS2, while nothing special, is a really decent game for the boring an soulless h'n's genre.

Well arent we edgy, I would give you some of mine Kodex Kool Kredits but then I wouldn't have any left for me.

I managed to finish DS3 while first two games just bored me to death, while second one is indeed much better it was still a just a endless grind of boring enemies, and its a shame since the start of the game was promising.

 

[sea]

I enjoyed it for what it was. I found combat engaging and at times challenging, and it played smoothly, plus looked okay as well. The story was nothing especially engaging but to be honest, it kept me occupied to the end, which is much more than I can say for the first two games. Monotonous is the right word, but at least there's nothing about it that's actively bad either.

That said it was still an obvious cash-in by Obsidian, and I doubt they spent a ton of time on stuff or had any great love for the franchise (though the lore seems far more fleshed out than the first two games). Bitches gotta get paid etc.

 

[attackfighter]

Wasn't it?

Do you consider KotOR a sequel to Tie Fighter?

 

[markec]

Wasn't it?

No

 

[IronicNeurotic]

I enjoyed it for what it was. I found combat engaging and at times challenging, and it played smoothly, plus looked okay as well. The story was nothing especially engaging but to be honest, it kept me occupied to the end, which is much more than I can say for the first two games. Monotonous is the right word, but at least there's nothing about it that's actively bad either.

That said it was still an obvious cash-in by Obsidian, and I doubt they spent a ton of time on stuff or had any great love for the franchise (though the lore seems far more fleshed out than the first two games). Bitches gotta get paid etc.

They did actually want to do more (According to some stuff by Chapman and Ziets) but it was a very tightly (and low) budgeted project with the main problem being time. Adding to that it was the first released Onyx Engine they probably went with polish and presentation over other aspects.

I still maintain that parts of the story itself were at least on the better side of Obsidians games. (Completly avoiding "evil" stereotypes. At least in the storyline itself)

 

[Excommunicator]

Cool story bro, but unfortunately DS3 makes F3 look like a proper sequel.

I wasn't calling it a good sequel, I haven't played your beloved game. I was pointing out how illogical it is to call the game out on things that have always been realities of the series.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

Game is a chore to finish but its still a better game then first two parts. It was funny seeing Dungeon Siege fans (yeah there are actually fans of this piece of shit games) bitching how Obsidian declined the series. The only good part of DS3, beside abundance of jugs, was few seconds long ending slide of what happened to Jayne after you choose to imprison her, which I thought was a nice touch and I was disappointed that entire game was not made in that tone.

I will never replay this game, but it was worth few bucks I spend on it while on sale.

If you think that DS3 is better than DS2 than you're either stupid or from Croatia. DS and DS3 are shit games, but DS wins that contest if only for its engine which was brilliant at the time. DS2, while nothing special, is a really decent game for the boring an soulless h'n's genre.

Well arent we edgy, I would give you some of mine Kodex Kool Kredits but then I wouldn't have any left for me.

I managed to finish DS3 while first two games just bored me to death, while second one is indeed much better it was still a just a endless grind of boring enemies, and its a shame since the start of the game was promising.

Wtf is edgy about claiming that DS2 is a decent h'n's? You're not the sharpest tool in the shed, are you?

Anyway, DS2 not only improved exponentially on every aspect of its prequel (bar the graphics), it also had quite a few things that other games in the genre didn't - best journal, special attacks, quests that were pretty expanded for this kind of game, a team with full control, various pets that could be developed in different ways. I never finished it, because the only h'n's that didn't bore me before ending was the first Diablo, but I'd say it's one of the best h'n's games.

DS3 is not only a completely shit game, it is also one of the worst examples of raping a PC series to use a brand to promote another shitty console game that has absolutely nothing to do with its predecessors and, like I already said, it even manages to beat abominations like Fallout 3 in that aspect. Codex is usually up in arms when this happens, this time no one gave a fuck. Maybe because DS is not really a series worth caring about (good reason), maybe because DS was regurgitated by Obsidian (dumb reason), but it doesn't change a fact that it's both an awful game and a console rape.

Cool story bro, but unfortunately DS3 makes F3 look like a proper sequel.

I wasn't calling it a good sequel, I haven't played your beloved game. I was pointing out how illogical it is to call the game out on things that have always been realities of the series.

Wow, way to miss the point. Anyway, I'm glad you didn't illogically call F3 on lack of proper shooting mechanics.

 

[markec]

Game is a chore to finish but its still a better game then first two parts. It was funny seeing Dungeon Siege fans (yeah there are actually fans of this piece of shit games) bitching how Obsidian declined the series. The only good part of DS3, beside abundance of jugs, was few seconds long ending slide of what happened to Jayne after you choose to imprison her, which I thought was a nice touch and I was disappointed that entire game was not made in that tone.

I will never replay this game, but it was worth few bucks I spend on it while on sale.

If you think that DS3 is better than DS2 than you're either stupid or from Croatia. DS and DS3 are shit games, but DS wins that contest if only for its engine which was brilliant at the time. DS2, while nothing special, is a really decent game for the boring an soulless h'n's genre.

Well arent we edgy, I would give you some of mine Kodex Kool Kredits but then I wouldn't have any left for me.

I managed to finish DS3 while first two games just bored me to death, while second one is indeed much better it was still a just a endless grind of boring enemies, and its a shame since the start of the game was promising.

Wtf is edgy about claiming that DS2 is a decent h'n's? You're not the sharpest tool in the shed, are you?

Anyway, DS2 not only improved exponentially on every aspect of its prequel (bar the graphics), it also had quite a few things that other games in the genre didn't - best journal, special attacks, quests that were pretty expanded for this kind of game, a team with full control, various pets that could be developed in different ways. I never finished it, because the only h'n's that didn't bore me before ending was the first Diablo, but I'd say it's one of the best h'n's games.

DS3 is not only a completely shit game, it is also one of the worst examples of raping a PC series to use a brand to promote another shitty console game that has absolutely nothing to do with its predecessors and, like I already said, it even manages to beat abominations Fallout 3 in that aspect. Codex is usually up in arms when this happens, this time no one gave a fuck. Maybe because DS is not really a series worth caring about (good reason), maybe because DS was regurgitated by Obsidian (dumb reason), but it doesn't change a fact that it's both an awful game and a console rape.

Its quite funny seeing you confused about me calling you edgy for your tone and then telling me that I am not the sharpest one.

No matter how many new features DS2 introduced I would rather play Nox or Diablo. whats the good about being innovative when your core gameplay is shit. When your core gameplay is shit the game itself is shit, so yeah its a better game then first one but still a shitty game.

Saying that DS3 is a bigger rape of a franchise then Fallout 3 is a joke, and thats saying it very mildly since I am not kool enough to use dirty words.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

Playing it I got the feeling that everyone who worked on it was giving honest effort and yet completely looking forward to doing something else. They tried on the player character design though(apart from knight guy).

The absolutely terrible character management interface doesn't help.

Why it is difficult for me to describe the essence of DS3 is because it fails to elicit any significant emotion whatsoever. Yeah that's sort of decent, but it doesn't change things much. Yeah that's rather crap, but you don't care enough about the game for it to matter.

 

[Excommunicator]

Wow, way to miss the point. Anyway, I'm glad you didn't illogically call F3 on lack of proper shooting mechanics.

I didn't play Fallout 3 either. Not everyone around here plays every shit game they can get their hands on.

 

[Roguey]

Anjali has a lot of special dialogues that others don't get regarding Archons, how odd that you're not seeing them. Probably because you haven't played with another character for comparison.

Also, keys to understanding DS3 courtesy of George Ziets:
http://www.formspring.me/GZiets/q/315223446420209266
http://www.formspring.me/GZiets/q/316796485544972152
http://www.formspring.me/GZiets/q/317032190338667232

Edit: Oh the comment from Tony Evans in the third one

Agreed. We should not have attempted to tell much of a story in DS3. I pushed too hard for story in the beginning, and you, George, sealed our fate by writing such a kick ass narrative bible for a game license that was unsuited for such depth.

Iceburn.
And it's Dragon Age 2 done better, not Jade Empire.

I still maintain that parts of the story itself were at least on the better side of Obsidians games. (Completly avoiding "evil" stereotypes. At least in the storyline itself)

Dapper Old Gent and Jeyne Kassynder are some of the best antagonists of all time! They and the lack of annoying companions elevate it above the mundane Bioware-wannabe crapfest of NWN2.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

George and Tony were spot on. The franchise is unworthy of Obsidian. Those guys make great narrative-driven RPGs, as KOTOR 2, MotB and Fallout: New Vegas have proven. I get the feeling from their comments that Square Enix basically wanted a casual action game and came down pretty hard on any attempts to make it into a true RPG. That being said, the writing is great (especially the main characters and their motivations, and the way the writers fleshed out the pretty bland DS lore into something really interesting), and the presentation is amazing, all Obsidian need to do is use that engine for a proper RPG.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

Wow, way to miss the point. Anyway, I'm glad you didn't illogically call F3 on lack of proper shooting mechanics.

I didn't play Fallout 3 either. Not everyone around here plays every shit game they can get their hands on.

You can't say it is shit if you haven't played it. If someone said The Godfather was shit and then said they hadn't watched it, would their opinion be of any worth? Just to clarify, I'm not comparing Fallout 3 to The Godfather.

 

[circ]

I might pick up some bad games again just for whatever reason. DS3 just has nothing going for it though. What iceburn also, story bears no resemblance to the franchise, or did they think they actually wrote some awesome kind of story? Confusing. They threw in some keywords and that's it. Was it a better story because there was a plot-twist with Kassynder and Old Gent? Not really. I also love the padding boss fights towards the end. Shit game, even worse than AP, defended for no good reason, although lack of obvious bugs probably counts, and that's it.

 

[Quetzacoatl]

Wow, way to miss the point. Anyway, I'm glad you didn't illogically call F3 on lack of proper shooting mechanics.

I didn't play Fallout 3 either. Not everyone around here plays every shit game they can get their hands on.

You can't say it is shit if you haven't played it. If someone said The Godfather was shit and then said they hadn't watched it, would their opinion be of any worth? Just to clarify, I'm not comparing Fallout 3 to The Godfather.

But then they would be asked why they played a game they saw as shit.

 

[Forest Dweller]

Anjali has a lot of special dialogues that others don't get regarding Archons, how odd that you're not seeing them. Probably because you haven't played with another character for comparison.

After I defeated Rajana, someone mentions her being special, and you can ask "what do you mean?" They then say that she's an archon, and you get a dialogue option of "Archon?" Then Anjali says "Tell me more about these archons."

I think the writers were half asleep when writing the dialogue for this game.

 

[Excommunicator]

You can't say it is shit if you haven't played it. If someone said The Godfather was shit and then said they hadn't watched it, would their opinion be of any worth? Just to clarify, I'm not comparing Fallout 3 to The Godfather.

I can say it as an educated guess. I can't know for certain that it is, but I can be almost completely sure I won't enjoy it based on my experience with Oblivion and everything I've heard about the game.

 

[Stinger]

She makes frequent special commentary about the Archons throughout the game and is easily the main character of the game (by contrast someone as cool as Reinhart feels like an extra).

In general Anjali is kinda bland in terms of personality so that's probably why she comes across that way.

 

[IronicNeurotic]

The problem is that there's not really much original dialouge for your MAIN CHAR. If you want Anjali to speak up more about things she needs to be a companion.

 

[Surf Solar]

I really really enjoyed both the BG Dark Alliance games on the playstation so I thought DS3 would be similar in quality since some people worked on both of these games. Boy how wrong I was. :/ I found DS to be absolutely terrible and I dont see a reason to give the devs some kind of credit only because they are named Obsidian. So glad I only rented it instead of buying.

I later played it on pc aswell and boy do I hate their new engine. Glorious times await if their next PC game performs so "well" on computers like DS3 did.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

Its quite funny seeing you confused about me calling you edgy for your tone and then telling me that I am not the sharpest one.

What the hell are you talking about? "Edgy for my tone"? Edgy, edgy, edgy - you repeat it so often I only hear "butthurt".

No matter how many new features DS2 introduced I would rather play Nox or Diablo. whats the good about being innovative when your core gameplay is shit. When your core gameplay is shit the game itself is shit, so yeah its a better game then first one but still a shitty game.

What the hell has your fondness for Diablo and Nox got to do with anything and what is so shit about core gameplay of DS2 that it makes it so much worse? Diablo reached its status because it was first and its atmosphere and presentation were top notch. Plus, what's very important, it is a properly short game which means the typical h'n's boredom and burnout don't kick in before finish (which is one of the biggest problems of DS2 - its campaign is waaay too long for such game). But if you claim that core gameplay of a game like Diablo is somehow significantly better/different than DS2 then I don't even...

Saying that DS3 is a bigger rape of a franchise then Fallout 3 is a joke, and thats saying it very mildly since I am not kool enough to use dirty words.

Tell me, funny guy, what is the connection between DS1-2 and DS3? Because Fallout3, while being a braindead monstrosity, clearly tried to copy large parts of previous Fallout games - feel of the world, character system, aimed shots, equipment etc. It was done in an incredibly clumsy and talentless manner, but everyone can see that it's a shit game that someone tried to place in a Fallout universe. The connection between DS2 and DS3 is virtually nonexistent, it amounts to some casual namedropping at best. If you took an average person who tried DS1-2 and made him play DS3 without revealing its title and these few names that appear here and there he would have never guessed it's a DS game.

Wow, way to miss the point. Anyway, I'm glad you didn't illogically call F3 on lack of proper shooting mechanics.

I didn't play Fallout 3 either. Not everyone around here plays every shit game they can get their hands on.

I bet you didn't.

 

[Excommunicator]

If you actually think that it is somehow implausible that someone didn't play it, then you are one sad and stupid individual

 

[markec]

What the hell are you talking about? "Edgy for my tone"? Edgy, edgy, edgy - you repeat it so often I only hear "butthurt".

Throwing insults and having angry rants really shows who is the butthurt one on this thread, you really should calm down a bit since I never saw anyone so emotionally engaged for one of the worst RPG series.

What the hell has your fondness for Diablo and Nox got to do with anything and what is so shit about core gameplay of DS2 that it makes it so much worse? Diablo reached its status because it was first and its atmosphere and presentation were top notch. Plus, what's very important, it is a properly short game which means the typical h'n's boredom and burnout don't kick in before finish (which is one of the biggest problems of DS2 - its campaign is waaay too long for such game). But if you claim that core gameplay of a game like Diablo is somehow significantly better/different than DS2 then I don't even...

Diablo is a better game then DS2 because it has a better atmosphere, lore, loot is better balanced and more interesting, it has different enemy types that forces you to a more varied approach to a fight and forces you to use terrain to you advantage unlike in DS games where every fight feels the same. Thats the reason why DS games feel too long, not because it has a very long campaign but because every single fight during that campaign feels the same. Thats what I mean about bad core gameplay and add to it a boring loot system and there is no reason to play the game. Atleast DS3 has a sort of interesting story that gives you an incentive to play, to finish the previous two games you need to be a masochist.

Tell me, funny guy, what is the connection between DS1-2 and DS3? Because Fallout3, while being a braindead monstrosity, clearly tried to copy large parts of previous Fallout games - feel of the world, character system, aimed shots, equipment etc. It was done in an incredibly clumsy and talentless manner, but everyone can see that it's a shit game that someone tried to place in a Fallout universe. The connection between DS2 and DS3 is virtually nonexistent, it amounts to some casual namedropping at best. If you took an average person who tried DS1-2 and made him play DS3 without revealing its title and these few names that appear here and there he would have never guessed it's a DS game.

DS1-2 and DS3 share similar camera, combat, all three have corridor shaped world design (which is really narrow in DS3) and are set in same setting. Only major difference is amount of companions you can lead and no pack mules, you are free to correct me here since I played first two games a really long time ago.
FO3 completely changed the combat and the perspective which is a pretty big deal, butchered the character system to actually not being of a major influence to gameplay, limited world to a small area instead of a huge region,introduced abomination what is VATS and only totally raped entire lore of the game.

 

[Roguey]

I later played it on pc aswell and boy do I hate their new engine. Glorious times await if their next PC game performs so "well" on computers like DS3 did.

What problems did you have? I've tried it on two rigs, didn't have any problems on either, got insanely high framerates with max settings.