Game News Six Things You Didn't Know About Dungeon Siege III

[CrimHead]

Graphics and fat lute? Count me in.

 

[Volourn]

Infinity engine is no more turn based than Diablo. "Not that I dislike it, but it doesn't feature turns: all actions, including attacks and casting have a speed factor which determines the frequency with which the action occurs, just like in Diablo.
The false impression you get of it progressing "without player input" - no player input means turn based? So FF XII is the most turn based game EVER! - is due to the fact that you can pause the game and assign tasks."

Yes, they do. It's real time but it does feature turns. 6 second rounds just like pnp D&D. It's not ol fashion turn base but it's also not real real time either.

Go ahead. Click your mouse button 20n times during those 6 seconds and see how many spells or attacks your character gets.

 

[Overweight Manatee]

Infinity engine is no more turn based than Diablo. "Not that I dislike it, but it doesn't feature turns: all actions, including attacks and casting have a speed factor which determines the frequency with which the action occurs, just like in Diablo.
The false impression you get of it progressing "without player input" - no player input means turn based? So FF XII is the most turn based game EVER! - is due to the fact that you can pause the game and assign tasks."

Yes, they do. It's real time but it does feature turns. 6 second rounds just like pnp D&D. It's not ol fashion turn base but it's also not real real time either.

Go ahead. Click your mouse button 20n times during those 6 seconds and see how many spells or attacks your character gets.

Bullshit. Click your mouse button 20 times during 6 seconds and see if a character in Diablo attacks any faster then simply holding the button down. The only difference between Diablo and infinity engine games is that in the IE games all actions can only have durations measured in whole fractions of 6 seconds while Diablo games aren't limited to those breakpoints.

Stop lies, start truth, etc.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Bullshit. Click your mouse button 20 times during 6 seconds and see if a character in Diablo attacks any faster then simply holding the button down. The only difference between Diablo and infinity engine games is that in the IE games all actions can only have durations measured in whole fractions of 6 seconds while Diablo games aren't limited to those breakpoints.

Stop lies, start truth, etc.

This is because there's a lower limit. I can't speak for Diablo, but in Divine Divinity the amount of spells you cast per second depends on how fast you click the RMB. Yet there's a lower limit, e.g. if you click 20 times per second you will still cast only , say, 5 spells. But if you click only once per second you will cast one spell...

IE games work like turnbased, the difference is that everyone gets his turn at the same time and not one after each other.

 

[Norfleet]

Because they can do whatever the hell they want with it, as there's not much canon to consider?

With that logic, they should have just used their OWN. Does DS really have that much name recognition, and is it GOOD recognition?

Bullshit. Click your mouse button 20 times during 6 seconds and see if a character in Diablo attacks any faster then simply holding the button down. The only difference between Diablo and infinity engine games is that in the IE games all actions can only have durations measured in whole fractions of 6 seconds while Diablo games aren't limited to those breakpoints.

What are you talking about? Diablo *IS* limited to breakpoints. Ever trying seeing what that extra +10% IAS does for you? Answer: Often, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, because unless it crosses a breakpoint, it does jack.

 

[Volourn]

Diablo attack speed is alrgely based on animation only while BIO style combat games tend to be based on 6 second rules and are strictly based on CHARACTER skill/level.

ie. In NWN, level 1 fighters attack 1ce epr round while 6th level fighters attack 2 per round. Period.

It's round based which is exactly what D&D pnp combat is based on. Dumbass.

 

[Metro]

The loot numbers are always deceptive for games like this -- just like the guns in Borderlands. That said, I'll still probably pick this one up... eventually.

 

[denizsi]

Down with this retarded herp-a-derpin over turns. The word you are looking for is "rounds" in the long established gaming terminology of our beloved RPGs. IE games have rounds where actions are based around this concept where Diablo only has animation length as a limiting factor, without adherence to any other time standard.

 

[Overweight Manatee]

Diablo attack speed is alrgely based on animation only while BIO style combat games tend to be based on 6 second rules and are strictly based on CHARACTER skill/level.

ie. In NWN, level 1 fighters attack 1ce epr round while 6th level fighters attack 2 per round. Period.

Diablo attack speeds are based on character skill/level, modified by equipment. Same as IE games. The only difference is that in Diablo there are simply a lot more ways to modify attack speed and you aren't limited to fractions of 6 second for your attack speed.

It's round based which is exactly what D&D pnp combat is based on. Dumbass.

Being based on rounds means nothing. You may as well say the game is based on 6 second increments. That has nothing to do with turn based. Using the words 'round' and 'turn' when describing how long something takes rather then 'seconds' doesn't magically transform a game into turn based if 'round' and 'turn' are just another word for x amount of seconds. Turn based specifically refers to how actions are taken and time is played out.

Bullshit. Click your mouse button 20 times during 6 seconds and see if a character in Diablo attacks any faster then simply holding the button down. The only difference between Diablo and infinity engine games is that in the IE games all actions can only have durations measured in whole fractions of 6 seconds while Diablo games aren't limited to those breakpoints.

What are you talking about? Diablo *IS* limited to breakpoints. Ever trying seeing what that extra +10% IAS does for you? Answer: Often, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, because unless it crosses a breakpoint, it does jack.

I said limited to *those* breakpoints. Of course Diablo and other games have breakpoints, its just much more granular.

Down with this retarded herp-a-derpin over turns. The word you are looking for is "rounds" in the long established gaming terminology of our beloved RPGs. IE games have rounds where actions are based around this concept where Diablo only has animation length as a limiting factor, without adherence to any other time standard.

Incorrect, IE is also based on animations. Note that you can cast a spell and then still move or attack within the round as soon as the animation is done. If IE was turn based it wouldn't allow players to take actions at any time other then the beginning of their turn.

 

[denizsi]

You have got to be kidding me. Nope, not animation based. At. All. They wait until the next round. At least unless there were broken spells/attacks that had lengthier animation than the associated number of rounds, which I don't remember.

If they carry out two subsequent actions smoothly, it's because the animation length for the first action coincides with the end of the round or some bonus that lets you attack faster. I can't even count how many times I saw characters seemingly wait doing nothing between two actions, even without you issuing a new order, like a character continuing to attack and he seemingly waits between dealing two blows or waits until he moves somewhere because of the round dependencies.

In fact, this has always been one of the primary complaints of the ADHD kids, whining that combat is so slow and your characters "waiting" between attacks not making any sense.

You must have played very little of IE games or paid little attention to combat.

 

[Overweight Manatee]

Have you actually played IE games or are you just making stuff up?

Cast Magic Missile. As soon as the spell is cast, attack. You have 0 wait afterwords, though you can't cast spells for approximately 5.5s or so. In fact, if you time it just right and are fast enough on the draw, you can cast magic missile, shoot an arrow at someone, and have the arrow arrive before the magic missile hits. More ridiculously, if you use the items in BG2 that reduce casting time, spells of 0 cast time effectively become free action spells usable once every 6s; You can have a fighter/mage attacking at their full attack rate while they use up half their spell book.

 

[oscar]

Combat has never been something Obsidian's been great at. So why they're trying to make a dungeon crawler with a new engine (coding also being one of their weaknesses) in a ultra-generic setting where they'll be unable to utilize their talents (writing and plot) is anyone's guess.

Has their success with New Vegas gone to their heads? Dungeon Siege doesn't exactly have massive brand-recognition so why the hell is a storyfag company risking their hard-won fortunes on a hack 'n slash?

Does anyone know how successful the previous games where profit wise?

 

[denizsi]

And how does that invalidate what I'm saying? That you can attack as soon as the spell is cast only means that the animation length is in perfect sync with round length and I know what you're saying, I remember this myself and casting several magic missiles in a row very fast. Many animations are like that, many others aren't. For instance, with many weapons, if you order your character to attack and then click somewhere to move him/her while (s)he is attacking, (s)he will wait a moment or two *after* the attack animation is completed and *before* actually following your order, because the round for the attack hasn't actually ended yet.

Start paying attention.

 

[Overweight Manatee]

And how does that invalidate what I'm saying? That you can attack as soon as the spell is cast only means that the animation length is in perfect sync with round length.

No. Characters never wait for rounds to end. Rounds are 6 seconds. If the characters went by rounds it would be never be possible to move or attack after casting, you would have to wait until 6 seconds after you begun casting the spell to move. But in IE you can in fact make a character do arbitrarily many actions within any 6 second period, so that is clearly not the case. The only thing 'round based' is spell casting, which can only be done once every 6 seconds. Everything else has nothing to do with rounds.

For instance, with many weapons, if you order your character to attack and then click somewhere to move him/her while (s)he is attacking, (s)he will wait a moment or two *after* the attack animation is completed and *before* actually following your order, because the round for the attack hasn't actually ended yet.

No. Just no. At most there is a .1 second delay between you ordering someone and them moving there. If what you said was true the delay would average 3 seconds. It just does not work that way. IE does not keep track of individual character rounds at all. Characters DO sometimes get stuck for a half-second moving out of combat, but that is only because they will not move while they are doing their 'hurt' animation whenever they are hit by an attack. You may actually be able to break this animation and move immediately if you click again, I can't remember.

Start paying attention.

 

[CrunchyHemorrhoids]

Combat has never been something Obsidian's been great at.

You're worried they'll botch the combat of dungeon siege, the screensaver?

they'll be unable to utilize their talents

Is that why they're hyping it with obsidian storytelling and choices&consequences?

Dungeon Siege doesn't exactly have massive brand-recognition

Isn't it the most successful diablo clone? Spawned a movie?

why the hell is a storyfag company risking their hard-won fortunes on a hack 'n slash?

All they risk is what good reputation they gained from new vegas. Square picks up the tab.

Releasing a diablo 3 clone with good story and dialogs before D3 actually comes out sounds like as good a shot at a slam dunk as kotor2 and new vegas ever did.

 

[denizsi]

And how does that invalidate what I'm saying? That you can attack as soon as the spell is cast only means that the animation length is in perfect sync with round length.

No. Characters never wait for rounds to end. Rounds are 6 seconds. If the characters went by rounds it would be never be possible to move or attack after casting, you would have to wait until 6 seconds after you begun casting the spell to move. But in IE you can in fact make a character do arbitrarily many actions within any 6 second period, so that is clearly not the case. The only thing 'round based' is spell casting, which can only be done once every 6 seconds. Everything else has nothing to do with rounds.

For instance, with many weapons, if you order your character to attack and then click somewhere to move him/her while (s)he is attacking, (s)he will wait a moment or two *after* the attack animation is completed and *before* actually following your order, because the round for the attack hasn't actually ended yet.

No. Just no. At most there is a .1 second delay between you ordering someone and them moving there. If what you said was true the delay would average 3 seconds. It just does not work that way. IE does not keep track of individual character rounds at all. Characters DO sometimes get stuck for a half-second moving out of combat, but that is only because they will not move while they are doing their 'hurt' animation whenever they are hit by an attack. You may actually be able to break this animation and move immediately if you click again, I can't remember.

No I wasn't talking about hit animations at all. I know a round is 6 seconds in DnD but I always thought it to be shorter/faster in IE games. After all, I don't ever remember seeing a 6 seconds wait between the continuing attacks of any character that attacked only once per round. Likewise, spells with durability always lasted shorter than the rounds and turns in descriptions when translated into real time as per DnD rules. Was this not the case?

 

[Overweight Manatee]

No I wasn't talking about hit animations at all. I know a round is 6 seconds in DnD but I always thought it to be shorter/faster in IE games. After all, I don't ever remember seeing a 6 seconds wait between the continuing attacks of any character that attacked only once per round. Likewise, spells with durability always lasted shorter than the rounds and turns in descriptions when translated into real time as per DnD rules. Was this not the case?

A character with 1 attack per round will make a minimum of 3 or 4 attack animations per round, this was done so characters don't look stupid making only 1 attack animation every 6 seconds (and this is what I think you are referring to when the ADHD kids complain about combat being slow and attacks doing nothing). If you turn on the attack rolls display you will see a character with 1 attack only gets 1 attack roll, the others are duds.

Also, if you have set the game to run faster then the default of 30 FPS, the game literally runs faster and combat rounds are shortened. 60 FPS will give you 3 seconds per round and everything will be 2x as quick as in D&D. What I said before about being able to break the round system by casting spells and attacking or moving during the same round is still relevant, though.

Further complicating the situation with regards to how long spells last, absolute times such as 'minutes' and 'seconds' refer to in-game minutes and seconds, not real time. In-game time runs faster then real time. I'm not entirely sure what the scale is, suffice it to say that neither did the developers because they are inconsistent themselves with it. e.g. Mage armor says it lasts 8 hours but it actually lasts 50 minutes in real time @ 30 FPS. On the other hand, Stoneskin says it lasts 12 hours but actually lasts 60 minutes. Some of the spells that last 1 minute per level actually last 1 minute per level while others are shortened by 50 or 75%. Everything is a bit haphazard.

 

[oscar]

It's hard to have good choices and consequences and an interesting plot when the setting is the most generic fantasy imaginable. It's just hard to drum up any kind of interest. Some sort of deconstruction could work.

I'm no expert at all on Dungeon Siege (only played the first one for a couple of days) but isn't the whole point of the game combat? And it didn't really seem like Diablo at all. NWN maybe.

 

[denizsi]

No I wasn't talking about hit animations at all. I know a round is 6 seconds in DnD but I always thought it to be shorter/faster in IE games. After all, I don't ever remember seeing a 6 seconds wait between the continuing attacks of any character that attacked only once per round. Likewise, spells with durability always lasted shorter than the rounds and turns in descriptions when translated into real time as per DnD rules. Was this not the case?

A character with 1 attack per round will make a minimum of 3 or 4 attack animations per round, this was done so characters don't look stupid making only 1 attack animation every 6 seconds (and this is what I think you are referring to when the ADHD kids complain about combat being slow and attacks doing nothing). If you turn on the attack rolls display you will see a character with 1 attack only gets 1 attack roll, the others are duds.

Also, if you have set the game to run faster then the default of 30 FPS, the game literally runs faster and combat rounds are shortened. 60 FPS will give you 3 seconds per round and everything will be 2x as quick as in D&D. What I said before about being able to break the round system by casting spells and attacking or moving during the same round is still relevant, though.

Further complicating the situation with regards to how long spells last, absolute times such as 'minutes' and 'seconds' refer to in-game minutes and seconds, not real time. In-game time runs faster then real time. I'm not entirely sure what the scale is, suffice it to say that neither did the developers because they are inconsistent themselves with it. e.g. Mage armor says it lasts 8 hours but it actually lasts 50 minutes in real time @ 30 FPS. On the other hand, Stoneskin says it lasts 12 hours but actually lasts 60 minutes. Some of the spells that last 1 minute per level actually last 1 minute per level while others are shortened by 50 or 75%. Everything is a bit haphazard.

Damn, I haven't been paying attention, then. Better to leave learned from this, I guess. And I've must have played the game on faster than default speed , though movement speed never looked hurried and was still slow and extra annoying on repeated plays.

 

[Crooked Bee]

Combat has never been something Obsidian's been great at. So why they're trying to make a dungeon crawler with a new engine (coding also being one of their weaknesses) in a ultra-generic setting where they'll be unable to utilize their talents (writing and plot) is anyone's guess.

Truth be told I like the attempt. If it succeeds - and the chances are slight, I know, given that the combat system will make or break this game - it may be a very fun game indeed, like the best possible Diablo-clone or maybe even more than that.
As for the setting, well, it's George Zeits we're talking about; I think Obsidian can make something interesting out of it -- make it feel less generic, even.

 

[KalosKagathos]

And @KalosKAthagagfalos, uh, I never said it wasn't a big difference from real TB combat, dumbass, I just said that I prefer semi turn-based stuff to real time. Is that not allowed on newfag codex?

Oh, you can certainly prefer whatever you want. Just stop making up new expressions to make things you like sound better than they actually are. Phase-based is OK. Semi-turn-based? Complete nonsense.

 

[Radisshu]

Deniszi and other guy, you can cast a spell and then attack in infinity games because the rules employed by the games let you cast one spell and then attack in the same round. If you try to cast another spell, though, nothing will happen, and that's not affected by animation speed

And @KalosKAthagagfalos, uh, I never said it wasn't a big difference from real TB combat, dumbass, I just said that I prefer semi turn-based stuff to real time. Is that not allowed on newfag codex?

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

No. Characters never wait for rounds to end. Rounds are 6 seconds. If the characters went by rounds it would be never be possible to move or attack after casting, you would have to wait until 6 seconds after you begun casting the spell to move. But in IE you can in fact make a character do arbitrarily many actions within any 6 second period, so that is clearly not the case. The only thing 'round based' is spell casting, which can only be done once every 6 seconds. Everything else has nothing to do with rounds.

You are wrong. It is as has been said, IE games work on 6 second rounds, only everyone gets his round at the same time. Use an item, e.g. drink a potion. Then drink another one. You character will wait for the next round, only then he'll drink the second potion. The same applies for spells/using a wand or any other form of action except moving. There is no *move*-action in IE games. You can always move, before casting a spell, after casting a spell. It doesn't matter. If you cast a spell and have seconds left in that round you can attack and move - if you have attacks left for that round. Otherwise you can just move. Anyway, the fact that IE games don't treat moving as standard action that can be taken only once per round as per DnD doesn't mean that the game doesn't work on 6 second rounds - it does in fact.

 

[IronicNeurotic]

Considering Obsidians Track Record Dungeon Siege III will be in the Codex Top 3 of 2011 anyway.

 

[SimpleComplexity]

Obgoldian will turn Dungeon Shit into Dungeon Gold.