| LuckyCarbon |
November 12th, 2010 17:51 |
Quote:
Originally Posted by JemyM
(Post 1061033731)
And who ever you heard that from lied in your face, because that's RADICALLY wrong.
DS2 was everything DS1 should have been. While DS1 was diablo-with-a-party, DS2 is much more like Baldur's Gate or Icewind Dale in style.
DS2 adds a fleshed out world (one of the lore-heaviest journals I have seen in a Computer Game part from Dragon Age), real quests, real story, a less linear progression with a lot of side content, NPC's to interact with, real dialogue, subquests, companion sidestories/subquests (pretty well written companions for this kind of game) etc. That way DS2 is more in the line what I would demand from a CRPG these days. It's not the best RPG ever, but I would easily include it with games like Arcanum and Divine Divinity as one of those random odd titles people who are looking for more RPG's to play should check out.
|
DS2 means Dungeon Siege 2 from GPG right? I must be confused because there's no way we're talking about the same game. The DS2 I played was an ugly party-based hack & slash without the atmosphere. Also, I hope you like brown, lots and lots of brown.
Dungeon Siege 2 has no place being mentioned in the same sentence with titles like Baldur's Gate or Arcanum. What did DS2 have in common with Baldur's Gate? I played DS2 about half way through before the monotony got to me and I can't recall having to make a single story decision, nothing but fetch quests. The character builds and equipment were virtually linear, not even having the depth ( and this is sad ) that DS1 had.
I disagree with Jemy, DS2 is skippable and forgettable.
|