10 hours long RPG, um… w00t!?

I think everyone who followed the game closely knew that this would be a "short" game.

But to say that the replay value is "little" is an understatement. There are 4 vastly different characters in the game. You also don't consider the multiplayer co-op value. I wouldn't be surprised if most people put 30-50 hours into the game. I already played the demo thrice and I had fun every time. If you seriously thought this game was meant to be a one-playthrough-only singleplayer experience, you were never part of the target audience.

Seriously, most people had completely unrealistic expectations on what the game is about. It really is about the co-op experience and the ability to try out different party compositions with your friends, all while engaging in combat that is fun.

I could go on explaining why DS3 control's scheme is actually more precise on the PC and how the complaints about consolization are exaggerated and totally irrelevant but I won't waste my breath, since most people already decided that it's a horrible abomination. Suffice it to say that if you didn't get how the control scheme is more precise on PC, you failed at basic geometry.

Many people around here pull for Obsidian to succeed but almost expect it to come up short on its releases. Instead of trying to patronize people with blanket statements, you could expand on your diatribe's reasoning. You come off as a twit whose opinion is easily discarded otherwise.

It's not about expecting anything from DS3 - as much as it's about calling a spade a spade.

The game is a snack at best, and nothing more.

I was expecting about 20 hours. Diablo 2 had increasing challenge tiers and so did DS1&2.

As for replay value it is less than most games of thsi type.

Games like this, that are very short and well a joke shouldn't be allowed the ridiculous price tag of $50, ~ $60 on consoles. Maybe a $20 ~ $30 split at most.

There are far better, and more well designed titles that scream the dedicated love and attention by indie devs for $5-$30 that most the AAA RPG titles in the past few years combined can't compete with. And yeah I do play them to make up for the big name crap that are usually a huge disappointment!

If you like this kind of games I recommend spending instead $19.99 on Titan Quest Gold (available on Steam), a great and under-rated hack & slash made for PCs. It's from 2007 but the graphics still looks great.

Definitely.

Dungeon Siege 2
Diablo 2
Hellgate London
Titan Quest

Are my personal favorites of the genre.

That said, Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance holds a special place in my heart - and it resembles Dungeon Siege 3 most of all. DS3 is similarly small and consolish in both scope and execution. Also, if you're into this kind of snack - I'd recommend the PS2 Norrath games, as they're bigger and will last a good deal longer.

How is Co-op? How much complementary are the characters? Is co-op straightforward, does it offer elaborated combos? How does it work?

That is a good one.

My perspective is that I can plug a controller in and still get a much better experience than console players do thanks to higher framrates, resolution and graphics (as well as tweaks and mods when applicable). Even the worst PC port is still better than the console version.

I guess some people have a "true PC game or screw off" attitude but I don't have that. If PC gaming stopped existing tomorrow I would go buy an Xbox.

Save points? Sigh.

I simply don't think it's a good idea to force players to buy and use a controller, if they want to enjoy your game on their PCs.

In fact, I think it's insulting to people who spend 50$ on a PC game in a genre that's 100% KB/mouse in terms of tradition.

It takes absolutely zero effort to keep the PC in mind when designing your control scheme. There are two ways of ending up with a control scheme like in DS3 = extreme incompetence or apathy towards that market segment.

For DS3, the perfect solution would have been standard WASD for movement and mouselook for camera controls. It's so obvious, it hurts to think of how little they've done to adapt the game for the PC.

And I don't think it's a good idea to make a RPG you can pass in 10 hours.
It's not RPG any more.

Then go play on your xbox. I dont use a controller on my pc and never will. I said its a small but fun short rpg. I dont care if it has 4 characters and I dont care about co-op as most most games do nowadays. Its like most of there games its aspires to be more than it is.

At the very least, they could have implemented the established progressively higher difficulty modes - and scaled loot/enemies accordingly.

From a technical standpoint, it's incredibly simple to do - but I guess that's Obsidian for you. They all but ruined multiplayer in NWN2 - so why not ignore staple features in Dungeon Siege 3.

It's almost as if they WANT to piss of fans of the franchise and genre.

I think you've been spoiled by recent behemoths. PS:Torment lasted me 19 hours, earlier games like Eye of the Beholder were even shorter.

Eye of the Beholder cost £30 in the 90s, and still got great reviews:

http://amr.abime.net/review_15418

96% ;)

I was like you… until I bough an xBox controller. There are games that are more comfortable to play with controllers, like Devil May Cry, sports games, driving games or GTA style games. I will play even The Witcher 2 with a controller. Obviously, for FPS and RTS there is nothing like mouse and kb.

And this game is an rpg. So it has no excuse.

Exactly.
Want an example of a hack & slash well ported to PC? Deathspank