Dungeon Siege 3 - Screens @ Worthplaying

Physically or mentally ?

Besides, I've been looking at them now, too … And I'm not impressed. Not at all. It looks to me rather like a faithful and exact copy of DS1 - only with better graphics.

Originally Posted by TheGameSquid
Seriously? Man, and to think I've been avoiding the game all this time based on incorrect information! I LOVE all the IE games (Especially BG and IWD)!

Downloading the demo ASAP

Just remember that I said it's not the best RPG out there, but it's one I would recommend for those who played everything else. Remember, DS2 keeps the engine, so the fighting/looting is the same diablo-with-a-party like gameplay. Combatwise it is still a hack-n-slash RPG, and you do spend a lot of time hacking whatever stands in your path, just like in DS1. But what it have that DS1 didn't is a rich world and a story. That means actual places, towns filled with quests and npc's, a growing story and plenty of hidden areas to explore. Kinda reminds me of Divine Divinity in that regard, which also had diablo-style combat and looting, but it's goodness comes from having a real world to explore making it much more than smacking randomly generated foes for xp/loot.

I think people have the wrong idea about what type of game DS3 is. Unless they changed things, it's not party-based. You control a single character and can have AI-controlled teammates. The game looks to be more along the lines of Diablo or the Baldur's Gate : Dark Alliance games, but with more of an emphasis on story and dialogue.

Originally Posted by JemyM
Just remember that I said it's not the best RPG out there, but it's one I would recommend for those who played everything else. Remember, DS2 keeps the engine, so the fighting/looting is the same diablo-with-a-party like gameplay. Combatwise it is still a hack-n-slash RPG, and you do spend a lot of time hacking whatever stands in your path, just like in DS1. But what it have that DS1 didn't is a rich world and a story. That means actual places, towns filled with quests and npc's, a growing story and plenty of hidden areas to explore. Kinda reminds me of Divine Divinity in that regard, which also had diablo-style combat and looting, but it's goodness comes from having a real world to explore making it much more than smacking randomly generated foes for xp/loot.

I'm not the biggest Action RPG fan, but they can sometimes be enjoyable. What annoys me most in these these games take you from place to place with little explanation/context/narrative/world building/etc. If DS2 has at least some of that I'm already satisfied. Also, I'm a big fan of Divine Divinity (despite it's sometimes awkward combat).

Regarding Zborno's post, I did indeed misunderstand. From the article Skavenhorde linked about the DS3 announcement timeline I was actually under the impression that Obsidian was putting "true" party-based gameplay in the game. If that's not the case, then I'd be really disappointed.

Expecting a "true" party-based experience from DS3 would be a very odd expectation, to be honest.

There HAS to be a reason Obsidian picked THIS game over any other franchise.

Not saying it can't happen, I'm just saying it would be the last thing to expect from DS3.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Expecting a "true" party-based experience from DS3 would be a very odd expectation, to be honest.

There HAS to be a reason Obsidian picked THIS game over any other franchise.

Not saying it can't happen, I'm just saying it would be the last thing to expect from DS3.

My expectation would simply be for it to have some decent writing and some light version of Obsidians trademark choice-and-consequence oriented quest design. That might actually make it interesting to me.

Originally Posted by GhanBuriGhan
My expectation would simply be for it to have some decent writing and some light version of Obsidians trademark choice-and-consequence oriented quest design. That might actually make it interesting to me.

Yeah, that's the kind of thing I'm expecting as well.

I certainly have trouble seeing it as a pure action-fest (not Obsidian's style or strength) - and the franchise is too far removed from "seriousness" to have a "true" cRPG be a clever direction, in marketing terms.

Originally Posted by JemyM
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.

DS2 - judged only from the demo in my case - had the athmosphere DS1 lacked.