Dungeon Siege 3 - PC Demo On Steam

I agree with kyrross and couchpotato in regards to demos in the sense that if someone does not enjoy a demo at all, then there is a very slim chance that they will enjoy the full game. It's true that a full game can't be judged by the demo because certain elements (story progression, characters, choice and consequence, etc) cannot be properly shown in a small sample, but the core gameplay mechanics - which is often the meat of most games - can absolutely be judged by a demo, and that is the purpose that demos have. I'm not sure how wise it would be to assume that a demo is somehow a misrepresentation of the gameplay that will be available in the final product.

Man, it rare that a game is so shitty that I write the company off my list; and there's nothing so insulting as a half-assed port. My options are getting slim indeed.

Oh, and I can't even believe the whole "demo thing" is up for debate (such is the Internet). As stated above, if the UI, camera and movement, and game mechanics are bad, most likely your gaming experience will suffer (in this case terminally): and, yes, all said features can usually be found in a demo. Thus, if the demo sucks (for those particular reasons), the game will almost certainly suck; if the demo is great, well, the game can still suck, sadly. After 5 minutes with DS3, I wouldn't play it if you paid me.

I get the same feeling in the pit of my stomach about this one as I do when I've eaten one too many fish tacos. I think I'll pass!

Originally Posted by Sergorn
Except LucasArts invested in patches (well they refused to invest for them to reintegrate cut contents, but they did let them patch the major issues), so did Atari, or Bethesda.

No. Maybe for Obsidian, but not or other games.

- Star Wars Battlefront I : - last Patch 1.3 ONLY in English
- last dedicated server also

- Star Wars Battlefront II : similar things

- Atari : did a TERRIBLE job on getting patches out for TOEE :
- patches available almost only in English
- forther *needed* patches were never done

LucasArts wasn't great in supporting "their" developers - as long as the old chief was still there.

The new one, however, feels himself dedicated to quality more than his predecessor …

I don't get why people are complaining about the equipment screen. I think inventory management is handled fairly well. It's not like you have to check every item you pick up for its stats. You immediately see the items value in gold, so you can make a quick ad-hoc decision whether the item is worth equipping. This is a very convenient feature, though I don't know if DS3 introduced it to the genre as I don't play most ARPGs.

A lot of people also seem to have missed that it's possible to go directly to the equipment screen by pressing F.

There is not enough praise here for the things it does right. Namely, tactical combat, good dialogue for an Action RPG and little possibilities to branch the story.

Originally Posted by Nerevarine
I think the love-fest for Obsidian in certain corners boils down to two things: They are a humble "underdog" company, which makes them an easy-to-like developer that you want to pull for, and some of their team members have ties to the Black Isle Studios days.

I bet most of the people who "pull for" Obsidian do so simply because they like one or more of their games and/or appreciate how they tend to handle certain creative/design elements.
Chances are I don´t know those "certain corners" you have in mind though.

I, for example, have Obsidian firmly on my radar since I´ve played Mask of the Betrayer, which is a game I consider to be masterpiece. And with Fallout: New Vegas under their belt, in my book they´re the only AA/AAA developer who made two great relatively fully-fledged RPGs in the last five years (I consider The Witcher 2 to be more on the RPG-light side).

As for Dungeon Siege 3, previous two games never caught my interest and I don´t think it´s a type of game where Obsidian can utilize well what I perceive as their strengths, so personally I don´t give the slightest shit about it, though I hope they won´t be toast because of it.

Originally Posted by DeepO
I, for example, have Obsidian firmly on my radar since I´ve played Mask of the Betrayer, which is a game I consider to be masterpiece. And with Fallout: New Vegas under their belt, in my book they´re the only AA/AAA developer who made two great relatively fully-fledged RPGs in the last five years (I consider The Witcher 2 to be more on the RPG-light side).

I'd take both CD Projekt and Piranha Bytes over Obsidian, even if we're only looking at the last five years. Like I stated earlier though, I haven't played FO:NV yet.

Originally Posted by Tilean
There is not enough praise here for the things it does right. Namely, tactical combat, good dialogue for an Action RPG and little possibilities to branch the story.

There were tactics?

I spent the entire demo letting enemies pile up in fromt of me and hitting them with the spear/two-handed sword, then switching to single target for anyone who was left. Add in using the defensive healing ability and that was it for almost every fight.

Any thought-out plans or targeting of specific, dangerous enemies was basically impossible due to the difficulty of turning in the right direction in the heat of combat and the fact that it seemed to be quite impossible to choose a specific target. The computer just seemed to pick an enemy at random from the big bunch I was facing and decide "That guy there, you're targeting him". Was there a way to choose a target properly?

Originally Posted by JDR13
I'd take both CD Projekt and Piranha Bytes over Obsidian, even if we're only looking at the last five years. Like I stated earlier though, I haven't played FO:NV yet.

That´s partially why I said "relatively fully-fledged". Neither Risen, nor The Witcher 2 are as heavy on RPG elements as Mask of the Betrayer or Fallout: New Vegas, at least according to my take on the concepts.

But that´s besides the point, I was simply illustrating why someone might "pull for" Obsidian for reasons other than those in Nerevarine´s post (and personally I´m of opinion that reasons such as mine are a lot more common than those he listed).

Originally Posted by DeepO
I said "relatively fully-fledged". Neither Risen, nor The Witcher 2 are as heavy on RPG elements as Mask of the Betrayer or Fallout: New Vegas, at least according to my take on the concepts.

I tend to rate crpgs on how good the game is overall, rather than trying to count the number of perceived RPG elements it has. Of course I realize it's subjective though.

Originally Posted by DeepO
But that´s besides the point, I was illustrating why someone might "pull for" Obsidian for reasons other than those in Nerevarine´s post (and personally I´m of opinion that reasons such as mine are a lot more common than those he listed).

Oh, I'm not disagreeing with you. It's certainly possible that's the case.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I tend to rate crpgs on how good the game is overall, rather than trying to count the number of perceived RPG elements it has.

Cool, that´s how I tend to rate cRPGs too.
I´m saying that for certain type of RPGs Obsidian has been my best bet in the last 5 years, not that Risen is worse than MotB because it has fewer RPG features.

Originally Posted by DeepO
I´m saying that for certain type of RPGs Obsidian has been my best bet in the last 5 years, not that Risen is worse than MotB because it has fewer RPG features.

Well, I also meant it's subjective what "RPG features" actually are, but that's probably not worth getting into.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Well, I also meant it's subjective what "RPG features" actually are, but that's probably not worth getting into.

That´s for sure.
(and also the reason why I usually put "in my book" or "according to my" and such in place)

Originally Posted by Mana Garmr
There were tactics?

On the higher difficulty levels, yes. I clearly remember dying a lot when I didn't prioritize targets. And I often thought "I could have survived that, if I had used my skills more efficiently".

I only played with the Montbarron soldier though, and when I got Anjali at the end and took a look at her skills I found myself thinking that she should have had an easier time surviving the previous encounters.

People here seem to be underestimating the fairly challenging combat in the game, probably because death isn't punished at all in the demo. Weird decision by Obsidian, though.

Originally Posted by Tilean
On the higher difficulty levels, yes. I clearly remember dying a lot when I didn't prioritize targets.

How does one "prioritize targets" in a game that doesn't let you target specific characters, and, that often decides that you prefer to shoot several barrels in the distance, rather than the (closer) enemies charging at you (who you have your cursor on as you fire)?

This is not a taunt, but a legitimate question: perhaps you found a technique that I, in my brief play, missed. If so, it would, perhaps, fix about 1/5 of my issues with the game.

Originally Posted by DeepO

But that´s besides the point, I was simply illustrating why someone might "pull for" Obsidian for reasons other than those in Nerevarine´s post (and personally I´m of opinion that reasons such as mine are a lot more common than those he listed).

Well, you're reasons are part of what I meant (in my head at least..I should have clarified a bit more ) as why people might pull for them; they are "underdogs" because they have tried to do things that (most) other developers no longer focus on in regards to "classic role-playing elements." I certainly always wish them the best, even if I've yet to be extremely impressed by any of their games (as mentioned earlier, the only one I haven't played yet is FO:NV).

Originally Posted by Starwars
I think it's fine to not like DS3, I can certainly understand why. But the complaints about coherent and logical stories …Hell, in the Witcher 2 (a game that I would say aims for a much more "realistic" and down-to-earth tone) guards…

The cage complaints, and the guy getting wounded in DS3 are about the nitpickiest complaints I've heard. That's not excusing OEI. If it comes down to it, it's excusing every damn RPG maker ever.

I almost didn't include my story issues because I knew people would latch on to them and not understand what I was saying. First, notice the MASSIVE list of issues I posted, with only two of them being the story issues. But second, the story issues are a symptom of a larger problem, a lack of attention to detail. I make no apology for asking dev's to write coherent stories…

And if any game includes the whole "you defeat so in so in battle, but then the cutscene shows them winning", that is VERY bad game design. So we should knock Witcher 2 for that as well.

All I ask is DS3 at least put a magic shader effect on the wooden cage if they're going to say it has magical protection. Otherwise, it's just bad design and hurts the overall presentation. As they say, the devil's in the details.

Originally Posted by Santos
How does one "prioritize targets" in a game that doesn't let you target specific characters, and, that often decides that you prefer to shoot several barrels in the distance, rather than the (closer) enemies charging at you (who you have your cursor on as you fire)?

This is not a taunt, but a legitimate question: perhaps you found a technique that I, in my brief play, missed. If so, it would, perhaps, fix about 1/5 of my issues with the game.

I played the Montbarron guy, so I didn't have to pick targets at range. I am going to replay it now with Anjali, to see how the combat differs.

Though I know from browsing different forums that a lot of people find the combat to be surprisingly challenging for a console game.

_______

Okay, I have played the demo now with Anjali.
She is definitely easier to play because of her AOE heal, which doesn't consume a focus "circle". But you still have to pick off ranged fighters first and use crowd control skills on the melee enemies if you are playing on hardcore.

Ranged combat is a mess, though.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I tend to rate crpgs on how good the game is overall, rather than trying to count the number of perceived RPG elements it has. Of course I realize it's subjective though.



Oh, I'm not disagreeing with you. It's certainly possible that's the case.

You mean Mass Effect 2 is a great RPG because it's a great game overall? I think you are completely off the mark. A game can be great but be a poor RPG.

Originally Posted by Nerevarine
Well, you're reasons are part of what I meant (in my head at least..I should have clarified a bit more ) as why people might pull for them; they are "underdogs" because they have tried to do things that (most) other developers no longer focus on in regards to "classic role-playing elements." I certainly always wish them the best, even if I've yet to be extremely impressed by any of their games (as mentioned earlier, the only one I haven't played yet is FO:NV).

So, you were not impressed by Mask of the Betrayer? OK.