Obsidian Announces Dungeon Siege 3

[PMCervantes8994]

I can't really comment on Dungeon Siege itself, having never played the games, but one line stuck out to me:

"part of Square Enix's plan to partner with Western studios and increase its presence in the North American market"

Does Square Enix really need that much help in the Western audience? I would think that with the popularity of Final Fantasy that they already have a good grip on at least some of the west, at least those gamers who play more than the FPS of the month. Sure JRPGs may be a niche appeal (don't have any numbers, just a guess) but its still a pretty big niche regardless.

 

[Kevlar Eater]

Oh joy. Another Obsidian product. They're definitely biting off more than they can chew.

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

Oh, stop your whining. Name one franchise Obsidian has "ruined" that they didn't develop themselves.

Name one Obsidian game that didn't suck. Seriously. Urquhart and co. have been trading on the Black Isle name for the better part of a decade now but what have they shown aside from an inability to deliver a finished game?

Fortunately, I don't care what they do with this one, I thought Dungeon Siege was an absolute turd.

Oh boy, here we go again. I sometimes wonder if the Obsidian haters even played the games for the amount of nonsense I hear.

KotOR 1 was a good game. It had good gameplay, a decent story that had one big twist that got all the attention but was otherwise predictable and utterly generic, and maybe one or two interesting characters. KotOR 2 had slightly improved gameplay, a story that, while lacking the big "TWEEST" of the first, was far more layered, in-depth and well-crafted than the first. Most of its characters were well fleshed-out and had personalities worth exploring compared to the cardboard cutouts of the first.

The only (only) thing that sucked about KotOR2 was that a chunk of content was cut from the game, which isn't even entirely Obsidian's fault since they had to release an unfinished product due to publisher pressure.

NWN1 was a bad game. It had awesome potential with its great toolset, but the campaign it shipped with was one the most boring, ill-paced, badly designed games I've ever played. It didn't have a single interesting NPC, a completely generic storyline, and barely any redeeming qualities until the second expansion, which was pretty good. NWN2 was far better paced, avoiding much of the tedium that plagued the first. It had a bunch of interesting companions (compared to NWN1's cardboard companions who didn't start growing a personality until, again, the second expansion). It had a more interesting, more personal storyline. It had the stronghold, which added a sense of belonging and responsibility that the first lacked. It had a bunch of great memorable scenes like the trial and Jerro's sanctum.

NWN2 was pretty buggy at release, but most of those bugs were fixed shortly after. It also had a rather tedious part right before the final boss, but that was nothing compared to the endless tedium that was NWN1.

In short, both of the franchises Obsidian supposedly 'ruined' were superior to their predecessors.

 

[Worcanna]

Obsidian is a good group but they have a way of killing things by there own vision of greatness. If they just backed down a little, things would be good. They now have cemented there reputation for not doing there own work as even AP was based of other games like it. Not a direct take but based off. The thing is AP REALLY made me want to give them a chance and so il say this "If they are going to do this, they had better not over-stretch themselves and finish the game this time"

 

[Claptrap]

I'm watching this with hawk eyes, I LOVED dungeon siege 1 and 2, But.. I donno about this, The game is quite old now and i'm not sure about obsidian doing it.

 

[JensenBlayloc]

KOTOR 2 was decent, the plot was half-baked, but the game itself was good.

NWN2, was a very good game. It has a few technical idiosyncrasies, but it was otherwise good, and I am replaying it as we speak, just as an aside. MoTB on the other hand was @$$. But that was because they tried to get cute. Get rid of the funky mechanics and it is ok.

Personally I wouldn't worry about buying an Obsidian game, and am awaiting F:NV with baited breath. Maybe that was the tuna sandwich..

 

[Therumancer]

I'm not sure if one can blame Obsidian for a lot of the problems, or if it comes down to the producers. Looking at things like KoTR II and NWN2, rumor has it that these things were pushed back to earlier builds and chopped to death for content, mostly revolving around things like sex. This is why there is a lot of unfinished content in games like KOTR 2.

Not entirely sure what happened with "Alpha Protocol", it's not a bad game, and doesn't deserve all the hate it's getting, but it's definatly not everything it could have been.

Simply put I think a lot of it is going to come down to the new producer keeping hands off the game content entirely, and letting Obsidian work at it until it's done.

Given the potential I've seen with Obsidian games, and the people working for the company, I am *VERY* wary about pointing fingers at them as being the source of the problem given the rumors that have been circulating about a lot of these games for a long time.

Right now I think "New Vegas" will be their big redemption, but then again that all depends on whether they will be allowed to push the envelope (always their thing) and Bethesda being able to keep it's lack of guts from infecting their project.

 

[Abedeus]

NO! Bad Obsidian! Stop ruining promising games/franchises!

Dungeon Siege promising? I thought the first one was a very, very poor Diablo 2 clone. Even Titan Quest was better.

NWN1 was a bad game. It had awesome potential with its great toolset, but the campaign it shipped with was one the most boring, ill-paced, badly designed games I've ever played. It didn't have a single interesting NPC, a completely generic storyline, and barely any redeeming qualities until the second expansion, which was pretty good.

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAA*cut out*AAAAH!!!

NWN WASN'T A SINGLE PLAYER GAME!! SINGLE PLAYER WAS A TUTORIAL FOR THE MULTIPLAYEEEEEEER

NWN2 was far better paced, avoiding much of the tedium that plagued the first. It had a bunch of interesting companions (compared to NWN1's cardboard companions who didn't start growing a personality until, again, the second expansion). It had a more interesting, more personal storyline. It had the stronghold, which added a sense of belonging and responsibility that the first lacked. It had a bunch of great memorable scenes like the trial and Jerro's sanctum.

It also had a fuckshitload of bugs, performance issues, multiplayer issues, resource-hoginess issues, instance-size problems in multiplayer (increasing the size of a 1x1 small room to a 2x2 chamber automatically requires 4 times more RAM than the small room required. PER PLAYER). So unless you made a small, 2x2 boxed Arena... oh, wait, prestige classes and special races ruined all arenas.

Multiplayer was dead after a month.

NWN2 was pretty buggy at release, but most of those bugs were fixed shortly after. It also had a rather tedious part right before the final boss, but that was nothing compared to the endless tedium that was NWN1.

Too bad people didn't buy NwN 2 for single player, they bought it because they hoped for an even better multiplayer. In return, we got a mediocre single-player semi-RPG and a shitty multiplayer graveyard of a game.

In short, both of the franchises Obsidian supposedly 'ruined' were superior to their predecessors.

About KotOR 2 - it sucked. Compared to Bioware's prequel, it sucked big ass.

Surprise - both series that did great, received critical acclaim when Bioware made them, suddenly were bad when Obsidian did them.

http://www.metacritic.com/search/process?sort=relevance&termtype=all&ts=neverwinter+nights&ty=0&button=search

NwN is 91, NwN 2 barely 82, but based on single-player and editor power. Again, multiplayer and player mods, hacks and generally user-created content was tons of times better in NwN 1.

http://www.metacritic.com/search/process?sort=relevance&termtype=all&ts=knights+of+the+old+republic&ty=3&button=search

Again, 94 from first game, 85 from the first. If a 9% drop isn't bad, then I don't know what is. Also user score speaks loudly... NwN 2 has a 5.3 rating from users, KotOR 2 only 7.3.

Obsidian seriously should stop ruining franchises. Next thing we know, they'll make a sequel of Jade Empire... NOO!!!

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

People really seem to be giving Obsidian a lot of flak.

In my experience they've been extremely gifted at creating Role-Playing Games, except for the "game" part. However, as buggy and poorly optimized as their games are I've loved every Obsidian game I've ever played. I did in fact like KotOR 2 a lot more than the original, I couldn't even finish that one but I've played the sequel at least 5 times.

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAA*cut out*AAAAH!!!

NWN WASN'T A SINGLE PLAYER GAME!! SINGLE PLAYER WAS A TUTORIAL FOR THE MULTIPLAYEEEEEEER

Whoa there. Forgot to take your medication or something?

Yes, the great multiplayer, WHICH THE PLAYERS HAD TO BUILD THEMSELVES. I think that says it all really. NWN1 was a really shitty game with a really good toolset attached.

It also had a fuckshitload of bugs, performance issues, multiplayer issues, resource-hoginess issues, instance-size problems in multiplayer (increasing the size of a 1x1 small room to a 2x2 chamber automatically requires 4 times more RAM than the small room required. PER PLAYER). So unless you made a small, 2x2 boxed Arena... oh, wait, prestige classes and special races ruined all arenas.

Ok, one by one:

- The bugs were less bad than most people seem to think, and most of them were fixed fairly quickly. I've played through the first NWN2 campaign three times, and only encountered a serious bug once.
- I never had any issues with performance on my machine.
- I haven't played NWN2 multiplayer so I'll take your word for it, but almost no game has ever been able to hold my attention without a solid singleplayer mode, so I'm gonna take a page from Yahtzee's book here and say that I don't give a damn about how much fun it is or isn't online. I'll judge a game on the content provided by the developers, not how awesome it is when the players develop a ton of mods for it.
- NWN1 had just as shitty a PvP balance as NWN2. The Dungeons and Dragons ruleset is simply not meant for PvP. That's just as stupid as criticizing your new blender because you can't drive to work in it.

Too bad people didn't buy NwN 2 for single player, they bought it because they hoped for an even better multiplayer. In return, we got a mediocre single-player semi-RPG and a shitty multiplayer graveyard of a game.

Yes, people did buy NWN2 for the singleplayer. I did, and last time I checked I was people too. Sure, not everyone might've bought it for the singleplayer, but that's hardly relevant. If I buy Left 4 Dead and call it shit because the singleplayer experience is boring, most people would laugh at me as well. The singleplayer campaign was miles ahead of NWN1's in almost every possible way. Just because Bioware built a good toolset the first time around doesn't excuse them for creating such a bad game with it.

About KotOR 2 - it sucked. Compared to Bioware's prequel, it sucked big ass.

Apart from the fact that KotOT2 had a bunch of content cut, what exactly sucked about it? The personal, multi-layered story that explored some of the philosophy and morality behind the Star Wars universe compared to the first's "save the universe" snorefest with a single redeeming twist? The well-developed, interesting NPCs compared to the first's cardboard cutout walking whinefests? The increased influence you had on your companions? The upgraded engine and gameplay? Enlighten me.

NwN is 91, NwN 2 barely 82, but based on single-player and editor power. Again, multiplayer and player mods, hacks and generally user-created content was tons of times better in NwN 1.

Again, 94 from first game, 85 from the first. If a 9% drop isn't bad, then I don't know what is. Also user score speaks loudly... NwN 2 has a 5.3 rating from users, KotOR 2 only 7.3.

First of all, if you're honestly saying that a 82 and a 85 are bad ratings, then I'm really going to have to stop taking you seriously.

Second, a higher rating doesn't mean a better game, unless you're willing to say that Halo 3 (94) is better than both KotOR and NWN.

 

[Abedeus]

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAA*cut out*AAAAH!!!

NWN WASN'T A SINGLE PLAYER GAME!! SINGLE PLAYER WAS A TUTORIAL FOR THE MULTIPLAYEEEEEEER

Whoa there. Forgot to take your medication or something?

Yes, the great multiplayer, WHICH THE PLAYERS HAD TO BUILD THEMSELVES. I think that says it all really. NWN1 was a really shitty game with a really good toolset attached.

And mods on CD. And on community websites. And the mods that were considered "public domain", like Nordock. And, unlike TF2, CSS, Enemy Territory and so on, you didn't have to download anything except wide-spread hakpacks and optional portraits. Everything was on servers.

Ok, one by one:

- The bugs were less bad than most people seem to think, and most of them were fixed fairly quickly. I've played through the first NWN2 campaign three times, and only encountered a serious bug once.

Fairy quickly = 2 months?

- I never had any issues with performance on my machine.

Multiplayer. Also, horrible graphics compared to performance. On a PC that could, at that time, handle Oblivion at High.

- I haven't played NWN2 multiplayer so I'll take your word for it, but almost no game has ever been able to hold my attention without a solid singleplayer mode, so I'm gonna take a page from Yahtzee's book here and say that I don't give a damn about how much fun it is or isn't online. I'll judge a game on the content provided by the developers, not how awesome it is when the players develop a ton of mods for it.

TF2 - all multiplayer, CSS - all multiplayer, Enemy Territory - all multiplayer, Warcraft 3, Diablo 2, Starcraft - 95% multiplayer, Call of Duty - multiplayer, Battlefield - all multiplayer.

Also, Oblivion is pretty mediocre without mods, so is Fallout 3. Add 10-20 mods, ZOMFG A NEW GAME AWESOME!

- NWN1 had just as shitty a PvP balance as NWN2. The Dungeons and Dragons ruleset is simply not meant for PvP. That's just as stupid as criticizing your new blender because you can't drive to work in it.

You know, one of the great things about NwN was that you could MODIFY THE RULES. Heal overpowered, Harm too powerful? NERF! Death Magic too strong? Lower DC! Rest too common? Exclude from PvP areas. Spells like Flesh to Stone too powerful, again? Disable.

Yes, people did buy NWN2 for the singleplayer. I did, and last time I checked I was people too. Sure, not everyone might've bought it for the singleplayer, but that's hardly relevant. If I buy Left 4 Dead and call it shit because the singleplayer experience is boring, most people would laugh at me as well. The singleplayer campaign was miles ahead of NWN1's in almost every possible way. Just because Bioware built a good toolset the first time around doesn't excuse them for creating such a bad game with it.

Actually, it does. If the multiplayer experience is about 95% of the game, it can be excused. Especially since NwN campaign, at least in expansions, wasn't all that bad. Again, you can play other player's mods offline.

I'd rather play NwN with a Baldur's Gate module (possible, and probably exists) than Baldur's Gate without anything to prolong the game experience.

Apart from the fact that KotOT2 had a bunch of content cut, what exactly sucked about it? The personal, multi-layered story that explored some of the philosophy and morality behind the Star Wars universe compared to the first's "save the universe" snorefest with a single redeeming twist? The well-developed, interesting NPCs compared to the first's cardboard cutout walking whinefests? The increased influence you had on your companions? The upgraded engine and gameplay? Enlighten me.

Okay, sucked was a bad expression. "Wasn't as good or memory-falling as the first game". Seriously, what do I remember from KotOR 2?

...Oh, I remember the ending made no sense and was cut short at least 5 hours too soon.

First of all, if you're honestly saying that a 82 and a 85 are bad ratings, then I'm really going to have to stop taking you seriously.

Compared. To. Previous. Games. We're talking about Obsidian making sequels that are worse than the previous game. You want to know a company that makes better sequels than first games? Blizzard, Bioware, Valve.

Second, a higher rating doesn't mean a better game, unless you're willing to say that Halo 3 (94) is better than both KotOR and NWN.

Yes, it does. And you can't compare different genres, for Christ's sake. I won't say that, for instance, Sims 3 is better than Diablo 2 because it has better rating (didn't check, just an example). I don't care, because I don't like sim games (most of them).

If Baldur's Gate 2 has better score than Baldur's Gate or Icewind Dale, it means they are better RPGs. In the sense of "better games in the RPG genre".

 

[thosta]

I played Dungeon Siege 2 for a little bit, lost the disc in a blackhole. Well that was the explanation I came to since it felt like it dropped off the face of the earth. Needless to say I wasn't motivated by my short experience of the game to hunt down another copy, though occasionally in a few spates of boredom I turned the house upside down looking for it again. Maybe I won't lose and enjoy Dungeon Siege 3?

NWN2 And KotOR2 were great fun, though they did have freaking annoying issues with the former having frustrating and boring parts (Old Owl Well anyone?) and the latter's story being cut up. But I still had fun with it.

I still have faith in Obsidian's capacity to release a good and fulfilling game, hopefully this time it won't have the glaring problems their other releases had.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

Obsidian: Destroying everything you love, one unfinished game at a time.

God, has this company released ANYTHING that didn't piss me off? NWN2, completly missed the biggest selling point of NWN, KOTOR2 unfinished, Alpha Protocol a bowl of bleh...

The original Fallout and Fallout 2, maybe? Even those were sprawling unfinished buggy messes though (see: invisible pickpocket children)

NO! Bad Obsidian! Stop ruining promising games/franchises!

Oh, stop your whining. Name one franchise Obsidian has "ruined" that they didn't develop themselves.

Neverwinter Nights 2. Knights of the Old Republic 2. But maybe that was their fault for trying to follow Bioware.

 

[thosta]

I would say it was more of a letdown rather than outright ruining the franchise.

 

[Naheal]

Oh, stop your whining. Name one franchise Obsidian has "ruined" that they didn't develop themselves.

Name one Obsidian game that didn't suck. Seriously. Urquhart and co. have been trading on the Black Isle name for the better part of a decade now but what have they shown aside from an inability to deliver a finished game?

That, for the most part, is on the hands of their publishers, whom they bring on WAAAAAAAAAAY too early. Most devs now simply say "It'll be out when it's ready" and proceed to get their game finished. Publishers generally are best brought in when you're at the QA stage and, thus, the game's nearly ready anyways. Obsidian, on the other hand, has to deal with announced release dates that their publishers decide on, before the game is complete.

 

[fnartilter]

Wasn't this series destroyed when Uwe Boll made that horrible, horrible movie?

I don't know how the games stories were destroyed by the movie. Hell, the film had nothing to do with the game other than the title.

 

[BoogieManFL]

Dungeon Siege bored me to tears.

Maybe they can finish this game.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

For fucks sakes people, get your facts straight.

Knights of the Old Republic 2 was given a 9 month development phase, Lucasarts was responsible for the game being rushed, not Obsidian! They wanted the game out by Christmas, and rushed Obsidian, leaving the game broken.

And Andy, here's a little tidbit you might like to know: After KOTOR 2 was released in the state it was, Obsidian asked Lucasarts if they could release a mass content patch, to fill in the missing parts of the game. Lucasarts refused.

Seriously, the hate they get for KOTOR 2 is completely unjustified.

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

And mods on CD. And on community websites. And the mods that were considered "public domain", like Nordock. And, unlike TF2, CSS, Enemy Territory and so on, you didn't have to download anything except wide-spread hakpacks and optional portraits. Everything was on servers.

Not saying there were no awesome mods for NWN1. I already mentioned they had a great toolset. But that's just it, a great toolset, with little else of value. You can't say Bioware made a great game when it wasn't worth playing until the fans started making mods, and then whine about KotOR2 missing stuff even though there's a huge fanpatch for that too. The thing is that Obsidian delivered a good game out of the box, while Bioware delivered a toolset with a shitty game attached.

TF2 - all multiplayer, CSS - all multiplayer, Enemy Territory - all multiplayer, Warcraft 3, Diablo 2, Starcraft - 95% multiplayer, Call of Duty - multiplayer, Battlefield - all multiplayer.

Also, Oblivion is pretty mediocre without mods, so is Fallout 3. Add 10-20 mods, ZOMFG A NEW GAME AWESOME!

Not seeing your point here. Yes, there are good multiplayer games, and there are good mods. All of the games you mentioned were great multiplayer games right out the box. NWN1 had nothing worth playing, single- nor multiplayer, until the fans got to it. That doesn't change a thing about the fact that vanilla NWN1 sucked. Relying on the community to make a good game out of it, no matter how awesome the game turns out in the end, does not make you a good developer. I'm not trying to knock on Bioware here, but as I pointed out, vanilla NWN1 was a bad game.

You know, one of the great things about NwN was that you could MODIFY THE RULES. Heal overpowered, Harm too powerful? NERF! Death Magic too strong? Lower DC! Rest too common? Exclude from PvP areas. Spells like Flesh to Stone too powerful, again? Disable.

...again relying on the fans to fix their mistakes. Do I have to keep reiterating my point that having a creative fanbase doesn't somehow make the original a better game? Pretty much ever single one of your points boils down to "fanmade mods made NWN1 awesome." That might be true, but doesn't change a thing that the vanilla game sucked.

Actually, it does. If the multiplayer experience is about 95% of the game, it can be excused. Especially since NwN campaign, at least in expansions, wasn't all that bad. Again, you can play other player's mods offline.

I'd rather play NwN with a Baldur's Gate module (possible, and probably exists) than Baldur's Gate without anything to prolong the game experience.

Again, NWN didn't have 95% worth of multiplayer.

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove by your last statement. Sure, Baldur's Gate in NWN's engine would be cool, but it would be just as cool in NWN2's engine, or any other engine that's more up-to-date than the original one.

Okay, sucked was a bad expression. "Wasn't as good or memory-falling as the first game". Seriously, what do I remember from KotOR 2?

...Oh, I remember the ending made no sense and was cut short at least 5 hours too soon.

...So in other words, you're criticizing a game you know nothing about, and can't think of a good reason other than mindless Obsidian-bashing. Good to know.

Compared. To. Previous. Games. We're talking about Obsidian making sequels that are worse than the previous game. You want to know a company that makes better sequels than first games? Blizzard, Bioware, Valve.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember any of those companies ever taking over another company's franchises.

Yes, it does. And you can't compare different genres, for Christ's sake. I won't say that, for instance, Sims 3 is better than Diablo 2 because it has better rating (didn't check, just an example). I don't care, because I don't like sim games (most of them).

If Baldur's Gate 2 has better score than Baldur's Gate or Icewind Dale, it means they are better RPGs. In the sense of "better games in the RPG genre".

Even assuming that blindly trusting review sites proves anything, I still don't see how ratings upwards of 80/100 mean a game sucks.

I realize that the Obsidian sequels have had technical issues, but their writing, pacing, characters, and design have been consistently top-notch. I'm also not saying they're somehow better than Bioware, but in these cases the mentioned aspects of both games were simply superior to the originals in all but a few ways. Even if you think that the parts that didn't improve with the sequels weight heavier than those aspects that did, it's a gross exaggeration to say that these games sucked, or that Obsidian 'ruined' those franchises in any way. It's even more ridiculous to make such wild claims considering that KotOR2's biggest flaw was completely out of Obsidian's hands, as they were forced by their publisher to release an unfinished product.

I don't mean to say that Obsidian is perfect, or even that they're objectively better than Bioware (I haven't played it myself, but Alpha Protocol appears to be proof that they're not). I'm just saying that the endless whining about Obsidian is based on ignorance and exaggeration at best and just plain pathetic fanboyism at worst.