Game News Six Things You Didn't Know About Dungeon Siege III

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Tags: Dungeon Siege III; Obsidian Entertainment

<p><em>The third game in the beloved <em>Dungeon Siege</em> series is well underway by Obsidian Entertainment</em>, and so USA today decided to <a href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gamehunters/post/2010/12/six-things-you-didnt-know-about-dungeon-siege-iii/1" target="_blank">compile a list with tidbits of info</a> we likely didn't know about <strong>Dungeon Siege III</strong>. Or we did.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Start your engine</strong>. This game is the first to use Obsidian's proprietary Onyx game engine. <em>Dungeon Siege III</em> is a perfect opportunity for us to show what we can do with our own internal technology. While Onyx is fine tuned for RPG production, it also is graphically powerful and was built with our art director's vision in mind.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I'm undecided. Is Obsidian trying themselves at an own engine good or bad news?</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Loot, there it is</strong>. In <em>Dungeon Siege III</em>, players will have access to over 15,000 pieces of equipment. In an action RPG like ours, extensive loot is key, and we strive to make sure that players will get the pleasure of finding items throughout the entire game.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Phat lewtz don't hurt.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Spotted at: <a href="http://www.gamebanshee.com/news/100830-six-things-you-didnt-know-about-dungeon-siege-iii.html">Gamebanshee</a></p>

 

[Crooked Bee]

If DS3 manages to actually be good, especially combat- and loot-wise, ITZ will surely happen.

 

[.Sigurd]

Phat lewtz don't hurt.

True. But own egine coming from Obsidian? meh...

 

[IronicNeurotic]

Phat lewtz don't hurt.

True. But own egine coming from Obsidian? meh...

We'll see. That really can go both ways. Using the engine that you created yourself and fits your needs can only benefit. Its not like they could beat BethesdaGamebryo in beeing a piece of shit.


This though

Ehb and flow. Our Creative Lead Designer, George Ziets, created a large Ehb Sourcebook (reminiscent of the Forgotten Realms Gazetteers for all of you Dungeons & Dragons nerds out there. You know who you are!). He took all the lore that he could find from the first two games and advanced the land of Ehb over 150 years. He built this tome in consultation with [series creator] Chris Taylor who was responsible for the original Dungeon Siege games. Richness of story and setting has always been a hallmark of Obsidian games and Dungeon Siege III is no exception.

Ziets must have worked his ass off considering you could sum up the lore of DS in a single page.

 

[Nex]

We all know phat loot is the most important feature of an rpg

 

[SimpleComplexity]

You can't judge the game untill you like it.

 

[Morkar Left]

I'm undecided. Is Obsidian trying themselves at an own engine good or bad news?

At least it will show if their bugs are related to the crappy engines from others or related to their programmers.

 

[racofer]

You can't judge the game untill you like it.

I can hardly imagine how great it will be with a brand new engine from no one else than Obshitian.

 

[Dyspaire]

Of all the intellectual properties to 'build up', why choose this one?

Initially I thought the reason for making a game called Dungeon Siege III at all, was based on using Chris Taylor's engine and tech. If they're instead using an in-house engine, why oh why use one of THE weakest settings in gaming history?

Guys. Seriously. Off the top of my head, I know that Larry Niven's Known Space IP is unlicensed at present. There are dozens more.

Hell there's probably 20 better IPs in the public domain.

Good luck and all that, but you're choosing weak tea from the get-go.

2c

 

[SimpleComplexity]

You can't judge the game untill you like it.

I can hardly imagine how great it will be with a brand new engine from no one else than Obshitian.

Don't judge the engine until you like it.

 

[KalosKagathos]

I'm undecided. Is Obsidian trying themselves at an own engine good or bad news?

It's the ultimate test of Obsidian's coding prowess. Technical issues of their past games can be explained by their unfamiliarity with the technology coupled with tight deadlines. Won't fly now. Either they'll finally transcend the reputation of being crappy coders, or they'll live with it until the end of times.

Of all the intellectual properties to 'build up', why choose this one?

Initially I thought the reason for making a game called Dungeon Siege III at all, was based on using Chris Taylor's engine and tech. If they're instead using an in-house engine, why oh why use one of THE weakest settings in gaming history?

Because they can do whatever the hell they want with it, as there's not much canon to consider?

 

[Radisshu]

George Ziets created MotB. I believe in George Ziets, even though I don't like action RPGs and thus probably won't be playing this.

 

[.Sigurd]

We all know phat loot is the most important feature of an rpg

Absolutism in your (or anyone) opinions are a really bad idea.

 

[KalosKagathos]

George Ziets created MotB. I believe in George Ziets, even though I don't like action RPGs and thus probably won't be playing this.

Someone suffered through the EPIC MotB combat without many reservations, yet considers himself too cool for a Diablo clone? hahaohwow.jpg

 

[Radisshu]

George Ziets created MotB. I believe in George Ziets, even though I don't like action RPGs and thus probably won't be playing this.

Someone suffered through the EPIC MotB combat without many reservations, yet considers himself too cool for a Diablo clone? hahaohwow.jpg

Yes, I prefer semi turn-based combat to action RPGs. hahaohwow.jpg retard.jpg

 

[Unkillable Cat]

DS3 will have 15000 pieces of loot?

Great. The original DS had at least a thousand different pieces and that was about 900 pieces too many.

 

[KalosKagathos]

semi turn-based combat

What.

 

[Serious_Business]

Thread = more like obshitian turd dungeon trololo

Thread inclined motherfuckers.

 

[Radisshu]

semi turn-based combat

What.

Yes. Battles in NWN, NWN2, and the Infinity games feature "turns" or "phases", but can't be considered turn-based since they progress without player input. For example, drinking a potion takes X amount of a turn, casting a spell takes an entire turn, so your mose quickness won't matter as much. Diablo II doesn't feature turns, and just lets you do new shit as soon as you can click.

 

[KalosKagathos]

Yes. Battles in NWN, NWN2, and the Infinity games feature "turns" or "phases", but can't be considered turn-based since they progress without player input. For example, drinking a potion takes X amount of a turn, casting a spell takes an entire turn, so your mose quickness won't matter as much. Diablo II doesn't feature turns, and just lets you do new shit as soon as you can click.

They still have simultaneous movement, which is kind of a big deal.

 

[Kron]

Yes. Battles in NWN, NWN2, and the Infinity games feature "turns" or "phases", but can't be considered turn-based since they progress without player input. For example, drinking a potion takes X amount of a turn, casting a spell takes an entire turn, so your mose quickness won't matter as much. Diablo II doesn't feature turns, and just lets you do new shit as soon as you can click.

Cool story bro.
Infinity engine is no more turn based than Diablo. Not that I dislike it, but it doesn't feature turns: all actions, including attacks and casting have a speed factor which determines the frequency with which the action occurs, just like in Diablo.
The false impression you get of it progressing "without player input" - no player input means turn based? So FF XII is the most turn based game EVER! - is due to the fact that you can pause the game and assign tasks.

Also

They still have simultaneous movement, which is kind of a big deal.

 

[Azrael the cat]

Overall, the creation of their own engine is probably a good thing, but it actually makes me more certain that DS3 is unlikely to be one of their better efforts.

Think about it for a moment. Firstly, this is an unashamed action-rpg from a shamelessly hack-slash-and-turn-your-brain-off series of screensavers/games. It's Obsidian doing their take on a Diablo clone (ok, maybe party based, but you get the idea). Personally, that's not what I buy an Obsidian game for - they've never been great action/arcade developers.

Secondly, this is (by their standards) a very expensive game, new engine and all. They'd be aiming for a summer-blockbuster type of seller in order to recoup the costs of creating a new engine, let alone the art and design (even though it's an existing IP, the DS licence is almost a blank slate - even the mechanics would need to be redone). The closest comparison is probably NWN2 - I'd expect that this will have a similar target audience. Obsidian usually tries to play it broad and safe when working on an expensive new product.

Obsidian seems to do their best work on their lower-cost products. When using an existing engine and IP for an expansion (or a 'NV' version) they get to put their spin on it, add some good writing and allow for some more risky/innovative mechanics. Dungeon Siege seems exactly like the kind of licence that they'd use when doing the first game on a new engine - a broad, safe-and-boring licence.

I'm also not overly optimistic about this being a low-bug experience, given their track record. But frankly I'm not bothered by bugs, or even system performance - if I can grow up on blob graphics and turnbased, I can deal with some stuttering and chugging along. And I've never had a game of theirs ruined by bugs - maybe I'm just lucky, but for me they've all been minor stuff if any - but more importantly, bugs are eventually fixed. I'm too old to get annoyed about waiting a month for a patch if needed. Some of my favourite games have been unplayable on release (as in immediate crash-to-desktop unplayable: I'm talking about Bloodlines and SS).

But if the engine turns out to be decent, it could well mean some good games down the road a bit. If it allows them to crank out a few lower-cost games with a familiar engine, hence allowing a bit more freedom and creativity, I'm all for it. I just really wouldn't expect anything from DS though. Maybe something along the level of NWN2 - which I enjoyed enough to finish, but not enough to replay.

 

[butsomuch]

Onyx Engine

 

[IronicNeurotic]

Personally, that's not what I buy an Obsidian game for - they've never been great action/arcade developers.
.

Dark Alliance 2.



Multiple members of that team are working on DS3. Nearly all artists but still.

Also Avellone has helped out on Dark Alliance 1 and Champions.


So there.

 

[Radisshu]

Yes. Battles in NWN, NWN2, and the Infinity games feature "turns" or "phases", but can't be considered turn-based since they progress without player input. For example, drinking a potion takes X amount of a turn, casting a spell takes an entire turn, so your mose quickness won't matter as much. Diablo II doesn't feature turns, and just lets you do new shit as soon as you can click.

Cool story bro.
Infinity engine is no more turn based than Diablo. Not that I dislike it, but it doesn't feature turns: all actions, including attacks and casting have a speed factor which determines the frequency with which the action occurs, just like in Diablo.

Uh, no. There are turn-based factors, like casting spells. No matter how quick your character is, you can only cast one spell each turn (which is why sometimes characters will appear to do nothing even when they've got a spell queued up - it's because they're waiting for the next turn). There's even a toggle which auto-pauses the game at the end of each turn, so they definitely play out.

The false impression you get of it progressing "without player input" - no player input means turn based? So FF XII is the most turn based game EVER! - is due to the fact that you can pause the game and assign tasks.

It's pretty obvious that I meant that the turns progress without player input, which means they progress in real time, which means it's real time with "turns", I think people on the codex have called that type of combat phase-based before.

So, yeah, it's very different from pure real time (which dragon age, for example, is an example of - it features cooldowns instead of "only X times per turn"). And @KalosKAthagagfalos, uh, I never said it wasn't a big difference from real TB combat, dumbass, I just said that I prefer semi turn-based stuff to real time. Is that not allowed on newfag codex?