Pre-order Dungeon Siege 3 on Steam, get parts one and two for free
Steam pre-orders for Dungeon Siege 3 will receive Dungeon Siege and Dungeon Siege 2 for free.
Square Enix and Valve are partnering up to triple the siege-value for those who pre-order Dungeon Siege 3 from Steam. Order the Gearbox-developed ">Dungeon Siege 3 in advance of release, and you'll receive free copies of the first two titles in the series made by Gas Powered Games.
"Selecting Steamworks to be integrated into the upcoming Dungeon Siege 3 title made perfect sense as we wanted to provide the best possible gameplay experience for PC gamers and long-standing fans of the series," said David Hoffman, executive producer for Dungeon Siege 3.
Featuring four unique playable characters, four-player online cooperative play, as well as two-player local co-op, Dungeon Siege 3 is due to launch on PC, Xbox 360, and PlayStation 3. Recently delayed, the game is now expected to release on June 17.
-
Shacknews
replyComment on Pre-order Dungeon Siege 3 on Steam, get parts one and two for free, by Jeff Mattas.
-
I'm going to take this opportunity to ask what people didn't like about DS2. The general consensus seems to be that it wasn't a good game. On the whole it seemed better to me than DS1. I've always wanted to know where everyone is coming from when they say this. Please enlighten me.
-
The game classes were not compelling or interesting and the story was uninspiring. It was generic fantasy trope of the worst kind where the quests/acts completely failed to draw a player into the world (much like Titan Quest).
Also the sound design was lackluster. There was not a lot of umph to your attacks or damage dealing. Compare it to Diablo where, even at a low level, you feel overwhelmingly powerful as you wield out meaty death. Every hit had a strong sound of impact and enemies would explode from the power of your strikes.
That's what games like DS2 (and TQ) are missing.-
Interesting. The funny thing is, what I remember most of DS2 is running around with the mini-dragon and two archers, and using Jesus Arrow every 5 seconds to just demolish shit left and right - most of the time with large bloody explosions.
I definitely see where you're coming from though, and I think maybe it's just a difference of approach.
Hopefully with the polish delay that DS3 got we'll see details like this ironed out in the final release.-
I remember trying to play multiplayer when it first came out and having massive trouble doing anything. It took forever to get to work, and when we finally all got connected up on LAN the multiplayer balancing was very strange. Multiplayer was what made the first game great, IMO...my friends all felt disappointed.
A couple of patches later, same problems.
-
-
-
DS1 LOA was the best. They changed too much of the core fun gameplay with DS2. This pre-order deal is only worth it if it includes the LOA expansion and the DS 2 xpac as well as both of the games being updated to work with Win7 and current video cards.
-
Can't say as I know as I liked it enough to finish, and play the expansion. I will say it felt like the actual combat mechanics weren't quite visceral, and the feedback in Diablo 2 was probably better. With some tweaking it probably would have felt better. Maybe had animations been more like Dawn of War? I will say, going back to an early area with a wizard and gibing an enemy with a punch was amusing in DS.
I know I loved the sound when the big ability became ready. -
It was awesome. But having no random dungeons absolutely killed replayability
-
I remember the controls being poop. They claimed they'd made the ai for your goons better than DS1, but I liked it less. Seemed like they roamed a lot more and got in more trouble than 1.
And they added LOTS and LOTS more clickies. Chests and urns and stuff. I mean, everyone loves clickies, right? But it was *stupid* the amount of stuff you could find. Normal people may have liked it, but I'm a map-clearer and I hated it.
I know I didn't finish it, but I also struggled the last 5 or 10 hours of DS1, too. ymmv.
Pack dinos were okay, though.
-
-
Er, isn't Obsidian developing it?
-
Yup. I fully expect it to be some combination of buggy as hell, incomplete, and/or possessing significant poorly conceived/implemented gameplay mechanics or scenarios.
On the other hand, it's an action-RPG that's being delayed for "polish". Maybe this will be the game that doesn't succumb to Obsidian's habit of planning more significantly more than they have the time or QA to effectively produce.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
I've never heard of or played any of these games. Can someone give me an idea of what other games it is like, or what the game play style is?
-
[deleted]
-
It's a Diablo-type game but controls differently. You have a party of characters and there's a lot of AI control, though IIRC you can pause and issue commands if need be.
-
ARPGs with no hard set paths, for the most part you learn abilities and stats as you use the things associated with them. Typically a party between 5-8 depending on the game, though typically more in the older, but with no real backstory to them. You can setup some basic rules for spell casters in DS2, and can toggle attack modes (continuous or click). Still, they feel somewhat floaty, and don't have much of a story grab, though the DS1 co-op campaign, expansion, and DS2 are better in the story aspect.
Technically they're pretty neat, as everything is streamed in and out of memory on the fly so the only loading screen is when you start (though giant elevators/teleporters kind of cheat). Also there's an Ultima 6 remake for DS1, maybe Ultima 5 as well.-
Yeah, basically here is how it works:
Want to make a melee guy? Use a sword, and you'll get better with it.
Want to make an archer? Use a bow, and you'll get better with it.
Want to make a combat mage? Use combat spells, and you'll get better with them.
Want to make a nature mage? Use nature spells, and you'll get better with them.
It's a very natural system that just makes sense.
-
Thanks everyone!
-
-
The game has been console'd again :( Seriously...DS1 had either 8 or 16 player coop. 10 years later, due to the fucking console crowd (due to this being a multiplatform game) and their love for 4 player only coop on one screen (dumb idea unless it's mortal kombat, etc. where everything takes place on the same screen instead of cookie cutting the entire thing. They should make 2 versions of this game...one for consoles and 4 player coop, then one for PC's and up to 64-128 player coop. Our computers can handle it even if consoles can't. Console hardware is currently 4 to 5 entire generations behind just in video cards, not to mention how we have up to 12 core cpu's out now, on average of 8x more ram than consoles, and internet speeds have increased at least marginally over the past 5 years. When will companies get it that different crowds need to be catered to, and that they should set the bar high, such as with the pc crowd, then dumb it down for consoles. Going the other way pisses everyone off due to how shallow everything is. You can't make a complex game when you only have 16 buttons to work with. I have 9 buttons just on my mouse, then another 108 or so keys on my keyboard. /end rant
-
Stop whining like a 12 year old child. Did it ever occur to you that due a number of reasons, it wouldn't support 8-16 player coop? Lets list just a few:
- Performance
- Map design
- Balancing nightmare
- Spell effects of 8-16 players would essentially make it look like someone shit a rainbow on a screen and you wouldn't be able to find your character.
- Loot distribution
- They didn't feel like it.
Diablo 3 will also likely have only 4 player support and I think its perfectly fine. Torchlight II also said the sweet spot in their test sessions was 1-4 players.
"We haven't set the party maximum just yet. The sweet spot, just from playing in the office, is 1-4 players. There's no technological reason why we can't increase that, but once you get up to, like, eight players, it gets ridiculously crowded if you're at all in the same area."-
4 player co-op killed my parents and stole my girlfriend. :(
-
-
Hide your kids, hide your wife, hide your husband.
-
-
-
Let's see...
I have played 128 player games of Savage: Battle for Newerth
64 player games of Counter Strike: Source
4v4 games of Supreme Commander
10 player games of Heroes of Newerth
70+ player games of Freelancer
4v4 games of Left 4 Dead 1 and 2
8 - 12 player Dungeon Siege 1
Debunked your performence myth
Map design: Who says you need to design every map like a coridor? Debunked
Balancing: Scale the monsters in hp, damage, and quantity. Debunked.
Spell effects: Reduce bloom.
Loot distribution: Fixed via balancing by increased number of monsters.
This isn't DIablo 3.
This isn't Torchlight 2.
Again, where did you come up with performence being a limiting attribute? Are you still on a Pentium 4 Prescott/Northwood? Unless you're running hardware from 4+ generations ago, you shouldn't have a hitch. If you have at least a duel core cpu along with 2GB ram, a Radeon 2800/3800 series, and a hamster on a wheel for your power supply, you should be good to go. Now quit your bitching about TRIVIAL problems a 12 year old could fix. Also, keep your arguments on topic. Your comments regarding how Diablo 3 and Torchlight 2 play are irrelivent to how Dungeon Siege 3 plays. They're different games by different companies that only have the style of gameplay in common. Once you get into technical details, they run, play, and feel different.
-
-
-
8 player. I was wrong about 16 player :P
http://www.microsoft.com/games/dungeonsiege/10.aspx-
8 characters, dude. Not 8 players. http://www.co-optimus.com/game/1120/pc/dungeon-siege.html
-
-
-
-
-
I think I would be good with just updating the graphics with a modern engine and textures of the original. DS2 just wasn't enough for me to keep playing it. I've unfortunately lost my discs to DS1, not to mention the DX8 engine is just ugly now. Very fond memories of the original. LOVED the soundtrack.
-
I spent countless hours playing the first one. Loved that game.
-
