Average User Score: 5.8Dec 21, 2013My brief background: I've been a gamer since the 1980s, a PC gamer since 1991. Though I'm not a hardcore fan of Tolkien, I am a fanMy brief background: I've been a gamer since the 1980s, a PC gamer since 1991. Though I'm not a hardcore fan of Tolkien, I am a fan nevertheless I have a lifetime subscription in Lord of the Rings Online after all. Also, I play LoL and DotA2 regularly, having played HoN in the past as well.
I wanted to like this game, I really did. Seeing as it is a console port, I had next to no expectations of it, but even these almost nonexistent expectations have not been fully met. One of these expectations was to be able to customize my controls and graphics options. Even though I didn't need to do it in the end (I have a good enough PC and I'm more or less used to the control scheme they went for here), I expect a PC game to allow me to adjust at least those two options. I mean, look at Dust: An Elysian Tail a godlike 1-man indie game that had come out on consoles and was later ported by the same one guy to the PC in an EXEMPLARY fashion.
It's sad, really. The game itself seems like an interesting entry-level DotA/MobA/whatever set in a great world, with familiar protagonists and nice enough graphics (except the portrait art what's the deal with disfigured hand-drawn portraits of faces I am expected to know?), reasonable in-battle mechanics focused on immediate action and base upgrades instead of picking the right item build and farming money to afford it, and offering enough metagame complexity in the form of runes and gems to keep those more demanding interested if played on a console.
On the PC, the experience is extremely disappointing. What's also disappointing is the monetization model: Dozens of dollars for the game, still requiring micropayments/DLCs or weeks of playing afterwards to be able to afford most of the basic/mandatory stuff? Again, maybe on a console (LMAO Forza 5) where the game is reportedly decent, but who the hell would subject themselves to this on a PC where the market is extremely oversaturated, with the genre's pinnacles being readily available, even free to play, and incomparably more user-friendly (with enough players playing them to actually play with/against)?
I spent good 3 hours on this game, which is 3 hours more than I should have, because that's 3 hours I could have spent playing all the far better PC games I have, including LoL and Lord of the Rings Online, both of which offer an almost infinitely better experience than this game does.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.3Jul 23, 2012This game, more than any other one I've played in the recent years, has reminded me that people are supposed to have fun while playing. IfThis game, more than any other one I've played in the recent years, has reminded me that people are supposed to have fun while playing. If your idea of fun does not consist mainly of headshotting virtual avatars, getting somewhere in the shortest time possible or butchering hordes of evil minions, consider giving this game a try. If you like to think, make sense of things or solve puzzles/mysteries/whatever needs to be solved and if you enjoy weird humour, trippy sounds and visuals or absurd surprises, you'll love this game. If you like easter eggs or just clicking on things to see what happens, this is a MUST for you. I've spent maybe half the time clicking on the environment to see what happens and deliberately not progressing through the game and I got not only quite a lot of good laughs out of it, but the game even rewarded me for having fun by a few fun surprises at the end. Which is telling, because the developes themselves clearly had a lot of fun making this game. From the quaint yet charming story and weird yet gorgeous visuals to the wonderfully trippy sound effects, all of which consist of either voices or musical instruments. From the introductory animation the game invites you to have FUN. Which I certainly did.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.7Dec 31, 2011I loved it. Beuatiful art style, no text dialogues, great puzzles. Reminds me a lot of Neverhood. Have finished it without using a singleI loved it. Beuatiful art style, no text dialogues, great puzzles. Reminds me a lot of Neverhood. Have finished it without using a single hint. Limbo+Sequence+Machinarium = Indie Supergames. Enough said.… Expand
Average User Score: 4.6Jul 10, 2011Intended specifically for those who ask: "WHY ALL THE NEGATIVITY?"
This game is a spit in the eye of fans of all kinds. Literally. Let meIntended specifically for those who ask: "WHY ALL THE NEGATIVITY?"
This game is a spit in the eye of fans of all kinds. Literally. Let me explain:
DS1 was a great game: you literally started out as a farmer who went bashing heads with his/her pitchfork/hoe/whatever crude tool. On your way you met tons of other characters who you could recruit into your party as peers, thus making it essentially a squad-oriented action RPG game, with characters improving their skills and attributes by actually using them, mostly in combat. The combat was semi-automatic, with the player issuing orders as to what enemies to attack, who to move back for healing, what group formation to assume, etc. It was like an action-oriented baldur's gate in 3D (with incredible graphics for that time), with a simple, linear story and a varied, albeit linear world with non-respawning mobs, with a reasonable replayability value.
DS2 set the game in a different place in the same world, took what made DS1 great and made it even better: improved graphics, added talent trees, better group and pet management and controls, adding diablo2-style waypoints, character-specific sidequests, respawning mobs (again, diablo2-style) and incredibly fun LAN multiplayer that was stained only by horrible internet connection problems via GameSpy. It also had great replayability by offering additional difficulty modes (like Diablo-esque "normal-nightmare-hell"), each additional difficulty mode adding 1 more character slot to your party. YAY!
DS3? The only thing it has in common with those two is a few names here and there. - Groups gone.
- Pets gone.
- Combat has changed from "passive tactical realtime group control" to a "active single-character battle with the controls".
- Completely redesigned and horribly stunted controls for PC with no f***ing customization option!
- Character creation/progression completely redesigned and horribly simplified.
- Completely linear and very NARROW world. DS1+2 relied on linearity for progression and the world itself was vast and varied.
- Pathetic itemization.
- Multiplayer is ridiculously laughable.
- Industrial-age Britain? Gremlins?! ROBOTS?!!
+- An average story.
- An average story/background combining elements from DS1 lore with unrelated DS2 lore, adding immolated women, Gremlins and ROBOTS for f***'s sake.
+ The humour was mostly okay.
+ Better graphics.
It if hadn't been named "Dungeon Siege", I could have easily seen it as a game with a 6-7 score. The graphics are good, voice acting was okay (why are there so many people with strange - read "Slavic" - accents in this game?) the humour often made me laugh, I don't mind the style of the cutscenes, and there are bits and pieces of the game that I really liked and enjoyed. Yes, it could have been longer, the controls better, etc. That didn't bother me all that much. Well, it did bother me but it wouldn't have, if I hadn't been constantly reminded of the fact that it's supposed to be a "Dungeon Siege" game. The horribly cobbled together lore, the characters constantly referencing names and/or places from the previous games simply gave me no pause. This game is NOT a successor of DS1+2 in any way, shape or even form.
And that's why it's a spit in the eye of fans.… Expand