Topic: Dungeon Siege III Thread -- Taylor plans solo-hero focus, not big parties

[MysterD]

Chris Taylor has revealed a little bit of his plans for Dungeon Siege III with Eurogamer Germany.

And he plans to basically do away w/ parties, which will make it more of a solo-hero focus -- which is what Space Siege will be doing.

Gas Powered Games boss Chris Taylor has spoken of a third Dungeon Siege game.

Speaking exclusively to Eurogamer Germany, he said it would do away with the group focus of the previous games in favour a single hero similar to his current project Space Siege.

"There will be some things that are very much like Dungeon Siege 1 and 2, but some things will be simplified. I am done with multi-character parties; I really think that it's all going to be about a single hero. It's too much to manage," Taylor told our German network buddies.

Dungeon Siege made a name for itself by playing-down storyline, attribute and skill tweaking, and controls, so it could lump hordes of enemies on you and your party. Which it did. A lot.

It managed middle-of-the-road scores that were bumped up significantly by its 2005 sequel, which had more of a plot and generally tidied up a lot of the criticisms of the first. Still no Diablo II, mind you.

Taylor is currently working on Space Siege for SEGA, a single-player PC role-playing game more focused on traditional values of story with action to accompany it, although he is still all for action. Pop over to our Space Siege preview to find out more.

Gas Powered Games also gave us real-time strategy beast Supreme Commander, which was very good but a bit hardcore for all but the committed.

All of Gas Powered Games' titles, including Space Siege, have been exclusively made for PC.

Both the Xbox 360 Supreme Commander conversion and Dungeon Siege: Throne of Agony for PSP were handled by third-parties.

Look out for the full Chris Taylor interview on Eurogamer Germany later today.

[Quemaqua]

Well, step in the right direction, but considering how crappy I thought the last 2 games were, I think it's safe to say I don't care about this one either.

[MysterD]

I would like to see more RPG's with bigger parties to control, myself.

It just seems a lot of the newer RPG's never have more than THREE for you to command at once. I miss the old Infinity Engine days (Planescape, BG) and original Dungeon Siege, where you controlled big parties of 5 and 6.

[Quemaqua]

Not I.  I hate big parties.  I like to have a single character with deep progression, not a bunch of minions with shallow progression.

[MysterD]

Not I.  I hate big parties.  I like to have a single character with deep progression, not a bunch of minions with shallow progression.

Don't get me wrong.
I do like single-character progressions, too.

It just seems especially of late, there's a lot less of the 4-6 party members to control format.

[idolminds]

I'm with Que, I generally hate having to party (in singleplayer RPGs).

[Quemaqua]

And don't get me wrong, I've long loved Baldur's Gate and Planescape: Torment, but those were exceptional games in many regards, and I think the relative simplicity of character development actually helped rather than hindered those.  That was much more about the setting and story for me... such top notch games.  Dungeon Siege can't compete in even the smallest detail, on any level, to those.

[Xessive]

I agree with Que. I've never really been a fan of big groups. It was one of the main issues I had with NWN2 as well.

I'm curious about all changes they'll add to make DS3 stand out.

[MysterD]

To Que

And don't get me wrong, I've long loved Baldur's Gate and Planescape: Torment, but those were exceptional games in many regards, and I think the relative simplicity of character development actually helped rather than hindered those.

Actually, I thought the character development of the companions Aerie (BG II) and both Fall-From-Grace and Dak'kon were excellent (PS:T). I also thought Planescape has some of the best character development and prose in RPG's that was ever done.

And I think one other excellent companion I can think of was the drow-girl that was at constant inner-conflict (from being born an evil drow, but always wanted to do actual good) from NWN: Hordes.

That was much more about the setting and story for me... such top notch games.  Dungeon Siege can't compete in even the smallest detail, on any level, to those.

No way can the DS games even compare to the Infinity Engine games (Planescape and BG). DS games are nowhere on the level of the Infinity games in pretty much every regard.

DS2: Broken World looked like a step in the right direction, to me -- especially in comparison to DS2: Original. The characters were much more interesting (just look at Nessa, the dark sorceress who uses her dark powers for only good), the destroyed world was way more interesting, and the party members actually said stuff to you sometimes (more than ever in the past).

To Xessive

I agree with Que. I've never really been a fan of big groups. It was one of the main issues I had with NWN2 as well.

This is what I enjoyed about NWN2 -- controlling an entire party, like in the Infinity Engine and Fallout 2 days. The AI was decent enough, for the most part -- except with Elanee always wanting to use her morph skill at every chance (annoying!). Though, I was often controlling the party fully, anyways.

I'm curious about all changes they'll add to make DS3 stand out.

I will definitely look forward to DS3, after enjoying DS2: Broken World -- even if they're tossing the party aspect out. Yeah, especially if Taylor announces that Stardock will publish DS3.

I just wish more RPG's these days catered to the "full party-control" thing and/or having big parties (over three party members), these days. There seems to be less and less of them, as time goes along. Probably b/c there were SO MANY of them, in the late 1990's to early 2000's.

[Quemaqua]

Note that I wasn't talking about fiction, MyD, but mechanical depth.  The Infinity Engine games had very little customization and very little interesting character growth on a mechanical level.  It made having a party bearable since not much could be "done" with them.  Mostly that's a bad thing for games, but it worked with those.  It didn't work at all with Dungeon Siege because the gameworld was generic as fuck and everything felt meaningless.

[MysterD]

Note that I wasn't talking about fiction, MyD, but mechanical depth.  The Infinity Engine games had very little customization and very little interesting character growth on a mechanical level.

Ahhhh, you mean on the character-building (leveling-up) aspect...

It made having a party bearable since not much could be "done" with them.

The 2nd Edition D&D Rules are definitely not as flexible as the 3rd Edition -- you really could only do so much w/ those 2nd Edition rules, w/ your character. Lots of restrictions and whatnot.

I prefer the 3rd Edition rules, myself -- way more open-ended, for building up your character's skills, abilities, and whatnot.

Mostly that's a bad thing for games, but it worked with those.

I think that's b/c you can have a huge party, in which the NPC's are basically most of the important classes in the book. So, you'd have a party with a huge balance, by the time you got SIX in your party -- say a Paladin, Fighter, Mage, Thief, Cleric, Ranger, etc etc. And by the time you reached end-game and didn't do a hell of a lot of side quests, still all your characters will be very powerful and specialized. Everything base is covered.

Normally in RPG's, with only one character, if you have an Open-Class System (unlike D&D), it'd really take forever to become a very Powerful Jack-Of-All-Trades. That means normally doing WAY more than just the main quest. Morrowind and Oblivion's a perfect example of this.

It didn't work at all with Dungeon Siege because the gameworld was generic as fuck and everything felt meaningless.

DS1 and DS2, the world felt like your usual fantasy settings. It was just there, basically -- and unfortunately.

DS2: Broken World was much better, in creating an interesting world. With most of the world destroyed (and you, the Hero from DS2: Original being blamed for it), the way your party treats you (some like you, some hate you), and how other NPC's treat you (mostly like you're a nothing), it's much more interesting in the DS World than every before. It still is an action-RPG w/ the heavy action focus, but it finally had an interesting world and atmosphere (compared to what it was before). It was much better than feeling like these NPC's were just giving you quests and nothing more.

[Quemaqua]

DS2 was definitely better, but it still wasn't good.

[Cobra951]

So it's going to be another me-too one-character game.  The interesting thing about DS is how well it let you control the entire party.  You could set up general rules, like most games, then it had what I considered a brilliant approach to allow as much individual party member micromanagement as the player wants.  The moment-to-moment control worked, and very well.  This was scaled way back in DS 2, and so I didn't like it as well, though I still stuck with it.  Now, I guess they're abandoning the idea of advanced party control altogether.

I'm not against lone-character adventures.  We have plenty of those.  What made DS stand out was something else entirely, and I'm sorry to hear it's melting into the crowd.

[MysterD]

So it's going to be another me-too one-character game.

Yup. As if we don't have enough of those "lone hero" RPG's already, during this modern era and upcoming ones in this era -- Gothic series, Witcher, Elder Scrolls games (Morrowind, Oblivion), the upcoming Fallout 3, Sacred series, Titan Quest, Diablo series, etc etc.

Yeah, where'd the strategy RPG with the bigger parties go? I guess there were too many "party RPG's" during the 90's and early 2000's -- Planescape, Icewind Dale series, BG series, Fallout 1 and 2, NWN2, ToEE, Arcanum, etc etc.

The interesting thing about DS is how well it let you control the entire party.  You could set up general rules, like most games, then it had what I considered a brilliant approach to allow as much individual party member micromanagement as the player wants.

Exactly. 

The moment-to-moment control worked, and very well.

Agreed.

This was scaled way back in DS 2, and so I didn't like it as well, though I still stuck with it.  Now, I guess they're abandoning the idea of advanced party control altogether.

At least in DS2: Broken World, they brought back (some of) the party formations that were in the original DS.

I'm not against lone-character adventures.  We have plenty of those.  What made DS stand out was something else entirely, and I'm sorry to hear it's melting into the crowd.

Exactly.

Regardless, I'll probably wind up playing DS3 b/c it's a Action-RPG -- yes, especially if Stardock winds up publishing. I wouldn't be surprised if that does happen, with Stardock publishing the upcoming Demigod.

[MysterD]

Taylor says that he's just kicking ideas for DS3 around, currently.

Don't expect a DS3 soon, guys -- probably 'cause they busy w/ Space Siege and Demigod, I'd bet....

Maybe we'll see DS3 sometime in the distant future...

Gas Powered Games boss Chris Taylor has clarified his comments discussing what he'd like to do in Dungeon Siege 3 - which is not 'officially planned', he says.

Advertisement:
Click Here!
Taylor told CVG, "When asked if we were considering taking lessons learned from Space Siege back into the Dungeon Siege series, the answer was, yes.

"The example I gave was the multi-character parties... saying I was done with the big parties, because it really took the focus away from the main hero. In fact, in Dungeon Siege, it was hard to really have a 'main' hero, so-to-speak."

Space Siege, published by Sega, is the unofficial successor to the Dungeon series, and switches focus onto a main character who you must decide whether to mechanically enhance or keep as human as possible.

If the prospect of the same story-enhanced set-up in the Dungeon Siege universe sounds appealing to you, don't get to excited - because Taylor says the third game isn't happening yet.

"We have not made any official announcements, or have any official plans, but we are kicking ideas around, and that's no secret," he said.

"It would be a long time before another DS game was finished and saw the light of day..."

EDIT:
Translation, in other words -- expect MyD to revive this thread in a good 3-5 years or so!