There are games that are reinvented with new formulas and made better for it. Dungeon Siege III is NOT ONE OF THEM.
Dungeon Siege has always been known as a game that concentrated more on the action, rather than its story. Dungeon Siege III tries desperately to break this mold, and although Obsidian managed to create a rather good story, the game fails in so many respects, that it seems like the developers sacrificed everything that was fun in the first two games to get it.
Graphically, Dungeon Siege III is far superior to its predecessor…but that's to be expected, considering the considerable time gap between the two. Being graphically superior to the game before it is a good thing---being graphically inferior to every other game that comes out today is not, and unfortunately, DSIII comes up short on this department. Character models look alright, but when they talk, they show little emotion, all of them looking like they are in some sort of dream-like stupor. Special effects range from bland to good, but never cross into the realm of 'amazing' or 'breathtaking'.
Some environments are pretty to look at, such as the city of Stonebridge or the Rukkenvahl valley, though some can be monotonous and devoid of variety, such as…well, pretty much everywhere else. Despite that, most seem to be rendered quite well. But this brings us to perhaps one of the more frustrating things that plagues Dungeon Siege III---FRUSTRATING CAMERA ANGLES and your complete LACK OF CAMERA CONTROL. There are only two camera options for you to choose from, an isometric view that's TOO TOP DOWN, and an over the shoulder chase camera view, that's oddly enough, ALSO TOO TOP-DOWN. The result is a camera angle that rarely gives you an adequate view of where you are going or what's coming at you, which is sad, because half the time, your companions are the ones that point out beautiful objects or places, but you can't see them, since the camera is so bad. As a result, there is never a 'WOW' moment in the game, where something takes your breath away visually.
But even worse, is when the uncooperative camera wreaks its havoc during combat. Unfortunately, half the challenge in Dungeon Siege III doesn't come from the enemies; it comes from the frustrating view, because you can't see enemies before they see you. If you're a ranged character, other ranged enemies will be able to detect and fire at you before you're even aware of them. Melee fares little better. Instead of adopting an "disappearing/invisible wall" or "see-through wall" such as games like Neverwinter Nights or a "player outline" system like Diablo 2 or Torchlight, which allowed you to see what was going on in case a player approached a wall, Obsidian opted for the camera to suddenly zoom in on your character, affording you a nice close up of your character's face and shoulders, all the while being pummelled by multiple enemies and you not being able to see what the hell is going on around you. It makes one wonder if anyone EVER play-tested this game. Did no one notice this?
Going into a new room is also bad. Since the game doesn't cut away the surrounding walls of a door, when you enter a new room you could literally walk into the midst of five or six enemies before you even know they're there, since you have no idea what's inside until it's too late. Even if they're only a few steps from the door, the wall simply doesn't disappear in time, and before you know it you've been knocked on your behind by a spellcaster across the room from an attack you could have easily avoided had you simply seen what was coming.
This wouldn't be so bad if the game wasn't so punishing, even on normal difficulty. A few hits from even the lowliest of enemies can be enough to kill you. I remember one instance when faced with multiple magic-wielding enemies, whose primary attack was casting a ball of energy that drove me back, one such attack caught me from behind, driving me into a wall. Since the player takes so long before getting back up, other magic-wielders cast the same spell over and over on top of me, and I was cornered by multiple melee type enemies, all the while trying to adjust the camera because I didn't know what was going on since it had zoomed in so close I didn't even know what was happening.
And the boss battles are even worse. Some boss battles actually zoom out in order to give you a better view of the battlefield, which makes sense, considering that you wouldn't want to find yourself surrounded. Which beggars the question---why does the battlefield zoom out at such an extreme angle to give you a better view of what's in FRONT of you, but not what's behind? That's right. In these boss battles your character is located at the extreme bottom of your screen, affording you an excellent view of what's in front of the PC, but even LESS of what's behind you than you would under normal gameplay. The result? You have no idea what's coming up behind you. And, all me to repeat myse0lf, it shows LESS than what you would normally see. And, as I said, in a game which is dreadfully punishing, where one spell or one hit can incapacitate you for several crucial moments, allowing other foes (and THERE WILL BE MANY OTHER FOES) to pummel you without you able to raise a single ounce of resistance.
This points us to the next problem, which is the basic control scheme. I imagine anyone who has played ANY console will immediately realize that Dungeon Siege III is a lazy console port to the PC. The fact that none of the controls can be remapped, and even the mere fact that you CAN'T EVEN STRAFE LEFT OR RIGHT is all indicative of the fact that DSIII SHOULD be played with a controller. YOU CAN ONLY MOVE FORWARD AND BACKWARD. The 'A' and 'D' keys move the camera instead. Normally, such an uncomfortable control scheme wouldn't be a problem---just remap the keys. But in the most extreme move, as if Obsidian were DELIBERATELY trying to show how lazy they were in porting this game to the PC, you CANNOT REMAP the controls.
Anyone who tries a keyboard-mouse configuration will find themselves scrambling to navigate the game's punishing combat sequences. In fact, there is little to no reliable target selection method in place in the game. You generally swing your sword in the direction your character is facing. Sometimes you can click on a foe behind you, and if you're lucky, you'll turn around. More often than not, however, you'll be stuck facing a foe that's in front of you, BUT FAR AWAY, since the game preferentially locks on to targets directly ahead, even if they aren't the immediate threat…even when they aren't even attacking you…even when a huge Cyclops is swinging his hammer right beside you. Changing targets isn't impossible, but it is certainly harder than it should be. You'd think that a game whose predecessors had their roots in the PC would have a simple control scheme. Click on enemy, attack selected enemy. But sadly, the LAZY shift from PC to console shows in this poor port, and as such, combat becomes much more difficult than it needs to be.
Now on to the gameplay itself, which, as I have mentioned, can be incredibly punishing even on normal mode. A few well-placed hits are enough to completely drain your health, and you are completely reliant on skills or items to regain your hitpoints. However, the combat is more frustrating than actually challenging. Apparently, making a "challenging" game to the developers meant throwing wave after wave after wave after wave of enemies at you, and then mixing them up so you have enemies that knock you down, stun you, throw you backwards, slow you down, and generally incapacitate you over and over and over again. Again, this wouldn't be so bad, and could make a challenging button-mashing action game---if it weren't for the absolutely ABSURD camera and control scheme. When you die in an action RPG, you're supposed to say "I didn't take the right approach…I should do this next time," or "I nearly had him, maybe if I do this instead". Instead, in Dungeon Siege III, you'll usually end up saying "If only that damn camera hadn't zoomed in at that particular time" or "Why did I dodge when I wanted to block" or "My character keeps targeting the wrong enemy!" Instead of challenging, the game ends up for frustrating, encouraging you to be lucky with how the camera acts, rather than skillful.
Most other boss battles are three-to-five hit kill affairs (meaning you die after three to five hits), but suffer from the same monotony. Get two or three shots in or maybe a lengthy special maneuver that does extra damage (not both, as you'll likely be sent on your *ss), dodge the (usually) unblockable attack, repeat. Few boss battles rise above this formula. In fact, the only variation seems to be how many OTHER enemies will join the fray to add extra "challenge" to the game. And when a boss hits you (and they usually hit hard), you'll be scrambling to use whatever health-acquiring skill you've got to try and mitigate the damage and recover HP (no health pots here)…which again requires you to run around, dodging attacks and waiting until you have enough life to again engage the enemy safely. When a dungeon crawler or action RPG has a character dodging and running around more than actually swinging his sword or firing her gun, that's a problem. Unfortunately, Dungeon Siege III replaces health potions with floating orbs that drop from fallen enemies or destroyed crates. In the heat of battle however, with the camera going every which way and you struggling with the controls, this method of healing is a fail as well.
Co-op is always more fun, and ultimately, more engaging. However, doubling the number of players also doubles the chances that one of you gets frustrated due to camera problems or control problems.
If you do decide to give Dungeon Siege III a chance, do so on a console. At the very least, the controls shouldn't be as big as a problem.
But certainly, Dungeon Siege III should have at least one redeeming factor, and one which Obsidian has made no secret that they've working for since they announced the existence of the game, and that's the story. Removing character customization altogether, the developers decided to focus the game on four named PC's, Lucas, Katarina, Anjali, and Manx.
That said, the story of Dungeon Siege III, while not groundbreaking, is at least, entertaining and quite well-written. It's not going to win any awards, but allow yourself to get into it and you'll find yourself wanting to know exactly how the story unfolds. A twist midway through the game might draw some genuine surprise from some players, and maybe even question who the real enemy is, and if they've been told the whole truth by the people they supposedly trust most, or even if you've been fighting under the wrong assumptions.
Although character models are quite good (the same cannot be said for human enemies), the lack of emotion from the faces of the people you converse with detract from the immersion of the game, as everyone looks like an emotionless doll. That's not so bad with the archons, who seem like they ought to be that way in an otherworldly sense, but that doesn't excuse every NPC looking like figurines caught in a persistent state of monotone dreariness and lethargy. Even Fable III's NPC character models show SOME emotion---and they have less personality than a cardboard box.
The voice acting fares a lot better, so while you can't tell whether an NPC is angry, sad or worried by looking at his/her face, at least s/he might SOUND angry, sad or worried. The voices of the main characters, at least, are quite well-done, if not downright impressive. Audio is probably the game's most redeeming feature, as the sounds of battle, spells, and background music combine quite well to draw you into the environment, which is sad, considering that the rest of the game fails to do the same.
There are a few key decisions you make, and these affect the outcome of the game, which is a nice touch, as the consequences of your actions are sometimes not what you expect or intend, and this gives a nice touch to the story of DSIII, as it makes one feel like their decisions do actually matter. The results of such decisions, unintended or not, can take form in a paradigm shift of how your character is perceived or treated by friends and foes alike. Those that don't take the form of in-game changes instead are relayed to you through the epilogue, which is also a nice touch.
Unfortunately, to try and make each main character unique, they limited the combat abilities of each character to fulfill a role so specifically, that it comes up lacking in the end. Lucas, for example, is a close combat specialist, and can switch from one-handed to two-handed stances…but that's it. Should an enemy that is extremely tenacious against such a fighting style rear its ugly head, (such as the gargoyles, which can easily dodge melee attacks far away enough and quick enough before you can even land a single blow), you have to rely on either a very small and specific set of skills in order to engage them, or your companion. But since you have no control WHATSOEVER on your companion, you are therefore forced to utilize said specific skills (which is a poor choice if you don't use them often in the first place---since you obviously wouldn't have them levelled up as you would other skills), wait until your companion takes it down, or hope that you get lucky to get a shot in here and there. Likewise, if you're a ranged character, that's it. You're a ranged character all the time. This is in stark contrast to---well, EVERY HALF-DECENT SINGLE ACTION RPG AND DUNGEON CRAWLER IN THE PAST FIFTEEN YEARS, where even though you could make a melee character, you could always have a reliable ranged option should the need arise, and vice versa.
So, sadly, on the PC, this action RPG that was once known for engaging action suffers from being poorly ported from the console, and suffers from horrendous camera control and placement, atrocious controls without a gamepad, and frustrating combat with limited options.
Sadly, the game lacks in immersion in terms of things you can do. For some odd reason, you never feel as though you're actually doing what the game says you're doing. The game tells you you're retaking the former headquarters of the Legion, but really, all you do is slay monsters in its basement and---that's it. It certainly doesn't FEEL like you've retaken it, primarily because there's nothing to DO in it except save, or talk to the right NPC in order to advance a quest. Sure, in the first 'headquarters' you acquire there is a hidden treasure and an NPC who can sell you stuff, but you don't actually HAVE a reason to return to it at all until the next main quest requires you to do so. No gambling, no crafting, no blacksmith to repair items or whatnot, there isn't even a way to fast travel or teleport (though there is little need to revisit most areas, some means of fast travel would have been nice – and the Causeways don't cut it). No more reagents or enchanting either. Sad to think, then, that ALL OF THESE GAMEPLAY MECHANICS were in place in action RPGs and dungeon crawlers more than 15 YEARS AGO. Hell, some of them were already in Dungeon Siege II, so why the step backwards?
That seems to be what happened in Dungeon Siege III. After taking one step forward into trying to create a more compelling story, Obsidian somehow managed to take several steps back in every other element. Lack of camera control and poor default camera views, the abysmal and infuriating PC controls and inability to remap keys, frustrating combat (and fans of both DS1 and 2 will be extremely disappointed to know that pausing to appraise the battlefield to arrange yourself strategically is a no-no---there is no such thing as strategy or tactics in DSIII. Dodge enough attacks, mash enough buttons, dodge enough attacks, mash enough buttons, you win) in which victory is best described as shallow instead of satisfying, and death (usually due to camera/control problems) feel cheap rather than challenging, and the removal of features that were in place many years ago for no apparent reason such as enchanting and health potions.
Dungeon Siege III is one step forward, so many steps back, and it is difficult to imagine that anyone at Obsidian ever tried to play this game on the PC and finished it without ever noticing how incredibly frustrating it is from a gameplay and technical standpoint.
Many will say that Dungeon Siege III is Dungeon Siege in name only. I can understand the sentiment. I believe, however, that a game can revamp its formula and create a sequel extremely different from its predecessor and yet be a truly amazing game, for as long as the spirit of the game remains intact, and it is treated with love and care, and made by people who genuinely want to bring forth something epic and grand and true to the original. Many years ago, Westwood Studios turned a well-loved RPG into the father of RTS games, Dune 2. More recently, Bethesda revitalized a beloved franchise, turning a turn-based tactical RPG into a role-playing FPS with Fallout 3. These were transformed so dramatically that they were in different genres when they came out. And while some hardcore fans of the past incarnations of these beloved series' may complain of such changes, whether they be artistic or gameplay related, the fact remains that these games were given new life in a new era. Many other hardcore fans were happy to see them presented in such a new and innovative manner (myself included), and a brand new generation of gamers were introduced to these worlds and as a result, games and gamers alike benefitted from that. Yes, there are games that are reinvented and made better for it.
Dungeon Siege III is NOT ONE OF THEM.
To any and all who play DS III but who did not play the first two, I guarantee you, its predecessors were better by far. DS III is an average dungeon crawler, whose defining characteristics are its poor controls and camera angles and frustrating, button-mashing combat that sadly overshadow what could have been a fairly good story with characters that are, sadly, again, defined more by their limitations in combat from a gameplay standpoint rather than their personalities and backstories.
Perhaps, on a different platform, the game will handle much better. Certainly half the frustration of the game can be attributed to shoddy controls and camera angles. It is sad, though, that Obsidian could not even muster the effort to implement something so simple as point and click.