Dungeon Siege 3 = highly underrated, Diablo 3 = highly overrated

Ten years from now, people will still be playing Diablo 3. I can not say that for Dungeon Seige 3.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="MonsieurX"]Because the beta doesn't represent what we'll see further in the game.Elann2008

DS3 does not have better combat....

DS3 had a good story, interesting characters and some nice art design but it did not have better combat or atmosphere then the D3 beta.

Diablo games you can also beat 1million times and still have fun, I beat DS3 two times and that was enough for me. I still had some fun with it, but it aint on Diablo's level (just like TQ, Sacred2, Torchlight,etc.. are not on Diablos level for hack n slash)

In my opinion both games are overrated ... DS3 was a terrible port for PC, D3 will be ... good in some ways, bad in other and worse in 3rd ... unfortunately.

I am now a few hours into Dungeon Siege 3 (full version) and I am using an Xbox-PC controller. I gotta say that this game is FAR better than Diablo 3 beta for single player campaign. The combat is great, the story is good, and the loot is really good too. Of course the graphics totally destroy Diablo 3 graphics. The keyboard/mouse control option in Dungeon Siege 3 is worse than I originally thought, but with a Xbox-PC controller, the game control is great! Anyways, Dungeon Siege 3 is a great game and very underrated! Viper5121

[QUOTE="James00715"]

Dungeon Siege 3 fails on the most important thing: co-op multiplayer.

Viper5121

forever alone, lvl: gamespot.

seriously who plays dungeon crawlers alone in modern times?

Laughable. Aside from the writing, Obsidian really dropped the ball on this one. Something as simple as having tight controls on the PC was totally abandoned. It's a bad game, and I'm an Obsidian fan. :/Elann2008

i played just fine with an xbox controller, what i really hated was the coop camera.

Thats like saying Big Rigs is underrated:lol:

Dungeon Siege 3 is terrible and bad.

I.. I just can't take you seriously lol!

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]I thought Dungeon Siege 3 was a failure? Lots of reviews said it wasn't as good as part 1 or 2?Viper5121

Then you're completely ignoring the whole point of reviews.

Reviews are for people to know the quality and content of a game so they can spend their money wisely. If you're not a fan of a series, a review is a very important tool.

As a fan of the original DS games, DS3 is absolute garbage, i agree Diablo 3 is slightly overrated though.

[QUOTE="Viper5121"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"]I thought Dungeon Siege 3 was a failure? Lots of reviews said it wasn't as good as part 1 or 2?Wasdie

Then you're completely ignoring the whole point of reviews.

Reviews are for people to know the quality and content of a game so they can spend their money wisely. If you're not a fan of a series, a review is a very important tool.

[QUOTE="Viper5121"][QUOTE="James00715"]

Dungeon Siege 3 fails on the most important thing: co-op multiplayer.

Krelian-co

forever alone, lvl: gamespot.

seriously who plays dungeon crawlers alone in modern times?

I think reviews are very valuable. Of course they are just opinions, but it's not like you can't look at things from a an objective view point and make observations that will hold true for many other people. Reviews describe in detail gameplay mechanics, pros/cons of certain functionality, quality of graphics/sound, bugs (if any), and tons of other stuff. Most reviews come with images and video as well, so we can observe for ourselves and make judgements based off of them.

There's tons of games that reviewed poorly that I love, and tons of games that got amazing scores that I do not enjoy. That doesn't mean reviews are worthless though. Even for those games I purchased with poor reviews, I still used reviews to buy them. How is that? It's simple...I can discern what does and doesn't apply to my tastes and what may be a negative in a review would be a non-issue for me.

I think people who are on this "reviews are worthless" are just trying to be edgy or seem savvy...but honestly I think it shows the opposite. Reviews are simply a tool, and if one knows how to use that tool its extremely helpful. Not knowing how to use a tool doesn't make you savvy...

I've been gaming for over 20 years myself and use reviews to help me purchase game, and I've been extremely successful in buying games I like and enjoy, and staying away from games I wouldn't.

I think people are on this "reviews are worthless" to be edgy or seem savvy...but honestly I think it shows the opposite. Reviews are simply a tool, and if one knows how to use that tool its extremely helpful. I've been gaming for over 20 years myself and use reviews to help me purchase game, and I've been extremely successful in buying games I like and enjoy, and staying away from games I wouldn't.Renevent42

Or maybe people simply don't trust the validity or the integrity of game reviews. I know I don't.

There are no standards or oversight in this multi-million dollar a year industry and I've read far too many "reviews" that read exactly like pre-release marketing previews for it to be a "mere" coincidence. I've also read too many reviews that sound identical to each other, praising the same points using almost identical language. When game companies stop flying reviewers out for free vacations and other "perks" then maybe my faith in gaming "journalism" might be restored, a little.

It also doesn't help matters that most websites and magazines are funded by the same people they're supposed to be critiquing. Or how about the magazines that are published by stores like Gamestop or Best Buy? The sole purpose of those "magazines" is to sell games for their parent company. Is it really in their best interest to give me the straight story?

As it is, I don't trust most reviews and it has nothing at all to do with my wanting to be edgy, sorry.

[QUOTE="Renevent42"] I think people are on this "reviews are worthless" to be edgy or seem savvy...but honestly I think it shows the opposite. Reviews are simply a tool, and if one knows how to use that tool its extremely helpful. I've been gaming for over 20 years myself and use reviews to help me purchase game, and I've been extremely successful in buying games I like and enjoy, and staying away from games I wouldn't.-wildflower-

Or maybe people simply don't trust the validity or the integrity of game reviews. I know I don't.

There are no standards or oversight in this multi-million dollar a year industry and I've read far too many "reviews" that read exactly like pre-release marketing previews for it to be a "mere" coincidence. I've also read too many reviews that sound identical to each other, praising the same points using almost identical language. When game companies stop flying reviewers out for free vacations and other "perks" then maybe my faith in gaming "journalism" might be restored, a little.

It also doesn't help matters that most websites and magazines are funded by the same people they're supposed to be critiquing. Or how about the magazines that are published by stores like Gamestop or Best Buy? The sole purpose of those "magazines" is to sell games for their parent company. Is it really in their best interest to give me the straight story?

As it is, I don't trust most reviews and it has nothing at all to do with my wanting to be edgy, sorry.

There are so many sources of reviews, from large organizations down to youtube videos from ordinary folks, surely you can find some that mirror your own tastes and biases?

I think the idea that the majority of reviews are literally bought and paid for is paranoia. It's is so overblown and taken out of proportion...even people who have been caught up in certain "scandals" (like here on gamespot) have said that it's not as prevalent as people are saying it is. Of course there's that aspect and definetly something to be aware of, but I think it's paranoia mostly and the majority of reviews have tons of good information in them.

Personally I read a bunch of different reviews from many different sources, and the idea is you start seeing certain trends in what they say. If most of the reviews mention the same poor gameplay mechanic...well there's probably something to it no? There's more to reading a review than just paying attention to a score or a few adjectives. If you can read 5 reviews and get nothing out of it, you're literally doing it wrong.

Reading a few reviews and it's absolutely easy to get a good grasp on key gameplay elements, its strengths and weaknesses, and what it does and doesn't do well. By the time I actually get around to playing the game, there's very few surprises gameplay wise. Most of the time games are pretty much what I expected, and that's due to reading reviews. If they are completely worthless and nothing more than marketing drivel, how is that possible? Am I super human? No, the reality is reviews are useful and do have lots of information for people to make solid decision from.

You just have to know how to use them.

[QUOTE="-wildflower-"]

[QUOTE="Renevent42"] I think people are on this "reviews are worthless" to be edgy or seem savvy...but honestly I think it shows the opposite. Reviews are simply a tool, and if one knows how to use that tool its extremely helpful. I've been gaming for over 20 years myself and use reviews to help me purchase game, and I've been extremely successful in buying games I like and enjoy, and staying away from games I wouldn't.Renevent42

Or maybe people simply don't trust the validity or the integrity of game reviews. I know I don't.

There are no standards or oversight in this multi-million dollar a year industry and I've read far too many "reviews" that read exactly like pre-release marketing previews for it to be a "mere" coincidence. I've also read too many reviews that sound identical to each other, praising the same points using almost identical language. When game companies stop flying reviewers out for free vacations and other "perks" then maybe my faith in gaming "journalism" might be restored, a little.

It also doesn't help matters that most websites and magazines are funded by the same people they're supposed to be critiquing. Or how about the magazines that are published by stores like Gamestop or Best Buy? The sole purpose of those "magazines" is to sell games for their parent company. Is it really in their best interest to give me the straight story?

As it is, I don't trust most reviews and it has nothing at all to do with my wanting to be edgy, sorry.

Personally I read a bunch of different reviews from many different sources, and the idea is you start seeing certain trends in what they say. If most of the reviews mention the same poor gameplay mechanic...well there's probably something to it no? There's more to reading a review than just paying attention to a score or a few adjectives. If you can read 5 reviews and get nothing out of it, you're literally doing it wrong.

The thing is though what some people call AMAZING gameplay might be piss poor to someone else. And when some reviews say this gameplay sucks, yet some people love the gameplay, that can throw people off of reviews.

I can see both sides of the story, there has been plenty of games that got average or bad reviews taht I ended up loving and there are some highly rated games that I just could not understand why they got such good scores or praises. And on the flip side there has been times when Ive agreed with the majoriety of reviews on high scoring games, but there has been far to many times when I see Game A get 90% average and sucks, yet game B got a 75% average that I found better myself.

I like to read reviews,etc.. but I prefer to see gameplay, rent the game or try it at a friends, watch playing now videos, look at screenshots,etc... then take reviews 100% to the heart.

To me Fallout 3 was pretty boring, but I loved Fallout New Vegas, Fallout3 got much better reviews and most said they had more bugs in New Vegas, yet I had more crashes and issues in F3 then I did New Vegas.

Also one mroe thing, some people like different aspects of videogames more then others.. if a review trashes a games animations or voice acting I dont mind to much personally, so that would be only a little take off the score of the game for those issues, but for others those issues (animations and voice acting) might be the two things that mean the most to them in games. You see? I like gameplay, atmosphere, ambitious ideas, story, characters,etc.. Graphics, Presentation, etc.. don't mean nearly as much to me but to some others those are the most important things in a game. That person would not find my reviews for some games very useful because we both have difference of opinions as to what is more important in a game.

I do enjoy reading reviews and what not but I dont take them all that serious to be honest. I love reading Kevin's reviews here at gamespot, hes got a great writign style, he explains why he didn't like certain aspects of games,etc.. But I dont take his reviews/scores or anyones reviews to serious personally as I have loved some games he hated and vice versa, while once in awhile Ill agree 100% with him. As you said its good to check tons of reviews and get different sides/opinions instead of just a few or the top/popular ones. This is why I like playign now videos more then reviews, they have sold more games to me then any review has. I like to see games that I enjoy get good scores but that does not always happen, I am just glad I have given games that average below 80% a try, alot of people take reviews so serious they wont even try any games that score below 8/10!

Check reviews (fans and writers), watch gameplay videos/presentation, check screenshots, watch playing nows, read up on the games forums, try the game at a friends, rent (if your on console) etc.. there is lots you can do to check if a game is for you. There must be a game or two that you loved that got average reviews or a game that got great reviews taht you didnt see what all the fuss was about :P

Anyways, just my opinion, sorry for the long post ;)

[QUOTE="Renevent42"]

[QUOTE="-wildflower-"]

Or maybe people simply don't trust the validity or the integrity of game reviews. I know I don't.

There are no standards or oversight in this multi-million dollar a year industry and I've read far too many "reviews" that read exactly like pre-release marketing previews for it to be a "mere" coincidence. I've also read too many reviews that sound identical to each other, praising the same points using almost identical language. When game companies stop flying reviewers out for free vacations and other "perks" then maybe my faith in gaming "journalism" might be restored, a little.

It also doesn't help matters that most websites and magazines are funded by the same people they're supposed to be critiquing. Or how about the magazines that are published by stores like Gamestop or Best Buy? The sole purpose of those "magazines" is to sell games for their parent company. Is it really in their best interest to give me the straight story?

As it is, I don't trust most reviews and it has nothing at all to do with my wanting to be edgy, sorry.

kozzy1234

Personally I read a bunch of different reviews from many different sources, and the idea is you start seeing certain trends in what they say. If most of the reviews mention the same poor gameplay mechanic...well there's probably something to it no? There's more to reading a review than just paying attention to a score or a few adjectives. If you can read 5 reviews and get nothing out of it, you're literally doing it wrong.

The thing is though what some people call AMAZING gameplay might be piss poor to someone else. And when some reviews say this gameplay sucks, yet some people love the gameplay, that can throw people off of reviews.

I can see both sides of the story, there has been plenty of games that got average or bad reviews taht I ended up loving and there are some highly rated games that I just could not understand why they got such good scores or praises. And on the flip side there has been times when Ive agreed with the majoriety of reviews on high scoring games, but there has been far to many times when I see Game A get 90% average and sucks, yet game B got a 75% average that I found better myself.

I like to read reviews,etc.. but I prefer to see gameplay, rent the game or try it at a friends, watch playing now videos, look at screenshots,etc... then take reviews 100% to the heart.

To me Fallout 3 was pretty boring, but I loved Fallout New Vegas, Fallout3 got much better reviews and most said they had more bugs in New Vegas, yet I had more crashes and issues in F3 then I did New Vegas.

Also one mroe thing, some people like different aspects of videogames more then others.. if a review trashes a games animations or voice acting I dont mind to much personally, so that would be only a little take off the score of the game for those issues, but for others those issues (animations and voice acting) might be the two things that mean the most to them in games. You see? I like gameplay, atmosphere, ambitious ideas, story, characters,etc.. Graphics, Presentation, etc.. don't mean nearly as much to me but to some others those are the most important things in a game. That person would not find my reviews for some games very useful because we both have difference of opinions as to what is more important in a game.

That's exactly what I am getting at actually...don't pay so much attention to the adjectives, instead read about the mechanics and other observations and how that actually applies to your own tastes. It's not like the majority of reviews are just "this sucks, this is great, ect"...most describe in pretty good detail how mechanics work, what the game focuses on, and things like that. They are not entirely subjective and there's a lot of good information to be used.

With that said, if 10 out of 12 reviews are raving about how great a story line is in a game there's probably something to that opinion, right? I mean, that's clearly subjective but more times than not when a game is lauded (or conversly slammed) for something it probably holds some truth. Of course if story lines really don't matter to you (like in my case) that particular observation doesn't really apply, but I don't think it makes it worthless.

I also think the problem lies when people act like reviews should be taken as gospel. It's just a tool, and like you I use other tools as well like videos, player commentary/reviews, and many other sources. It's just another tool in the toolbox :)

I thought DS3 was ok for what it is, I think D3 was and is way over hyped (mainly by kiddies who clearly have never played the previous diablo games). \igsmither

[QUOTE="igsmither"]I thought DS3 was ok for what it is, I think D3 was and is way over hyped (mainly by kiddies who clearly have never played the previous diablo games). \SF_KiLLaMaN

[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"][QUOTE="igsmither"]I thought DS3 was ok for what it is, I think D3 was and is way over hyped (mainly by kiddies who clearly have never played the previous diablo games). \igsmither

Yay, hipster thread

I thought DS3 was ok for what it is, I think D3 was and is way over hyped (mainly by kiddies who clearly have never played the previous diablo games). Both games are not my cup of tea and personally I think they are both lame excuses for an rpg.igsmither

[QUOTE="igsmither"]I thought DS3 was ok for what it is, I think D3 was and is way over hyped (mainly by kiddies who clearly have never played the previous diablo games). Both games are not my cup of tea and personally I think they are both lame excuses for an rpg.Elann2008

Co-signed

Diablo While over-hyped, still deserves much of its praise.

[QUOTE="igsmither"][QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"]Another ignorant poster throwing insults at those who like Diablo 3. I played Diablo 2 to death, and Diablo 3 will be a great game. Go troll somewhere else.SF_KiLLaMaN

Not trying to pick sides but I love the irony in this statement :D

[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"][QUOTE="igsmither"] i'm not going anywhere, if you don't like what you see then move along :)Croag821

Not trying to pick sides but I love the irony in this statement :D

[QUOTE="Croag821"]

[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"] Just stop trolling and insulting people and everything will be fine. You sound like a 13 year old. SF_KiLLaMaN

Not trying to pick sides but I love the irony in this statement :D

If he is so, let him make a fool out of himself. If he sees you being irritated by his comments, he'll try to stoop you down to his level. Chill bro ;).

Anyway, I know only about playing DS3's demo and it was horrendus. Diablo 3's Beta gameplay felt quite satisfying, although assigning the skills to the toolbar seemed a little too simplified to me, other than that, I like the feel of the gameplay from the perspective of the Barbarian and Demon Hunter. One of the Demon Hunter's skill where he stands and shoots out arrows like a machine gun made me puke rainbows.

butt hurt? yea you are butt hurt...igsmither

I thought DS3 was ok for what it is, I think D3 was and is way over hyped (mainly by kiddies who clearly have never played the previous diablo games). Both games are not my cup of tea and personally I think they are both lame excuses for an rpg.igsmither

I guess being 23 also makes me a kiddie too now. Cool stuff.

[QUOTE="igsmither"]I thought DS3 was ok for what it is, I think D3 was and is way over hyped (mainly by kiddies who clearly have never played the previous diablo games). Both games are not my cup of tea and personally I think they are both lame excuses for an rpg.trastamad03

I guess being 23 also makes me a kiddie too now. Cool stuff.

I can relate, though I never tried Hellfire (unfortunately), and I haven't played DIII, but we have pre-orders.

I am 27, I guess "30 is the new 20" lol:P