forums | blogs | polls | tutorials | downloads | rules | help
Home-> Dungeon Siege III and its expansion.

Add new comment

Submitted by KillerGremal on Fri, 2007-10-05 12:52

Giovanna_del_Arco wrote:

As for set items, I think it would be a good idea if there were some way to make sure that the entire set could be gotten before it is outclassed by "ordinary" or "rare" items.

I fully agree - you should have a realistic chance to enjoy your full set before it becomes obsolete, but specially in SP mode this chance is not given.
Perhaps DS2 would need eg. a quest there you could choose your item reward. Also within a conversation you could restrict the number of possible items so the chance to get the missing set item would increase seriously.
Unfortunately DS2 has neither such quests nor the functions to do this at the moment, but who knows... (the winter nights are long ;)).



Giovanna_del_Arco wrote:
And with regard to reagent recipes, I can't count how many times I've managed to gather all the necessary reagents for a recipe but been unable to get the item needed to be enchanted, or gathered the item and all of the reagents but one. Then when I finally get all the necessary stuff together and have the item enchanted, it turns out to be a disappointment in terms of how weak it is. That's another thing that should be fixed, ideally in terms of level-relation. For example, there was that one sword recipe that needed an enchantable legendary 2-handed sword, a demon jaw, an oak branch, a sapphire pommelstone, and a ruby pommelstone. By the time I had all the necessary ingredients and the item and got it enchanted, it was basically useless to my characters, as they had progressed beyond any advantage it would have provided.
Indeed if you become a 'sponanteous item cooker' it's almost too late, it will take you too much levels and the result is no more interesting enough. So the only way is to look forward any buy interesting items and reagents for safety before you have a suitable recipe for them. This is not completely unpretending, some experience about items (and when they appear in game) can help as well as early shopping tours to the enchantable-selling merchant on the Broken World map. Moreover you must get the required storage space too for all these foraged things - anyhow...

This (dis)proportional work can be considered as conceptional bug if you like and actually many mods can help here.
I must admit i'm a bit impatient too to get my recipes cooked Wink thus not surprising there are some corresponding improvments like an extra enchantable shop in the Hotfix and Aranna Legacy mod.
However, in particular having knowledge about the approximate levels of recipe items will help you a lot planing your efforts.



Giovanna_del_Arco wrote:
With regard to an "ordinary" legendary item, I think it should have the full 4x4 enchantment, not just some single enchantment. What's the point of calling it "legendary" if it only has one enchantment?
A legendary item is just the latest/highest item of an 'item family', sadly not more an not less. The higher its requirements then the better chances/possibilities that the magical additions may turn out better (totally), but not said that they really will. Of course legendary items have a 4x4 enchanting grid but in further scope this is nothing more than an indirect way of becoming magic.


ghastley wrote:
2) Grades of otherwise identical items looks like a lazy way to get a few models to do the work of a lot more, and it wasn't done right. A "good" should always be better than a basic item, and so on all the way up. All too often the "legendary" items are no better than an exceptional with the right enchantments.
These 'item families' (i'm sorry' i dont' know how to tell them else) are really a bit cheap. Well also DS1 had this and even Diablo2 but with 5 'members' now it's quite extreme in DS2. Sad Also for me it was it's irritating to see that a rare exceptional sword can be sometime as good (or even better) as a rare legendary sword with the same requirements. Unfortunatly it's also possible to find an exceptional enchantalbe 1h-sword with higher requirements although there is already a legendary enchantable 1h-sword with lower requirements to - the logic is not really evident here...



Giovanna_del_Arco wrote:
Capping advancement at level 100 was a bad idea (particularly if you play through DS2 Merc, then BW Merc, then DS2 Vet, then BW Vet, then DS2 Elite, and then BW Elite, including all secondary quests...
First, i'm interested to know how many players is really playing all 3 'turns'!? Contrary to expectations the game difficulty impression is often sinking, moreover many quest and loot drops are not tuned for veteran and elite (also i don't think many players have a mod fixing this ;)).



Giovanna_del_Arco wrote:
...there's little to no room for extraneous leveling outside the official questing). Give us back level 150 (or more).
Well accoding to some code parts in the rules there is natively as good as no room for this (not just around level 100) - already being more than 4 levels higher or lower than monsters will have a not-proportional impact for the game experience suddenly escalating difficulty or easiness. Also DS2 gives too much Exp in mercenary and veteran mode - with most party combinations you only will reach Vadis below level 40 when skipping a notable percentage of monsters in the main quest (don't even think on side quests). In elite mode of v2.0-2.2 however you have no monsters above level 85. Even if you can kill the monsters very quickly now leveling beyond level 90 will become really hard - so the basic version isn't tuned here in more than one perspective.



Giovanna_del_Arco wrote:
Make PvP an option. ...
ghastley wrote:
3) PvP was made impracticable by the introduction of Powers. Without equally unbalanced defence they make a one-hit kill too possible, so PvP just becomes a question of who can hit first. So a PvP game would have to turn them off. This would probably eliminate any dual-mode option, because without them, you can't take on a mob with over a million hit points. I.e. PvP with powers off, regular PvC (Player(s) versus Computer) has powers on.
Expect of the power issue i'm generally not convinded when implementing PvP in client-based games. The cheating related unfainess will be huge and specially if a game is moddable you really make it easy - i mean look once at the PvP mode of DS1 - a nice option for familar friends but online against unknown people this PvP mode will soon turn into CvC - cheater vs. cheater.

However, also the PvP part of a game has to be programmed, moreover PvP probably wants the delelopper/publisher to provide much more updates since bugs will be found quickly and surely abused too - i'm not sure if he is willed to spend more money (or willed to increase game price because of an evidentally holey PvP mode).



ghastley wrote:

4) GPG apparently think that online MP means no mods allowed, otherwise you get cheating. So that has to mean no mods for SP? Why can't CRC checks be applied only for multi-player games?

I have absolutely no idea about GPG's modding concept - did they ever have one...!?
Currently it's too chaotic, the hole 'modding scene' depends on a third party tool (3rd party = Elys, thanks!) but is this a professional approach!?
I only can guess why there is a CRC for singleplayer too - beause you can export your char to multiplayer. Probably GPG even knew that Gamespy is everything else than secure - one player still is the host and so eg. replacing drops by memory editing works there as well as uploading savegames (with very simple methods). And it's very probable they have no functionalities ready to detect this and to call to account such players (or their CD-keys) appropriately.
»