To preface the forthcoming blog you are about to read (or just stare at and say "cool story, bro"), I'm a sucker for games that involve me using an overhead viewpoint to hack 'n' slash random enemies and pick up loot to equip on my characters in order to hack 'n' slash more powerful enemies. It's a pitfall that has stuck with me since the years of Infinity Engine games, and continued through with Snowblind's endeavors on the PlayStation 2. I was even able to pick up Sacred 2 and look past its flaws to see a pretty worthwhile game that had countless hours dumped into it.

With that said, it has been surprising to hear so much vitriol spewed over Dungeon Siege III in the last week. Listening to the Bombcast and hearing the guys talk about it, they made it seem like Dungeon Siege III does nothing right and leads to a very boring experience overall. Even hearing comments on Twitter and Facebook, looking at reviews, and the general word of mouth has made the game sound like it shouldn't even exist.

Everyone else must be playing a different game than I am, because Dungeon Siege III definitely doesn't feel that way to me. Instead, it feels like a very streamlined experience that features all the tropes I love about action RPGs while cutting out the middlemen that hold it down all the goddamn time. Sure, it has its problems...like every hack 'n' slash game before it. However, it makes up for it with marked improvements on the genre that...if anything...make me enjoy it far more than something like Dragon Age.

To start, the "classes" you play as are conveniently placed into four separate characters you choose from. This helps the story move along quite well without ever making you feel like your "custom character" is a nameless wonder of a hero that no one has the time to say "HEY NADFACE, WHAT'S UP?! GO BEAT SOME BAD GUYS!" It offers what most RPGs should excel at: storytelling. What is presented in Dungeon Siege III can definitely be described as a linear experience, but for the life of me, I can't think of too many hack 'n' slash games in recent years that weren't relatively guided experiences. There aren't big, wide open spaces to venture through. Instead, everything is paced incredibly well along a track of well-realized areas to venture through. It's almost as if...*GASP*...you are being sent to a bunch of dungeons that have a specific layout! NO, SAY IT ISN'T SO! -_-

Another thing that Dungeon Siege III does to keep you going in the action is offer a mind-blowing idea: no potions. Rather than have you pick up a gajillion health and mana potions, the game handles both in a very intelligent and easy way. Each character has a defensive ability that can be used as a heal-over-time spell, as well as lifesteal capabilities with weaponry and armor. Beyond that, you use Focus to cast spells and powerful moves, and you recharge that by hitting shit. If anything, Obsidian found a way to JUSTIFY HITTING THE SAME BUTTON OVER AND OVER TO KILL SHIT!

The boss fights are also pretty well done. You can't just standing around hitting something, but instead, you are dodging and trying to find ways to approach different bosses without getting your ass stomped to the ground. When I fought Rajani last night, it was a good 5 minute fight, since you have to dodge around and avoid all the damage pools she leaves on the ground. When fighting the boss in the First People Village, you can't even get close to the guy, instead needing to focus on use ranged spells and taking down his helpers to ensure you don't get poisoned. I actually died on that boss, was revived by my teammate, then she died, and I ended up winning with barely any health left. The shit can get tough, ladies and gentlemen - a welcome addition to the hack 'n' slash games I love.

The dungeons and areas you visit are also varied enough to feel fresh while also holding enough of the fantasy tropes to feel familiar. There are trees, dirt roads, bandits, skeletons...but then there are things that I don't even know the name of. There are areas like the Causeway that are visually impressive and make you wonder why few games before have used such a unique looking place.

The voice acting is relatively good and appropriately British when it needs to be. The controls feel good, smooth, and efficient. I have no once had to struggle with them. Mind you, I'm playing on 360, and I understand that the PC version has some bunk stuff going on. I also understand that Obsidian is fixing that, so...cool.

Really, the only problems that I have are this: the graphics leave a bit to be desired...yet still work fine for the world is presents, the frame rate dips in and out, but rarely hits below 30fps, and the story takes a good hour to get kicked up and moving. Yeah, there's also the moments when you have to do the dialogue wheels and there's just not a lot going on there...much like those revered games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect...right?

All in all, I can see the linearity bugging people, or even how Obsidian has streamlined a handful of systems in the game to make it work better on consoles while also offer a pretty solid game. What I don't understand is why people are hating on it. Is it just cool to hate on Obsidian? They may not make the most polished games, but it hasn't stopped me from enjoying their games yet. I can also see the way the co-op works as being an issue to people, but I haven't actually played any co-op yet, so I can't comment on it.

People, give Dungeon Siege III a try. Sure, you could wait until it hits that $40 sweet spot price point, but it's worth the money as it stands. Please, though: play a little more than an hour of an RPG before jumping up and saying "this game is boring, the graphics are muddy, and I don't think I want to play more of Dungeon Siege III".

To preface the forthcoming blog you are about to read (or just stare at and say "cool story, bro"), I'm a sucker for games that involve me using an overhead viewpoint to hack 'n' slash random enemies and pick up loot to equip on my characters in order to hack 'n' slash more powerful enemies. It's a pitfall that has stuck with me since the years of Infinity Engine games, and continued through with Snowblind's endeavors on the PlayStation 2. I was even able to pick up Sacred 2 and look past its flaws to see a pretty worthwhile game that had countless hours dumped into it.

With that said, it has been surprising to hear so much vitriol spewed over Dungeon Siege III in the last week. Listening to the Bombcast and hearing the guys talk about it, they made it seem like Dungeon Siege III does nothing right and leads to a very boring experience overall. Even hearing comments on Twitter and Facebook, looking at reviews, and the general word of mouth has made the game sound like it shouldn't even exist.

Everyone else must be playing a different game than I am, because Dungeon Siege III definitely doesn't feel that way to me. Instead, it feels like a very streamlined experience that features all the tropes I love about action RPGs while cutting out the middlemen that hold it down all the goddamn time. Sure, it has its problems...like every hack 'n' slash game before it. However, it makes up for it with marked improvements on the genre that...if anything...make me enjoy it far more than something like Dragon Age.

To start, the "classes" you play as are conveniently placed into four separate characters you choose from. This helps the story move along quite well without ever making you feel like your "custom character" is a nameless wonder of a hero that no one has the time to say "HEY NADFACE, WHAT'S UP?! GO BEAT SOME BAD GUYS!" It offers what most RPGs should excel at: storytelling. What is presented in Dungeon Siege III can definitely be described as a linear experience, but for the life of me, I can't think of too many hack 'n' slash games in recent years that weren't relatively guided experiences. There aren't big, wide open spaces to venture through. Instead, everything is paced incredibly well along a track of well-realized areas to venture through. It's almost as if...*GASP*...you are being sent to a bunch of dungeons that have a specific layout! NO, SAY IT ISN'T SO! -_-

Another thing that Dungeon Siege III does to keep you going in the action is offer a mind-blowing idea: no potions. Rather than have you pick up a gajillion health and mana potions, the game handles both in a very intelligent and easy way. Each character has a defensive ability that can be used as a heal-over-time spell, as well as lifesteal capabilities with weaponry and armor. Beyond that, you use Focus to cast spells and powerful moves, and you recharge that by hitting shit. If anything, Obsidian found a way to JUSTIFY HITTING THE SAME BUTTON OVER AND OVER TO KILL SHIT!

The boss fights are also pretty well done. You can't just standing around hitting something, but instead, you are dodging and trying to find ways to approach different bosses without getting your ass stomped to the ground. When I fought Rajani last night, it was a good 5 minute fight, since you have to dodge around and avoid all the damage pools she leaves on the ground. When fighting the boss in the First People Village, you can't even get close to the guy, instead needing to focus on use ranged spells and taking down his helpers to ensure you don't get poisoned. I actually died on that boss, was revived by my teammate, then she died, and I ended up winning with barely any health left. The shit can get tough, ladies and gentlemen - a welcome addition to the hack 'n' slash games I love.

The dungeons and areas you visit are also varied enough to feel fresh while also holding enough of the fantasy tropes to feel familiar. There are trees, dirt roads, bandits, skeletons...but then there are things that I don't even know the name of. There are areas like the Causeway that are visually impressive and make you wonder why few games before have used such a unique looking place.

The voice acting is relatively good and appropriately British when it needs to be. The controls feel good, smooth, and efficient. I have no once had to struggle with them. Mind you, I'm playing on 360, and I understand that the PC version has some bunk stuff going on. I also understand that Obsidian is fixing that, so...cool.

Really, the only problems that I have are this: the graphics leave a bit to be desired...yet still work fine for the world is presents, the frame rate dips in and out, but rarely hits below 30fps, and the story takes a good hour to get kicked up and moving. Yeah, there's also the moments when you have to do the dialogue wheels and there's just not a lot going on there...much like those revered games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect...right?

All in all, I can see the linearity bugging people, or even how Obsidian has streamlined a handful of systems in the game to make it work better on consoles while also offer a pretty solid game. What I don't understand is why people are hating on it. Is it just cool to hate on Obsidian? They may not make the most polished games, but it hasn't stopped me from enjoying their games yet. I can also see the way the co-op works as being an issue to people, but I haven't actually played any co-op yet, so I can't comment on it.

People, give Dungeon Siege III a try. Sure, you could wait until it hits that $40 sweet spot price point, but it's worth the money as it stands. Please, though: play a little more than an hour of an RPG before jumping up and saying "this game is boring, the graphics are muddy, and I don't think I want to play more of Dungeon Siege III".

@jakob187:

I'm enjoying my sp campaign as well. There are some things missing that I prefer in my dungeon crawler/loot game though. Mostly the sameness of each character's loot. Most of it looks identical, and even when there are some changes it's really just color changes and minor visual differences. And the game is super linear. Feels like there's no going back...but I guess as the lvl cap is just 30, w/no N+ either, why bother. The story is ok, the world is nicely fleshed out, and there is a lot of lore to read and study up on. I like the environments, and the color palette and lighting are good. I like the UI, and the quests are well designed and interesting for the most part, combat is satisfying overall, and pacing seems about right. And you're right about the healing system being smart. Overall, it's well worth a run through or two in sp mode.

The big letdown is co-op. The one camera is just atrocious, and the host only saves is just a baffling design choice on Obsidian's part. That's the thing w/them. They always have some issues w/their games, mostly things that make you scratch your head and ask why....what were they thinking?

Just a few problems...if you play more than an hour of Dungeon Siege III...you'll already have played an 1/8 of the game. And by "streamlined" do you mean incredibly fucking linear? I liked the first two games a good bit, while not perfect they did have some value and i dumped quite a few hours into each of them. Probably the 1st more than the 2nd. But after playing this game, i just kinda wonder why they even made it?

Yep, I had hours and hours of fun with a friend playing co-op... With two controllers... In the same room... On the same PC...  Because we couldn't get online going...
 
And then I was informed that my friends character disappeared when I turned off the game? That's the last straw. It's a shame because I think the game itself is some of the best hack-and-slash I've played in years!
 
I have no problem with the linearity personally. That's exactly what I look for in these kinds of games, with Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance being the seminal hack-and-slash for me.

Yeah, I've been playing it with a friend and it's a lot of fun. Some minor annoyances but nothing more than I'd have with any other game on the market. I really doesn't deserve all the harsh words I feel, to me it's a fantastic game and I'm glad I put down the money on it.

Personally, the way co-op works isn't that terrible to me. It allows for drop in/drop out. I don't agree with the design choice, but I do understand it. At least they scale your friend to the appropriate level.

As for "streamlined", everything in that game feels readily accessible without having to fumble over the controls and gameplay mechanics. Yeah, the game if linear...and it also tells a good story. I don't know how the word "linear" is perceived as bad.

As for the play time, that is something I'm happy about!!! Given that the game features four different to play through the game with, that's 32 hours...and that's not counting the fact that there are multiple options for moral choice that change some stuff up a bit. Yes, it means that I won't get to feel the uber-badassness of a character with crazy gear, but I'm okay with that if the story is good, the gameplay works, and I can enjoy a quick playthrough.

Just goes to show a lot of 'bad' games are much better then given credit for.

What I don't understand is that Torchlight was praised up the ass despite being incredibly linear and having no multiplayer whatsoever, and DS3 is being criticized despite having superior combat and far, far greater writing and storytelling. I don't think people actually understand what linearity means. Being able to go the wrong way is not 'non-linear' it's just going the wrong way. That you're able to go to The Crypts of Zamalor despite having no missions or reason to be there does not make a game better, it's just fluff. As for the co-op, maybe they have a point... but I played a bunch of Torchlight by myself. When I played Marvel Ultimate Alliance, there was never a point where my co-op buddy was loading his Deadpool up into world and keeping the experience. Maybe I've lost the plot of where having host-specific progression was a complete deal breaker.

It reminds me of the threads that claim Doom had superior level design than modern shooter games. Somehow we've equated backtracking and being lost with 'fun'. No one has ever been excited by the prospect of not knowing where to go next. I feel like this is a complete nostalgia tilt, people who forget that being lost and confused with absolutely no instruction is actually completely frustrating.

Cool story br-*gets punched in the stomach

It controls like a bad action RPG, and I was never comfortable with either camera angle. I just wanted to be able to shove that camera directly behind my character, Dragon Age style. I know that by enabling that, it would go against it's heritage... but it also points towards the limbo between genres that this game falls into.

Not only that, I found it so annoying that in dialogue scenes the camera NEVER faces your character... EVEN WHEN YOU ARE TALKING! So frustrating.

I've never played a Dungeon Siege game before, but this certainly hasn't inspired me to try more.

@Brodehouse: Great point indeed. Hell, Torchlight on XBLA is great and all, but the frame rate drops make it nigh unplayable at times for me. Meanwhile, Dungeon Siege III doesn't suffer from those same drops...and yet it's running a bit more of a sophisticated engine with at least 7-12 enemies onscreen at any point in time.

The points you bring up are good as well: Torchlight was super linear with ONE small ass town to handle your needs for transmuting, buying, selling, etc. There was no multiplayer at all. It's a great game, don't get me wrong...but you make the most valid point possible: how can Torchlight be praised on high for doing what it does when Dungeon Siege III does the same things PLUS adds multiplayer and gets hated on?

Maybe the problem is that people have some certain level of expectation when it comes to a Dungeon Siege game. Funny enough, the franchise has never necessarily been known for keeping systems from previous games or even necessarily stretching the bounds of bringing new elements to the genre. However, they've always been competent games that play just fine and feature a good fantasy-style story with interesting environments and top-tier hack 'n' slash combat. The fact that Dungeon Siege III features much steadier combat with some actual necessity to dodge-roll, block, and use your skills in some form of strategic way WITHOUT HAVING TO PAUSE THE GAMEPLAY is something that should be praised.

I've been playing with Lucas on my first playthrough, and I'll tell ya what: I make sure to go into two-handed stance before every fight, Blade Dash through the initial wave, and make sure to take out those archers first every time. I don't have to pause the gameplay to get to that shit like I would in something like Dragon Age. Instead, it just happens because I want it to happen. When I'm about to die, I don't just pop a potion and keep swinging. I jump out of the fight, throw my defensive ability, use some lifesteal and weave in and out of the combat.

I think a lot of my ire really comes from the last Bombcast. How can anyone really decide a game's fate, let alone an action RPG, in an hour? Yeah, the campaign may only be about eight hours or so, but it was just odd to hear that much hate getting thrown down on it when other games that they've praised have done some of the same things that Dungeon Siege III does (and might I say, does well!).

The game is undoubtedly terrible for a thousand reasons which have been listed everywhere already, no need to repeat.
 
Heck I've heard you can simply buy the best gear in the game /facepalm.
But what's loot worth anyways if the game is completely over after a walkthrough *yawn*

The game is undoubtedly terrible for a thousand reasons which have been listed everywhere already, no need to repeat.  Heck I've heard you can simply buy the best gear in the game /facepalm. But what's loot worth anyways if the game is completely over after a walkthrough *yawn*

@NaDannMaGoGo said:

The game is undoubtedly terrible for a thousand reasons which have been listed everywhere already, no need to repeat. Heck I've heard you can simply buy the best gear in the game /facepalm. But what's loot worth anyways if the game is completely over after a walkthrough *yawn*

This comment is more deserving of a facepalm than the OP.

So, with that in mind:

@creamypies: That's amusing. Dragon Age II took a beating for not allowing you to pull the camera way back, and Dungeon Siege III is taking one for not being able to move it in. Personally, I agree with you, I like to be able to see farther ahead than be able to see farther behind my character.

I'm leaning towards the traditional RPG being dead, the push-button-attack-based-on-stats thing is becoming a relic. I think it has to do with the incredible fickleness of gamers, nothing can please them, and their ideas of what RPGs 'used to be' are so clouded in nostalgia that if you gave them a direct clone of their favorite classic RPG, they'd dislike it before they realized what it was. That's not even getting into that the spreadsheet-management simulator that RPGs are based on simply doesn't have a wide enough appeal to justify spending tens of millions of dollars creating, so they'll have to contend with super-niche, small-scope low budget RPGs, or streamlined, wide-appealing big budget RPGs.

I believe I have the ability to prognosticate the next decade for RPG fans; complete self-righteous anger. In every case.

@jakob187 said:

" People, give Dungeon Siege III a try. Sure, you could wait until it hits that $40 sweet spot price point, but it's worth the money as it stands. Please, though: play a little more than an hour of an RPG before jumping up and saying "this game is boring, the graphics are muddy, and I don't think I want to play more of Dungeon Siege III". "

Then again, I could just go and buy Torchlightfor... $15?

@Gaff said:

@jakob187 said:

" People, give Dungeon Siege III a try. Sure, you could wait until it hits that $40 sweet spot price point, but it's worth the money as it stands. Please, though: play a little more than an hour of an RPG before jumping up and saying "this game is boring, the graphics are muddy, and I don't think I want to play more of Dungeon Siege III". "

Then again, I could just go and buy Torchlightfor... $15?

Or like a lot of us, get it for something like $2 on sale. Hard to complain about a game when it only cost $2-$15 isn't it?

@Gaff said:

@jakob187 said:

" People, give Dungeon Siege III a try. Sure, you could wait until it hits that $40 sweet spot price point, but it's worth the money as it stands. Please, though: play a little more than an hour of an RPG before jumping up and saying "this game is boring, the graphics are muddy, and I don't think I want to play more of Dungeon Siege III". "

Then again, I could just go and buy Torchlightfor... $15?

which features:

- a few hours more gameplay

- worse graphics/crappy framerate

- one town

- not a lot of story

- no multiplayer

I love torchlight, and I am pretty okay with what Dungeon Siege 3 is. Sure I think not being able to have both characters save (even if you just had to have a separate multiplayer character) kind of sucks, but it is a pretty good looking action RPG, with pretty enjoyable combat with a good story, some good bosses and reat production value.

I loved the first DS (didn't care for the second, but that's another story), and I'm really enjoying DS3. It's not reinventing the wheel or anything, but I think it makes some smart changes to eliminate some of the more annoying aspects of the genre, like the aforementioned hammering-on-a-button-to-drink-a-potion.

Maybe it's just because I was expecting more of Dungeon Siege and not much else, but I was honestly surprised by how negative the fan reaction has been. Like I said, I have yet to find a major complaint with it.

@LaszloKovacs said:

I loved the first DS (didn't care for the second, but that's another story), and I'm really enjoying DS3. It's not reinventing the wheel or anything, but I think it makes some smart changes to eliminate some of the more annoying aspects of the genre, like the aforementioned hammering-on-a-button-to-drink-a-potion.

Maybe it's just because I was expecting more of Dungeon Siege and not much else, but I was honestly surprised by how negative the fan reaction has been. Like I said, I have yet to find a major complaint with it.

I also only played the first DS, and you pretty much summed up how I feel exactly, this game is great, I am about 10 hours in and I am enjoying it a lot, I hope people give it a chance.

I really want to give it a chance. Based on what I played in the demo, the game had a cheap look to it. This genre is so strange in that it literally hasn't had any major innovation, ever. Making changes to the formula is dangerous. How's the co-op?

The internet is prone to hyperbole. Even I find myself expressing my opinions using stronger (or weaker) words than I intend to when I write my blogs. I'm sure Dungeon Siege III is alright. I'm also sure that it's a game I don't really want to play.

@Gaff said:

@jakob187 said:

" People, give Dungeon Siege III a try. Sure, you could wait until it hits that $40 sweet spot price point, but it's worth the money as it stands. Please, though: play a little more than an hour of an RPG before jumping up and saying "this game is boring, the graphics are muddy, and I don't think I want to play more of Dungeon Siege III". "

Then again, I could just go and buy Torchlightfor... $15?

which features:

- a few hours more gameplay

- worse graphics/crappy framerate

- one town

- not a lot of story

- no multiplayer

I love torchlight, and I am pretty okay with what Dungeon Siege 3 is. Sure I think not being able to have both characters save (even if you just had to have a separate multiplayer character) kind of sucks, but it is a pretty good looking action RPG, with pretty enjoyable combat with a good story, some good bosses and reat production value.

I hate to say it, but from what I've heard here DS3 does not sound like the loot-driven-grind that I love out of other action RPG's of the genre. It's the focus on the go-out-there,-kill-some-shit-get-awesome-new-killing-toy that keeps me so enthused to put the 100 hours into Borderlands, or 63 into Torchlight, or 50-something into even littler games like Phantasy Star Zero. The problem here is that there seems to be little of said 'grind' in DS3; nowhere to continue building your character and snagging sweet sweet loots once the initial 8-10 hour campaign is said and done. On top of that, I can speak to the whole linearity thing that was mentioned earlier, and that is the desire for exploration. While I'm not crazy enough to say that Doom's level design was better than it is now, I do have to say that they where incredibly successful in keeping the wonder of "what's behind that corner, or that one, or that one!" That wonder is a - with no real way to put it - form of fun that has been in use since old text adventures. While exploration such as that creates problems in the way of backtracking, the action RPG has never really had a history where backtracking is a huge detriment compared to other genres, like the Shooter. So comes the question: why make this game use RPG elements as it does when the level design is that of a shooter, or just about any modern action game?

I love exploration, but I'm alright with sacrificing it for a concise story that genuinely gets me involved and good world design. Moreover, the lack of exploration in the free form sense that people might want means there is also a general lack of jankiness.

I just beat my first playthrough, and I'm ready to jump back in for more. There are different decisions I want to make, different loot setupa I want to use, and different abilities I want to Max out.

As for the whole Torchlight thing, yeah...it's a 100 hour game if you through the "endless dungeon"...which serves no purpose but grinding for gear and fame. I did three of the floors, and I haven't touched the game since. Dungeon Siege III will get more play time than Torchlight did.

@jakob187: @Brodehouse said:

What I don't understand is that Torchlight was praised up the ass despite being incredibly linear and having no multiplayer whatsoever, and DS3 is being criticized despite having superior combat and far, far greater writing and storytelling.

Torchlight didn't cost $50-60 when released. Expectations from a full retail product and from a cheap $10-15 title are different.

@jakob187 said:

I think a lot of my ire really comes from the last Bombcast. How can anyone really decide a game's fate, let alone an action RPG, in an hour? Yeah, the campaign may only be about eight hours or so, but it was just odd to hear that much hate getting thrown down on it when other games that they've praised have done some of the same things that Dungeon Siege III does (and might I say, does well!).

Personally I have long since stopped giving a rats ass about the main crew's thoughts on anything remotely resembling an RPG

Vinny is the only one who ever has some remotely valid thoughts on the genre.

@jakob187: You make many good points in your original blog post, however not much of that of this is what most people are complaining about. The issues are: bad multi player, lack of single player content, bad PC controls.

Just to clear things up, I played through DS3 four! times and absolutely got my moneys worth, but I understand that this is just how I play and most people will not do that.

People should stop comparing this to Diablo and start thinking of it in the terms of a Gauntlet style dungeon-crawler. Once you do that, you'll drop the pre-conditioned bias.

@CaptainCody said:

@Metalideth said:

@Gaff said:

@jakob187 said:

" People, give Dungeon Siege III a try. Sure, you could wait until it hits that $40 sweet spot price point, but it's worth the money as it stands. Please, though: play a little more than an hour of an RPG before jumping up and saying "this game is boring, the graphics are muddy, and I don't think I want to play more of Dungeon Siege III". "

Then again, I could just go and buy Torchlightfor... $15?

which features:

- a few hours more gameplay

- worse graphics/crappy framerate

- one town

- not a lot of story

- no multiplayer

I love torchlight, and I am pretty okay with what Dungeon Siege 3 is. Sure I think not being able to have both characters save (even if you just had to have a separate multiplayer character) kind of sucks, but it is a pretty good looking action RPG, with pretty enjoyable combat with a good story, some good bosses and reat production value.

How is a game you can easily put over 100 hours into, "a few hours more gamplay" when DS3 is a standard short ass hack-and-slash, albeit I would hope that rerolling has its benefits. Lastly, I will undoubtedly admit DS3 is a much better game, but when people have purchased Torchlight for a 30th of DS3's current value it's hard to not pick sides. Personally, a game that's free is always a 10. Hell, Yaris GOTY.

I could sink in 1000 hours of time into skipping stones, I guess I have found the ultimate deal! Just because you are alright with an endless dungeon crawl, doesn't make it a compelling game for everyone. Like I said, torchlight was awesome, and DS3 is pretty okay certainly not the abortion the internet is claiming it is.

People say the PC controls are bad, but they feel fine to me. You move with W and S, control the camera with A and D, switch stance with Q and interact with E. The only thing I don't like is that you can't click on the abilities on the screen, so you have to use the number keys, and it just feels weird to me. Also it auto-targets on a random enemy, but I just keep dodging till it locks on the dude I want.