Chris Taylor Talks Dungeon Siege II Details

Thanks to GameSpy for its overview of the changes and interview with Gas Powered Games boss Chris Taylor regarding PC action RPG sequel Dungeon Siege II, due out via Microsoft later in 2004. Taylor, lead designer of the classic RTS Total Annihilation, discusses the original Dungeon Siege ("Overall the response was very positive, and most criticism was offered as a call for features in a sequel"), and reveals features for the sequel including (Phantasy Star Online mag-like?) "exotic pets", of which he explains: "You can buy these and develop them by feeding them different items you find in the world."

Comments

Multiplayer?

[Sylver Dragon]

I just hope the multiplayer is better implimented in DS2 than it was in DS1. My group tried playing this one at a LAN party, and the lack of thought in MP really showed. The entire method of scaling the game for more players seemed to revolve around giving the enemies a ton of hit points. So you'd end up hacking at a single enemy like it was a damned redwood tree. It eventually got so bad that the fighters of our group would set thier character to attack an enemy, and then go out to the kitchen to get sodas. We even had one person take a break by having his character follow another character. The nearest person would just reach over occasionally to hit the "take a healing potion" button. And (insert diety here) forbid that you were stupid enough to be a mage, you would sit there blasting off the most powerful spells in the game repeatedly, chugging mana potion after mana potion, and be lucky to drop an enemy before you ran out, or the enemy got a hold of you and killed you.
In all, the multiplayer just didn't seem very polished. It eventually broke down into everyone being a fighter type, with just enough magic to cast a heal spell now and again. And far too long chopping at the same damned enemy. Some of the elements in the game were great, and I really wanted to like it, but I just couldn't get past the obvious problems.

Re:DS I, Mac Version: C

[Quarters]

It's playability was stronger due to a typical Mac's better-than-standard-issue video card (in my case, initially a GeForce 4MX 32MB).

I can't tell if you are being funny or if that is some misguided Mac zealotry. A GeForce 4MX 32MB as standard issue? Such a card is standard issue on a Mac? That somehow qualifies as a way to make the playability of DSI on a Mac better than on a PC?

A GeForce 4MX (64Mb, as the 32s aren't available any more) goes for a paltry $40.00. It's not even a GF4 level card as it lacks pixel and and vertex shaders. It's a renamed GF2 card.

It was behind the curve when it came out 2+ years ago. It was strictly a budget card. If that is "better-than-standard-issue" for a Mac I'd hate to know what you consider to be standard issue.

Re:DS 1 = looked pretty, crap game

[Sigma 7]

* You had little to do in the game other than tell the characters where to move - fighting was automatic.

Why exactly is that a bad thing? I have seen that feature reproduced in other games, and find it to be quite convienent since you do not have to stop fighting in order to prime one or more of your spells.

Requiring the player to keep clicking to attack is a bad thing. As an example, take Nox: you have to do some fancy movements with your mouse in order to defeat some powerful monsters -- click on monster to attack, swing mouse to other side of screen and click to retreat, swing mouse back to attack monster, etc. One wrong move, and you are either dead, or have 90% of your health taken off. Failing to have ultra-1337 mousing skills should not warrent a player's death.

* The levels were quite sprawling with many parts leaving you wondering where to go next.

Didn't notice the problem in either single or multi player. The single player campaign is considered linear enough that you can generally tell which direction is forward or backward. The multiplayer campaign has signposts scattered through the dungeons/map that you can tell which direction to head next.

* The enemies weren't very difficult so you could get through the entire game in one playing.

Are you sure? I've attempted to complete the game with one character, and ended up having to recruit NPCs because of the difficulty in single-handedly killing off the monsters. Not only that, but I've had cases where monsters actually managed to knock out (and even kill) some of my characters.

* No jump-to-town spells or potions, meaning that you had to walk huge distances to sell your stuff.

For single-player, that is a problem. However, that's why you hire packmules - you can purchase two at the first town in single player, and thus have a lot of carring capacity for magical items you can pick up.

Multiplayer, as you know, implements statically placed teleporters - if you reach a distant teleport pad, you can return to town without too much problem.

* You had to complete an entire world in one go as the save-game didn't record what you had already done.

To complete the official multiplayer campaign, all you need are the eight city stones and to ensure the primary quest triggers have been primed by talking to the priests that hand out the primary quests. The HUB system allows teleportation between cities, thus allowing you to easily tag the quests as complete with minimal problem. As a result, you don't need save the world state in multiplayer.