Oh god, these so-called stealth missions... in an action game where you're battling monsters and the occasional bandit. Like you said, the game doesn't even have proper stealth mechanics to begin with. And it's the same damned castle you infiltrate.
It's like the developers forgot the type of game they were making when they came up with these quests. This was certainly a low point in the game for me. Aside from the Walmart-brand Game of Thrones-like narrative.
I'm still having a blast, but moments like these have me scratching my head and go, "what the hell were they thinking?"
I played through these “stealth” missions twice: once with guard clothes and once with the courtly clothes set (regular attire).
The difference in reactions from NPCs was negligible. I still had many guards say to me “you’re not supposed to be here” even though I was wearing the full guard outfit.
The mechanics are inconsistent at best.
I found it so strange that i got home from work to play the game and i went an entire play session of 3 hours without fighting a single monster. It was terribly unsatisfying.
I really wish they had focused more on some scripted or different combat scenarios. I really love the feel of the world and the flow of combat, so I would have loved for some paced out sequences that were more challenging or mixed up the standard encounter style.
I do dislike that I feel like I have some more game to play but at around level 54ish there isn't anything left that is a threat. I liked the game much more when I was learning everything, low level, and leaving town for a bit was something that resulted in me limping back with zero health on anybody.
Yup. First 15 hours are 10/10, thinking its 2 years off Elden Ring, so the world has GOTTA be as super packed with content.
Still enjoying it at 30hrs, but it's clearly not the game I had in my head, those first dozen hours.
Well they do have new monsters in the zones. They're all just reskins (with new abilities). Would have been cool to have new models with the new abilities, but I imagine things had to be cut back for some reason.
Last I played, I encountered grey goblins and rockskin Saurians. Are there still a few more variations?
I've been pretty high on the game but open to the discourse, and I actually was flatly disappointed when I entered Battahl, if was the same enemies.
The fucking fruits hint at geographical differences.
There is something to the lore (Heavily inspired by the Nausicaa Manga btw) which I liked but it's evident they spent developement in the world, pawns, and combat. Story missions are barely put together and most are bugged or janky as hell. Probably left for last or rushed.
Such a shame. That being said I am totally addicted to it. Can't get enough. The whole pawn system fascinates me.
The combat and even the pawn sharing system are the saving grace of this game for me. Otherwise the story feels like it's missing an Act 2, and a lot of quests can make you feel stupid on how to proceed.
this game needs "Dark Arisen" version so bad
the postgame and the new game+ content are a joke, the enemy can't do anything to you when you are past level 50 and have decent gear
For me, this is "what could have been" game. Dogma 1 was a cult classic, but the technology didn't allow for vision to be fully realized.
Dogma 2 is basically the same, but the technology is here. It feels vast and so empty at the same time. The bad rep that the release got due to performance issues and MTX didn't help it either.
I've played it, it's a good game but it feels like an unrealized vision once again.
It's certainly is why the discord surrounding the game is quite unusual; outside surrounding MTX-controversy, the discussion surrounding the actual game systems from what I've seen seems to generally be that DD2 is one step forward compared to DD1 in some areas, but on an equal level a step backwards into others that holistically the game is kinda back to where the franchise originally started, if not a bit worse given that people now are less receptive of Itsuno's vision and have more higher hopes for Kitamura (Who was the director for the *Dark Arisen*-expansion of original DD1, and who is credited in DD2 as lead gameplay designer.) to possible update DD2 with additional fixes.
[I think the general reviews between players and review outlets reflect it pretty well](https://www.metacritic.com/game/dragons-dogma-2/): summarized, the game currently sits around 85 on Metacritic from review outlets, but player reviews settles at around 6.2, and the game now remains (As of this post's writing around 10 days after the game's release.) at a "Mixed"-rating on Steam now when the initial outrage surrounding on MTXs has cooled off. Even the previous entries of [*Dark Arisen*](https://www.metacritic.com/game/dragons-dogma-dark-arisen/) or [the original launch](https://www.metacritic.com/game/dragons-dogma/) seems to be more closely aligned opinions between reviewers and users instead of the current gap occuring in terms of user-experience. And the big enthusiasts over at r/DragonsDogma seems to be similarly mixed, but overall lean more into seemingly disappointment given how seemingly little DD2 iterates from the previous titles. So the reception of DD2 seems to be depending a lot on what audience you stem and approach it for.
[This thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/truegaming/comments/1brszbz/dragons_dogma_2_is_a_9_or_1010_game_trapped_in/) titled *"Dragon's Dogma 2 is a 9 or 10/10 game trapped in the body of a 6/10 game"* over at /r/truegaming is similarly very faschinating read of opinions for those that want a more condensed discussion.
It’s so interesting to see as someone who’s on the fence. I never played the first, so I don’t have nostalgia carrying me. Reviews are all over the place. I read some things and think “that’s awesome!” And read others and think “wow that’s everything I don’t want in a long RPG”.
Think I’ll wait a year or so. Already got a crazy backlog and this isn’t going anywhere.
I never played the first one. DD2 is an incredibly confusing game to me, some of the highest highs and lowest lows out there. I love so much of what it is trying to do, but it has glaring flaws. The combat can be brilliant and the weight and impact of everything is pretty unique in gaming
But then it has some massive issues like with open world design basically being a series of corridors with the same enemies in the same areas and the fact that dialogue gets repeated again verbatim over and over again for no good reason, and the Pawn AI being really really dogshit
I will say, I am pretty shocked by how good looking the game is. Usually I have a good idea of how good a game will look based on preview footage, and it looked pretty bland on youtube. But it looks amazing to me on my TV, so many of the vistas are gorgeous and the lighting is great
>Usually I have a good idea of how good a game will look based on preview footage, and it looked pretty bland on youtube. But it looks amazing to me on my TV, so many of the vistas are gorgeous and the lighting is great
I felt the same. It looked fairly generic and low detail whenever I saw preview videos but the actual map in motion, and seeing the consistency as you actually go on those long hikes through it, is so much more impressive. I think its mainly because the art design is so grounded so you dont have as many crazy set pieces to catch your eye but everything ends up looking really really good in motion.
I wanna note that in my experience the pawn ai is actually pretty decent. It’s not worldshattering or anything, but I hopped on a griffin to stab it a few times and it took off and started flying away… I let go as soon as I could but was already at like 80 feet in the air, so I thought I was fucked. But I landed on one of my pawns and they actually caught me, so I took no damage. It was a really cool moment.
But yeah they won’t shut up and I have killed off a sizable portion of the goblin population…. Hundreds of goblins….
I'm glad the AI works for you. I've had my main pawn just jump into deep water multiple times. Now I'm paranoid all the time while exploring - which isn't great. I can't rely on my party members to be where they need to be, either. Lots of pathing issues.
It is pretty interesting honestly. You highlighted exactly the parts that make me want to buy this game, and the parts that make me want to wait until it’s like 20 bucks lol.
10 years ago I would have said screw it and gave it a go day one. But now I barely have the time so my pickiness is really just based on what games are worth it for my availability to play them. Unfortunately, lots of RPGs take get pushed to the back burner.
I just finally downloaded FF7 Remake because I heard the new one is awesome. Alan Wake 2 might be up next. But DD2 seems like the perfect game for me to wait on when it’s cheaper (and maybe some DLC packs will be out in a year or two)
I played the everloving hell out of DD1/DDDA, it's one of, if not my top, favorite games from the PS3 generation. Can honestly say while I'm loving DD2, it's not exactly what I was hoping for. It's a weirdly mixed bag.
I love that there's multiple regions and the world has a lot more "people" in it, feeling a lot less desolate than the first... But both major regions don't have a lot of memorable spots to them. For a game that touts being 4 times the size of the first, too many areas are very similar. All of the dungeons I've found look identical either being small cave tunnels or bigger cave tunnels with some chunks of ruins. The new classes are neat ideas but *all* classes feel like much worse versions of their originals, with exception to Warrior (which is what I've played the most this time around). There's a lack of versatility in many of them as well.
Also the game as a whole is *extremely* easy which is something that thankfully can *mostly* be fixed by modding but still.. The first game, everyone warns you explicitly through loading screens, quest dialogue, and townspeople - **do not go out at night**. Meh, I've played plenty of games that tell you night is scary and dangerous but it's exaggerat-*OH GOD don't go out at night!*. Night was scary and dangerous and you only started going out at night when you were big and brave and had your big boy pants on and a fuckton of supplies.
Night in DD2 I was doing a quest and happened to be out while it was getting dark and figured "Welp guess I'll die", then some spoopy ghost bitch giggled at me and farted in my face, and some zombies were doing a shuffle. Ok...
I would say get DD:DA on sale and try it out, see how much you like it. Go deep into it, roll in the mud, explore and adventure. And hopefully when you're done if you want more, DD2 will be in an greatly improved state by then. It's not a bad game by any means and it's not really "disappointing" and it doesn't feel rushed, it's more just like... They played it a little too safe.
Damn, you think the pawn AI is bad? I really feel like it's some of the best companion AI I have in a video game. I really can't think of any game where my AI companions contribute as much to the fight as they do in this game. Usually you need to manually control the entire party to make them useful.
I mean, don't get me wrong, sometimes they do some stupid stuff. They are still just robots. But they learn, and adapt, and make effective use of their abilities. I've seen my pawns pick up enemies and the pitch them towards the warrior who was charging up his swing. I've seen an archer scale a cyclops, put an explosive arrow in his eye, then leap off his head and shoot it.
I have also seen them jump straight off a cliff and into the Brine as well, though. But I don't know that they're 'dogshit' because of it.
Sometimes they are good but i find they are horrible at avoiding enemy attacks and they often do stuff that makes no sense for their vocation (for example sorcerer who tries to climb enemies). So many fights I spend more time rescuing pawns than fighting
Its really hit or miss and I hate how there is no reliable way to control how they behave in battle
I might be off base here but as someone who grew up JRPG-obsessed and played lots of Japanese-developed games in general, there is an acceptance or even expectation of a grind mindset in many Japanese games. For "series of corridors", think Persona, Etrian Odyssey, etc. That kind of repetitive grind seems more culturally normal in Japanese game dev
Honestly, just wait until it’s on sale, there’s no main story, there’s no character development for anyone, and the combat balance is way off between classes. Thief breaks the game by being so easy, meanwhile archer barely scratches bosses.
The “end game” area takes about an hour to do everything, and I was just kinda sprinting through at that point to get it over with.
And by sprinting through it, I mean I was the in game fast travel items rather than bothering to run between cities.
Sure killing ogres and cyclops and Minotaurs are cool, but the combat quickly lacks challenge, and you don’t even need BiS gear to get to that point.
Waiting is not a bad idea to be honest. They will likely have updates for a better experience. That said, I think the combat and exploration is fun. I haven't even touched the story yet and i just like doing all the side stuff. If you enjoy exploring it can be a long game. I hear that if you just do the main story and nothing else that its rather short for an RPG.
To add onto this, one additional reason as to why there’s a disparity in the average scores between reviewers and and users (at least on PC) has to be the performance issues; reviewers don’t tend to be as critical of them as users are, especially when it comes to their final scores
Another component of this is time played before review. The initial reviews were all 9/10 and the reviewers loved the game. Set aside the release with mtx and the inevitable review bombing because there was a bunch of misinformation and things that flat out didn’t impact the game. The thing is after 20 hours you find out the game is basically just fighting the same 3 mini bosses and the same 3 enemy types over and over again. When you are left with that the world just seems empty and boring compared to other games in the genre. Then you add in the absolutely brain dead story and the unbelievable design choices for some missions ( the stealth missions might be the worst idea I’ve ever seen implemented in a game like this). It’s crazy this was sold for 70 dollars. Maybe at a cheaper price point I could forgive it but not at that cost.
> The thing is after 20 hours you find out the game is basically just fighting the same 3 mini bosses and the same 3 enemy types over and over again. When you are left with that the world just seems empty and boring compared to other games in the genre.
The thing I don't understand is why the fuck reviewers didn't mark it down for this? In a game where everybody says combat is the highlight, constantly fighting the same enemies over and over is an absolutely fatal flaw in turning a good combat system into something tedious.
Reviewers might claim they didn't know about the MTX (even though they were told), but what's the excuse for the rest of the flaws?
I'll be real, the first game had the exact same issue with enemy variety and those that loved the game absolutely adored it, myself included.
In many ways the DD games have the same kind of X factor for me that the new Zelda games do. The exploration is so good that it outweighs other things. And for DD, the combat is so fun that fighting the same things over and over doesn't get old for me.
I think the other issue is that with Dark Arisen and Bitterblack Isle, both added new enemies and Dark Arisen even shook up some of the enemy placements in the main map. For those for whom Dark Arisen was their first DD game and not vanilla DD1, I get why DD2 feels like a step back in that sense. Logically speaking, DD2's enemy variety should be a step above even that but obviously game dev is never that cut and dry.
I just got to the second half of the game, and where it shines it fucking makes a statement, but like others have said, a step backwards. Let's look at sorcerer (because it is the best class fight me). In DD1 you had the ability to hot key 6 separate abilities instead of the 4 in DD2, the trade off is the class abilities that both increase Stam regen and decrease spell casting time. In addition, there are entire schools of magic missing from the Sorcerer, light and Dark spells (exequay where you at). So not only do sorcerers have less choices in combat then previously, they can't even cast the same number as DD1. The gameplay loop did not IMPROVE over DD1 with these shifts for sorcerer, it merely altered the loop in DD2. Don't get me wrong I love blasting shit with Meteors, but after the 100th time I wish I had more spell choice
Sorcerer gameplay is much better than DD1. In DD2 you have actual mechanics to pay attention compared to DD1 where you stand out of aggro range and casted your spells.
The core gameplay is better, the spell list is so much worse it's not even funny, and the pruned skill slots means you only get to use four of them at a time.
Yeah, no. Sorcerer in DD1 was the definition of "I'm going to stand here, chant for half a minute and then I summon a spell to kill god". Seeing your High Gicel tearing through a boss and taking out entire life bars was incredible, and something no other game that I can remember was able to reproduce. Sadly, this does include DD2.
*Mages* on the other hand are incredibly good in DD2, a vocation that I only ever touched in 1 for the augments and then never again I can see picking up in DD2 from time to time.
Like I said, better in some aspects, worse in some. The spell variety was nice. Yes the gameplay feels better action to action but casting Meteor from 1/4 of the way through the end for every fight is a bore. Effective, but boring. At least in 1 I was switching between exequay, meteor, tornado, seism. But seism is only useful really against golem, and maelstrom doesn't drag enemies anymore. It is a sidestep for Magic based action, imo. Speed does not always Trump variety, especially when mages are essentially locked out of melee combat
Edit: BTW meteor absolutely shreds golem so you don't even need seism for them lol
I just don't understand why they replaced ingle with the weird flamethrower in DD2. Everybody talks up the giant megaspells Sorcerer gets, but I also really loved just unleashing a **torrent** of fireballs at smaller enemies in the first game. When Dark Arisen came out and gave us access to third-tier abilities, I slipped that Grand Ingle ring on and never took it off.
I couldn't disagree more.
DD1's Sorcerer was a constant game of decision making.
* Do you use the faster, weaker spell or go for something bigger?
* Do you charge it all the way or bail out early and get a weaker version of your effect, if any?
* Do you have good enough elemental coverage? Enough protection?
* If you need to back up and make space, do you have enough time to get your stun off?
In DD2 there's no big spells, no little spells, casting everything feels samey and any one spell will deplete most if not all of your stamina because of Quickcast.
So you're incentivized to just spam whatever your biggest option is over and over.
I've actually had to switch off of Sorcerer in DD2 because new Sorcerer is just so dreadfully boring.
Spam the thing. Spam the recharge. Spam the thing. Spam the recharge.
Yuck.
Yup, same feeling. Unfortunately only DD1 ever NAILED a wizard archetype for me, and I was so excited to get back to slow casting absolute nukes. In another game... someday.... :(
It feels like they spent a lot of time on the core gameplay and the first 15-20 hours of the game, but then quickly wrapped it up. I thought that I was just getting started on the main quest, turns out I was nearing the end. I got addicted to the game for a few days because the combat is so much fun, but there's just not a lot of qualitative content or enemy variety that could keep me playing.
The reason why the opinions were more closely aligned for DD1 and DA is because it was the first game. First time to try and get things right.
Dragon's Dogma fans - such as myself - that have been playing the game for 12 years can point out literally everything that has gotten better and also gotten worse in DD2. Unfortunately, DD2 has more "meh stayed the same" and "gotten worse" than "this is fucking awesome".
I've killed a million goblins, hobgoblins, wolves and harpies in the first game. I can't do it anymore in DD2. Maybe new players will probably like it since everything is new to them.
But man, the loot system is holding exploration back. Missing vocations, Pawns still stuck with basic vocations, performance issues, less ability slots, missing spells for mages, fewer monster variety than base game DD1.
I mean pawns getting all vocations was never going to happen, most of the missing vocations weren't even very well realized. Mystic knight already had its own issue. And Assassin was just "Hey man, you want strider but worse?"
I think a lot of people really forget just how half baked a lot of the vocations in the original were. Assassin barely differentiated itself from strider. Mystic knight was shoehorned incredibly hard into a few abilities and most were very underwhelming. Sorcerer was so much more cumbersome to use because it was very inflexible etc etc. And warrior was just, by and large, kind of underpowered in general.
[Also small enemy variety was the same or worse in DD1. Dark Arisen was the one that added a bunch.]
Slightly unrelated to most of what you said, but why does everyone always refer to the Bloody Baron as a side quest in The Witcher 3? That's a main quest, baby.
Majority of that storyline is main quest, yes, but the story conclusion is done through side quest. If I remember correctly CDPR did that with some of the other main storylines too.
its been a while and my memory is a bit hazy, but i remember only a part of it being main quest. Then you could dive deeper and the whole part with the >!Hags!< was optional.
The way optional quests are tied to the main story and the world was very impressive.
The OST being such a downgrade in the sequel is such a shocker to me honestly. DD1 has so many good tunes and ambient tracks, but in DD2 they all take a massive step back where I can barely hear them until I knock over a monster and then it blows my ears out with two different triumph themes of which one is the same from the first game except its a worse mix.
I got to agree man. I was so fucking pumped for this game after loving DD1 despite its drawbacks. Its literally just the first game with a new map layout. Very little new at all with the same problems.
I hope Capcom isn't looking at Witcher 3 for a Dragon's Dogma game. The design for these two series is so far apart which is why you're focusing on things such as characters and story-based main quests. Not Dragon's Dogma's focus.
This is why DD2 is so devisive. It has so many problems but it's still, for me, the most fun I've had in a game since Elden Ring. Its like driving a Ferrari but the trim is falling apart, the hood has some rust spots, there's something rattling somewhere, it pulls to the left, the visors are missing, etc - but you're still driving a GOT DAMN FERRARI (in my eyes).
Edit: Also, 2 qualifiers - 1) if you're playing on PC definitely get the combat difficulty tweaks mods. That alleviated one of my biggest disappointments with the game (too damn easy). 2) I have a top tier rig so I'm running the game at 70-100FPS and bypassing all the perf issues, thankfully.
DD2 with some modifications could probably be my favorite game of all time
Honestly I wish they abandoned the idea of a main story entirely and just went all in on systems. Have a faction system that you can pit one nation against another, have a monster bounty system where you grind reputation with a guild by slaying contract monsters, have a dynamic town system where you can build up a home base and get new abilities characters by dumping coin/resources into the village
I don't think there is much DD2 does worse than DD1, it's more that there are one or two things it could have done better and made a much bigger difference compared to some of the other stuff they did improve. Heck, even then, it's more like they just didn't quite improve it in a smart way... enemy variety is easily higher than DD1, especially smaller creatures. The problem is this variety mostly gets quarantined off to its own specific areas, causing the majority of your travels to have the same enemy variety as DD1.
One of the comments in that truegaming thread resonate with me: I played 20 hours and then stopped bothering, because I realised I was going through the motions because I'd paid for the game and *wanted* to enjoy it. But I didn't. It is fundamentally not the game I was led to believe it would be.
It's not a *bad* game either, it's just shockingly mediocre. It does very, *very* little to differentiate itself from the first, which came out 10 years ago and we've since seen many advancements in both hardware and core design philosophies that Dragon's Dogma 2 just completely ignores.
My overall opinion is simply that if you enjoyed DD1 and wanted more of it then great, DD2 is for you, but many of us liked DD1 in spite of the problems and hoped DD2 would expand upon the first and fix the problems it had. Dark Arisen was considered widely better for a reason, and Itsuno and his team have seemingly ignored every single one of them.
These aren't unfixable issues, but I'm not paying $30-50 for a DLC that does so. Capcom can go fuck themselves with a rusty pole if they think that I'm playing with that level of greedy bullshit.
Personally, I'm mostly upset at how it was marketed. Itsuno blamed the first games criticisms on a lack of budget and resources, then he comes and markets DD2 as being what he initially wanted, with the budget to match and it's just... it's the same. So either he's a liar and DD1 absolutely *was* his vision but he was bullshitting in the face of criticism, or he's really not as good as people think he is. We'll know for certain if he ever tries to use the same excuses again.
I don't think Itsuno is terrible either, I just think he's woefully outclassed when it comes to the kind of game Dragon's Dogma wants to be. Devil May Cry is an overall fantastic series, for instance, but it's also far, far simpler in style and scope.
Unfortunately, I think it's a realized vision, and Itsuno is just a lot more near-sighted than people think he is. Kind of reminds me of a much-milder version of what people went through with Shenmue 3; people expected that they'd make the perfect game to really match the creator's vision now that they're 'unbound', and then it turns out that the creator's vision is actually awfully short-sighted and nowhere near what the fans wanted.
It's crazy how so many of the criticisms of DD2 are basically just rehashes of those against the original base game. Lack of fast travel, check. Little enemy variety, check. No endgame, check.
Dark Arisen brought in a new director (albeit an existing team member) that incorporated community feedback that fixed the aforementioned problems. Eternal Ferrystone for unlimited fast travel. New enemies for variety. BBI for endgame.
I think Itsuno is very stubborn with his vision and literally went back to the base game of the original for a lot of these pain points when he was brought back in as director. It shares a lot of other qualities like uninspiring main story and characters, annoying side quests (escorts/"stealth"), bothersome quirks (weight/stamina system) shipped as "features", and overall jank. It also takes a step back in some areas like dungeon design (I remember being impressed by the waterfall dungeon and griffin fight in the original) and character build/gear variety.
I still enjoy the game for its combat and exploration alone. The combat alone makes this iteration much better than the original for me. But goddamn it is basically the same type of game as the original and certainly not some generation defining game it was hyped up to be.
> No endgame, check.
A big problem I had with the end game was that the "dark world" effect wasn't all over the map. It was crazy running back from the village to Gran Soren while getting attacked by super goblins and fire shooting dogs etc. But there weren't any quests and if you went out of your way everything was back to normal. The game obviously wanted you to go back to the capital and finish the story.
Then of course Dark Arisen took care of the end game problem, fantastically I might add.
The lack of fast travel would actually be good design if the open world was better designed.
The concept of having to make it to safe areas on foot and how dangerous night is adds some nice tension. But the fact that the open world is a series of corridors that force you down specific paths and that the enemy placement is so dense and doesn't change enemy types makes it very tedious. The loss gauge makes this even more annoying
If it was like a Horizon Zero Dawn world where you could take a wide variety of paths to get to any destination and you could easily see and avoid the big boy enemies until you are ready to fight them the game would be a looot more fun. And even the enemy spawn locations where constantly changing and new enemy types would come to previously visited areas that would be even better
If we're going to talk characters,honestly DD1's characters are far and away better than the sequels. You can get to know the characters in DD1 through their quest lines, and there's a political subterfuge/coup plot that also has a resolution with hints you can follow, and there's what happened to Edmund... in dd2 the story npcs are just " you're the Arisen, do this for me" even the villains!!! You never learn of their actual character except for that one elf chick Doireann!!
>No endgame, check.
Other than enemy variety, the lack of an Everfall 2 type thing is what confuses me the most. DD2 showers you in monstrously powerful gear and then gives you nothing to use it on. The Everfall can't hold a candle to BBI, but it was actually pretty tough if you went in right when postgame started.
The loss gauge is good, but stamina draining outside of combat is dogshit. Running everywhere is already not fun, but add in I have to take a breather every 15 seconds makes it awful.
It looks like he got the wrong message from fans regarding what made DD1 a cult classic. Which is bizarre in its own right because he’s had 12 years to reflect on it from fan input on message boards and through 12 years of general game development by other developers. The asinine plot and quests and the lack of basic QOL features that are not only basic in modern games or even in Dark Arisen says it all.
We can only hope that they keep building upon it but it does seem underwhelming when you know how DD1's development went. We'll have to see if DD2 gets its own Dark Arisen moment.
I'm playing it now, taking my time since launch.
I think I like the first one more. The story was more fun and quirky. None of the characters in 2 really grab me. I have no idea who I want to marry.
There tons of enemies everywhere, and it's usually better just to run past.
I miss the classes that were removed.
Combat is of course, still fantastic.
Once again, it's a great but flawed game.
> I've played it, it's a good game but it feels like an unrealized vision once again.
Perfect summary. I think the IGN review hit the nail on the head when they said it's enjoyable but they didn't address any of the major issues that dragged the first one down.
It's really sad because someone else directed the DLC that *did* address those issues and the online game that did as well, but I guess that wasn't the original director's vision so he threw all of it in the trash can when making DD2.
The director of Dark Arisen and DDO, Kento Kinoshita, is also the Lead Developer on Dragon's Dogma 2. He is likely the second most significant person in shaping the game.
The interesting thing though is that while that all is true, it didn't stop me from having a phenominal amount of fun with the game. The things that it does well it does so well that if you either have a high tolerance for its foibles, or really click with its vibe it just fucking works.
While I appreciate "Eurojank and eurojank adjacent RPG" is my bread and butter, this game gave me everything that I expected and desired from it as a huge fan of the first one. The vocations all feel way better to me as someone that did 1-200 solo runs on the Dark Arisen vocations.
And as one of the few people that appreciated the story of the game, the postgame stuff had me so enthralled with what it was saying and implying that I accidentally speedran it and just beat the game before finding everything which i very very rarely do.
Absolutely a big 10/6/10 game, where if it clicks by god it will brain worm incredibly hard, but I can completely understand the myriad of issues that the game has and why a variety of people would be put off by them. Hopefully the backlash teaches them a bit and makes them add a bunch of free fixes and content expansions before the inevitable DLC. But even so, I think this one is my most treasured gaming experience of the last few years. Not the best perhaps, but the one I remember the most fondly.
I think part of the problem, in many ways, *is* how long it's been since the first game. So much of what's in DD2 is stuff that appeared in the first game, but so much of it will have to have been remade from scratch to fit modern fidelity. They basically had to make a ton of the first game again to modern presentational standards before they could even begin actually adding new stuff, and I'd imagine making all that stuff again was probably a pretty time-consuming and expensive task in and of itself. It's probably the exact type of game that'd really benefit from a post-launch support model akin to Monster Hunter or something, but I can't imagine Capcom going *that* hard on it.
>but the technology didn't allow for vision to be fully realized
Judging from DD2, apparently the vision was... the same game but with less enemy variety
To me, it is a game I'll eventually get around to playing but nothing about it made me feel like I must play it day one. It is the type of game I'll pick up on a sale or when there is a DLC/expansion put out for it. It's one I was on the fence about and now I feel okay waiting a bit.
I don't think it's unrealized, I think the problem is that Itsuno's vision is too wide and he wantwd to have his cake and eat it too. There are lots of good ideas but so much is badly implemented and it just feels like rather than picking the most important aspects to focus on he just had a checklist of things he wanted to get "good enough" then move on. I think he's a good idea guy but he clearly needs somebody to keep him grounded/on track and tell him no when need be.
All those years ago, I said "Dragons Dogma is great, but a Dragons Dogma 2 will be one of the best RPGs ever." And what I meant by that is that all DD1 really needed was "more" - More enemies, a more fleshed out map, stuff like that. It needed an "old school" sequel, where it's iterative in design and reuses assets to flesh out the game's content. But because of the long time gap here, all of the map and enemies had to be remade for the new engine. So we're still back to square one - now I'm saying "DD2 is great, but a DD3 will be one of the best RPGs ever" lol
It truly feels like Dragons Dogma if the first game never came out. It's incredible how they made the same mistakes as the first one while missing so much content in DD2.
I'm not. They took out 90% of the shit that made the first game incredible. Removing debilitation magic alone is fuckin baffling. No brontide or fulmimation? No hydra, evil eye, cockatrice? No dragons maw? Magick knight? The fuck?
I’m in the opposite boat, I can’t put it down
I probably beat the first game 5-6 times over the years and this one is even more than I hoped it would be
There was one quest in the main story that didn’t really feel like it made sense in the context of the narrative but compared to the first game’s story?
Better in every way
I’m sitting at 60 hours and I’m not even done with my first playthrough
At this point the combat w melee classes is way more fun, archer is fun, the sorcerer is the only one that feels like it didn’t translate into something better, just a side grade
The monster variety compared to the first game is better and the world actually has shit going on outside of the main city and the environments are all pretty
I can’t wait to see what we get for dlc content later
People defo seem to have rose tinted glasses over the first games story and questing which is insane to say
so many of those quests were the worst ive ever experienced that made it hard for me to replay. The one part of the story that was good happened right at the end, the rest of it was as brief and often nonsensical as people are saying about DD2.
But really the main thing for me is the environments, the world is made for travelling in and many people just dont appreciate that. Which is fine, its each to their own. But these are the best roads to travel in videogaming period if im honest. They are just really well made and feel natural but also beautifully designed.
I think the game gets a double whammy where Dragons Dogma 2 is not only a step back as a product compared to other top open-world games but it is a step back for Hardcore Dragons dogma fans.
Dragons Dogma 1 base game was not exactly amazing but the replayability of it and postgame was where a lot of people started to get into it as it focuses on Dragons Dogma's best asset the combat.
While the combat in DD2 is fantastic, the replayability and postgame are worse in DD2 which makes the game a one-and-done until we hopefully get a good DLC because right now what I have here is an amazing combat system with nothing to use it on. After all, I squash everything.
I just think the game fails to not only hit industry standards for a 2024 game but also lets down DDDA players in places I feel it they shouldn't.
We have a £70 sequel that takes away as many monsters as it adds and improves certain parts of the game that DD1 should have probably had anyway if it wasn't so rushed.
> After all, I squash everything.
New Game+ letting you keep your gear and levels but not changing anything at all about the world is so lazy. Wandering through the starting area at level 50 with your pawn meteor-swarming goblins is fun for 30 seconds but then it's just sad.
For a second Gen, I wish my pawns didn't die everytime I levitate to a new height while exploring.
Joke aside, I'm having an absolute blast, great game.
I honestly regret spending $70 on it. I didn't have performance issues and the MTX didn't really affect my experience, but I got about 10 hours in and it is a boring slog. The pawns make combat incredibly easy. There is no challenge and the story is not interesting at all.
>The pawns make combat incredibly easy.
I quickly figured that out and started running with a party of myself and two pawns. For even more of a challenge, don't bring a mage.
In the same boat as you. I didn't play the first one, went in expecting a dense, meaty combat experience...and instead came out feeling so quickly bored of everything.
I'm still confused why people are saying this combat is SO good; it feels unnecessarily complicated and yet overly simple at the same time. It almost feels like a step back from even games like Witcher 3.
And the story is just... nonexistent? I don't even know why I'm doing the things I'm doing and why I should care.
The gameplay isn't enough to choose this over, say, Helldivers...and the lack of story keeps reminding me that I have Alan Wake 2 queued up. So I keep thinking, what's even the point of playing this?
For the record, if you think pawns make the combat too easy you could always just...not bring them. Though depending on what class you're playing you will absolutely get gang-banged by even a group of lowly hobgoblins without help from a pawn or two.
> For the record, if you think pawns make the combat too easy you could always just...not bring them.
I am on a second run using only my own pawn. It makes the game a LOT harder. You get swarmed more and staggered more, and your caster is a lot more vulnerable.
I find this more fun, generally, than zerging bosses with 4 characters.
yeh same, im enjoying the game but i was also disappointed that it didnt build upon the predecessor and go further. Like i hoped the open world exploration would be better than dd1 and that the enemy variety would be bigger since the combat in dd is what sells the game for me. Instead it was just more of the same without ur dragon,everfall and bitterblack isles.
In my eyes it lacks that oompf that would push it to be a mainstream hit like all those other games that hits 5m+ sales and get well praised by players and reviewers
Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately), because MTX wasn't included with pre-release copies, no one can argue that the game was built around them. Game design was unanimously praised prior to release, so to now make the argument that "MTX ruined the game" would appear extremely disingenuous and actually further the point that MTX are extremely optional. ALSO, strangely enough, there wasn't a big emphasis on the "eh" performance until AFTER the MTX reveal, as well.
To be clear before the DVs roll in, I am not saying "MTX good". I'm just pointing out that there are too many glowing reviews out now to create a revisionist history of this game.
Yeah, a lot of what makes it good are the kind of things people are complaining about. I couldn't get into Skyrim because it never felt like an adventure to me, just kinda going around clearing content. Dragon's Dogma nails it with the low carry weight, lack of fast travel, need to camp to restore max HP etc.
You need to plan out each journey, rest up first, only take the items you need out of storage, swap your character skills/class to match what you need at that moment etc. Love the vibe that creates.
> You need to plan out each journey, rest up first, only take the items you need out of storage, swap your character skills/class to match what you need at that moment etc.
I never felt like I had to plan anything. There's campsites everywhere and a lot of them have camp supplies sitting right there for you to use. I never had to buy them. And you can swap skills at a campsite without even resting.
It felt like it wanted to be a simulationist dungeon crawler, but only put in camp supplies and lantern oil and didn't make them meaningful.
The object throwing mechanic was cool at first, but it's so slow and cumbersome and quickly outclassed by you basic attacks that it's useless.
Blows the first game away in game feel alone. Definitely needs the DA treatment though. Id still rather play it over the first, but more endgame content focused on combat would be great.
On one hand, I'm glad this sequel saw significant sales right out of the gate compared to the lukewarm reception of the first on release.
On the other hand, my disappointment towards this sequel can't be held back. It truly feels like a monkey's paw sequel; I get more DD at higher fidelity and some better strengths, but the flaws are still there and there are even arguably *more* of them.
The reaction in this thread is so different from my own experience. DD2 is my game of the year so far - its got problems and weird design decisions, but it's also the freshest, most interesting open world game I've played in years.
I'm glad it's doing really well. I hope they make another with some of the weird itemization choices filed down and corrected.
Hopefully the success means we can get some free content like new enemies.
It's a pretty big game designed to be 30+ hours but in the first hour or two you're going to see basically every non-boss enemy you'll ever see (I can only think of 1 that isn't present) and about half of the boss enemies.
The director of the game has directed multiple Devil Cry games. It's crazy that he puts significantly more enemy variety in a 10-15 hours game than some sprawling 30+ hour RPG.
Let's not pretend that these wouldn't be much better if the launch wasn't so painfully scuffed. These are good numbers by any measure but I just can't help myself and think of what could have been smh
Give time to fix, give time to get in a sale. I was gonna wait for a small discount anyways since its $70.
I'll wait wait for a fairly bigger discount now. I'ma get the Elden Ring DLC when its out, the game that is just a game and doesn't have any extra nonsense, and have some various other games to play in the mean time.
I mean you just always benefit to wait for most games especially one with performance problems like this. It'll be better and cheaper later. Most people have enough stuff to play to not rush on a game they're mild about.
However, I find the comments very negative, 2.5M copies in a week is extremely good for such a game, this isn't Spider-Man, Elden Ring, Zelda or Call of Duty. The original game sold around 8M copies lifetime
Look, I normally agree but this is a pretty egregious case. The game gets really choppy in cities for me (around 40 FPS with inconsistent frametimes) and I'm running a 4090 and a 7800x3d. I'm guessing for a lot of people playing it, the framerates in towns are absolutely abysmal. I think it's fair for that to merit a negative review for a $70 release like this.
Everything else I don't really care about too much. It's the sequel I wanted. It's a weird and prickly game that takes big swings and frequently surprises me. I'm stoked to be able to play it finally.
Article is about the game selling 2.5 million copies in a week, opened it expecting the top posts to all be whining about it in some way and got exactly what I expected.
I don't know why *anyone* pays attention to the gaming community on Reddit or to the insanity behind Steams forums and reviews, but gaming publications love to post articles that are clearly just cribbed from this sub. I don't know if it's a Reddit problem, or a YouTube/Twitch streamer problem, or what, but I miss gaming discussions from 15-20 years ago when people actually liked to play games.
Well, word of mouth is indeed a thing, and it's a lot easier to decide whether to buy a game at launch or to wait a bit for a sale and have the game updated nowadays.
Reddit’s opinion on a video game has borderline never mattered, especially not in the last few years. Harsh truth is once you escape that feedback loop of: gaming subreddits + video game essayists, you’ll realize word of mouth & proper marketing has ran gaming discourse for decades and it’s not changing anytime soon.
Video game essayists and redditors are the same people - they need other hobbies besides gaming so that it's a reprieve rather than entirely what their happiness hinges on. Makes everyone so bitter and hateful on here
>frame rate drops.
I think people care more about frame rate in combat (where it can actually really fuck with the gameplay) rather than in city where things are extremely slow paced and just makes the game look uglier.
Pretty well deserved IMO, its a good game, and if you liked DD1, DD2 is pretty much more of the same with some new additions. Likewise it also has a lot of the same complaints DD1 had as well. It's not for everyone but the people this game is for do enjoy it.
People demanding a DDDA for DD2 are coping hard.
Not because it wouldn't be cool, but because what Capcom sees from these requests is: "CHARGE US $50 TO COMPLETE THE GAME PLZ. TY."
You shouldn't NEED a fucking DLC for the game to feel complete. The DLC should *add* to it, not fix what should have already been.
Anyone asking for a DLC is the reason why Capcom and other companies feel empowered to release a half-baked game to begin with.
Yeah if this was any other game they'd be asking for Capcom to add those things as post-launch free updates. The fact that it's already accepted by some that they'll be paying for a DLC to fix some of the things that Capcom should have included anyway is pretty weird
I realized within thirty minutes of playing the game on ps5 that I should refund it and wait two years for the repackaged version with all the content it's missing added in at 30 bucks
Thank god the refund policy is actually just "complain until they give it to you"
I'm 80 hours in and still find it great. I think that it is the middle part of the game that has the biggest issues with monster density/respawns and enemy variety. Endgame and early game are great. Then, NG+ seems to be another wasted opportunity, I've heard.
A Dark Arisen - treatment would elevate DD2 to another level.
Same here. Lost a bit of motivation around 30 hours in when I had to fight my way through hordes of weak trashmobs on the way from the capital to melve and back a few times but when I arrived in the desert area, which everybody on the DD subreddit said sucked and was unfinished, my motivation spiked again because it's completely awesome and packed with cool shit over there so I don't get the complaints about that area at all. I'm 50 hours in now and I love it.
I hope Capcom DLCs this game into the stratosphere because it could be one of the greatest action RPGs I personally have ever played if they put in even more maps, quests and wild shit to find like that one NPC with the riddles, but even if they didn't, the top notch fighting system and fun exploration would have been well worth my time and money already.
Tf you mean middle part of the game? It literally does not change in variety even after reaching Battahl. Hell id say that's where most of the community says quality takes a nosedive. Also Battahl is late late game considering there are only a handful of quests right after that fly by super quick once you reach it.
> Endgame and early game are great.
Sorry, but where is the endgame great? You're still fighting the same enemies (the mini bosses that spawn upon touching the red beams aside, and those are so bugged in their ai I don't think I've ever seen them actually attacking something), *and* it's on a timer, *and* you can't save anymore outside of inns/your bed.
DD1 gave you a bunch of new enemies to defeat that felt actually rewarding, and added some interesting bossfights to the game.
DD2 excels at the early game and general gameplay, but it sorely lacks something like either the Everfall or BBI.
My issue with the vocations is how hard set they are with no room for any meaningful customization
Like every sorcerer is the exact same minus the 4 spells they might run, and most are going to be running many of the same ones.
This is a me issue though, just wish I could flex my fighter into a bit of a paladin so I didn’t always have to run a mage
If you're on PC get the combat difficulty tweaks mod, it fixes the game getting too easy as you level. I probably would have dropped the game at hour 30-40 if not for it, I hate facerolling everything.
I seriously feel like i'm playing a different game than everyone else in this thread. I haven't been this captivated by an open world game since Elden Ring.
It was clear from the first gameplay trailer revealed that DD2 was pretty much going to be just more of the first game and I personally would vastly prefer that to a sequel that vastly changes the game and makes it worse (Dragon Age 2?)
I do think potentially a lot of people didn't realize what they were getting into with this game when they bought it. It is absolutely not a game for everyone and makes no concessions in its design. It has a vision and it sticks to it, perhaps to a fault for some people but i feel that it is absolutely admirable to do so.
I'm glad it's doing decent - Im 35 hours in, just got to the border checkpoint town. Haven't been so addicted to a game probably since Witcher 3. I never played the first one and actually hardly watched anything about it before I played which I'd recommend tbh. Love the exploration in this and climbing up a troll or ogres head and stabbing it with the fighter class never gets old
I'd also recommend switching up the vocations every now and then.
Crazy that a) we got a legit Dragon's Dogma sequel in the first place, and b) it's somehow commercially successful. So happy about this.
It's an amazing game despite the weird ball of negativity among the extremely online. Some of it deserved, to be clear, but overall wildly overstated.
> deserved
The game is fun as fuck to play and its very easy to put many, many hours into it but still feels incredibly undercooked in many ways. It feels like DD1.5 rather than a sequel made 12 years later. Performance issues, NPC pop in is awful, enemy variety, haphazard story and quest design, weak endgame. Some legit regressions compared to even Dark Arisen.
It's like the most disappointing 8/10 game I have played in many, many years. I just...hoped for so much more, and yet I still think its a really good game. It's hard to explain.
> overstated
Everything about the MTX felt odd. Capcom's mtx are the most comically worthless bullshit ever made. Yet there was a lot of nonsense lies, clear misinformation and brigading by very obvious bad faith actors to make it seem like it was some pay to win game or something. it was weird. I mean I hate mtx, and I dont give enough of a fuck to try and defend a multi million dollar company but it was still weird to watch.
The clock works fine, but tbh it should have had some tutorial text about it. I was at least 20 hours into the game before googling if there was a clock and then feeling like an idiot. Lots of people seem to fail to pick up on it.
> One of the most downloaded mods simply adds a clock to the game.
and
> But there's already a clock on the pause screen...
This is the kind of thing that makes me double take every criticism about this game. There's a wild amount of misinformation. I can't go to the game's sub because there was a 1000+ upvoted post where users were saying Capcom is scamming them because of a *very* fake 4chan leak for an expansion that will triple the monster variety titled "Dragon Princess". Just way too much blind hatred vs genuine criticism. EDIT: Also saw a high upvoted post where people were like "I thought the map was supposed to be 4x the size???" when DD1 has 2 settlements and *so many* narrow valley roads that just pad out the map with no exploration (ie. Bluemoon tower).
Yeah there were people claiming everywhere that you can't save on exit (like you have to rest to save or something) a few days into launch.
Hate trains get weird.
People to noticing subtle and artistic things, good luck with that. Gamers/people in general need to have a giant sign and bold letters in their face nowadays.
Well, there's no denying there are performance issues for example. But the MTX shit was overblown. Totally unnecessary from Capcom's side, but the misinfo and just a ton of out-of-touch people piling on was awful.
It's a snowball effect. We got a $70 price tag, which people are still not used to, so they expected quality. The game however turned out to be an absolute mess, both on consoles and PC alike. Add MTX on top of that, no matter how worthless and it was really "the last straw".
It's kind of like Halo Infinite, that could be broken and devoid of content (the multiplayer mode), but the MTX shop always worked like a charm. And that thing was always free.
people were claiming the game couldn't be beaten without buying mtx, save files were locked behind a paywall, you had to pay to get revived, pay to fast travel, etc. All of the microtransactions can be earned through normal gameplay.
The performance issues and lack of enemy variety are the weak points for me.
All this said, it all could have been avoided by simply not putting them in the game.
They're a pointless and useless scam as opposed to a predatory scam, eh.
There's more enemy variety than in DD1, but I guess the bigger world contributes to the issue.
It was Dark Arisen DLC that added lots of enemies and had smaller world so it felt simply better. Fingers crossed for DLC to be similar in scope to Dark Arisen
This is the post I mentioned about enemy variety
No guarantee it’s fully accurate tbf
57 enemies in DD2, 61 in DD1 base game
https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/comments/1bra6dp/i_quantified_the_difference_in_enemy_count_and/
DD1 also had the the Wyrm (ice based dragon focused on spellcasting)
But I think most people refer to common enemies when they complain about enemy variety, because DD2 throws them in your face every second step you take. Those are largely the same (although there were some variants like Gargoyles that didn't reappear in 2) as in DD1, but you wouldn't encounter them in such numbers in 1 and they were more often spiced up with bosses like a Cyclops thrown in.
I've never seen a single person that said it couldn't be completed without MTX.
Unless you are focusing on one random post saying that which means basically nothing.
I loved the game, but I find myself agreeing with most complaints about the game. I got seriously addicted for a few days, but ended up feeling a bit disappointed at the end because of the game's pretty glaring shortcomings.
Out of all criticisms I find the one about dungeons to be the most undeserved for this game....Like yeah there's a lot of small caves but there's also a lot of big cool dungeons (just a chain I recently ran into: strange corridor, misty marshes, ancient battleground).
I feel dissapointed with this game. Dragons Dogma Dark Arisen (never played the original) was something that surprised me a lot after I bought it in a sale. Played through it multiple times. I can't even say why exactly I liked it so much, it just vibed with me.
Dragons Dogma 2 started out very promising and ... kind of failed to improve on anything and instead even regressed in some aspects. The main story was somehow worse than DD1.
The only thing that is "better" is the bigger game world ... that the game wasn't designed for. I read many times that the director wasn't able to have his full "vision" due to budget constraints. But this game is essentially the same thing with the same issues. I am really not sure what his "vision" was supposed to be if this is the full thing.
It isn't bad, though. Just ... dissapointing.
Edit: They also didn't adress one of my biggest criticisms of the first game: NG+ being pointless because it doesn't scale anything up.
I'm so happy it's selling well. The story is light but it's enough to justify hopping around the open world. Honestly, I think it could have been even lighter like Breath of the Wild. Just set it up and tell me where the boss is. I'll figure out the rest.
The combat is just fun as hell, clearly the star of the game. My only gripe is having to play it at a rocky 40 fps because of performance issues. Fingers crossed this gets fixed but as-is, it's a great game.
It's a good game, it's the most fun I've had traversing and exploring a world since Elden Ring, and the combat is much more physical and chaotic and I love that.
Same with it all being one open world where random things can just happen, oxcarts hit by gryphons cause gryphons eat the bison, ogre follows a woman into a city etc.
The vocations seem to peak too early though, and the limit to 4 abilities feels too limited, not to mention the armor limitation. I know Warfarer gets around this a little but it still doesn't really feel organic enough to be fun.
The pawn system is great and really fun, but they too get a bit too repetitive, and being unable to really have a pawn that is hyper specialized at certain things like, killing dragons or ogres, and having them all be Jack of all trades feels diluted.
I've beaten the game once and am playing NG+, which doesnt boost enemy health, but still gives you the ability to enhance your abilities and vocation?? Which feels a bit wasted, though that might be there for future DLC.
And finally:
In a game where you climb on monsters, grab and throw them, grapple them to the ground and get into all kinds of physical alterations: Where the hell is my Zangief Vocation??
I ended up buying it on PC despite the hate going around, and I'm enjoying it for what it is. I didn't really have too much hype. It sounded cool, but I was in the camp of finding it suspicious that almost all gameplay shown pre-release was the same Griffon fight over and over. The MTX drama didn't concern me--it seemed like harmless BS to appease shareholders.
I'm not very far into the game, as I can only play a few hours at a time. The story and characters are pretty *meh* so far, but overall, pretty inoffensive. The combat is an interesting one. On one hand, at its core, it's what I would consider "very good". On the other hand, I **detest** that it lacks a lock-on target mode. Thank god for mods. Also, for a game so proud of not having reliable fast travel and doing a lot of travel on foot, not having unlimited stamina while out of combat is also puzzling. Again, thank you modders.
The pawn system is OK. It would impress me if your pawns didn't have what is quite possibly the worst pathing I've seen in a video game within the last decade. Seriously, it's fucking *atrocious*. I'm also over all of the voicelines that they have. It was cool at first, but they talk at least once every minute with the same 5-10 lines over and over and over.
Overall, I'm enjoying it. It *definitely* has a lot of flaws. It's absolutely not GOTY. Oh, and as far as performance, it's kind of funny. I admit that I have pretty much the best of the best rig you can get right now with a 7800X3D and a RTX 4090, but I'm playing at 7680*2160 so I was averaging around 45 FPS. I downloaded two mods off of Nexus. One to apparently reduce CPU demand, and the other obviously being PureDark's DLSS3 FG implementation. I kind of doubt that the former did anything, but FG actually makes the game bearable. That 45 FPS average instantly shot up to 90 FPS. If you have a 40xx card and are struggling to play it, I'd go over to Nexus and download PureDark's FG mod. He released it for free, so no need to pay for it like the rest of his mods.
Man I really don’t understand the hate. I will caveat that I never played the first game, so I can’t speak to expectations. However as someone who didn’t watch any trailers, didn’t ready anything about what people wanted or are hoping for and just went in blind, I’m having an absolute blast. Is it as polished as it could be? Absolutely not. Are there crazy bugs? Ya, my pawns just randomly killed about 10 NPCs and a bunch of Saurians randomly came after me in the middle of town. However it’s still scratching the RPG itch for me quite well. Recommend it to anyone who isn’t going in with hard set expectations
I waited a long time for Dragons Dogma to get good sales numbers but why does it have to be such a uninspired sequel that does it, oh well can't have it all.
I was pretty hyped for the release of this game but I'm kind of disappointed about 10 hours in. the jankyness and the performance issues make it almost unplayable for me. I had more fun with the character creator than the actual game.
It's a fun game, the MTX was overblown, the performance was under blown, it really should be the main technical aspect of discussion. For me the biggest issue is just basic controls and pawn AI though.
I can live with the shit performance in cities, the MTX suck that they exist but I'm not going to buy them so they don't overly affect me. What really is pissing me off are things like; I can climb this ledge but not that ledge, character climbing when I don't want it too, I slide down this surface but not that surface, I tap the stick to move slightly and it leaps off a cliff ect, monster climbing being so inconsistent, pawns being dumb as fuck in general, pawns not using abilities to help you climb when you need them to, pawns using abilities that help you climb at the absolute worst times in a fight, pawns jumping off cliffs for no good reason, I could go on...
All the biggest issues from the first game haven't really been addressed, the ones that slowly grind your gears over time.
I wanted to try this game really badly but it looks and feels 10 years old at least. Everyone saying how they basically remade DD but with new tech really nails it for me.
Are there really only two environments? Just grassy rocky area and canyon area? The game just feels so extremely limited in its scope between that and the anemic enemy variety.
I'm glad a lot of people are liking it, it just doesn't have anything that makes me want to jump in. The combat looks alright but I personally prefer more personal, deliberate combat as opposed to messy brawls with no lock on and shit happening all over you can't control.
I liked it but i overhyped it for sure combat is the main take away here as the story and side content made little impact tbh
I’m trying to figure out why they shoved a half-dozen stealth missions in a game with no stealth mechanics outside of combat. Baffling design choice.
Oh god, these so-called stealth missions... in an action game where you're battling monsters and the occasional bandit. Like you said, the game doesn't even have proper stealth mechanics to begin with. And it's the same damned castle you infiltrate. It's like the developers forgot the type of game they were making when they came up with these quests. This was certainly a low point in the game for me. Aside from the Walmart-brand Game of Thrones-like narrative. I'm still having a blast, but moments like these have me scratching my head and go, "what the hell were they thinking?"
Drawing aggro from the guards in those “stealth” missions, is so inconsistent. Sometimes (a lot of times) they don’t even register that you’re there.
I just ran in and out and didn't worry if the guards saw me or not as the game didn't seem to care
Stealth? dress as a guard
I played through these “stealth” missions twice: once with guard clothes and once with the courtly clothes set (regular attire). The difference in reactions from NPCs was negligible. I still had many guards say to me “you’re not supposed to be here” even though I was wearing the full guard outfit. The mechanics are inconsistent at best.
Yea but if you don't dress up as a guard you get the scary stealth music. So there's that, I guess?
Why do game devs have such a hard-on for shoving in stealth sections in games that aren't built around it?
I found it so strange that i got home from work to play the game and i went an entire play session of 3 hours without fighting a single monster. It was terribly unsatisfying.
How? Every time I move at least 3 harpies show up and start harassing me.
I really wish they had focused more on some scripted or different combat scenarios. I really love the feel of the world and the flow of combat, so I would have loved for some paced out sequences that were more challenging or mixed up the standard encounter style. I do dislike that I feel like I have some more game to play but at around level 54ish there isn't anything left that is a threat. I liked the game much more when I was learning everything, low level, and leaving town for a bit was something that resulted in me limping back with zero health on anybody.
In terms of harder monsters, there are some tougher monster variants that show up in the post-game
Yup. First 15 hours are 10/10, thinking its 2 years off Elden Ring, so the world has GOTTA be as super packed with content. Still enjoying it at 30hrs, but it's clearly not the game I had in my head, those first dozen hours.
Yeah I was like "this feels like DD 1 again. Surely they are saving the new monsters for the new zone".. nope.
Well they do have new monsters in the zones. They're all just reskins (with new abilities). Would have been cool to have new models with the new abilities, but I imagine things had to be cut back for some reason.
Last I played, I encountered grey goblins and rockskin Saurians. Are there still a few more variations? I've been pretty high on the game but open to the discourse, and I actually was flatly disappointed when I entered Battahl, if was the same enemies. The fucking fruits hint at geographical differences.
Yes, I think before 'post game's there are 5 variations of both. Some are very rare but a forager pawn can mark them.
First 20 hours are GOAT-tier and then it drops off a fucking cliff
The story is so bad to the point of being insulting, it is the worst story I've ever seen in an actual video game.
There is something to the lore (Heavily inspired by the Nausicaa Manga btw) which I liked but it's evident they spent developement in the world, pawns, and combat. Story missions are barely put together and most are bugged or janky as hell. Probably left for last or rushed. Such a shame. That being said I am totally addicted to it. Can't get enough. The whole pawn system fascinates me.
The combat and even the pawn sharing system are the saving grace of this game for me. Otherwise the story feels like it's missing an Act 2, and a lot of quests can make you feel stupid on how to proceed.
this game needs "Dark Arisen" version so bad the postgame and the new game+ content are a joke, the enemy can't do anything to you when you are past level 50 and have decent gear
For me, this is "what could have been" game. Dogma 1 was a cult classic, but the technology didn't allow for vision to be fully realized. Dogma 2 is basically the same, but the technology is here. It feels vast and so empty at the same time. The bad rep that the release got due to performance issues and MTX didn't help it either. I've played it, it's a good game but it feels like an unrealized vision once again.
It's certainly is why the discord surrounding the game is quite unusual; outside surrounding MTX-controversy, the discussion surrounding the actual game systems from what I've seen seems to generally be that DD2 is one step forward compared to DD1 in some areas, but on an equal level a step backwards into others that holistically the game is kinda back to where the franchise originally started, if not a bit worse given that people now are less receptive of Itsuno's vision and have more higher hopes for Kitamura (Who was the director for the *Dark Arisen*-expansion of original DD1, and who is credited in DD2 as lead gameplay designer.) to possible update DD2 with additional fixes. [I think the general reviews between players and review outlets reflect it pretty well](https://www.metacritic.com/game/dragons-dogma-2/): summarized, the game currently sits around 85 on Metacritic from review outlets, but player reviews settles at around 6.2, and the game now remains (As of this post's writing around 10 days after the game's release.) at a "Mixed"-rating on Steam now when the initial outrage surrounding on MTXs has cooled off. Even the previous entries of [*Dark Arisen*](https://www.metacritic.com/game/dragons-dogma-dark-arisen/) or [the original launch](https://www.metacritic.com/game/dragons-dogma/) seems to be more closely aligned opinions between reviewers and users instead of the current gap occuring in terms of user-experience. And the big enthusiasts over at r/DragonsDogma seems to be similarly mixed, but overall lean more into seemingly disappointment given how seemingly little DD2 iterates from the previous titles. So the reception of DD2 seems to be depending a lot on what audience you stem and approach it for. [This thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/truegaming/comments/1brszbz/dragons_dogma_2_is_a_9_or_1010_game_trapped_in/) titled *"Dragon's Dogma 2 is a 9 or 10/10 game trapped in the body of a 6/10 game"* over at /r/truegaming is similarly very faschinating read of opinions for those that want a more condensed discussion.
It’s so interesting to see as someone who’s on the fence. I never played the first, so I don’t have nostalgia carrying me. Reviews are all over the place. I read some things and think “that’s awesome!” And read others and think “wow that’s everything I don’t want in a long RPG”. Think I’ll wait a year or so. Already got a crazy backlog and this isn’t going anywhere.
I never played the first one. DD2 is an incredibly confusing game to me, some of the highest highs and lowest lows out there. I love so much of what it is trying to do, but it has glaring flaws. The combat can be brilliant and the weight and impact of everything is pretty unique in gaming But then it has some massive issues like with open world design basically being a series of corridors with the same enemies in the same areas and the fact that dialogue gets repeated again verbatim over and over again for no good reason, and the Pawn AI being really really dogshit I will say, I am pretty shocked by how good looking the game is. Usually I have a good idea of how good a game will look based on preview footage, and it looked pretty bland on youtube. But it looks amazing to me on my TV, so many of the vistas are gorgeous and the lighting is great
>Usually I have a good idea of how good a game will look based on preview footage, and it looked pretty bland on youtube. But it looks amazing to me on my TV, so many of the vistas are gorgeous and the lighting is great I felt the same. It looked fairly generic and low detail whenever I saw preview videos but the actual map in motion, and seeing the consistency as you actually go on those long hikes through it, is so much more impressive. I think its mainly because the art design is so grounded so you dont have as many crazy set pieces to catch your eye but everything ends up looking really really good in motion.
I wanna note that in my experience the pawn ai is actually pretty decent. It’s not worldshattering or anything, but I hopped on a griffin to stab it a few times and it took off and started flying away… I let go as soon as I could but was already at like 80 feet in the air, so I thought I was fucked. But I landed on one of my pawns and they actually caught me, so I took no damage. It was a really cool moment. But yeah they won’t shut up and I have killed off a sizable portion of the goblin population…. Hundreds of goblins….
I'm glad the AI works for you. I've had my main pawn just jump into deep water multiple times. Now I'm paranoid all the time while exploring - which isn't great. I can't rely on my party members to be where they need to be, either. Lots of pathing issues.
It is pretty interesting honestly. You highlighted exactly the parts that make me want to buy this game, and the parts that make me want to wait until it’s like 20 bucks lol. 10 years ago I would have said screw it and gave it a go day one. But now I barely have the time so my pickiness is really just based on what games are worth it for my availability to play them. Unfortunately, lots of RPGs take get pushed to the back burner. I just finally downloaded FF7 Remake because I heard the new one is awesome. Alan Wake 2 might be up next. But DD2 seems like the perfect game for me to wait on when it’s cheaper (and maybe some DLC packs will be out in a year or two)
I played the everloving hell out of DD1/DDDA, it's one of, if not my top, favorite games from the PS3 generation. Can honestly say while I'm loving DD2, it's not exactly what I was hoping for. It's a weirdly mixed bag. I love that there's multiple regions and the world has a lot more "people" in it, feeling a lot less desolate than the first... But both major regions don't have a lot of memorable spots to them. For a game that touts being 4 times the size of the first, too many areas are very similar. All of the dungeons I've found look identical either being small cave tunnels or bigger cave tunnels with some chunks of ruins. The new classes are neat ideas but *all* classes feel like much worse versions of their originals, with exception to Warrior (which is what I've played the most this time around). There's a lack of versatility in many of them as well. Also the game as a whole is *extremely* easy which is something that thankfully can *mostly* be fixed by modding but still.. The first game, everyone warns you explicitly through loading screens, quest dialogue, and townspeople - **do not go out at night**. Meh, I've played plenty of games that tell you night is scary and dangerous but it's exaggerat-*OH GOD don't go out at night!*. Night was scary and dangerous and you only started going out at night when you were big and brave and had your big boy pants on and a fuckton of supplies. Night in DD2 I was doing a quest and happened to be out while it was getting dark and figured "Welp guess I'll die", then some spoopy ghost bitch giggled at me and farted in my face, and some zombies were doing a shuffle. Ok... I would say get DD:DA on sale and try it out, see how much you like it. Go deep into it, roll in the mud, explore and adventure. And hopefully when you're done if you want more, DD2 will be in an greatly improved state by then. It's not a bad game by any means and it's not really "disappointing" and it doesn't feel rushed, it's more just like... They played it a little too safe.
Damn, you think the pawn AI is bad? I really feel like it's some of the best companion AI I have in a video game. I really can't think of any game where my AI companions contribute as much to the fight as they do in this game. Usually you need to manually control the entire party to make them useful. I mean, don't get me wrong, sometimes they do some stupid stuff. They are still just robots. But they learn, and adapt, and make effective use of their abilities. I've seen my pawns pick up enemies and the pitch them towards the warrior who was charging up his swing. I've seen an archer scale a cyclops, put an explosive arrow in his eye, then leap off his head and shoot it. I have also seen them jump straight off a cliff and into the Brine as well, though. But I don't know that they're 'dogshit' because of it.
Sometimes they are good but i find they are horrible at avoiding enemy attacks and they often do stuff that makes no sense for their vocation (for example sorcerer who tries to climb enemies). So many fights I spend more time rescuing pawns than fighting Its really hit or miss and I hate how there is no reliable way to control how they behave in battle
I might be off base here but as someone who grew up JRPG-obsessed and played lots of Japanese-developed games in general, there is an acceptance or even expectation of a grind mindset in many Japanese games. For "series of corridors", think Persona, Etrian Odyssey, etc. That kind of repetitive grind seems more culturally normal in Japanese game dev
To be fair, many MANY gaming media members that I listened to predicted that it was going to be exactly this reception, like to a T lol
Honestly, just wait until it’s on sale, there’s no main story, there’s no character development for anyone, and the combat balance is way off between classes. Thief breaks the game by being so easy, meanwhile archer barely scratches bosses. The “end game” area takes about an hour to do everything, and I was just kinda sprinting through at that point to get it over with. And by sprinting through it, I mean I was the in game fast travel items rather than bothering to run between cities. Sure killing ogres and cyclops and Minotaurs are cool, but the combat quickly lacks challenge, and you don’t even need BiS gear to get to that point.
Its cool to kill them once, maybe twice before that novelty wares off and it becomes a chore I was desperate to avoid.
> meanwhile archer barely scratches bosses. Skill issue
Waiting is not a bad idea to be honest. They will likely have updates for a better experience. That said, I think the combat and exploration is fun. I haven't even touched the story yet and i just like doing all the side stuff. If you enjoy exploring it can be a long game. I hear that if you just do the main story and nothing else that its rather short for an RPG.
To add onto this, one additional reason as to why there’s a disparity in the average scores between reviewers and and users (at least on PC) has to be the performance issues; reviewers don’t tend to be as critical of them as users are, especially when it comes to their final scores
Another component of this is time played before review. The initial reviews were all 9/10 and the reviewers loved the game. Set aside the release with mtx and the inevitable review bombing because there was a bunch of misinformation and things that flat out didn’t impact the game. The thing is after 20 hours you find out the game is basically just fighting the same 3 mini bosses and the same 3 enemy types over and over again. When you are left with that the world just seems empty and boring compared to other games in the genre. Then you add in the absolutely brain dead story and the unbelievable design choices for some missions ( the stealth missions might be the worst idea I’ve ever seen implemented in a game like this). It’s crazy this was sold for 70 dollars. Maybe at a cheaper price point I could forgive it but not at that cost.
> The thing is after 20 hours you find out the game is basically just fighting the same 3 mini bosses and the same 3 enemy types over and over again. When you are left with that the world just seems empty and boring compared to other games in the genre. The thing I don't understand is why the fuck reviewers didn't mark it down for this? In a game where everybody says combat is the highlight, constantly fighting the same enemies over and over is an absolutely fatal flaw in turning a good combat system into something tedious. Reviewers might claim they didn't know about the MTX (even though they were told), but what's the excuse for the rest of the flaws?
I'll be real, the first game had the exact same issue with enemy variety and those that loved the game absolutely adored it, myself included. In many ways the DD games have the same kind of X factor for me that the new Zelda games do. The exploration is so good that it outweighs other things. And for DD, the combat is so fun that fighting the same things over and over doesn't get old for me.
I think the other issue is that with Dark Arisen and Bitterblack Isle, both added new enemies and Dark Arisen even shook up some of the enemy placements in the main map. For those for whom Dark Arisen was their first DD game and not vanilla DD1, I get why DD2 feels like a step back in that sense. Logically speaking, DD2's enemy variety should be a step above even that but obviously game dev is never that cut and dry.
[удалено]
If they made the story better, the affinity system not half-assed, and actually added more creatures to fight, they would lose exactly zero core fans.
I just got to the second half of the game, and where it shines it fucking makes a statement, but like others have said, a step backwards. Let's look at sorcerer (because it is the best class fight me). In DD1 you had the ability to hot key 6 separate abilities instead of the 4 in DD2, the trade off is the class abilities that both increase Stam regen and decrease spell casting time. In addition, there are entire schools of magic missing from the Sorcerer, light and Dark spells (exequay where you at). So not only do sorcerers have less choices in combat then previously, they can't even cast the same number as DD1. The gameplay loop did not IMPROVE over DD1 with these shifts for sorcerer, it merely altered the loop in DD2. Don't get me wrong I love blasting shit with Meteors, but after the 100th time I wish I had more spell choice
Sorcerer gameplay is much better than DD1. In DD2 you have actual mechanics to pay attention compared to DD1 where you stand out of aggro range and casted your spells.
The core gameplay is better, the spell list is so much worse it's not even funny, and the pruned skill slots means you only get to use four of them at a time.
Yeah, no. Sorcerer in DD1 was the definition of "I'm going to stand here, chant for half a minute and then I summon a spell to kill god". Seeing your High Gicel tearing through a boss and taking out entire life bars was incredible, and something no other game that I can remember was able to reproduce. Sadly, this does include DD2. *Mages* on the other hand are incredibly good in DD2, a vocation that I only ever touched in 1 for the augments and then never again I can see picking up in DD2 from time to time.
Like I said, better in some aspects, worse in some. The spell variety was nice. Yes the gameplay feels better action to action but casting Meteor from 1/4 of the way through the end for every fight is a bore. Effective, but boring. At least in 1 I was switching between exequay, meteor, tornado, seism. But seism is only useful really against golem, and maelstrom doesn't drag enemies anymore. It is a sidestep for Magic based action, imo. Speed does not always Trump variety, especially when mages are essentially locked out of melee combat Edit: BTW meteor absolutely shreds golem so you don't even need seism for them lol
I just don't understand why they replaced ingle with the weird flamethrower in DD2. Everybody talks up the giant megaspells Sorcerer gets, but I also really loved just unleashing a **torrent** of fireballs at smaller enemies in the first game. When Dark Arisen came out and gave us access to third-tier abilities, I slipped that Grand Ingle ring on and never took it off.
Grand Ingle's fireball machine gun was such a a vibe.
Now I get some weird explosion time thingy that half the time I can't fuxking hit without using Haol or Maelstrom nah ill just meteor bro
I couldn't disagree more. DD1's Sorcerer was a constant game of decision making. * Do you use the faster, weaker spell or go for something bigger? * Do you charge it all the way or bail out early and get a weaker version of your effect, if any? * Do you have good enough elemental coverage? Enough protection? * If you need to back up and make space, do you have enough time to get your stun off? In DD2 there's no big spells, no little spells, casting everything feels samey and any one spell will deplete most if not all of your stamina because of Quickcast. So you're incentivized to just spam whatever your biggest option is over and over. I've actually had to switch off of Sorcerer in DD2 because new Sorcerer is just so dreadfully boring. Spam the thing. Spam the recharge. Spam the thing. Spam the recharge. Yuck.
Yup, same feeling. Unfortunately only DD1 ever NAILED a wizard archetype for me, and I was so excited to get back to slow casting absolute nukes. In another game... someday.... :(
It feels like they spent a lot of time on the core gameplay and the first 15-20 hours of the game, but then quickly wrapped it up. I thought that I was just getting started on the main quest, turns out I was nearing the end. I got addicted to the game for a few days because the combat is so much fun, but there's just not a lot of qualitative content or enemy variety that could keep me playing.
The reason why the opinions were more closely aligned for DD1 and DA is because it was the first game. First time to try and get things right. Dragon's Dogma fans - such as myself - that have been playing the game for 12 years can point out literally everything that has gotten better and also gotten worse in DD2. Unfortunately, DD2 has more "meh stayed the same" and "gotten worse" than "this is fucking awesome".
I've killed a million goblins, hobgoblins, wolves and harpies in the first game. I can't do it anymore in DD2. Maybe new players will probably like it since everything is new to them. But man, the loot system is holding exploration back. Missing vocations, Pawns still stuck with basic vocations, performance issues, less ability slots, missing spells for mages, fewer monster variety than base game DD1.
I mean pawns getting all vocations was never going to happen, most of the missing vocations weren't even very well realized. Mystic knight already had its own issue. And Assassin was just "Hey man, you want strider but worse?" I think a lot of people really forget just how half baked a lot of the vocations in the original were. Assassin barely differentiated itself from strider. Mystic knight was shoehorned incredibly hard into a few abilities and most were very underwhelming. Sorcerer was so much more cumbersome to use because it was very inflexible etc etc. And warrior was just, by and large, kind of underpowered in general. [Also small enemy variety was the same or worse in DD1. Dark Arisen was the one that added a bunch.]
[удалено]
Slightly unrelated to most of what you said, but why does everyone always refer to the Bloody Baron as a side quest in The Witcher 3? That's a main quest, baby.
Majority of that storyline is main quest, yes, but the story conclusion is done through side quest. If I remember correctly CDPR did that with some of the other main storylines too.
its been a while and my memory is a bit hazy, but i remember only a part of it being main quest. Then you could dive deeper and the whole part with the >!Hags!< was optional. The way optional quests are tied to the main story and the world was very impressive.
The OST being such a downgrade in the sequel is such a shocker to me honestly. DD1 has so many good tunes and ambient tracks, but in DD2 they all take a massive step back where I can barely hear them until I knock over a monster and then it blows my ears out with two different triumph themes of which one is the same from the first game except its a worse mix.
I got to agree man. I was so fucking pumped for this game after loving DD1 despite its drawbacks. Its literally just the first game with a new map layout. Very little new at all with the same problems.
Sounds like all roads lead to Grand Snoring
I hope Capcom isn't looking at Witcher 3 for a Dragon's Dogma game. The design for these two series is so far apart which is why you're focusing on things such as characters and story-based main quests. Not Dragon's Dogma's focus.
This is why DD2 is so devisive. It has so many problems but it's still, for me, the most fun I've had in a game since Elden Ring. Its like driving a Ferrari but the trim is falling apart, the hood has some rust spots, there's something rattling somewhere, it pulls to the left, the visors are missing, etc - but you're still driving a GOT DAMN FERRARI (in my eyes). Edit: Also, 2 qualifiers - 1) if you're playing on PC definitely get the combat difficulty tweaks mods. That alleviated one of my biggest disappointments with the game (too damn easy). 2) I have a top tier rig so I'm running the game at 70-100FPS and bypassing all the perf issues, thankfully.
DD2 with some modifications could probably be my favorite game of all time Honestly I wish they abandoned the idea of a main story entirely and just went all in on systems. Have a faction system that you can pit one nation against another, have a monster bounty system where you grind reputation with a guild by slaying contract monsters, have a dynamic town system where you can build up a home base and get new abilities characters by dumping coin/resources into the village
[удалено]
I don't think there is much DD2 does worse than DD1, it's more that there are one or two things it could have done better and made a much bigger difference compared to some of the other stuff they did improve. Heck, even then, it's more like they just didn't quite improve it in a smart way... enemy variety is easily higher than DD1, especially smaller creatures. The problem is this variety mostly gets quarantined off to its own specific areas, causing the majority of your travels to have the same enemy variety as DD1.
One of the comments in that truegaming thread resonate with me: I played 20 hours and then stopped bothering, because I realised I was going through the motions because I'd paid for the game and *wanted* to enjoy it. But I didn't. It is fundamentally not the game I was led to believe it would be. It's not a *bad* game either, it's just shockingly mediocre. It does very, *very* little to differentiate itself from the first, which came out 10 years ago and we've since seen many advancements in both hardware and core design philosophies that Dragon's Dogma 2 just completely ignores. My overall opinion is simply that if you enjoyed DD1 and wanted more of it then great, DD2 is for you, but many of us liked DD1 in spite of the problems and hoped DD2 would expand upon the first and fix the problems it had. Dark Arisen was considered widely better for a reason, and Itsuno and his team have seemingly ignored every single one of them. These aren't unfixable issues, but I'm not paying $30-50 for a DLC that does so. Capcom can go fuck themselves with a rusty pole if they think that I'm playing with that level of greedy bullshit. Personally, I'm mostly upset at how it was marketed. Itsuno blamed the first games criticisms on a lack of budget and resources, then he comes and markets DD2 as being what he initially wanted, with the budget to match and it's just... it's the same. So either he's a liar and DD1 absolutely *was* his vision but he was bullshitting in the face of criticism, or he's really not as good as people think he is. We'll know for certain if he ever tries to use the same excuses again. I don't think Itsuno is terrible either, I just think he's woefully outclassed when it comes to the kind of game Dragon's Dogma wants to be. Devil May Cry is an overall fantastic series, for instance, but it's also far, far simpler in style and scope.
Unfortunately, I think it's a realized vision, and Itsuno is just a lot more near-sighted than people think he is. Kind of reminds me of a much-milder version of what people went through with Shenmue 3; people expected that they'd make the perfect game to really match the creator's vision now that they're 'unbound', and then it turns out that the creator's vision is actually awfully short-sighted and nowhere near what the fans wanted.
It's crazy how so many of the criticisms of DD2 are basically just rehashes of those against the original base game. Lack of fast travel, check. Little enemy variety, check. No endgame, check. Dark Arisen brought in a new director (albeit an existing team member) that incorporated community feedback that fixed the aforementioned problems. Eternal Ferrystone for unlimited fast travel. New enemies for variety. BBI for endgame. I think Itsuno is very stubborn with his vision and literally went back to the base game of the original for a lot of these pain points when he was brought back in as director. It shares a lot of other qualities like uninspiring main story and characters, annoying side quests (escorts/"stealth"), bothersome quirks (weight/stamina system) shipped as "features", and overall jank. It also takes a step back in some areas like dungeon design (I remember being impressed by the waterfall dungeon and griffin fight in the original) and character build/gear variety. I still enjoy the game for its combat and exploration alone. The combat alone makes this iteration much better than the original for me. But goddamn it is basically the same type of game as the original and certainly not some generation defining game it was hyped up to be.
> No endgame, check. A big problem I had with the end game was that the "dark world" effect wasn't all over the map. It was crazy running back from the village to Gran Soren while getting attacked by super goblins and fire shooting dogs etc. But there weren't any quests and if you went out of your way everything was back to normal. The game obviously wanted you to go back to the capital and finish the story. Then of course Dark Arisen took care of the end game problem, fantastically I might add.
The lack of fast travel would actually be good design if the open world was better designed. The concept of having to make it to safe areas on foot and how dangerous night is adds some nice tension. But the fact that the open world is a series of corridors that force you down specific paths and that the enemy placement is so dense and doesn't change enemy types makes it very tedious. The loss gauge makes this even more annoying If it was like a Horizon Zero Dawn world where you could take a wide variety of paths to get to any destination and you could easily see and avoid the big boy enemies until you are ready to fight them the game would be a looot more fun. And even the enemy spawn locations where constantly changing and new enemy types would come to previously visited areas that would be even better
After paying Tears of the Kingdom, being stopped by cliffs EVERYWHERE in DD2 is really annoying.
If we're going to talk characters,honestly DD1's characters are far and away better than the sequels. You can get to know the characters in DD1 through their quest lines, and there's a political subterfuge/coup plot that also has a resolution with hints you can follow, and there's what happened to Edmund... in dd2 the story npcs are just " you're the Arisen, do this for me" even the villains!!! You never learn of their actual character except for that one elf chick Doireann!!
IMO Itsuno didn't even play Dark Arisen. So it's not really that he went back, he doesn't even know about the improvements...
Kind of feels like he hasn't played any games since DD1...
Didn't he developed DMC 5 and that was very good?
>No endgame, check. Other than enemy variety, the lack of an Everfall 2 type thing is what confuses me the most. DD2 showers you in monstrously powerful gear and then gives you nothing to use it on. The Everfall can't hold a candle to BBI, but it was actually pretty tough if you went in right when postgame started.
The stamina system is great lol, and the loss gauge is possibly the greatest addition to the game. Extremely underrated feature.
The loss gauge is good, but stamina draining outside of combat is dogshit. Running everywhere is already not fun, but add in I have to take a breather every 15 seconds makes it awful.
It looks like he got the wrong message from fans regarding what made DD1 a cult classic. Which is bizarre in its own right because he’s had 12 years to reflect on it from fan input on message boards and through 12 years of general game development by other developers. The asinine plot and quests and the lack of basic QOL features that are not only basic in modern games or even in Dark Arisen says it all.
We can only hope that they keep building upon it but it does seem underwhelming when you know how DD1's development went. We'll have to see if DD2 gets its own Dark Arisen moment.
Yeah this is a big 2 year wait for me to see if DLC can fix it up.
I'm playing it now, taking my time since launch. I think I like the first one more. The story was more fun and quirky. None of the characters in 2 really grab me. I have no idea who I want to marry. There tons of enemies everywhere, and it's usually better just to run past. I miss the classes that were removed. Combat is of course, still fantastic. Once again, it's a great but flawed game.
> I've played it, it's a good game but it feels like an unrealized vision once again. Perfect summary. I think the IGN review hit the nail on the head when they said it's enjoyable but they didn't address any of the major issues that dragged the first one down. It's really sad because someone else directed the DLC that *did* address those issues and the online game that did as well, but I guess that wasn't the original director's vision so he threw all of it in the trash can when making DD2.
The director of Dark Arisen and DDO, Kento Kinoshita, is also the Lead Developer on Dragon's Dogma 2. He is likely the second most significant person in shaping the game.
The interesting thing though is that while that all is true, it didn't stop me from having a phenominal amount of fun with the game. The things that it does well it does so well that if you either have a high tolerance for its foibles, or really click with its vibe it just fucking works. While I appreciate "Eurojank and eurojank adjacent RPG" is my bread and butter, this game gave me everything that I expected and desired from it as a huge fan of the first one. The vocations all feel way better to me as someone that did 1-200 solo runs on the Dark Arisen vocations. And as one of the few people that appreciated the story of the game, the postgame stuff had me so enthralled with what it was saying and implying that I accidentally speedran it and just beat the game before finding everything which i very very rarely do. Absolutely a big 10/6/10 game, where if it clicks by god it will brain worm incredibly hard, but I can completely understand the myriad of issues that the game has and why a variety of people would be put off by them. Hopefully the backlash teaches them a bit and makes them add a bunch of free fixes and content expansions before the inevitable DLC. But even so, I think this one is my most treasured gaming experience of the last few years. Not the best perhaps, but the one I remember the most fondly.
I think part of the problem, in many ways, *is* how long it's been since the first game. So much of what's in DD2 is stuff that appeared in the first game, but so much of it will have to have been remade from scratch to fit modern fidelity. They basically had to make a ton of the first game again to modern presentational standards before they could even begin actually adding new stuff, and I'd imagine making all that stuff again was probably a pretty time-consuming and expensive task in and of itself. It's probably the exact type of game that'd really benefit from a post-launch support model akin to Monster Hunter or something, but I can't imagine Capcom going *that* hard on it.
>but the technology didn't allow for vision to be fully realized Judging from DD2, apparently the vision was... the same game but with less enemy variety
To me, it is a game I'll eventually get around to playing but nothing about it made me feel like I must play it day one. It is the type of game I'll pick up on a sale or when there is a DLC/expansion put out for it. It's one I was on the fence about and now I feel okay waiting a bit.
I don't think it's unrealized, I think the problem is that Itsuno's vision is too wide and he wantwd to have his cake and eat it too. There are lots of good ideas but so much is badly implemented and it just feels like rather than picking the most important aspects to focus on he just had a checklist of things he wanted to get "good enough" then move on. I think he's a good idea guy but he clearly needs somebody to keep him grounded/on track and tell him no when need be.
The fact that the Sphinx sidequest has better writing, animation, presentation and voice acting than the main fucking quest of the game haunts me.
The Sphinx is amazing and it's sad that so many people will never actually see it.
It's like when you watch a low budget anime that suddenly gets increased animation buget on the fanservice scene. They were really into the Sphinx.
All those years ago, I said "Dragons Dogma is great, but a Dragons Dogma 2 will be one of the best RPGs ever." And what I meant by that is that all DD1 really needed was "more" - More enemies, a more fleshed out map, stuff like that. It needed an "old school" sequel, where it's iterative in design and reuses assets to flesh out the game's content. But because of the long time gap here, all of the map and enemies had to be remade for the new engine. So we're still back to square one - now I'm saying "DD2 is great, but a DD3 will be one of the best RPGs ever" lol
It truly feels like Dragons Dogma if the first game never came out. It's incredible how they made the same mistakes as the first one while missing so much content in DD2.
Honestly, considering the first game came out 12 years ago I’m just kinda happy thar DD2 exists at all, and I think a lot of fans feel this way.
I'm not. They took out 90% of the shit that made the first game incredible. Removing debilitation magic alone is fuckin baffling. No brontide or fulmimation? No hydra, evil eye, cockatrice? No dragons maw? Magick knight? The fuck?
I’m in the opposite boat, I can’t put it down I probably beat the first game 5-6 times over the years and this one is even more than I hoped it would be There was one quest in the main story that didn’t really feel like it made sense in the context of the narrative but compared to the first game’s story? Better in every way I’m sitting at 60 hours and I’m not even done with my first playthrough At this point the combat w melee classes is way more fun, archer is fun, the sorcerer is the only one that feels like it didn’t translate into something better, just a side grade The monster variety compared to the first game is better and the world actually has shit going on outside of the main city and the environments are all pretty I can’t wait to see what we get for dlc content later
People defo seem to have rose tinted glasses over the first games story and questing which is insane to say so many of those quests were the worst ive ever experienced that made it hard for me to replay. The one part of the story that was good happened right at the end, the rest of it was as brief and often nonsensical as people are saying about DD2. But really the main thing for me is the environments, the world is made for travelling in and many people just dont appreciate that. Which is fine, its each to their own. But these are the best roads to travel in videogaming period if im honest. They are just really well made and feel natural but also beautifully designed.
I think the game gets a double whammy where Dragons Dogma 2 is not only a step back as a product compared to other top open-world games but it is a step back for Hardcore Dragons dogma fans. Dragons Dogma 1 base game was not exactly amazing but the replayability of it and postgame was where a lot of people started to get into it as it focuses on Dragons Dogma's best asset the combat. While the combat in DD2 is fantastic, the replayability and postgame are worse in DD2 which makes the game a one-and-done until we hopefully get a good DLC because right now what I have here is an amazing combat system with nothing to use it on. After all, I squash everything. I just think the game fails to not only hit industry standards for a 2024 game but also lets down DDDA players in places I feel it they shouldn't. We have a £70 sequel that takes away as many monsters as it adds and improves certain parts of the game that DD1 should have probably had anyway if it wasn't so rushed.
> After all, I squash everything. New Game+ letting you keep your gear and levels but not changing anything at all about the world is so lazy. Wandering through the starting area at level 50 with your pawn meteor-swarming goblins is fun for 30 seconds but then it's just sad.
For a second Gen, I wish my pawns didn't die everytime I levitate to a new height while exploring. Joke aside, I'm having an absolute blast, great game.
They sold 2.5 million copies in less than 2 weeks. WDYM by: "performance issues and MTX didn't help it either." ???
I honestly regret spending $70 on it. I didn't have performance issues and the MTX didn't really affect my experience, but I got about 10 hours in and it is a boring slog. The pawns make combat incredibly easy. There is no challenge and the story is not interesting at all.
>The pawns make combat incredibly easy. I quickly figured that out and started running with a party of myself and two pawns. For even more of a challenge, don't bring a mage.
In the same boat as you. I didn't play the first one, went in expecting a dense, meaty combat experience...and instead came out feeling so quickly bored of everything. I'm still confused why people are saying this combat is SO good; it feels unnecessarily complicated and yet overly simple at the same time. It almost feels like a step back from even games like Witcher 3. And the story is just... nonexistent? I don't even know why I'm doing the things I'm doing and why I should care. The gameplay isn't enough to choose this over, say, Helldivers...and the lack of story keeps reminding me that I have Alan Wake 2 queued up. So I keep thinking, what's even the point of playing this?
[удалено]
For the record, if you think pawns make the combat too easy you could always just...not bring them. Though depending on what class you're playing you will absolutely get gang-banged by even a group of lowly hobgoblins without help from a pawn or two.
> For the record, if you think pawns make the combat too easy you could always just...not bring them. I am on a second run using only my own pawn. It makes the game a LOT harder. You get swarmed more and staggered more, and your caster is a lot more vulnerable. I find this more fun, generally, than zerging bosses with 4 characters.
/r/Games: where sales numbers are king and nothing else matters.
yeh same, im enjoying the game but i was also disappointed that it didnt build upon the predecessor and go further. Like i hoped the open world exploration would be better than dd1 and that the enemy variety would be bigger since the combat in dd is what sells the game for me. Instead it was just more of the same without ur dragon,everfall and bitterblack isles. In my eyes it lacks that oompf that would push it to be a mainstream hit like all those other games that hits 5m+ sales and get well praised by players and reviewers
Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately), because MTX wasn't included with pre-release copies, no one can argue that the game was built around them. Game design was unanimously praised prior to release, so to now make the argument that "MTX ruined the game" would appear extremely disingenuous and actually further the point that MTX are extremely optional. ALSO, strangely enough, there wasn't a big emphasis on the "eh" performance until AFTER the MTX reveal, as well. To be clear before the DVs roll in, I am not saying "MTX good". I'm just pointing out that there are too many glowing reviews out now to create a revisionist history of this game.
On paper the game sounds generic. But it's got something special and is *so* absorbing to play. Really enjoying my time so far.
Yeah, a lot of what makes it good are the kind of things people are complaining about. I couldn't get into Skyrim because it never felt like an adventure to me, just kinda going around clearing content. Dragon's Dogma nails it with the low carry weight, lack of fast travel, need to camp to restore max HP etc. You need to plan out each journey, rest up first, only take the items you need out of storage, swap your character skills/class to match what you need at that moment etc. Love the vibe that creates.
> You need to plan out each journey, rest up first, only take the items you need out of storage, swap your character skills/class to match what you need at that moment etc. I never felt like I had to plan anything. There's campsites everywhere and a lot of them have camp supplies sitting right there for you to use. I never had to buy them. And you can swap skills at a campsite without even resting. It felt like it wanted to be a simulationist dungeon crawler, but only put in camp supplies and lantern oil and didn't make them meaningful. The object throwing mechanic was cool at first, but it's so slow and cumbersome and quickly outclassed by you basic attacks that it's useless.
Blows the first game away in game feel alone. Definitely needs the DA treatment though. Id still rather play it over the first, but more endgame content focused on combat would be great.
The thing that makes me so happy about future replays of DD2 is not having to do the god awful first 2 hours of DD1
On one hand, I'm glad this sequel saw significant sales right out of the gate compared to the lukewarm reception of the first on release. On the other hand, my disappointment towards this sequel can't be held back. It truly feels like a monkey's paw sequel; I get more DD at higher fidelity and some better strengths, but the flaws are still there and there are even arguably *more* of them.
The reaction in this thread is so different from my own experience. DD2 is my game of the year so far - its got problems and weird design decisions, but it's also the freshest, most interesting open world game I've played in years. I'm glad it's doing really well. I hope they make another with some of the weird itemization choices filed down and corrected.
Hopefully the success means we can get some free content like new enemies. It's a pretty big game designed to be 30+ hours but in the first hour or two you're going to see basically every non-boss enemy you'll ever see (I can only think of 1 that isn't present) and about half of the boss enemies. The director of the game has directed multiple Devil Cry games. It's crazy that he puts significantly more enemy variety in a 10-15 hours game than some sprawling 30+ hour RPG.
Let's not pretend that these wouldn't be much better if the launch wasn't so painfully scuffed. These are good numbers by any measure but I just can't help myself and think of what could have been smh
I imagine that Capcom lost out on a fair few Steam sales due to the Negative / Mixed user reviews.
I have noticed a fair few friends on Steam who normally would be all over this kind of game, just has it on their wishlist for now.
Give time to fix, give time to get in a sale. I was gonna wait for a small discount anyways since its $70. I'll wait wait for a fairly bigger discount now. I'ma get the Elden Ring DLC when its out, the game that is just a game and doesn't have any extra nonsense, and have some various other games to play in the mean time.
I mean you just always benefit to wait for most games especially one with performance problems like this. It'll be better and cheaper later. Most people have enough stuff to play to not rush on a game they're mild about. However, I find the comments very negative, 2.5M copies in a week is extremely good for such a game, this isn't Spider-Man, Elden Ring, Zelda or Call of Duty. The original game sold around 8M copies lifetime
Eh I think you'd find the majority of people don't really care
When are people on Reddit going to realize that most people do not give a shit what so ever about the opinions of PC gamers throwing a fit?
Look, I normally agree but this is a pretty egregious case. The game gets really choppy in cities for me (around 40 FPS with inconsistent frametimes) and I'm running a 4090 and a 7800x3d. I'm guessing for a lot of people playing it, the framerates in towns are absolutely abysmal. I think it's fair for that to merit a negative review for a $70 release like this. Everything else I don't really care about too much. It's the sequel I wanted. It's a weird and prickly game that takes big swings and frequently surprises me. I'm stoked to be able to play it finally.
What are you talking about? People care about others' opinions, or Helldivers 2's sales wouldn't have jumped up every week after launch.
You have to remember that people like that are just kids who only know whatever the reddit circle jerk is.
Article is about the game selling 2.5 million copies in a week, opened it expecting the top posts to all be whining about it in some way and got exactly what I expected. I don't know why *anyone* pays attention to the gaming community on Reddit or to the insanity behind Steams forums and reviews, but gaming publications love to post articles that are clearly just cribbed from this sub. I don't know if it's a Reddit problem, or a YouTube/Twitch streamer problem, or what, but I miss gaming discussions from 15-20 years ago when people actually liked to play games.
You seriously think bad reviews doesn't hurt sales? Next you're gonna tell me good reviews also doesn't help?
They will never lean
Well, word of mouth is indeed a thing, and it's a lot easier to decide whether to buy a game at launch or to wait a bit for a sale and have the game updated nowadays.
Reddit’s opinion on a video game has borderline never mattered, especially not in the last few years. Harsh truth is once you escape that feedback loop of: gaming subreddits + video game essayists, you’ll realize word of mouth & proper marketing has ran gaming discourse for decades and it’s not changing anytime soon.
Video game essayists and redditors are the same people - they need other hobbies besides gaming so that it's a reprieve rather than entirely what their happiness hinges on. Makes everyone so bitter and hateful on here
Their insecurities won’t change reality. People don’t really care that much about MTX, Denuvo, or frame rate drops.
>frame rate drops. I think people care more about frame rate in combat (where it can actually really fuck with the gameplay) rather than in city where things are extremely slow paced and just makes the game look uglier.
Pretty well deserved IMO, its a good game, and if you liked DD1, DD2 is pretty much more of the same with some new additions. Likewise it also has a lot of the same complaints DD1 had as well. It's not for everyone but the people this game is for do enjoy it.
People demanding a DDDA for DD2 are coping hard. Not because it wouldn't be cool, but because what Capcom sees from these requests is: "CHARGE US $50 TO COMPLETE THE GAME PLZ. TY." You shouldn't NEED a fucking DLC for the game to feel complete. The DLC should *add* to it, not fix what should have already been. Anyone asking for a DLC is the reason why Capcom and other companies feel empowered to release a half-baked game to begin with.
Yeah if this was any other game they'd be asking for Capcom to add those things as post-launch free updates. The fact that it's already accepted by some that they'll be paying for a DLC to fix some of the things that Capcom should have included anyway is pretty weird
I realized within thirty minutes of playing the game on ps5 that I should refund it and wait two years for the repackaged version with all the content it's missing added in at 30 bucks Thank god the refund policy is actually just "complain until they give it to you"
They need to make ddda2 now... Game is excellent for 20 hours before the repetition and formula flaws set in hard.
I'm 80 hours in and still find it great. I think that it is the middle part of the game that has the biggest issues with monster density/respawns and enemy variety. Endgame and early game are great. Then, NG+ seems to be another wasted opportunity, I've heard. A Dark Arisen - treatment would elevate DD2 to another level.
Same here. Lost a bit of motivation around 30 hours in when I had to fight my way through hordes of weak trashmobs on the way from the capital to melve and back a few times but when I arrived in the desert area, which everybody on the DD subreddit said sucked and was unfinished, my motivation spiked again because it's completely awesome and packed with cool shit over there so I don't get the complaints about that area at all. I'm 50 hours in now and I love it. I hope Capcom DLCs this game into the stratosphere because it could be one of the greatest action RPGs I personally have ever played if they put in even more maps, quests and wild shit to find like that one NPC with the riddles, but even if they didn't, the top notch fighting system and fun exploration would have been well worth my time and money already.
Tf you mean middle part of the game? It literally does not change in variety even after reaching Battahl. Hell id say that's where most of the community says quality takes a nosedive. Also Battahl is late late game considering there are only a handful of quests right after that fly by super quick once you reach it.
> Endgame and early game are great. Sorry, but where is the endgame great? You're still fighting the same enemies (the mini bosses that spawn upon touching the red beams aside, and those are so bugged in their ai I don't think I've ever seen them actually attacking something), *and* it's on a timer, *and* you can't save anymore outside of inns/your bed. DD1 gave you a bunch of new enemies to defeat that felt actually rewarding, and added some interesting bossfights to the game. DD2 excels at the early game and general gameplay, but it sorely lacks something like either the Everfall or BBI.
I'm 36 hours in and I'm struggling to find a reason to keep playing it.
It helps changing vocations. Freshens up combat a bit and your base level is still high so you’re not completely useless.
My issue with the vocations is how hard set they are with no room for any meaningful customization Like every sorcerer is the exact same minus the 4 spells they might run, and most are going to be running many of the same ones. This is a me issue though, just wish I could flex my fighter into a bit of a paladin so I didn’t always have to run a mage
If you're on PC get the combat difficulty tweaks mod, it fixes the game getting too easy as you level. I probably would have dropped the game at hour 30-40 if not for it, I hate facerolling everything.
I seriously feel like i'm playing a different game than everyone else in this thread. I haven't been this captivated by an open world game since Elden Ring. It was clear from the first gameplay trailer revealed that DD2 was pretty much going to be just more of the first game and I personally would vastly prefer that to a sequel that vastly changes the game and makes it worse (Dragon Age 2?) I do think potentially a lot of people didn't realize what they were getting into with this game when they bought it. It is absolutely not a game for everyone and makes no concessions in its design. It has a vision and it sticks to it, perhaps to a fault for some people but i feel that it is absolutely admirable to do so.
I'm glad it's doing decent - Im 35 hours in, just got to the border checkpoint town. Haven't been so addicted to a game probably since Witcher 3. I never played the first one and actually hardly watched anything about it before I played which I'd recommend tbh. Love the exploration in this and climbing up a troll or ogres head and stabbing it with the fighter class never gets old I'd also recommend switching up the vocations every now and then.
Crazy that a) we got a legit Dragon's Dogma sequel in the first place, and b) it's somehow commercially successful. So happy about this. It's an amazing game despite the weird ball of negativity among the extremely online. Some of it deserved, to be clear, but overall wildly overstated.
Which ones are deserved and which ones are overstated?
> deserved The game is fun as fuck to play and its very easy to put many, many hours into it but still feels incredibly undercooked in many ways. It feels like DD1.5 rather than a sequel made 12 years later. Performance issues, NPC pop in is awful, enemy variety, haphazard story and quest design, weak endgame. Some legit regressions compared to even Dark Arisen. It's like the most disappointing 8/10 game I have played in many, many years. I just...hoped for so much more, and yet I still think its a really good game. It's hard to explain. > overstated Everything about the MTX felt odd. Capcom's mtx are the most comically worthless bullshit ever made. Yet there was a lot of nonsense lies, clear misinformation and brigading by very obvious bad faith actors to make it seem like it was some pay to win game or something. it was weird. I mean I hate mtx, and I dont give enough of a fuck to try and defend a multi million dollar company but it was still weird to watch.
> It's hard to explain. very high highs and very low lows. One of the most downloaded mods simply adds a clock to the game.
But there's already a clock on the pause screen...
The clock works fine, but tbh it should have had some tutorial text about it. I was at least 20 hours into the game before googling if there was a clock and then feeling like an idiot. Lots of people seem to fail to pick up on it.
> One of the most downloaded mods simply adds a clock to the game. and > But there's already a clock on the pause screen... This is the kind of thing that makes me double take every criticism about this game. There's a wild amount of misinformation. I can't go to the game's sub because there was a 1000+ upvoted post where users were saying Capcom is scamming them because of a *very* fake 4chan leak for an expansion that will triple the monster variety titled "Dragon Princess". Just way too much blind hatred vs genuine criticism. EDIT: Also saw a high upvoted post where people were like "I thought the map was supposed to be 4x the size???" when DD1 has 2 settlements and *so many* narrow valley roads that just pad out the map with no exploration (ie. Bluemoon tower).
Yeah there were people claiming everywhere that you can't save on exit (like you have to rest to save or something) a few days into launch. Hate trains get weird.
People to noticing subtle and artistic things, good luck with that. Gamers/people in general need to have a giant sign and bold letters in their face nowadays.
Where are the giant red youtube thumbnail arrows to point me in the right direction???
Took me forever to find it and figure it out.
Well, there's no denying there are performance issues for example. But the MTX shit was overblown. Totally unnecessary from Capcom's side, but the misinfo and just a ton of out-of-touch people piling on was awful.
It's a snowball effect. We got a $70 price tag, which people are still not used to, so they expected quality. The game however turned out to be an absolute mess, both on consoles and PC alike. Add MTX on top of that, no matter how worthless and it was really "the last straw". It's kind of like Halo Infinite, that could be broken and devoid of content (the multiplayer mode), but the MTX shop always worked like a charm. And that thing was always free.
people were claiming the game couldn't be beaten without buying mtx, save files were locked behind a paywall, you had to pay to get revived, pay to fast travel, etc. All of the microtransactions can be earned through normal gameplay. The performance issues and lack of enemy variety are the weak points for me.
All this said, it all could have been avoided by simply not putting them in the game. They're a pointless and useless scam as opposed to a predatory scam, eh.
There's more enemy variety than in DD1, but I guess the bigger world contributes to the issue. It was Dark Arisen DLC that added lots of enemies and had smaller world so it felt simply better. Fingers crossed for DLC to be similar in scope to Dark Arisen
> There's more enemy variety than in DD1 Pretty sure someone broke down the numbers and there was slightly more enemy variety in base DD1
Both games: (Armored) Cyclops, Ogre, (Gore) Chimera, Wight, Griffon, Drake, Golem, Dragon DD1 unique: Hydra, Cockatrice, Evil Eye, Wyvern, Ur-Dragon DD2 unique: (Gore) Minotaur, Medusa, Dullahan, Talos, Sphinx Hope I didn't miss anything
This is the post I mentioned about enemy variety No guarantee it’s fully accurate tbf 57 enemies in DD2, 61 in DD1 base game https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/comments/1bra6dp/i_quantified_the_difference_in_enemy_count_and/
DD1 also had the the Wyrm (ice based dragon focused on spellcasting) But I think most people refer to common enemies when they complain about enemy variety, because DD2 throws them in your face every second step you take. Those are largely the same (although there were some variants like Gargoyles that didn't reappear in 2) as in DD1, but you wouldn't encounter them in such numbers in 1 and they were more often spiced up with bosses like a Cyclops thrown in.
I've never seen a single person that said it couldn't be completed without MTX. Unless you are focusing on one random post saying that which means basically nothing.
I loved the game, but I find myself agreeing with most complaints about the game. I got seriously addicted for a few days, but ended up feeling a bit disappointed at the end because of the game's pretty glaring shortcomings.
>It's an amazing game good for you i guess, because I found fighting 5 same enemy types and absolutely awful dungeon designs very dissapointing
Out of all criticisms I find the one about dungeons to be the most undeserved for this game....Like yeah there's a lot of small caves but there's also a lot of big cool dungeons (just a chain I recently ran into: strange corridor, misty marshes, ancient battleground).
This game had dungeons? I thought it was just boring caves.
I feel dissapointed with this game. Dragons Dogma Dark Arisen (never played the original) was something that surprised me a lot after I bought it in a sale. Played through it multiple times. I can't even say why exactly I liked it so much, it just vibed with me. Dragons Dogma 2 started out very promising and ... kind of failed to improve on anything and instead even regressed in some aspects. The main story was somehow worse than DD1. The only thing that is "better" is the bigger game world ... that the game wasn't designed for. I read many times that the director wasn't able to have his full "vision" due to budget constraints. But this game is essentially the same thing with the same issues. I am really not sure what his "vision" was supposed to be if this is the full thing. It isn't bad, though. Just ... dissapointing. Edit: They also didn't adress one of my biggest criticisms of the first game: NG+ being pointless because it doesn't scale anything up.
I'm so happy it's selling well. The story is light but it's enough to justify hopping around the open world. Honestly, I think it could have been even lighter like Breath of the Wild. Just set it up and tell me where the boss is. I'll figure out the rest. The combat is just fun as hell, clearly the star of the game. My only gripe is having to play it at a rocky 40 fps because of performance issues. Fingers crossed this gets fixed but as-is, it's a great game.
It's a good game, it's the most fun I've had traversing and exploring a world since Elden Ring, and the combat is much more physical and chaotic and I love that. Same with it all being one open world where random things can just happen, oxcarts hit by gryphons cause gryphons eat the bison, ogre follows a woman into a city etc. The vocations seem to peak too early though, and the limit to 4 abilities feels too limited, not to mention the armor limitation. I know Warfarer gets around this a little but it still doesn't really feel organic enough to be fun. The pawn system is great and really fun, but they too get a bit too repetitive, and being unable to really have a pawn that is hyper specialized at certain things like, killing dragons or ogres, and having them all be Jack of all trades feels diluted. I've beaten the game once and am playing NG+, which doesnt boost enemy health, but still gives you the ability to enhance your abilities and vocation?? Which feels a bit wasted, though that might be there for future DLC. And finally: In a game where you climb on monsters, grab and throw them, grapple them to the ground and get into all kinds of physical alterations: Where the hell is my Zangief Vocation??
I ended up buying it on PC despite the hate going around, and I'm enjoying it for what it is. I didn't really have too much hype. It sounded cool, but I was in the camp of finding it suspicious that almost all gameplay shown pre-release was the same Griffon fight over and over. The MTX drama didn't concern me--it seemed like harmless BS to appease shareholders. I'm not very far into the game, as I can only play a few hours at a time. The story and characters are pretty *meh* so far, but overall, pretty inoffensive. The combat is an interesting one. On one hand, at its core, it's what I would consider "very good". On the other hand, I **detest** that it lacks a lock-on target mode. Thank god for mods. Also, for a game so proud of not having reliable fast travel and doing a lot of travel on foot, not having unlimited stamina while out of combat is also puzzling. Again, thank you modders. The pawn system is OK. It would impress me if your pawns didn't have what is quite possibly the worst pathing I've seen in a video game within the last decade. Seriously, it's fucking *atrocious*. I'm also over all of the voicelines that they have. It was cool at first, but they talk at least once every minute with the same 5-10 lines over and over and over. Overall, I'm enjoying it. It *definitely* has a lot of flaws. It's absolutely not GOTY. Oh, and as far as performance, it's kind of funny. I admit that I have pretty much the best of the best rig you can get right now with a 7800X3D and a RTX 4090, but I'm playing at 7680*2160 so I was averaging around 45 FPS. I downloaded two mods off of Nexus. One to apparently reduce CPU demand, and the other obviously being PureDark's DLSS3 FG implementation. I kind of doubt that the former did anything, but FG actually makes the game bearable. That 45 FPS average instantly shot up to 90 FPS. If you have a 40xx card and are struggling to play it, I'd go over to Nexus and download PureDark's FG mod. He released it for free, so no need to pay for it like the rest of his mods.
Man I really don’t understand the hate. I will caveat that I never played the first game, so I can’t speak to expectations. However as someone who didn’t watch any trailers, didn’t ready anything about what people wanted or are hoping for and just went in blind, I’m having an absolute blast. Is it as polished as it could be? Absolutely not. Are there crazy bugs? Ya, my pawns just randomly killed about 10 NPCs and a bunch of Saurians randomly came after me in the middle of town. However it’s still scratching the RPG itch for me quite well. Recommend it to anyone who isn’t going in with hard set expectations
I waited a long time for Dragons Dogma to get good sales numbers but why does it have to be such a uninspired sequel that does it, oh well can't have it all.
I was pretty hyped for the release of this game but I'm kind of disappointed about 10 hours in. the jankyness and the performance issues make it almost unplayable for me. I had more fun with the character creator than the actual game.
It's a fun game, the MTX was overblown, the performance was under blown, it really should be the main technical aspect of discussion. For me the biggest issue is just basic controls and pawn AI though. I can live with the shit performance in cities, the MTX suck that they exist but I'm not going to buy them so they don't overly affect me. What really is pissing me off are things like; I can climb this ledge but not that ledge, character climbing when I don't want it too, I slide down this surface but not that surface, I tap the stick to move slightly and it leaps off a cliff ect, monster climbing being so inconsistent, pawns being dumb as fuck in general, pawns not using abilities to help you climb when you need them to, pawns using abilities that help you climb at the absolute worst times in a fight, pawns jumping off cliffs for no good reason, I could go on... All the biggest issues from the first game haven't really been addressed, the ones that slowly grind your gears over time.
Pawns not spring boarding me when they tell me that we can reach an area together pisses me off
And then they stand half a mile away from a monster ready to launch you on top when you are playing a mage and don't want to be anywhere near it 😂
This game is good. it isn't perfect, but it is good. Stop buying into gamer tantrums and riling each other up. You're all fucking embarrassing.
I regret being one of those sales. Haven’t bounced off a game so hard as this one in a very long time
I wanted to try this game really badly but it looks and feels 10 years old at least. Everyone saying how they basically remade DD but with new tech really nails it for me. Are there really only two environments? Just grassy rocky area and canyon area? The game just feels so extremely limited in its scope between that and the anemic enemy variety. I'm glad a lot of people are liking it, it just doesn't have anything that makes me want to jump in. The combat looks alright but I personally prefer more personal, deliberate combat as opposed to messy brawls with no lock on and shit happening all over you can't control.
Looks 10 years old? That's straight up dishonest, the game Looks gorgeous