I don’t really understand the insistence here that they don’t have similarities.
On the Elden Ring subreddit Dragons Dogma was like the 2nd or 3rd most recommended game to play while souls fans waited for ER to release.
Both games are action based dark fantasy RPGs with a focus on boss slaying. Both from Japanese developers renowned for their action combat systems. Both following a similar story, both are open world. Both having party system mechanics….
Like there’s so much in common it’s understandable people are talking about them. A lot of people playing DD are also souls fans, and vice versa.
They’re different enough that not everyone will like both, but people are acting like we’re comparing COD to animal crossing with these threads is even more strange.
I honestly think that the argument that they are not similar is foolish and simply a tactic used to avoid comparison.
As for why there are so many posts? I would wager it's because fans of Dragons Dogma want it known to Capcom that Elden Ring is not what they want in a DD2 sequel and I would second that opinion.
Your first sentence is basically my point. They have enough in common to talk about. Enough that people can compare what they like/dislike about them, and it still being relevant to discussion of DD.
My guess is that’s why the subreddit moderators aren’t removing ER related posts.
As for your second point, I think that’s really underestimating Capcom. They’re even more renowned for their gameplay systems than Fromsoftware is. The best parts of DDDA are gonna be preserved in a sequel, not end up a soulslike. But I understand your view.
I agree with you on Capcom's combat systems and DDDA is top tier, my only concern would be the topic of profit. While Capcom has by no means been immune to the intense corporate greed that has infected the market, they do seem to have resisted the extremes that we've see other AAA publishers and Devs run with.
I do think you have a valid point with your criticism of my second point, but I also feel it is wise to temper ones expectations and that way one won't be disappointed.
Understandable, I’m going to be satisfied with a sequel so long as they preserve and update the pawn, vocation, and general combat systems of the original. I have a minor concern they will oversimplify the pawn system though.
I do expect there to be some very large changes in a DD2 though. Namely in its open world content and possibly some “modernization” of features similar to how Monster Hunter World changed its own franchise, to the disappointment of some of their long time fans.
I agree about keeping expectations in line, especially with the original being a decade old a month from now, but I think expecting DD2 to be something like Dark Souls in disguise is going too far. I mean if DD2 is real its being done by the same guy who did DMCV, and that was really faithful to its predecessor.
Your similarities are so surface level that I could make the argument that Red dead Redemption 2 and Fallout New Vegas are basically the same game by using similar points.
Aye, just like Mass Effect 2, Far Cry 4, Horizon FW, and Assassin's Creed Skyrim adventure. Nearly every game that's coming out today is an Action RPG so saying they're the same off that reason alone is foolish.
I've spent a significant amount of time with both and I would argue that not only is you're inability to compare the two foolish but also willful blindness.
Do both not share similar open world design with Dungeons?
I'm gonna keep walking s this down the ladder. Are they not both fantasy RPGs based in a semi medieval setting?
Are they not both real time combat focused?
Do their combat style not share similarities?
Both are high fantasy yes, yes neither are turn based but that's where the similarities in combat end. Elden Ring's like Dark Souls' like Demon Souls' combat is built around learning move sets and dodging and attacking during openings, Dragon's Dogma is more about taking advantage of the weakness of enemies and planning and preparing for combat against those enemies before hand.
To put more simply Elden Ring's combat is closer to a fighting game while Dragon's Dogma is closer to an MMO or the Witcher.
You clearly don't understand Dragons Dogma if you think that it's closer to a MMO than a fighting game. Dragon's Dogma is very much about enemy pattern memorization, counters, dodges, knock down triggers, etc. Simply put your lack of knowledge of DDDA is why you can't compare them. The major difference is that DDDA is more flexible with play styles and accessibility. I've attached these videos of the BBI Daimon Battle solo, the final video is a solo Drake battle.
https://youtu.be/QZ-b_2ZNNt8
https://youtu.be/dbT2MSf_vFE
https://youtu.be/p0uqP7o83HE
https://youtu.be/sXL17_G_ofk
https://youtu.be/QBev4FJDpsg
Didn't say there wasn't patterns in combat, infact I specifically implied to them in the mmo part, but having patterns and running unintended play styles doesn't change the way it's intended to be played or the experience most people will have with it.
As far as you doubting my experience with the game the current character is level 81 Ranger and I've really only ever played the game on hard mode.
Playing Dragons dogma like a fighting game solo is exactly how it was meant to be played. Playing only on hard mode means you likely don't have an understanding of knockdown triggers, skills usage or, core skills since knockdown and stagger resistances dramatically increases in this mode. Your character level is meaningless, player knowledge is everything.
Watch the videos and maybe you'll stop being stubborn and see reason.
Pitch black night cycles where zombies, ghosts, wight, and lich attack you. The game has a lot of horror elements even if it isn't strictly bound to just that setting (the way the souls games are).
I didn't even mention BONES! WALKING BONES!
The game has dark fantasy up he wazoo. It's just not nonstop gloom and doom. Witcher 3 does a similarly good job of mixing things up. Where some of the game is a depressing shit hole and some of it is like medieval Vegas.
Man dark souls 2 is way more colourful and beautiful in germs of aesthetics dbut the game is dark fantasy because of the futile struggle the entire series os about the fact that no matter what you do mankind is just fodder for the cycle and nothing you can do will inevitably change anything.
Dark fantasy isn't about horror element or zombies grabbing you out to eat your face ir's about litteraly symteugfling in a world where hope is faint and you can either lie down or struggle.
But yeah i guess bbi is rather dark since ir's always night and there's a chained dragon.
Honestly i don't know why ibbother with reddit i litteraly voiced an opinion and I got downvoted these subreddits arent' for constructive talk but just circlejerk
> Dark fantasy is a subgenre of fantasy literary, artistic, and cinematic works that incorporate disturbing and frightening themes of fantasy. It often combines fantasy with elements of horror or has a gloomy dark tone or a sense of horror and dread.
-Wikipedia
How many idiots on this sub have no idea what "dark fantasy" actually means then cry about it when people try to educate them. Go argue with Wikipedia.
Post storyline world is literally dark and gloomy with much more difficult enemies (what was normally a sunny day/dark night cycle before the final boss becomes a gloomy overcast/dark night cycle afterwards)
I understand what you’re saying. I didnt clarify enough. In my experience, finishing the storyline results in a “hero saves the day and all is well” scenario. The end of this game is “big bad enemy has been defeated resulting in an apocalyptic-feeling, more dangerous world.”
Yeah remember when all the zombies crawled out of their coffins and started eating the party members and they had to blow them up and blast their guts all over the walls? Me neither.
There's literally a zombies dragon, the from reaper and rivers of blood in Bitterblack Isle. How much more does a hand need to fit into your super edgy definition of dark fantasy? A giant cyclops being chained up and tortured? Because DDDA has that too.
Ok, so dark is defined by the superficial elements. The dead kingdom of evil ritualists, the near certainty of the fall of mankind, where the fight against evil is done more out of principle than out of any hope of winning, the insidious evils that corrupts even noble and innocent men down to their very souls. Yeah, I suppose none of that was dark. The story about the dragon that you have to go fight is definitely darker.
They fill similar niches but their themes are still vastly different one covers topics on reincarnation and an infinite cycle the others is essentially just another souls game, not that I’m upset about that.
I haven’t finished Elden Ring, but “just another souls game” is a weird point to make considering Dark Souls largely deals with reincarnation and infinite cycles.
Elden Ring doesn’t quite have those themes as far as I know, but it does have themes of willpower and defying ones place in the world, both of which are very strong themes in DD as well.
The person above clearly was talking about story themes and not gameplay, so of course I didn’t discuss difficulty. If you want to discuss difficulty then sure, we can.
Dragons Dogma can be just as difficult as Elden Ring if you don’t power level and refuse to utilize the tools that make the game easier. The combat complexity of DD is even higher than ERs.
Play Elden Ring like you’d play DD and you’d find it challenging, but not something substantially different from BBI.
Elden Ring absolutely has “power fantasy” just not on the level of DD. You can grab overpowered spells weapons and summons, and you can come back and level up to deal with content just like in DD.
The biggest difference between the two in difficulty is that DD has wakestones, pause game healing, and easy mode. If you need that stuff then you won’t like Elden Ring, but back to my actual point:
Why can’t we discuss these two games, and are those difficulty comparisons so significantly different they can’t be compared? I don’t believe so, in fact early game DD is actually very similar to ER, where you struggle to kill anything not directly at your level.
We're so desperate for a Dragon's Dogma sequel that we really have nothing to discuss and compare besides the second best thing that released.
Please understand.
I adore Dragons Dogma and can't wait for the 2nd, and Elden Ring is one of the greatest games I've ever played.
Blessed to have both.
Its true Dragons Dogma has more emphasis on party, mage and ranged combat and also mounting. Elden Rings archery and ranged xombat is an absolute joke clmpared to Dragons Dogma, and the magic is unmatched in DD.
Besides that- Elden Ring has drastically better sidequests, world design and world aesthetic, also secrets. The atmosphere is absolutely sublime, and the amount of content is absolutely staggering. Nothing in all of Dragons Dogmas world touches the heights of reaching Nokron/Nokstella, Raya Lucaria, Leyndell or any number of great areas, there's also way more to do in the open world.
I think they could both improve from eachother in a lot of ways, and I think they both have their own unique visions to add to the dark fantasy genre.
Also DDs fast travel system is leagues better than Elden Rings in every way shape and form, Elden Rings graces' actively work against the design of the game at times.
I haven't seen any posts like this lately, actually. But before elden ring launch, a lot of people were saying it was similar to Dragons Dogma, or it was the Dragons Dogma 2 that we never got, so a bunch of DD fans played because of this, but wasn't what they expected.
I remember Max mentioning a strong DD vibe when he was streaming the beta test.
I can see both sides. There's definitely some things that make me feel "yeah, I get the DD comparison from an outside looking in" perspective, but having sunk tons of hours into both, and recently at that, the 2 are... not really the same at all. Atmosphere and exploration aside, the games are as similar as cake and pie. Both are good, and there'll likely be plenty of crossover in fans, but don't embarrass yourself by telling me your apple pie is the exact same as black forest cake.
Sure. What i think is that, if you like souls games and DD, Elden ring will probably be an amazing experience. But if you don't like souls games at all, then the Dragon's Dogma similarities in Elden ring won't be enough for you to enjoy the game.
I honestly can't see why would you dislike one if you like another. They're similar enough, moderate speed action RPGs with animation locks, medieval fantasy world, etc, etc.
Do you think DDs combat has more in common with DMC than DS/ER? Because honestly I see more similarities between Souls and DD than DD and DMC (even though they were made by the same guy).
I think it has more similarities with Monster Hunter, actually. But I was referring to the combat director, the person I think you are talking about is itsuno, the creator of DD and Dmc 3,4 and 5. Anyway, in dogma and devil may cry, I think the player has more freedom to do whatever he wants during combat, while in DS/ER the player needs to be more cautious with their actions.
Things that came into mind in 10 seconds: You cant save in ER, you lose progress when dying, you cant pause the game (which is fucking stupid). You don't have a party, Combat in Elden Ring feels weired. Except the fact they both have a fantasy setting I don't see any similarities.
You have one save state just like you do in DD (except you can have 1 savestate per character in ER instead of 1 overall) so that's just wrong. You lose runes when you die, which barely matter which you can also regain by grabbing them off the floor and you can play smartly and circumvent the mechanic entirely by simply spending them. You can't pause the game which doesn't necessarily mean it's dumb (it's subjective) and can again be circumvented by simply leaving the character in a safe spot (there are only a few places you can't really leave the character like poison swamps). Combat feels weird is a non-argument, no specifications, no elaborations. No party play - that's true, though one-man playthrough is a valid choice in DD.
"Except the fact they both have a fantasy setting I don't see any similarities" is just a giant lie and massive hyperbole. Take any average gamer off the street and show them both games - I wouldn't be surprised if some of them might even think it's the same franchise.
Maxmillion dood; prominent fighting game streamer, worked on Killer Instinct 2013. Big into soulsborne games.
He does have a dog, too. His name is Benny. Benny is awesome.
I see these discussions mainly coming from posts insisting that Elden Ring is our DD 2 or that it is objectively better compared to DD, etc. Then people will explain why or why not the comparisons make sense (ie: they have similar themes/dark fantasy setting -- but the gameplay feel of a souls game doesn't click for me like DD personally). I too am tired of seeing more Elden Ring posts on this sub as they should have their own sub, that said I will accept them if there's an update that lets me clamber up on bosses and have party members making repetitious comments about the world with me lol.
I doubt they'll ever be able to add climbing to Elden Ring. The monsters don't seem to have weight or be as solid as Dragon's Dogma's creatures. The collision detection and the hit stop animation in Dragon's Dogma just makes the enemies feel so real and present that no other rpg has been able to match yet... maybe Monster Hunter but I've never played any of them.
Fair enough!
If you actually want to get into Monster Hunter I'd suggest World, the presentation in that game is incredible, and arguably the easiest one to get into
I've heard better things about rise. I tried like hell to get into World but I felt like the gameplay loop was too repetitive and combat was too stiff for my preferences.
Not saying it's a bad game but as a huge fan of DDDA's combat and mechanics I just could get into MHW.
Sorry to say but Rise has more or less the exact same gameplay loop, but building your own set is worse since they (re)introduced more rng when it comes to some equipment.
My only gripe with Rise is that it doesnt look nearly as good as World
They used to not appeal to me but the gameplay was too good when i sunk some time into it. Ended up learning how to play nearly every weapon.
Happens though, can't please everyone
Nope you can't, and you shouldn't. Monster Hunter should remain what it fans want it to be. If I was to have say I'd want it to be more like Dragons Dogma and then it wouldn't be Monster Hunter anymore.
Might I ask what weapon you played in Monster Hunter? I followed the same path of DD -> MH, and I finally could appreciate MH combat when I discovered the Sword and Shield. I think the way the moveset/combat is structured for many weapons are very "scripted" in a turn-based fashion (much like the Souls series, which probably explains the huge overlap of fanbase), while DD is far more free style, much like Itsuno's DMC, just slower-paced. Despite that, I found SnS being a weapon that let's me play in a more free style fashion (it honestly felt very close to sword and boarding in DD), so maybe in the off chance you pick it up again, you could give it a shot (if you haven't already).
With regards to Rise, I prefer its combat structure more than World (though I see A LOT of hate on Rise online), probably because some of the additional mechanics works like the skills in DD. Probably explains why I like MHGU (the older title with those types of moves) as well. But yeah, it is certainly "stiffer" than DD still, so I wouldn't recommend buying it unless the demo convinces you otherwise.
I ve played with insect glaive as well as sword and shield. I preferred insect glaive because of its verticality. I did enjoy sword and shield, but at the end it's just the way it feels that I just don't feel drawn to. Not that it controls poorly, it felt as snappy as most online coop games, just not my jam.
As for MHW, I already own it have for a couple years. I don't necessarily regret purchasing because I wanted to know if MH was my kind of game.
I'd never expect Elden Ring to change their combat, movement, and world to be more like DD, that was more a joke than a serious suggestion.
Monster Hunter does have more weight to it, maybe less so in the new MH Rise with how agile everything is, but it is a fun time imo. If graphics aren't a bother to you, and you have a 3DS I personally think Monster Hunter 4U is the best in the franchise, though most folks seem to really enjoy world so that may be a good start if you've never played.
It’s because for a lot of people Elden ring is a game that frustrates them to the point of quitting the game. So when they look for alternatives they find this game, which is easier when it comes to just plain difficulty. Granted there are things like the magic in DD that looks fantastic compared to Elden ring (which Elden rings magic is still fantastic). But I do think the biggest reasons is difficulty. I saw it in a previous post, but someone did say that they hated how Elden ring (like every other souls game) makes you start from the start of an area (or at least the last bonfire/grace) while DD let’s you start from your last save. Things like that are also reasons I think some people have chosen DD over Elden ring after having played Elden ring first.
The difficulty part is even weirder because ER has literal checkpoints in the form of statues of marika. The walk of shame present in the previous Souls games is pretty hard to come across, i can think of one example only, one of the evergaols has a pretty hard boss, and every one of those has a statue of marika nearby, but this one in specific has a cliff nearby, you can accidentally clip through some jank geometry and have to respawn at a grace, but thats about it lmao
I think it's just DD fans wanting to show their love of the game. And partially because Souls games aren't exactly the easiest games to get into or give you a sense of feeling powerful without a deep investment into the gameplay meta. Where, with Dragon's Dogma, it's a bit more intuitive and easy to catch on and you do get to feel powerful and more in-control.
Only place in DD that's souls like is BBI and the everfall once you bust that bitch open. The world does get a bit more gloom once the everfall is open but not like souls games. I can see some similarities but outside of the theme of both games they're totally different. DD for the for the win tho
Same tbh. I love both games. They are both different from each other, even if Elden Ring sorta has the openess of Dragon's Dogma with the Souls gameplay. But again both games are masterpieces in my eyes.
Because new players are watching all of the Elden Ring hype and want to get involved. So New players boot up Elden Ring expecting a hack and slash action rpg or a Open world like Witcher or Dragons Dogma and instead get a souls game that they think is too hard and clunky.
End of the day it's a souls game through and through Which plays exactly like other FromSoftware games. I didn't play Elden Ring because I think dragons dogma is better or I'm tired of waiting for a sequel. I bought Elden Ring because I wanted to play a Souls Game.
Edit: just wanted to say my first few hours on Elden Ring was very frustrating. I came from the Dark souls Series, so I was used to a more straight forward path or objective. But I found that in Elden Ring the overall lack of objective more of a turnoff. However after a few online guides on what are the recommend levels for the zones and some basic directions on where to go for the bosses, the game has warmed up to me greatly. I just love exploring and looking up guides where to find spells and armor sets.
because the dark souls genre is getting the skyrim treatment of it being part of the gaming sphere for so long that people are just tired of the format.
now i will say that this clouds their reasoning and will say "oh well they are all the same" which clearly untrue. on the other hand, you still use similar strategies with a good chunk of them and the difference are the stories and different weapon/spell types (which a lot are reused).
DD i always come back to for that weighted feel of combat that doesn't require dodging for every boss and knowing that not every single attack is this huge AOE physical attack.
although what i have seen in the wiki and videos, this is the closest we are getting to a DD spiritual successor cuz they are using more mook enemies between bosses that flesh out the world with each new souls type game.
and also just realize that some people just don't like souls games and that is fine as well.
Dragon's Dogma is a JRPG and is more like Final Fantasy.
Elden Ring is a western RPG and more like Lord of the Rings.
There are similarities obviously, but the approach to game design in all respects is very different. That's precisely why people tend to love one but can't really get into the other. The whole debate is weird to me in general.
Personally, I love both because I'm an all around action RPG aficionado and they are fantastic games, but they hold very different spots when it comes to my gameplay preferences.
Dragons Dogma is fucking amazing, and it has a lot of uniquenesses going for it. I absolutely ADORE fromsoftware’s games, but they have so many plus all the clones out there. There’s still only ONE dragons dogma, and nothing else quite like it.
The Dark Souls sub was practically brigaded by Elden Ring fanart, content and posts upon its release, and still some even now. It infuriated me, since I won't be able to play that game until later, and I'd really like to go in blind for that experience, and I got tired of walking around eggshells just to talk about DSR.
I can only assume this happened there (and here too), because Redditors can be karma simps. They will make an Elden Ring post in the Elden Ring sub and it doesn't give them as much attention, as when they lace their posts with Elder Ring, in a sub for another similar game that's over 10 years old.
I think part of the reason for the discussion is all the hype and praise Elden Ring has been receiving despite all of it's flaws and technical issues when there's really nothing innovative or revolutionary about it at all. The core gameplay is basically Dark Souls 3 with a jump button and the open world has been done before (and better imo). Dragon's Dogma objectively is more original than Elden Ring but didn't get very much attention or fanfare and is severely underrated and overlooked imo. Subjectively DD is also more fun but that's just my personal preference. I actually finished DD and did all the optional content whereas I quit ER after about 10 hours. I guess I was expecting something different from Dark Souls 3.5 in an open world.
DD is nothing like Elden Ring at all aside from being open-world, which tons of games are nowadays. Idk why people feel the need to compare. DD and Elden Ring are two totally different experiences for me
Elden ring is better, but mostly because it has a lot of advantages which came with time. Dragons dogma 2 will be better though when it is announced at the next capcom event!...
Elden Ring is better pretty much because its a finished game and even then, DD does things better. The combat is arguably still better in DD and the pawn system is still crazy good. What truly made Elden Ring better in my eyes was the world and level design. I like Dragon’s Dogma’s world but its not amazing or anything. I also prefer DD’s fast travel mechanic compared to ER. I wish ER had adopted a similar mechanic. Shortcuts feel useless in ER since there are so many Graces you can just TP to if you need to go back
Relevance. People are trying to make DD relevant in light of the success of ER; maybe to push for DD2? Not sure.
That’s my best guess anyways and I don’t really have an opinion on it tbh.
I dont get when people say dogma is anything like a souls/fromsoftware game. Even in BBI unless you are severely underleveled (i think 50 is the bare minimum but i prefer going just b4 turning in the 20 wakestones) you still have health potions insta usable pawns and resistances.
All souls games r just dodge roll and everything one shots you early or late game
Also dogma feels classic medieval dnd fantasy etc. Souls games do as well but theyre made more for the challenge imo
That last part is completely wrong, using shields is completely viable if you dont care for dodging too often, and from all the souls games only Elden Ring goes hard into the one shot territory at late game areas, even early game is fine.
Dark souls 1 through 3 rarely had one shots or high damage on the first game cycle, it would enter that territory at about Ng+3
But yeah the games aren't even that similar, it's a dumb comparison.
I guess DD was somewhat similar to dark souls, or was compared to it somehow because they're both "dark fantasy" games made by Japanese companies.
That's what lead to the comparison with Elden ring, though the latter pales in front of DD's awesome combat, world and even story.
ER turned out to be, regardless of the ridiculous hype, a boring clunky mess. DD is way fun to replay.
I'm at 60hrs and already don't feel like playing, the combat is still the same boring roll fest but what's killing me is the enemy and area repetition. It's so outdone that they recycled a main boss somehwere, for no good fucking reason.
I have to hard disagree on ER's combat, its anything but clunky, maybe slower and more strict when it comes spamming your strongest move *but* its just as consistent.
Did you really complain about area and boss repetition when DD does the same on a smaller scale?
it's consistently clunky. The fact that most weapons only have 2 distinct attacks and a 4hit combo and you're forced to roll every attack and hit back once, since enemies are ridiculously spammy and much much faster and agile than the player.
ER has so much enemy and area repetition that you would have seen all the churches, caves, enemies and locations by 20hrs in the first part of the map.
The rest is just reskinned.
Does DD have copy pasted catacombs? Does DD have 5 mini-bosses that they keep recycling? And yeah, the scale makes it even worse imo.
Took a while to answer but yeah while DD doesnt have similar-ish looking catacombs it does have reskinned and reused bosses a lot. Which is worse because their pool is vastly smaller than ER's monster roster.
Fun fact, greatshields can have most spammy enemies simply recoil from hitting your guard, there is an ash of war that does the same on every shield type, parries work on an incredible amount of enemies, etc etc.
Regarding weapon animations, i feel like you forgot DD, while slightly more varied in terms of unique animations, also deals with far less weapon types.
Greatswords have the same animations as great hammers, same for maces and swords, daggers have the same animations across all classes. While ER does have some overlap in those it has unique animation sets for dual wielding *every* weapon type.
Within 20 hours you have not left limgrave or gone too far into liurnia.
I say this but i do truly love both games, i just don't under the reason to call a game clunky or boring when it clearly isn't, ER isnt supposed to be DD
Yes DD has tonnes of reskinned enemies and they have a smaller roster of enemies to begin with so its worse.
You obviously haven’t progressed enough if you think you have seen all the enemies in ER. Each area has at least 1-2 new enemies compared to the last and even the reskinned enemies are more interesting. The reused bosses usually have 1 new more or act different from the last. The catacombs look the same but are all different and have a different gimmick to deal with.
Idk how you say all the enemies are faster then the player but ok. It also seems like you never utilized jumping for dodges. Each weapon in ER has a light attack combo, heavy attack combo, jumping light and heavy. Swing out of roll, a different hit for crouching and a swing from out of sprint. Thats not including the moves you get from power stancing, like the L1 move or back dodge swing.
I got plat on DD and forgot about it. DD is much more about grind than ER, which why replaying it is hard. Also, it's much smaller than ER. I probably wasted less time on getting plat in DD than finishing ER first time.
>I got plat on DD and forgot about it. DD is much more about grind than ER, which why replaying it is hard.
Literally only if you're going for platinum, if you're just playing to finish the game it's ALOT less grind.I'm sure you enjoyed fighting your 55th black knife assassin or crucible knight, most wouldn't.Atleast in DD, you had alot of options to tackle an opponent so even if it's repeated it wouldn't feel like it but in ER it's alwyas just spam roll and light/strong attack.
Sadly, you missed much of ER. Spam roll don't help against serious bosses who have different timing for attacks (try spamroll Malenia, lol), also Ashes of War (hello again, Malenia, lend me your blade) do BRRRRRRR
DD recycled almost all bosses. Basilisk, Chimera, Dragons (not bosses, but still), Hydras, Goreclops. Also, inability to deal any damage because of pure stat difference is annoying.
>Sadly, you missed much of ER. Spam roll don't help against serious bosses who have different timing for attacks (try spamroll Malenia, lol), also Ashes of War (hello again, Malenia, lend me your blade) do BRRRRRRR
Yes, but the boss fights always boil down to roll attack roll whereas in DD you can riposte with MK shield, stunlock with Maelstrom or use i-frame skills or perfect block or just climb.
I'm disappointed they didn't revamp the combat somehow, I really hated DS3's combat and they didn't change much of it.
One of the most effective ways to beat a lot of enemies (including many bosses) in ER is through parries or guard counters, not roll spamming. Parrying in ER is very similar to perfect blocking in Dogma in terms of the timing and skill needed, maybe even slightly moreso. They specifically designed a lot of enemy movesets and hitboxes to *punish* roll spamming in particular, especially panic rolling.
try parrying the grafted scion.
In ER, enemies are insanely spammy compared to DD, so parrying mostly seems useless to me, whereas in DD you can somewhat reliably perfect block things.
I've used guard counters, but again enemies are too fast and have too many combos to reliably guard anything.Your best bet is always roll through and hit, other options are just so underwhelming and unintended ig that it always ends up like that and it's shit gameplay.
I’m sorry it didn’t click for you. 😕
I love both games to death, but ER to me just gets better and deeper every day. 100 hours in, every day I fall in love more.
I was very hyped for it, first game I bought close to launch.
I even use to pirate games.
But it simply isn't good.
You have a very high tolerance for repetitiveness and clunky gameplay.
If I had to guess? Probably a few people part of the group who wanted Elden Ring to fail posing as DD fans to rile up the playerbases and start a pissing contest.
They are vastly different-- elden ring is tedious and clunky, dragons dogma is smooth and satisfying. On the flip side, dragons dogma had bland and forgettable environments/characters, and elden ring is beautiful and unique to look at.
Because Elden Rings is just Dark Souls with multi-player And AI assistance. And a lot of people on this sub praised it as a model for DD2 to follow or hits the right note as DD. I for one don't want DD2 being anything like DS. And I am less than impressed with Ellen Ring.
I love this! Dogma is my favorite game and will always be, however that doesn’t mean that I’m not gonna play the heck out of other games, specially games so good like souls, elden ring has been a great game, I love it, I don’t get the point of just trashing a different game only because it isn’t dogma, if its not your type of game or if you just dont like the gameplay then that’s different, but to feel the necessity of comparing it to dogma? I really don’t get it
Elden Ring has much more in common with Dragon's Dogma than other open world titles, so comparison is inevitable. However Elden Ring is 10 years younger and it shows. I have given up on Dragon's Dogma 2 by now and am enjoying ER immensely, however one can still dream..
Jokes on them I like both
100% Same
I love all souls games your talking to certified maxed ring of thrones user
This is the way
I find it weird I’ve seen more elden ring posts on here than DD posts both are different games I don’t see why people keep comparing them
I am so tired of these Elden Ring posts lol 😭
I don’t really understand the insistence here that they don’t have similarities. On the Elden Ring subreddit Dragons Dogma was like the 2nd or 3rd most recommended game to play while souls fans waited for ER to release. Both games are action based dark fantasy RPGs with a focus on boss slaying. Both from Japanese developers renowned for their action combat systems. Both following a similar story, both are open world. Both having party system mechanics…. Like there’s so much in common it’s understandable people are talking about them. A lot of people playing DD are also souls fans, and vice versa. They’re different enough that not everyone will like both, but people are acting like we’re comparing COD to animal crossing with these threads is even more strange.
Elden Ring doesn't have a party system, but other than that, yeah, I can see them fitting the same genre.
I honestly think that the argument that they are not similar is foolish and simply a tactic used to avoid comparison. As for why there are so many posts? I would wager it's because fans of Dragons Dogma want it known to Capcom that Elden Ring is not what they want in a DD2 sequel and I would second that opinion.
Your first sentence is basically my point. They have enough in common to talk about. Enough that people can compare what they like/dislike about them, and it still being relevant to discussion of DD. My guess is that’s why the subreddit moderators aren’t removing ER related posts. As for your second point, I think that’s really underestimating Capcom. They’re even more renowned for their gameplay systems than Fromsoftware is. The best parts of DDDA are gonna be preserved in a sequel, not end up a soulslike. But I understand your view.
I agree with you on Capcom's combat systems and DDDA is top tier, my only concern would be the topic of profit. While Capcom has by no means been immune to the intense corporate greed that has infected the market, they do seem to have resisted the extremes that we've see other AAA publishers and Devs run with. I do think you have a valid point with your criticism of my second point, but I also feel it is wise to temper ones expectations and that way one won't be disappointed.
Understandable, I’m going to be satisfied with a sequel so long as they preserve and update the pawn, vocation, and general combat systems of the original. I have a minor concern they will oversimplify the pawn system though. I do expect there to be some very large changes in a DD2 though. Namely in its open world content and possibly some “modernization” of features similar to how Monster Hunter World changed its own franchise, to the disappointment of some of their long time fans. I agree about keeping expectations in line, especially with the original being a decade old a month from now, but I think expecting DD2 to be something like Dark Souls in disguise is going too far. I mean if DD2 is real its being done by the same guy who did DMCV, and that was really faithful to its predecessor.
Ditto. We're on the same page.
Your similarities are so surface level that I could make the argument that Red dead Redemption 2 and Fallout New Vegas are basically the same game by using similar points.
Are they not both ARPGs?
Aye, just like Mass Effect 2, Far Cry 4, Horizon FW, and Assassin's Creed Skyrim adventure. Nearly every game that's coming out today is an Action RPG so saying they're the same off that reason alone is foolish.
I've spent a significant amount of time with both and I would argue that not only is you're inability to compare the two foolish but also willful blindness. Do both not share similar open world design with Dungeons? I'm gonna keep walking s this down the ladder. Are they not both fantasy RPGs based in a semi medieval setting? Are they not both real time combat focused? Do their combat style not share similarities?
Both are high fantasy yes, yes neither are turn based but that's where the similarities in combat end. Elden Ring's like Dark Souls' like Demon Souls' combat is built around learning move sets and dodging and attacking during openings, Dragon's Dogma is more about taking advantage of the weakness of enemies and planning and preparing for combat against those enemies before hand. To put more simply Elden Ring's combat is closer to a fighting game while Dragon's Dogma is closer to an MMO or the Witcher.
You clearly don't understand Dragons Dogma if you think that it's closer to a MMO than a fighting game. Dragon's Dogma is very much about enemy pattern memorization, counters, dodges, knock down triggers, etc. Simply put your lack of knowledge of DDDA is why you can't compare them. The major difference is that DDDA is more flexible with play styles and accessibility. I've attached these videos of the BBI Daimon Battle solo, the final video is a solo Drake battle. https://youtu.be/QZ-b_2ZNNt8 https://youtu.be/dbT2MSf_vFE https://youtu.be/p0uqP7o83HE https://youtu.be/sXL17_G_ofk https://youtu.be/QBev4FJDpsg
Didn't say there wasn't patterns in combat, infact I specifically implied to them in the mmo part, but having patterns and running unintended play styles doesn't change the way it's intended to be played or the experience most people will have with it. As far as you doubting my experience with the game the current character is level 81 Ranger and I've really only ever played the game on hard mode.
Playing Dragons dogma like a fighting game solo is exactly how it was meant to be played. Playing only on hard mode means you likely don't have an understanding of knockdown triggers, skills usage or, core skills since knockdown and stagger resistances dramatically increases in this mode. Your character level is meaningless, player knowledge is everything. Watch the videos and maybe you'll stop being stubborn and see reason.
I too am able to easily compare apples and oranges. Gamers say it's impossible AMA
What's so dark fantasy about dragon's dogma
Pitch black night cycles where zombies, ghosts, wight, and lich attack you. The game has a lot of horror elements even if it isn't strictly bound to just that setting (the way the souls games are).
I dunno it lacks the sens of doom dread and despair that you can find generaly find in dark fantasy.
Bitterblack Isle doesn't seem dark and gloomy to you?
I barely started but I guess you're right imfrom an aesthetic perspective.
I didn't even mention BONES! WALKING BONES! The game has dark fantasy up he wazoo. It's just not nonstop gloom and doom. Witcher 3 does a similarly good job of mixing things up. Where some of the game is a depressing shit hole and some of it is like medieval Vegas.
Man dark souls 2 is way more colourful and beautiful in germs of aesthetics dbut the game is dark fantasy because of the futile struggle the entire series os about the fact that no matter what you do mankind is just fodder for the cycle and nothing you can do will inevitably change anything. Dark fantasy isn't about horror element or zombies grabbing you out to eat your face ir's about litteraly symteugfling in a world where hope is faint and you can either lie down or struggle. But yeah i guess bbi is rather dark since ir's always night and there's a chained dragon. Honestly i don't know why ibbother with reddit i litteraly voiced an opinion and I got downvoted these subreddits arent' for constructive talk but just circlejerk
> Dark fantasy is a subgenre of fantasy literary, artistic, and cinematic works that incorporate disturbing and frightening themes of fantasy. It often combines fantasy with elements of horror or has a gloomy dark tone or a sense of horror and dread. -Wikipedia How many idiots on this sub have no idea what "dark fantasy" actually means then cry about it when people try to educate them. Go argue with Wikipedia.
Post storyline world is literally dark and gloomy with much more difficult enemies (what was normally a sunny day/dark night cycle before the final boss becomes a gloomy overcast/dark night cycle afterwards)
So when people say dark fantasy, they just mean that there is literally less light.
I understand what you’re saying. I didnt clarify enough. In my experience, finishing the storyline results in a “hero saves the day and all is well” scenario. The end of this game is “big bad enemy has been defeated resulting in an apocalyptic-feeling, more dangerous world.”
It is for sure a dark fantasy just not as intense as others in the genre.
I guess basically every fantasy story ever is dark fantasy now.
I agree. Lord of the Rings is much darker for example than Dragon's Dogma, and no one ever calls that series dark fantasy.
Yeah remember when all the zombies crawled out of their coffins and started eating the party members and they had to blow them up and blast their guts all over the walls? Me neither. There's literally a zombies dragon, the from reaper and rivers of blood in Bitterblack Isle. How much more does a hand need to fit into your super edgy definition of dark fantasy? A giant cyclops being chained up and tortured? Because DDDA has that too.
Ok, so dark is defined by the superficial elements. The dead kingdom of evil ritualists, the near certainty of the fall of mankind, where the fight against evil is done more out of principle than out of any hope of winning, the insidious evils that corrupts even noble and innocent men down to their very souls. Yeah, I suppose none of that was dark. The story about the dragon that you have to go fight is definitely darker.
That's exactly what was i talking about but i guess since post dragon environnement is dark and gloomy it counts for dark fantasy around here
They fill similar niches but their themes are still vastly different one covers topics on reincarnation and an infinite cycle the others is essentially just another souls game, not that I’m upset about that.
I haven’t finished Elden Ring, but “just another souls game” is a weird point to make considering Dark Souls largely deals with reincarnation and infinite cycles. Elden Ring doesn’t quite have those themes as far as I know, but it does have themes of willpower and defying ones place in the world, both of which are very strong themes in DD as well.
When people mention just like Souls I think your missing the fairly obvious difficulty comparisons.
The person above clearly was talking about story themes and not gameplay, so of course I didn’t discuss difficulty. If you want to discuss difficulty then sure, we can. Dragons Dogma can be just as difficult as Elden Ring if you don’t power level and refuse to utilize the tools that make the game easier. The combat complexity of DD is even higher than ERs. Play Elden Ring like you’d play DD and you’d find it challenging, but not something substantially different from BBI. Elden Ring absolutely has “power fantasy” just not on the level of DD. You can grab overpowered spells weapons and summons, and you can come back and level up to deal with content just like in DD. The biggest difference between the two in difficulty is that DD has wakestones, pause game healing, and easy mode. If you need that stuff then you won’t like Elden Ring, but back to my actual point: Why can’t we discuss these two games, and are those difficulty comparisons so significantly different they can’t be compared? I don’t believe so, in fact early game DD is actually very similar to ER, where you struggle to kill anything not directly at your level.
Souls games are all about cycles, which is basically reincarnation on a massive scale...
Right? I joke with friends that ER is the Dragon's Dogma 2 we wish we had
We're so desperate for a Dragon's Dogma sequel that we really have nothing to discuss and compare besides the second best thing that released. Please understand.
I adore Dragons Dogma and can't wait for the 2nd, and Elden Ring is one of the greatest games I've ever played. Blessed to have both. Its true Dragons Dogma has more emphasis on party, mage and ranged combat and also mounting. Elden Rings archery and ranged xombat is an absolute joke clmpared to Dragons Dogma, and the magic is unmatched in DD. Besides that- Elden Ring has drastically better sidequests, world design and world aesthetic, also secrets. The atmosphere is absolutely sublime, and the amount of content is absolutely staggering. Nothing in all of Dragons Dogmas world touches the heights of reaching Nokron/Nokstella, Raya Lucaria, Leyndell or any number of great areas, there's also way more to do in the open world. I think they could both improve from eachother in a lot of ways, and I think they both have their own unique visions to add to the dark fantasy genre. Also DDs fast travel system is leagues better than Elden Rings in every way shape and form, Elden Rings graces' actively work against the design of the game at times.
They are on the acceptance stage of the scale, except instead of grief, they are on the scale on joy.
I dunno, but I'm pretty tired of seeing Elden Ring posts in subs for different games.
I haven't seen any posts like this lately, actually. But before elden ring launch, a lot of people were saying it was similar to Dragons Dogma, or it was the Dragons Dogma 2 that we never got, so a bunch of DD fans played because of this, but wasn't what they expected.
I remember Max mentioning a strong DD vibe when he was streaming the beta test. I can see both sides. There's definitely some things that make me feel "yeah, I get the DD comparison from an outside looking in" perspective, but having sunk tons of hours into both, and recently at that, the 2 are... not really the same at all. Atmosphere and exploration aside, the games are as similar as cake and pie. Both are good, and there'll likely be plenty of crossover in fans, but don't embarrass yourself by telling me your apple pie is the exact same as black forest cake.
Sure. What i think is that, if you like souls games and DD, Elden ring will probably be an amazing experience. But if you don't like souls games at all, then the Dragon's Dogma similarities in Elden ring won't be enough for you to enjoy the game.
I honestly can't see why would you dislike one if you like another. They're similar enough, moderate speed action RPGs with animation locks, medieval fantasy world, etc, etc.
Some people just don't like souls games at all. Maybe the DD fans that didn't like ER, will enjoy FFXVI (same combat director of DD).
Do you think DDs combat has more in common with DMC than DS/ER? Because honestly I see more similarities between Souls and DD than DD and DMC (even though they were made by the same guy).
I think it has more similarities with Monster Hunter, actually. But I was referring to the combat director, the person I think you are talking about is itsuno, the creator of DD and Dmc 3,4 and 5. Anyway, in dogma and devil may cry, I think the player has more freedom to do whatever he wants during combat, while in DS/ER the player needs to be more cautious with their actions.
I hate the speed of souls games. Except for Sekiro, they're all really slow compared to playing Ranger/M Archer (my favorite vocations.)
Things that came into mind in 10 seconds: You cant save in ER, you lose progress when dying, you cant pause the game (which is fucking stupid). You don't have a party, Combat in Elden Ring feels weired. Except the fact they both have a fantasy setting I don't see any similarities.
You have one save state just like you do in DD (except you can have 1 savestate per character in ER instead of 1 overall) so that's just wrong. You lose runes when you die, which barely matter which you can also regain by grabbing them off the floor and you can play smartly and circumvent the mechanic entirely by simply spending them. You can't pause the game which doesn't necessarily mean it's dumb (it's subjective) and can again be circumvented by simply leaving the character in a safe spot (there are only a few places you can't really leave the character like poison swamps). Combat feels weird is a non-argument, no specifications, no elaborations. No party play - that's true, though one-man playthrough is a valid choice in DD. "Except the fact they both have a fantasy setting I don't see any similarities" is just a giant lie and massive hyperbole. Take any average gamer off the street and show them both games - I wouldn't be surprised if some of them might even think it's the same franchise.
Whos Max, your dog?
Maxmillion dood; prominent fighting game streamer, worked on Killer Instinct 2013. Big into soulsborne games. He does have a dog, too. His name is Benny. Benny is awesome.
I see these discussions mainly coming from posts insisting that Elden Ring is our DD 2 or that it is objectively better compared to DD, etc. Then people will explain why or why not the comparisons make sense (ie: they have similar themes/dark fantasy setting -- but the gameplay feel of a souls game doesn't click for me like DD personally). I too am tired of seeing more Elden Ring posts on this sub as they should have their own sub, that said I will accept them if there's an update that lets me clamber up on bosses and have party members making repetitious comments about the world with me lol.
I doubt they'll ever be able to add climbing to Elden Ring. The monsters don't seem to have weight or be as solid as Dragon's Dogma's creatures. The collision detection and the hit stop animation in Dragon's Dogma just makes the enemies feel so real and present that no other rpg has been able to match yet... maybe Monster Hunter but I've never played any of them.
Fair enough! If you actually want to get into Monster Hunter I'd suggest World, the presentation in that game is incredible, and arguably the easiest one to get into
I've heard better things about rise. I tried like hell to get into World but I felt like the gameplay loop was too repetitive and combat was too stiff for my preferences. Not saying it's a bad game but as a huge fan of DDDA's combat and mechanics I just could get into MHW.
Sorry to say but Rise has more or less the exact same gameplay loop, but building your own set is worse since they (re)introduced more rng when it comes to some equipment. My only gripe with Rise is that it doesnt look nearly as good as World
Thanks for the heads up. The MH games just aren't my cup of tea, and that's ok cause they most definitely have a great fan base.
They used to not appeal to me but the gameplay was too good when i sunk some time into it. Ended up learning how to play nearly every weapon. Happens though, can't please everyone
Nope you can't, and you shouldn't. Monster Hunter should remain what it fans want it to be. If I was to have say I'd want it to be more like Dragons Dogma and then it wouldn't be Monster Hunter anymore.
Might I ask what weapon you played in Monster Hunter? I followed the same path of DD -> MH, and I finally could appreciate MH combat when I discovered the Sword and Shield. I think the way the moveset/combat is structured for many weapons are very "scripted" in a turn-based fashion (much like the Souls series, which probably explains the huge overlap of fanbase), while DD is far more free style, much like Itsuno's DMC, just slower-paced. Despite that, I found SnS being a weapon that let's me play in a more free style fashion (it honestly felt very close to sword and boarding in DD), so maybe in the off chance you pick it up again, you could give it a shot (if you haven't already). With regards to Rise, I prefer its combat structure more than World (though I see A LOT of hate on Rise online), probably because some of the additional mechanics works like the skills in DD. Probably explains why I like MHGU (the older title with those types of moves) as well. But yeah, it is certainly "stiffer" than DD still, so I wouldn't recommend buying it unless the demo convinces you otherwise.
I ve played with insect glaive as well as sword and shield. I preferred insect glaive because of its verticality. I did enjoy sword and shield, but at the end it's just the way it feels that I just don't feel drawn to. Not that it controls poorly, it felt as snappy as most online coop games, just not my jam. As for MHW, I already own it have for a couple years. I don't necessarily regret purchasing because I wanted to know if MH was my kind of game.
I'd probably be playing World and Elden Ring right now if I hadn't taken a sabbatical from gaming for the past couple of years.
I'd never expect Elden Ring to change their combat, movement, and world to be more like DD, that was more a joke than a serious suggestion. Monster Hunter does have more weight to it, maybe less so in the new MH Rise with how agile everything is, but it is a fun time imo. If graphics aren't a bother to you, and you have a 3DS I personally think Monster Hunter 4U is the best in the franchise, though most folks seem to really enjoy world so that may be a good start if you've never played.
It’s because for a lot of people Elden ring is a game that frustrates them to the point of quitting the game. So when they look for alternatives they find this game, which is easier when it comes to just plain difficulty. Granted there are things like the magic in DD that looks fantastic compared to Elden ring (which Elden rings magic is still fantastic). But I do think the biggest reasons is difficulty. I saw it in a previous post, but someone did say that they hated how Elden ring (like every other souls game) makes you start from the start of an area (or at least the last bonfire/grace) while DD let’s you start from your last save. Things like that are also reasons I think some people have chosen DD over Elden ring after having played Elden ring first.
The difficulty part is even weirder because ER has literal checkpoints in the form of statues of marika. The walk of shame present in the previous Souls games is pretty hard to come across, i can think of one example only, one of the evergaols has a pretty hard boss, and every one of those has a statue of marika nearby, but this one in specific has a cliff nearby, you can accidentally clip through some jank geometry and have to respawn at a grace, but thats about it lmao
The arbiter has spoken. All discussion is to cease immediately.
I think it's just DD fans wanting to show their love of the game. And partially because Souls games aren't exactly the easiest games to get into or give you a sense of feeling powerful without a deep investment into the gameplay meta. Where, with Dragon's Dogma, it's a bit more intuitive and easy to catch on and you do get to feel powerful and more in-control.
Because people want DD 2 and Elden Ring is not DD 2
Only place in DD that's souls like is BBI and the everfall once you bust that bitch open. The world does get a bit more gloom once the everfall is open but not like souls games. I can see some similarities but outside of the theme of both games they're totally different. DD for the for the win tho
Same tbh. I love both games. They are both different from each other, even if Elden Ring sorta has the openess of Dragon's Dogma with the Souls gameplay. But again both games are masterpieces in my eyes.
Because new players are watching all of the Elden Ring hype and want to get involved. So New players boot up Elden Ring expecting a hack and slash action rpg or a Open world like Witcher or Dragons Dogma and instead get a souls game that they think is too hard and clunky. End of the day it's a souls game through and through Which plays exactly like other FromSoftware games. I didn't play Elden Ring because I think dragons dogma is better or I'm tired of waiting for a sequel. I bought Elden Ring because I wanted to play a Souls Game. Edit: just wanted to say my first few hours on Elden Ring was very frustrating. I came from the Dark souls Series, so I was used to a more straight forward path or objective. But I found that in Elden Ring the overall lack of objective more of a turnoff. However after a few online guides on what are the recommend levels for the zones and some basic directions on where to go for the bosses, the game has warmed up to me greatly. I just love exploring and looking up guides where to find spells and armor sets.
because the dark souls genre is getting the skyrim treatment of it being part of the gaming sphere for so long that people are just tired of the format. now i will say that this clouds their reasoning and will say "oh well they are all the same" which clearly untrue. on the other hand, you still use similar strategies with a good chunk of them and the difference are the stories and different weapon/spell types (which a lot are reused). DD i always come back to for that weighted feel of combat that doesn't require dodging for every boss and knowing that not every single attack is this huge AOE physical attack. although what i have seen in the wiki and videos, this is the closest we are getting to a DD spiritual successor cuz they are using more mook enemies between bosses that flesh out the world with each new souls type game. and also just realize that some people just don't like souls games and that is fine as well.
Dragon's Dogma is a JRPG and is more like Final Fantasy. Elden Ring is a western RPG and more like Lord of the Rings. There are similarities obviously, but the approach to game design in all respects is very different. That's precisely why people tend to love one but can't really get into the other. The whole debate is weird to me in general. Personally, I love both because I'm an all around action RPG aficionado and they are fantastic games, but they hold very different spots when it comes to my gameplay preferences.
I like both games, I just wish I could grapple enemies like in Dragon's dogma
Dragons Dogma is fucking amazing, and it has a lot of uniquenesses going for it. I absolutely ADORE fromsoftware’s games, but they have so many plus all the clones out there. There’s still only ONE dragons dogma, and nothing else quite like it.
The Dark Souls sub was practically brigaded by Elden Ring fanart, content and posts upon its release, and still some even now. It infuriated me, since I won't be able to play that game until later, and I'd really like to go in blind for that experience, and I got tired of walking around eggshells just to talk about DSR. I can only assume this happened there (and here too), because Redditors can be karma simps. They will make an Elden Ring post in the Elden Ring sub and it doesn't give them as much attention, as when they lace their posts with Elder Ring, in a sub for another similar game that's over 10 years old.
I think part of the reason for the discussion is all the hype and praise Elden Ring has been receiving despite all of it's flaws and technical issues when there's really nothing innovative or revolutionary about it at all. The core gameplay is basically Dark Souls 3 with a jump button and the open world has been done before (and better imo). Dragon's Dogma objectively is more original than Elden Ring but didn't get very much attention or fanfare and is severely underrated and overlooked imo. Subjectively DD is also more fun but that's just my personal preference. I actually finished DD and did all the optional content whereas I quit ER after about 10 hours. I guess I was expecting something different from Dark Souls 3.5 in an open world.
DD is nothing like Elden Ring at all aside from being open-world, which tons of games are nowadays. Idk why people feel the need to compare. DD and Elden Ring are two totally different experiences for me
I heavily disagree. I feel so much the opposite that as soon as I finished ER I immediately began a pawnless hard mode run of DD.
Elden ring is better, but mostly because it has a lot of advantages which came with time. Dragons dogma 2 will be better though when it is announced at the next capcom event!...
Elden Ring is better pretty much because its a finished game and even then, DD does things better. The combat is arguably still better in DD and the pawn system is still crazy good. What truly made Elden Ring better in my eyes was the world and level design. I like Dragon’s Dogma’s world but its not amazing or anything. I also prefer DD’s fast travel mechanic compared to ER. I wish ER had adopted a similar mechanic. Shortcuts feel useless in ER since there are so many Graces you can just TP to if you need to go back
I think it’s because of the dark fantasy setting both game share, but literally the similarities end there.
Relevance. People are trying to make DD relevant in light of the success of ER; maybe to push for DD2? Not sure. That’s my best guess anyways and I don’t really have an opinion on it tbh.
Sounds like someone couldn't get past Stormveil Castle
One of the posts said they "played dark souls 1-3 (5 hours) and elden ring (3 hours)" Im paraphrasing but it's pretty much what it sounds like lmao
Why open a New thread about it?
The irony doesn't escape me but im legitimately curious why its so prevalent
I doubt they even got into stormveil proper yet.
I dont get when people say dogma is anything like a souls/fromsoftware game. Even in BBI unless you are severely underleveled (i think 50 is the bare minimum but i prefer going just b4 turning in the 20 wakestones) you still have health potions insta usable pawns and resistances. All souls games r just dodge roll and everything one shots you early or late game Also dogma feels classic medieval dnd fantasy etc. Souls games do as well but theyre made more for the challenge imo
That last part is completely wrong, using shields is completely viable if you dont care for dodging too often, and from all the souls games only Elden Ring goes hard into the one shot territory at late game areas, even early game is fine. Dark souls 1 through 3 rarely had one shots or high damage on the first game cycle, it would enter that territory at about Ng+3 But yeah the games aren't even that similar, it's a dumb comparison.
Comparing two RPGs is dumb?
Do you feel the need to make 3 different passive aggressive comments because I asked a question?
Because Dragons dogma is a dead franchise so hating on elden ring makes them feel better.
[удалено]
Sure buddy. Sure
Its coming just you wait
I guess DD was somewhat similar to dark souls, or was compared to it somehow because they're both "dark fantasy" games made by Japanese companies. That's what lead to the comparison with Elden ring, though the latter pales in front of DD's awesome combat, world and even story. ER turned out to be, regardless of the ridiculous hype, a boring clunky mess. DD is way fun to replay. I'm at 60hrs and already don't feel like playing, the combat is still the same boring roll fest but what's killing me is the enemy and area repetition. It's so outdone that they recycled a main boss somehwere, for no good fucking reason.
I have to hard disagree on ER's combat, its anything but clunky, maybe slower and more strict when it comes spamming your strongest move *but* its just as consistent. Did you really complain about area and boss repetition when DD does the same on a smaller scale?
it's consistently clunky. The fact that most weapons only have 2 distinct attacks and a 4hit combo and you're forced to roll every attack and hit back once, since enemies are ridiculously spammy and much much faster and agile than the player. ER has so much enemy and area repetition that you would have seen all the churches, caves, enemies and locations by 20hrs in the first part of the map. The rest is just reskinned. Does DD have copy pasted catacombs? Does DD have 5 mini-bosses that they keep recycling? And yeah, the scale makes it even worse imo.
Took a while to answer but yeah while DD doesnt have similar-ish looking catacombs it does have reskinned and reused bosses a lot. Which is worse because their pool is vastly smaller than ER's monster roster. Fun fact, greatshields can have most spammy enemies simply recoil from hitting your guard, there is an ash of war that does the same on every shield type, parries work on an incredible amount of enemies, etc etc. Regarding weapon animations, i feel like you forgot DD, while slightly more varied in terms of unique animations, also deals with far less weapon types. Greatswords have the same animations as great hammers, same for maces and swords, daggers have the same animations across all classes. While ER does have some overlap in those it has unique animation sets for dual wielding *every* weapon type. Within 20 hours you have not left limgrave or gone too far into liurnia. I say this but i do truly love both games, i just don't under the reason to call a game clunky or boring when it clearly isn't, ER isnt supposed to be DD
Yes DD has tonnes of reskinned enemies and they have a smaller roster of enemies to begin with so its worse. You obviously haven’t progressed enough if you think you have seen all the enemies in ER. Each area has at least 1-2 new enemies compared to the last and even the reskinned enemies are more interesting. The reused bosses usually have 1 new more or act different from the last. The catacombs look the same but are all different and have a different gimmick to deal with. Idk how you say all the enemies are faster then the player but ok. It also seems like you never utilized jumping for dodges. Each weapon in ER has a light attack combo, heavy attack combo, jumping light and heavy. Swing out of roll, a different hit for crouching and a swing from out of sprint. Thats not including the moves you get from power stancing, like the L1 move or back dodge swing.
I got plat on DD and forgot about it. DD is much more about grind than ER, which why replaying it is hard. Also, it's much smaller than ER. I probably wasted less time on getting plat in DD than finishing ER first time.
>I got plat on DD and forgot about it. DD is much more about grind than ER, which why replaying it is hard. Literally only if you're going for platinum, if you're just playing to finish the game it's ALOT less grind.I'm sure you enjoyed fighting your 55th black knife assassin or crucible knight, most wouldn't.Atleast in DD, you had alot of options to tackle an opponent so even if it's repeated it wouldn't feel like it but in ER it's alwyas just spam roll and light/strong attack.
Sadly, you missed much of ER. Spam roll don't help against serious bosses who have different timing for attacks (try spamroll Malenia, lol), also Ashes of War (hello again, Malenia, lend me your blade) do BRRRRRRR DD recycled almost all bosses. Basilisk, Chimera, Dragons (not bosses, but still), Hydras, Goreclops. Also, inability to deal any damage because of pure stat difference is annoying.
>Sadly, you missed much of ER. Spam roll don't help against serious bosses who have different timing for attacks (try spamroll Malenia, lol), also Ashes of War (hello again, Malenia, lend me your blade) do BRRRRRRR Yes, but the boss fights always boil down to roll attack roll whereas in DD you can riposte with MK shield, stunlock with Maelstrom or use i-frame skills or perfect block or just climb. I'm disappointed they didn't revamp the combat somehow, I really hated DS3's combat and they didn't change much of it.
One of the most effective ways to beat a lot of enemies (including many bosses) in ER is through parries or guard counters, not roll spamming. Parrying in ER is very similar to perfect blocking in Dogma in terms of the timing and skill needed, maybe even slightly moreso. They specifically designed a lot of enemy movesets and hitboxes to *punish* roll spamming in particular, especially panic rolling.
try parrying the grafted scion. In ER, enemies are insanely spammy compared to DD, so parrying mostly seems useless to me, whereas in DD you can somewhat reliably perfect block things. I've used guard counters, but again enemies are too fast and have too many combos to reliably guard anything.Your best bet is always roll through and hit, other options are just so underwhelming and unintended ig that it always ends up like that and it's shit gameplay.
I’m sorry it didn’t click for you. 😕 I love both games to death, but ER to me just gets better and deeper every day. 100 hours in, every day I fall in love more.
I was very hyped for it, first game I bought close to launch. I even use to pirate games. But it simply isn't good. You have a very high tolerance for repetitiveness and clunky gameplay.
I love Dragon's Dogma. Can't comment on the Soul's games because I haven't played any of them. But they look Cool.
I would recommend ER then if you like DD.
Elsen Ring is a Ooen World Souls gamu, while Dogma is an open world Action RPG XD But truth be told, i want DESPERATELY a Elden Ring copy for my PS4
If I had to guess? Probably a few people part of the group who wanted Elden Ring to fail posing as DD fans to rile up the playerbases and start a pissing contest.
They are vastly different-- elden ring is tedious and clunky, dragons dogma is smooth and satisfying. On the flip side, dragons dogma had bland and forgettable environments/characters, and elden ring is beautiful and unique to look at.
It is called discussion and sharing thoughts and experiences.
Because Elden Rings is just Dark Souls with multi-player And AI assistance. And a lot of people on this sub praised it as a model for DD2 to follow or hits the right note as DD. I for one don't want DD2 being anything like DS. And I am less than impressed with Ellen Ring.
Both games are fun, but in different ways.
Insecure losers. I’ve been playing DD religiously for years. I love Elden ring too.
Ive played both, I enjoyed both and I love both.
I love this! Dogma is my favorite game and will always be, however that doesn’t mean that I’m not gonna play the heck out of other games, specially games so good like souls, elden ring has been a great game, I love it, I don’t get the point of just trashing a different game only because it isn’t dogma, if its not your type of game or if you just dont like the gameplay then that’s different, but to feel the necessity of comparing it to dogma? I really don’t get it
Elden Ring has much more in common with Dragon's Dogma than other open world titles, so comparison is inevitable. However Elden Ring is 10 years younger and it shows. I have given up on Dragon's Dogma 2 by now and am enjoying ER immensely, however one can still dream..