Wow, now i appreciate Ronin even more.
So media again, didn't even played enough, they a full of shit.
Dragon's Dogma 2 Review and |OT| "If victory is elusive, seek new allies".
- Thread starter Gamernyc78
- Start date
So media again, didn't even played enough, they a full of shit.
Knew there would be a polarizing discourse with this game once the honeymoon phase of hype leading to launch had settled down. This game isn't for everyone because of its design choices not being quality of life friendly for example. More importantly, a lot of people that were hype for DD2 never played the first one or never even heard of the first one. So as a result, they were blind by the old school gameplay and would probably be turned off by it once they've played it. And we can't forget that some folks who downplay that the low frame rate would be a concern actually came to their senses and realized that yes the technical performance is indeed bad after they had first hand experience with it on launch.Dragon's Dogma 2 Is Polarizing Its Community, And It's Not Just the Microtransactions
Dragon's Dogma 2 Is Polarizing Its Community, And It's Not Just the Microtransactions - IGN
Plenty of big, AAA releases don't stick the landing at launch. It's far rarer to see a AAA game's community genuinely divided over whether or not a game is groundbreaking or an utter disaster. But weirdly, that's what's happening with Dragon's Dogma 2.www.ign.com
Admittedly I only played a bit under 2 hours before hitting refund on Steam, but it was a bit suspicious that most of the game play clips being shared and hyped on Twitter from hacks like Gene Park and Xbot influencers are the janky and silly battles with random enemies. Gene Park in particular went on a meltdown when people were questioning his claim that DD2 has a better combat system than Elden Ring.
Idk how this game is considered short. 50h in and still trucking through. I don't think i'll put this as GOTY over rebirth. As a massive DD1 fan, i'll give this 9/10. so i can understand why the masses would walk out thinking its mid or just ok. Personally I love the medieval fantasy open world immersive simulator they are attempting here.
The issue is many of us fans of DD hated how much POTENTIAL this series had. this was out chance to see the potential fulfilled but it was squandered, because this game shares all the flaws of the first one. Still a fantastic game, but they should build upon it quicker next time, fuck waiting another decade.
that being said i think most people speaking on this title know absolutely nothing about it.
The issue is many of us fans of DD hated how much POTENTIAL this series had. this was out chance to see the potential fulfilled but it was squandered, because this game shares all the flaws of the first one. Still a fantastic game, but they should build upon it quicker next time, fuck waiting another decade.
that being said i think most people speaking on this title know absolutely nothing about it.
It does, & its not even close. Issue is, the game lacks variety of encounters compared to ER. Hell I'd even go as far as to say dd1 has better combat than elden ring.
Come on now out of those 50 hrs 20 hrs of yours must have been pointless walking back and forth between battahl and sacred arbor. Its very clear Itsuno and capcom scammed the DD fans.
Yeah, i read PowerPyx platinum trophy section, he mentioned that side quest can be that you get Quest in zone and the actual quest in another part of the map, you are back and forth all wasting hours. Takes forever to do it, there is now proper fast travel, even traversal is down bad.
The first one was like this too and I loved it for that. The journeying is literally the part that makes it fun. I don't like the fast travel meta at all. even then, once i hit about 20 hours, I have no problem paying for the fast travel, its cheap as shit. Like i said earlier, most people stomping on this game haven't even played it, or took a second to see why people like this series to begin with.
Nah man i think the traversal is immersive as hell. sorry. Look at it more like death stranding than anything else. the fun IS THE TRAVELING
Not saying this game is perfect but they definitely have a cool formula here that's UNIQUE first and foremost. Loved they stayed true to dd1 and that it's polarizing yet again
The traversal in this game drove me mad, small rivers cant be crossed- you have to trek across 5 mins to cross a bridge, mountains that cant be scaled so you go on a trek for 10 mins to traverse around the mountain all the while the same goblin+saurian+harpy love triangle is there to irritate you every 50 steps and when you reach the destination, The game fucking sends you back to where you came from. By the end I was so frustrated I wanted to murder all the beastren in battahl and call it a day
OP
OP
small rivers cant be crossed? Is it as static as FF16? I dropped it hours in because I hate worlds like tht.
No, you can’t. If you don’t like open world traveling then don’t bother with this game. It’s designed in way that is trying to get you to plan out your travels efficiently, like I said earlier, think death stranding. Or even Nier automata, you are running back and forth to the same places, but everytime you come back the world changes.
Idk what’s hard to believe that some people appreciate a game that encourages traveling rather than going in a menu and pressing X.
Yes, no swimming, no horses, running eats stamina very fast.
With all these technologies and advancements they couldn't even implement basic traveling things.
It's by design. Tech wise swimming, horses, quick travel is something that was possible in PS1. In fact in an interview Itsuno mentioned he didn't include fast travel on purpose.
They’re just gonna tell you no capcom is greedy and lied to get you to pay for mtx, when in reality it’s been a core design of Dd since 2012
OP
OP
Idc whether it was for design or not, things like not being able to go over a small creek, water bed, etc and having to run around to a bridge breaks immersion and is dumb. Devs tell ppl alot of shit of why they do things and we've learned through years don't the any of it at face value.
Games have been able to do 60fps many gens ago but by design they do not tht doesn't mean it's good.
Are you one of those people, whatever greedy, shitty, scamming things happens, you are in solidarity with your colleagues?
The guy thrown all gaming under the buss, called games uninteresting boredome slogs just to make this excuse which is laughable as people got to play it.
PR at all gaming devs expenses.
I know, in that case if the level designer doesn't want you walk over something, like a small amount of water, in terms of game design should put instead something that intuitively as player, you understand you can't walk there, like lava, a huge rock or something like that.
When you hit an invisible wall that's a level designer failure.
Yes, like since many generations ago devs can decide to aim for 60fps (or even 120fps) with way worse visuals or to aim for 30 with better ones. Sometimes they decide to chase only one of them to prioritize visuals or to prioritize fps, while in some cases they offer both options.
To do certain things have a certain performance cost and isn't realistic to have them at let's say 120fps. And well, optimization also requires time and budget. Maybe they could optimize it more but needed more time for it and couldn't delay the game more due to the available budget.
No, I just know how some things commonly work in the industry and explain them. Trying to help people who have no -or little- idea about these topics understand them. Which doesn't mean I agree or like them.
Here you have a PS1 game where you can ride horses, hope you like it:
Last edited: