-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
I liked Dragon's Dogma PC better than Dark Souls 3 this year
- Thread starter Imp the Dimp
- Start date
I don't remember having to really concern myself with gear until the middle parts of Bitterback Isle. And even then I was able to complete BBI with a mix of regular and tier 1 BBI loot. The post-game can become a gear grind if you let it, but I was doing fine finishing up achievements with a mix of tier 2 and some tier 3.
I wasn't wild about the stamina to weight/inventory system, but it didn't stop me from having a good time. The good news is that there's a mod that can remove it on pc for people that don't like it.
toddhunter
Member
Dragons Dogma is only good if you are prepared to focus on the strong aspects and ignore the massive flaws. You need to ignore the broken inventory management, the limited pawn system, the lack of balance once you level up a bit, the poor sense of progression, the mediocre quests, the worse than mediocre quests like escorting people around town, the lack of story, the lack of characterisation, the repetitive locations and enemies, having to walk the same paths over and over even with fast travel and most of all having to stop every three seconds because your fucking stamina makes you run like an asthmatic who has a rather nasty flu.
All that aside it is a good game.
All that aside it is a good game.
Luckily on PC there are mods that remove inventory management (no weight limit) and stamina while running. These went a long way in making the game faster and less tedious.
Hellraider
Member
There is a big misconception on what Dragon's Dogma nails, and where it fails. DD doesn't have a combat second to none. It has a character control that is second to none. Movement, platforming, animation (as a combat mechanism) all of these are excellent.
The game is really underwhelming, and sometimes plain terrible, when it comes to so many things related to its combat and gameplay in general. The way consumables work break the game from the start. The way statistics work make enemy encounters extremely unbalanced from the very first to the very last. Enemies themselves are also very few and with painfully few archetypes. Character progression never works as it should. Pawns, as great as they can be once in a while, are extremely counterproductive most of the time.
Joseph Anderson's video that has already been posted explains everything perfectly. It is a good game but with many and pretty vital flaws. I fear that the way we usually praise it, something that probably even I have done, may be setting some wrong expectations to those who plan to play the game.
I disagree, because while the game had its quirks it really is a sum of its parts -- the whole game is entertaining through and through. The boss battles were a delight, and the post-end game continuum has some of the best dungeon-crawling I've had the pleasure of playing. There's is no design flaw that breaks the whole game... And to your point, it's immensely satisfying to zip through the world because the controls are very, very good.
CAPCOM pls. Make a sequel!
Reizo Ryuu
Member
I have to laugh at the "no skill" comments, I'm sure fighting a living armour in the sewers, while your lantern is out, while an executioner is trying to bull rush you and a gore ogre/death just spawned in requires "no skill".
I wouldn't even call dark souls entirely skill based either, if at all; sure skill is a huge factor in pvp, but the pve encounters are very simple ignorance exploitation.
This is most evident with the very first boss in dks1, the asylum demon.
You can just run and ignore the encounter, or you can stay, die a couple of times to figure out the patterns, and then just maul it.
In fact, after beating dks once, I ran through it naked with just a club and had little trouble.
The challenge in dks comes from player ignorance, not from truly skill based gameplay, especially so because you can die in a few hits (or a surprise enemy that pops up from around a corner/ceiling/balcony). Dark souls is built around trial and error, "prepare to die", mistakes are punished severely. I remember Gwyn being moderately difficult, until I figured out you can just parry him to death, so much for skill.
It's not like certain character action games that truly require a sense of mastery before you can progress to a more difficult setting or secret bosses; Father Rodin in bayonetta? Hardest boss I've probably ever fought in any character action based game ever, bosses in Souls? Ehh, just look for the animation where it has the most recovery.
There are definitely encounters in DD where skill comes into play big time (heck make a wrong turn early in the game and you'd get mauled by regular bandits), especially on BBI, but the game wasn't made for constantly punishing the player.
Anyway
Another thing I absolutely love in DD, true darkness
Don't have a lantern? Well, you might just walk right into some crazy encounter.
Heck my very first experience with this was with the demo on 360, I was just goofing around waiting for nighttime, and a griffin attacked, instantly sold on the game from that point.
Yes these are all just beautiful.
I wouldn't even call dark souls entirely skill based either, if at all; sure skill is a huge factor in pvp, but the pve encounters are very simple ignorance exploitation.
This is most evident with the very first boss in dks1, the asylum demon.
You can just run and ignore the encounter, or you can stay, die a couple of times to figure out the patterns, and then just maul it.
In fact, after beating dks once, I ran through it naked with just a club and had little trouble.
The challenge in dks comes from player ignorance, not from truly skill based gameplay, especially so because you can die in a few hits (or a surprise enemy that pops up from around a corner/ceiling/balcony). Dark souls is built around trial and error, "prepare to die", mistakes are punished severely. I remember Gwyn being moderately difficult, until I figured out you can just parry him to death, so much for skill.
It's not like certain character action games that truly require a sense of mastery before you can progress to a more difficult setting or secret bosses; Father Rodin in bayonetta? Hardest boss I've probably ever fought in any character action based game ever, bosses in Souls? Ehh, just look for the animation where it has the most recovery.
There are definitely encounters in DD where skill comes into play big time (heck make a wrong turn early in the game and you'd get mauled by regular bandits), especially on BBI, but the game wasn't made for constantly punishing the player.
Anyway
Another thing I absolutely love in DD, true darkness
Don't have a lantern? Well, you might just walk right into some crazy encounter.
Heck my very first experience with this was with the demo on 360, I was just goofing around waiting for nighttime, and a griffin attacked, instantly sold on the game from that point.
Yes these are all just beautiful.
Hellraider
Member
We don't disagree, since that's exactly what I also believe. There is the groundwork for a sequel, that not a #2 game in a franchise doesn't wish it had. They also got pretty much everything right with Dark Arisen, but that very same groundwork that would work wonders on a sequel held the expansion back. Besides budget.
SmoothRunningGun
Member
I wanted to like it but the combat never felt good to me. I definitely prefer ds3.
You've gone way off the rails here, mate. The game didn't click with you and that's fine but trying to tear down the combat, which is almost universally praised, seems misguided. As an aside I really, really liked the world it's set in. You say plain, I say grounded. I'd take DD's authentic feeling countryside over Elder Scrolls medieval fantasy theme park any day.
Riposte
Member
Dragon's Dogma is a brilliant game held back by a lot of stupid decisions. The progression system is simply inexcusable and can ruin the combat a lot of the time (it even discourages switching classes!). I wouldn't even say it was a top 10 game of the year it came out (but close), let alone competing with a Souls game which to be locked in somewhere in there. Dark Souls III is much more competent, if less inventive.
EDIT: Dragon's Dogma is like the creators of Devil May Cry and Monster Hunter looked at Skyrim and said "Hmm, how do we make a game as bad as that?".
EDIT: Dragon's Dogma is like the creators of Devil May Cry and Monster Hunter looked at Skyrim and said "Hmm, how do we make a game as bad as that?".
Nah, I think my comment is a pretty accurate assessment of combat in DD. It's not a skill based action RPG, and I've explained why I say this repeatedly. Its combat is much closer to Skyrim than it is to Dark Souls, but Skyrim has a lot more going for it than combat...and DD has nothing else.
This is bit of a weird post. Just so I get you right, when you are saying you played through Dark Souls naked with just a club I assume you did the whole "soul level 1 run" thingie? Are you also claiming it took no skill to do? If so, that is some next level hidden brag posting.
Reizo Ryuu
Member
That's not what I'm saying, I'm saying as soon as the ignorance is gone from the encounter, most of souls is pretty easy.
Whereas if I boot up bayonetta to fight father rodin right now, he'd probably destroy me.
a very cute dog
Member
Dragon's Dogma has EXCELLENT combat and great character customization, but the quests and world are so bland I couldn't stick with it. I know it's supposed to get better post-game and with the expansion, but the setting was so devoid of personality I didn't think it was worth trudging through to get to the "good stuff."
EDIT: To keep this more on-topic, I enjoyed Dark Souls 3 more, despite how much it felt like a re-tread; it was just so much more lively and "crafted" in a sense, even if it was mostly more of the same.
EDIT: To keep this more on-topic, I enjoyed Dark Souls 3 more, despite how much it felt like a re-tread; it was just so much more lively and "crafted" in a sense, even if it was mostly more of the same.
Lanrutcon
Member
Your post makes my head hurt.
I get that the Souls games are beloved around these parts, but some of you are trying a bit too hard here. There's room for both games to exist without having to resort to crazy crazy comparisons to make DS3 look better.
Riposte
Member
I would easily put Dragon's Dogma above Skyrim in term of aesthetics and world, even if the pay off is a ways off. You can improve DD by ignoring 95% of side-quests, while Skyrim runs sub-mediocre the whole way through. Running through Gransys at night the first few times is more exciting than pretty much anything you'll do in Skyrim (although the first or second dragon can compete). If you are lucky and your stats match the encounter (or is only below by a reasonable extent), you do get something pretty amazing - this is never true for Skyrim, combat is never close to that good. (I did have some fun using bows and illusions during first dungeon when the balance was totally against my favor though).
Can't agree in the slightest. Whiterun, Markarth, and Riften off the top of my head were all more visually interesting, had more character, had more interesting NPCs, quests, music...the list goes on. I remember first reaching Gransys and thinking "This is kinda bland, I wonder what the other cities in the game will be like". Haha.
As for encounters, I'll give you one thing, before the veil is lifted, DD certainly seems thrilling. It didn't take long before I realized all was doing was spamming light attacks until I had stamina to do a flashier one, and then that all I really needed to do to become good at the game was simply be at an adequate level and have proper gear, and that there was no real "improving" in DD, just progressing, like in Skyrim.
Did you ever happen to fight the living armours on Bitterblack Isle or anything there really? Are aiming for weak points on the fly; traversing monsters to hit said weak points without being thrown; stamina management; risk/reward of trying to land a high damage spell with crazy long cast time in a frantic melee; avoiding monsters who go berserk etc not considered skill-based? Which aspect of these things is like Skyrim to you?
See previous posts for answers.
OnimaruXLR
Member
Dragon's Dogma is good but I'd rank it below every Souls game except DS2
A Dragon's Dogma sequel could've been a contender. If they had a chance to refine and improve things...
But sadly, the series is doomed to rot in obscurity while Capcom tries to reinvigorate Resident Evil for a 3rd time and milks Monster Hunter until it's giant, scaly teats run dry
A Dragon's Dogma sequel could've been a contender. If they had a chance to refine and improve things...
But sadly, the series is doomed to rot in obscurity while Capcom tries to reinvigorate Resident Evil for a 3rd time and milks Monster Hunter until it's giant, scaly teats run dry
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
Yeah, I expected something good.
Jokes aside, I guess I expected a game with an interesting world that's worth exploring.
Augemitbutter
Member
been on the DD train since day one. it was good exploring the game with the community when there was no info out there. i maxed 3 characters, which took around 200 hours.
there is no better rpg out there if you're into archery or assasin type gameplay. best controls to date for both jrpg and wrpg.
berserk cosplay is love.
bring this game back. we want DD2.
there is no better rpg out there if you're into archery or assasin type gameplay. best controls to date for both jrpg and wrpg.
berserk cosplay is love.
bring this game back. we want DD2.
Lux R7
Member
DD is one of the few games of my heart.
Also:
1) Best combat in a action open world rpg (but also action rpg in general) with Souls.
2) Best Magic
3) Best Archery
4) Best Griffin- Hydra - Dragon - Chimera - Cyclops and many other big famous fantasy beasts in every action rpg.
5) One of the best CCs.
And i'm surely forgetting something else.
Also:
1) Best combat in a action open world rpg (but also action rpg in general) with Souls.
2) Best Magic
3) Best Archery
4) Best Griffin- Hydra - Dragon - Chimera - Cyclops and many other big famous fantasy beasts in every action rpg.
5) One of the best CCs.
And i'm surely forgetting something else.
Well, you didn't really answer any of my questions in the post. You say you just spam light attacks until you had stamina to do a heavy one but I've given many examples of things that happen besides that. The closest I can come to understanding your viewpoint is that the base game does become very easy when you level up a lot. But you only need to go to BBI to see the combat system shine when the difficulty is ramped up.
Ganondorfo
Junior Member
What happened to Capcom, this game doesnt even have a sequel. Back in the day Capcom made 4 sequels to every franchise (Onimusha, Devil May Cry, Megaman, Resident Evil, ...)
I explain why I think I said DD's combat is not skill based over multiple post throughout the thread. I even provide video proof explaining it. I even answered your question regarding Bitterblack Isle in a previous post (I've only completed the vanilla title, never bothered with Dark Arisen).
Oh man you're missing out if you haven't played DA+BBI, even as someone who wasn't thrilled with the base game. BBI is the best showcase of the combat system, and it's where your character builds really come under pressure. Even as someone with high expectations for ARPG combat systems, like you sound like you are, the BBI experience is worth the price of admission. It's a lot of fun.
Forget about the comparisons to the Souls series, DD's BBI is really something special, and could have been a stand alone game.
Sanctuary
Member
I just don't see how, unless the only other ARPG he's enjoyed was from the Souls series. There's literally nothing else out there that has combat like either of these two games, and both are fun for very different reasons. Not every game has to be as rote as the Souls series to have fun combat. I don't disagree with the complaints about the world itself, the general aesthetic, the inventory, the story or any of the other flaws. They will be worse depending on what you're comparing it to and how much it really matters. The combat and exploration was so fun that those flaws didn't prevent me from wanting to keep playing. Conversely, one of the most praised RPGs recently around here just bores me to tears.
Father Rodin is not representative of Bayonetta's difficulty though. The game is not particularly hard even on Infinite Climax.
I can understand those saying they prefer the open world of Dragon's Dogma versus that of Skyrim, though I prefer Cyrodiil to that anyway. Gransys has a different quality about it. I see bleak and realistic rather than bland. The coastline areas are great and nighttime actually does feel like actual nighttime! I do wish it was larger though, with more cities and villages. I really enjoyed exploring what is there but I wanted more of it, because it's the first open-world fantasy game I've played in ages that gave me a real sense of adventure. I loved the game for that just as much as I loved it for the hugely entertaining combat.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
What a silly hyperbole. Dragon's Dogma is great, but the only thing it truly does better than Souls games is the character creator, the archery, the magic, and the monster weak part/climbing bit. Souls games have better level design, balance/difficulty, monster design, art direction, etc.
Battlechili
Banned
If I don't like Dark Souls because of how slow the combat is and because of how little direction it gives on where to go when, would I like Dragon's Dogma?
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
I don't even know why they get compared since they are very different. Go for it.
dragonlife
Member
Combat is faster, yes. You can also consult a map if you're lost.
Eppy Thatcher
God's had his chance.
You'll appreciate the combat immensely. It's closer to good character action games at times than anything present in DS and the magic system/visual style is head and shoulders above a majority of other action rpgs...
The direction part though? DD can be just as and sometimes more obtuse with it's missions and story structure. You won't really have a hard time navigating towards the end of the main story line but it's incredibly easy and quite common on your first few plays through the game to just completely miss rather large and involved side quests. In some instances you won't even know they are there until you check a very odd box of conditions.
I have infinitely more fun just putzing around in Dragon's Dogma for whatever that's worth.
Battlechili
Banned
All right, I'll give it a try, thanks. Its not just that not knowing where to go for Dark Souls; it was also getting destroyed by enemies I'm not ready to fight yet by wandering into places I'm not supposed to be that bugged me. As long as I can avoid that and have much faster, more action-y combat, I'm happy.
Sanctuary
Member
Name a single AAA "RPG" (or any really) that didn't have brain-dead/boring combat since last gen. So many games would benefit from having combat like this. It's not "hardcore" (neither is it in Souls, but people will claim that it is anyway), but it's not mash X to win or a game that relies on dated first-person shooter mechanics, and it also doesn't feel janky.
manfestival
Member
bought dark arisen on the last sale... didnt care to play the post game content... ESPECIALLY not newgame + but I did greatly enjoy the game despite a bunch of weird anime stuff not making sense in the usual way.
there is nothing about Souls combat that is objectively better than DD. Quit the opposite for the most part actually and I consider Dark souls 1 the best game of all time.
I fit weren't for the huge amount of weapons in DS, it would have more repetitive combat style than DD by default.
Hell what can you do combat wise in DS that you can't do in DD? Souls have more weapon variety and that's all.
With the options to cut monsters parts and climbing them DD even feels less repetitive than Souls to me.
Again I like Souls more than DD(except for DS2/3), but calling DD's combat repetitive compared to Souls just doesn't fly with me.
edit: DD does have bad story and worse open world. I don't know about art style and music though. DS3 has weak enemy designs Souls wise and I vastly like the ones in DD more.
Slick Butter
Member
Dragon's Dogma is great, I don't find it to be replayable at all, though. Which is a shame, because I wish to use the magic system, since I was mostly only an Assassin the first time around.
I found Dark Souls 3 to be way better, and that was a surprise after Dark Souls 2 (which I also enjoy more than Dragon's Dogma), but Dragon's Dogma isn't really similar enough to be compared to the Souls games. Maybe little bit more comparable to the Elder Scrolls games.
I'd say the combat is worse than Souls, but they are incredibly different, I just find the combat in DDDA to be unsatisfying.
The game was also so incredibly easy, but BitterBlack Isle is pretty damn tough, so that's good. Lots of repeating rooms, though.
The overworld felt very sparse and empty to me, and it makes me appreciate Skyrim's world way more than I did initially.
Also, this game had a lot cut, I think mostly for budgeting and time reasons. I know most games do, but there was so much crazy shit planned for this game, based on the artbook. It desperately needs a sequel that has more of what was planned for the original.
There are clearly still some interesting things left in the game though, like the Ur Dragon, the Everfall, the Pawn system, and the ending and story of the game in general.
I'd say the PC release is the 3rd best game to come out this year, after Dark Souls 3 and DOOM.
I found Dark Souls 3 to be way better, and that was a surprise after Dark Souls 2 (which I also enjoy more than Dragon's Dogma), but Dragon's Dogma isn't really similar enough to be compared to the Souls games. Maybe little bit more comparable to the Elder Scrolls games.
I'd say the combat is worse than Souls, but they are incredibly different, I just find the combat in DDDA to be unsatisfying.
The game was also so incredibly easy, but BitterBlack Isle is pretty damn tough, so that's good. Lots of repeating rooms, though.
The overworld felt very sparse and empty to me, and it makes me appreciate Skyrim's world way more than I did initially.
Also, this game had a lot cut, I think mostly for budgeting and time reasons. I know most games do, but there was so much crazy shit planned for this game, based on the artbook. It desperately needs a sequel that has more of what was planned for the original.
There are clearly still some interesting things left in the game though, like the Ur Dragon, the Everfall, the Pawn system, and the ending and story of the game in general.
I'd say the PC release is the 3rd best game to come out this year, after Dark Souls 3 and DOOM.