Dragons Dogma - whats the problem?

[brenz]

So in light of Dark Arisen being released, I decided it was time for me to give the game a bash. I had completed every other game I wanted to of the current releases, and found the original Dragons Dogma in the bargain bin so thought why not.

Now the reviews were quite up and down, and the general views were "meh", no outright hate, but no big praise either. hence why I avoided it for so long.

I am in act 2 now and I am loving it.
Its a very cool game, nice learning curve, challenging fights, massive exploration aspects, impressive visuals, generally a lot of fun.
I have maxed out Assassin and just switched over to magick archer for a new feel, and all the combat is really fun.
My only gripe as has been said before is the constant repeating of hints and facts from the pawns, and the pawn AI is rather retarded at times, but not game breaking or enough to make to quit.

So my main thought is, why did this game not receive the praise i think it was due?

 

[JayElleBee]

I think for me, the story and setting fell very flat. The combat was amazing, even though I typically hate combat in games, and while I loved running around killing things with my pawns, it all felt very bland. I just couldn't get excited about the world or the characters. I just plain did not care.

Honestly, I'd like to replay the game again. But now that I know everything that happens, and I know that it's all underwhelming, I just can't do it.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

The combat is great, it's just that the world it inhabits is boring.

Hell, Monster Hunter has a great world, with zero story to go on, but that's enough to carry it.

 

[AgentLampshade]

Because "all roads lead to Gran Soren," the central boring hub of the game. I expected there to more cities to explore, with better shops and whatnot. You know, like an RPG.

 

[xeyra]

The problem with Dragon's Dogma is that it does not exist for PC... I really wanted to play it. I guess I'm one of the few people in the civilized world without a Playstation or Xbox.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well the only real hate I've seen for Dark Arisen is the issue of it being a minor update on the base game yet early adopters have no other choice but to re-buy it as new if they want that update... that is just not cool.

Other then that it is a very cool game, in terms of combat I'd say it set the new bar for hack&slashers, but that story and world still need fleshing out.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

So my main thought is, why did this game not receive the praise i think it was due?

The game received highly mixed reviews with the result being a rather middling metacritc score. Were I to attempt to guess at the reason, it is the result of basically two things. The first, is a set of features that tend to cause some measure of irritation. Pawns talking, the lack of fast travel system, the relatively slim number of enemies in the world and so forth all tend to produce a set of problems, irritations and inconveniences that some people are less capable of ignoring or overcoming.

The second is that much like Dark Souls, the game can be somewhat difficult to play with cheap death relatively common for the first 10 or 20 levels. And, much the same as Dark Souls, there are vast systems in the game that offer little to no explanation to how they work leaving the player to simply figure it out on their own.

The unifying thing that results in Dragon's Dogma getting a relatively middling score while Dark Souls managed to wow critics and players across the land is that Dragon's Dogma is simply an inconsistent game. It is difficult for a time and obtuse in all systems but, since brutal difficulty doesn't seem to be a consistent goal (one can simply level high enough that all enemies found in the standard game are trivial with some classes being able to one hit kill a Chimera or an Ogre) it seems almost like an oversight. The game does a poor job of explaining most of it's systems but, then, the game can be played efficiently and well with only a slim understanding of them. To use an example, your character's height and weight matter for reasons beyond cosmetic, with mass determining carrying capacity, stamina usage and stamina regen and height affecting what can be reached with a jump, how deep of water one can brave without losing lantern light and so forth. Other issues are that the story is simply presented at the start and resolved at the end with a great deal of wheel spinning in between. The bottom line is the game seems to offer inconsistent gameplay and design goals and features a number of potentially irritating design elements. While this did not produce a bad game, it does produce a polarizing one.

That said, I personally adore the game. While I can recognize the inconsistency, what is functionally a combination of Dark Souls and Monster Hunter is something that I seemed well suited to enjoy.

 

[Maxtro]

For some reason, nobody in the US and Europe bought Dragon's Dogma. That really is a shame because the game is very fun. I don't really know why it only got half the sales that Demon's Souls did.

The gameplay is great. While the enemy types are limited, there are 9 different character classes each requiring a different stratagem to use.

Story did need some work, but a lot of it did focus on world building. The only main quest I'd change/get rid of is the trial.

 

[Exius Xavarus]

I don't have any problems with Dragon's Dogma. I do, however, have a few bones to pick with Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen.

"All new, more intuitive menu system" really means "we just made it faster," as if it wasn't already fast enough to be completely functional.

There are several bugs and minor annoyances that are in Dark Arisen, that I have not once encountered in the original game.

Spoiler: Quest with Mercedes

During the end cutscene after Mecerdes' duel with Julien, Mercedes is completely missing. The scene plays out as if Mercedes was there, but she's visibly and audibly nowhere to be found. So the Arisen just looks like a doofus, standing there looking out into space for 30 seconds.

Spoiler: Quest involving a Griffin

When I finally got to Bluemoon Tower and reach the top to finish the fight with the Griffin, neither the Griffin nor Ser Georg and his entourage were anywhere to be found, rendering the quest impossible to complete, unless you restart.

NPCs and enemies now pop in. When you're running into another area of town, or where monsters are, they'll take a few seconds to load before the NPCs show up. And sometimes, enemies won't show up at all until you're right in front of them. At times, ~2 seconds after you're standing in front of them. Watergod's Altar and just before the Southern Waycastle are absolutely awful about this.

Treasure chests will often take a second or two to load, before opening for you to collect the treasure.

If not for the shiny content and that some weapons were beefed up, I'd much rather be playing the original game. Functionally, Dark Arisen is a mess compared to the original.

 

[Pulse]

It has tactical and satisfying combat, a really well done leveling system, balanced to avoid the need for grinding, and remained challenging but fair. You were only limited in where you went by the danger posed by creatures out of your league.

The reasons it didn't get the acclaim...
1. Graphics:
Like it or not, people want pretty open world games, the texture load times and amount of pop in was excessive at times.

2. Lack of character interaction:
Your character doesn't speak, emote, or come across as anything more than a passenger most of the time. Your pawns are idiotic line conveyor belts with zero sense of awareness. Everyone apart from the dragon seems hollow and characterless and you can find yourself struggling to care about them. Your choices don't seem to have any impact.

3. Map design:
You don't really notice this until about halfway through, it's essentially a corridor with a branch or two at each end. I enjoyed walking everywhere as it added to the sense of exploration, but passing the same exact few points anytime you went somewhere didn't. Also, it could've been a lot bigger.

4. No bits and bobs:
I sort of liked the fact that it had no stupid minigames(crafting/cardgames/house etc) that other rpgs/open world games have. But some people like that stuff.


As for dark arisen, I'm not getting it because it simply doesn't seem worth it.

 

[Jimmy T. Malice]

The combat is rather good, but it just seems... imprecise (I'm playing as a mage). All of the spells have really long cast times, and healing spells only healing part of your health sucks. The pawns are a good idea, but they're really bland and annoying with their repetitive lines. It would be better to just have story-based companions. And there doesn't seem to be much of a plot- you just get your heart ripped out by a dragon and then go off and do random things.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

It has tactical and satisfying combat, a really well done leveling system, balanced to avoid the need for grinding, and remained challenging but fair. You were only limited in where you went by the danger posed by creatures out of your league.

The reasons it didn't get the acclaim...
1. Graphics:
Like it or not, people want pretty open world games, the texture load times and amount of pop in was excessive at times.

2. Lack of character interaction:
Your character doesn't speak, emote, or come across as anything more than a passenger most of the time. Your pawns are idiotic line conveyor belts with zero sense of awareness. Everyone apart from the dragon seems hollow and characterless and you can find yourself struggling to care about them. Your choices don't seem to have any impact.

3. Map design:
You don't really notice this until about halfway through, it's essentially a corridor with a branch or two at each end. I enjoyed walking everywhere as it added to the sense of exploration, but passing the same exact few points anytime you went somewhere didn't. Also, it could've been a lot bigger.

4. No bits and bobs:
I sort of liked the fact that it had no stupid minigames(crafting/cardgames/house etc) that other rpgs/open world games have. But some people like that stuff.


As for dark arisen, I'm not getting it because it simply doesn't seem worth it.

The catch with this interpretation is the exact same criticism could be leveled at Dark Souls which received enormous acclaim on all fronts. It features muddy textures and bland design on just about everything you encounter. The map is also tiny and linear. It also has a crafting system only there it is even less robust than the one found in Dragon's Dogma as, if memory serves, one simply pays souls to a man to upgrade a weapon in Souls where Dogma requires a set of items be collected in addition to the cash tax. Both games have minimal character interaction with the world and, in the cause of Souls, the PC's motivation to do what they do is even less clear.

As such, I have a hard time believing such trivial burdens are the fundamental cause of the lack of love for the game.

 

[kyuss462]

I thought it was a great game. Sure it has it's flaws but overall a solid purchase.

 

[Legion]

I only tried the demo and while I thought the character creation part was excellent (other RPG's need to seriously look at this game for how it's done) I just felt that the game seemed like it'd get repetitive.

I also found the constant one liners from the pawns to be incredibly irritating.

 

[brenz]

Ok I see the points made.
I can fully agree with the character interactions, you dont care about your character or anyone else, although I do have a bit of a soft spot for Mercedes
I see a lot of comparison to Dark Souls. While I get the 3rd person rpg similarities, they to me are very different games.
The linearity and seclusion of dark souls is intentional, it makes you feel alone in this crazy dead world on purpose to heighten tension and really get to you. Whereas in Dogma i think it is an unintentional design flaw.
Dark Souls is guilty of being very vague with what the hell is going on and how to play the game, I never really had that issue with Dogma, its all quite easy to do.
I am still playing Dark Souls, yet to finish, re rolled a pyromancer after my first choice wasnt working out for me (I decided this at Sens Fortress), and I am struggling to come to terms with doing Blighttown again, I hate that place....

 

[Branovices]

I was surprised by how much I loved Dragon's Dogma since the reviews seemed so middling. I just picked up Dark Arisen a bit ago, since it happened to come out right as I got done with final exams, and I've been having a blast with it. I like the improved menu speeds and improved ability to warp around the main of Gransys... but I love Bitterblack Island. Beautiful at times, undeniabley creepy at others. Just really impressive and strikes a perfect mood and atmosphere.

 

[kypsilon]

I dunno man, I loved the game myself but I like games where I can just wander the country side and enjoy the scenery. I haven't got the Dark Arisen game yet, I'm too broke to do so but eventually I'll make the switch. Hopefully by then the save game glitch will have been fixed. :/

 

[Carrots_macduff]

why did this game not receive the praise i think it was due?

right there.

 

[Pulse]

The catch with this interpretation is the exact same criticism could be leveled at Dark Souls which received enormous acclaim on all fronts. It features muddy textures and bland design on just about everything you encounter. The map is also tiny and linear. It also has a crafting system only there it is even less robust than the one found in Dragon's Dogma as, if memory serves, one simply pays souls to a man to upgrade a weapon in Souls where Dogma requires a set of items be collected in addition to the cash tax. Both games have minimal character interaction with the world and, in the cause of Souls, the PC's motivation to do what they do is even less clear.

As such, I have a hard time believing such trivial burdens are the fundamental cause of the lack of love for the game.

I think the difference is, dragons dogma tries to make the average/poor characters and story central to the game, highlighting how shallow some aspects of it are. While darksouls just has it in the background and it's perceived as a bonus if you uncover it. I'm sure some people would want to elaborate further and put it better than I can, but it's to do with presentation and expectation.

Dragons dogma wants to be (and you want it to be) open world and exploratory, filled with characters, but it does some of these aspects badly.

Dark souls is a punishing dungeon crawler, with grinding, and minimal story etc, and it does THAT well.

Darksouls is better at being what it is, even though I prefer Dragons dogma, it's one of my favourite games, but I recognise there are so many obvious areas for improvement that would undisputibly and undoubtebly improve the game for everyone (which are less obvious for dark souls).

 

[theevilgenius60]

I loved Dragons Dogma, but it just seemed a little off. If Capcom gives it a true sequel that fixes its misfires(no fast travel other that the stones, can't get the pawns to SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!, the wierd way they decided who your love interest is for you, the pawn[especially mage pawn] ai, and a few other minor things) it could be one of the best games ever. All this has made me want to try it again. Ur-Dragon, lets see how you like me as an archer(fought him as a fighter first time).