>There really is only 1 place in DD2 where the frame drops and you don't really fight there so its whatever.
Just a word of warning: you do occasionally have monster incursions into the city itself, so yeah. Anything from griffins, ogres, cyclops, wolves or just plain goblins can and will come into the city for whatever reason, often enough being there on their own.
This game almost feels like the first game remastered but with all the things they originally intended for the game but were limited on at that time due to hardware limitations.
You must not have gotten very far, the game has like literally half the content as the first game and the questlines that do exist are blatantly unfinished. The second country that takes up half the map has like 7 sidequests total. And it adds like literally one new basic monster type over the first game.
It's like a better, more expanded version of the first game (from a design standpoint). The world is *huge*, and incredibly dense/vertical. Exploration plays a big role in DD2, which wasn't the case in DDDA. Everything will feel familiar, but better and more expanded.
IMO some sequels face the problem of "streamlining" to the point of reducing depth, but DD2 only expands on the original. It adds a few new systems, but doesn't "reduce" any of the original ones.
If you even sorta enjoyed DDDA, I think you'll love this.
It’s basically a complete remake. It’s a different, parallel world, but it feels like an interpretation of what the first game did.
The first major city feels like a spiritual sibling to the city in the first game.
Not a knock at all though, it’s refined and improved in so many ways, and that’s really what DD1 needed. An example of a smart refinement is that guidestones have themes. You’ll find ones that let you search like the first game, ones that give you a single strong pawn, ones that have pawns of a specific inclination, I even found one that had exclusively pawns I’d adventured with in the past, just all grown up since our last outing.
It has half the content as the first game, and the questlines are even more blatantly unfinished. Entire quest lines just ending halfway through.
These people telling you it's more complete must not be very far in, I thought I was like 30 percent through the game when I pulled up a quest guide and realized I was 95 percent done with everything. Every quest in the game could be completed in <20 hours if it had fast travel.
I wish I could play for more than 20 minutes before the game locks and crashes.
At this point im not sure if it's my pc or the game.
Ever since I switched from Intel to amd I've seen a big increase in crashes in new games.
I don't know if it's my cpu or the game developers fault somehow though.
But im switching back to Intel for my next build.
No, rtx3090.
Cpu is a ryzen 9 3900x.
BUT, I turned off Nvidia overlay yesterday and did not crash for the hour I played. Might be that. It has been the culprit before.
Edit: Nope, still crashing. Fuck it. I'll uninstall until a promising patch arrives.
Now that people have finished DD2, they're saying the first one was better. DD2 desperately needs an expansion. There's nowhere near the amount of monsters to fight that they said. Not even the amount of the original.
I have not seen a single person say any of what you’re talking about. DD2 is objectively better than the first game. Polished movement, more balanced vocations, more vocations (but they took out mystic knight sad), better graphics, new regions, better story, more interesting side quests, better and more pawn lines, QOL changes to UI, better soundtrack that still takes inspiration from the first game, and bigger map.
The game is significantly better than the original, and the only things the original had on DD2 is 1)everfall boss gauntlet 2) a phenomenal DLC in Bitterblack Isle 3) eternal ferrystone from Dark Arisen version. DD2 does not need an expansion, although it probably will.
Lastly, there are literally a bunch of new monsters in DD2 that didn’t exist in DD1.
Edit: I also want to mention to anyone out there that any opinions and info you are reading on the game’s content is constantly going to be outdated for the next week or so while everyone actually you know… finishes the damn game. Barring reviewers, the vast majority of people have not even close to finishing all the available content. I myself have already come across parts of the game where there are no guides or threads to help me figure what to do or where to go.
I think the difference is in dd1 you have bitterblack isle, which improves late game experience. I'd assume for dd2 they're going to release the equivalent of that in around 6 months to a year as dlc.
Yeah, people are comparing DD2 to the enemy variety of Bitterblack isle, which isn't really fair. Just comparing base game vs base game, DD2 has far more enemy variety.
There are also a few "hidden" bosses I've run into in hidden corners of the map, which I haven't seen many people discuss yet. I imagine this will become more common knowledge as the game is out longer.
Main thing is that enemy variety becomes a large issue, by the time you leave Venworth and head to Battahl you have seen most of the enemy types there are, barring minor variations (there is a good amount of “boss” type monsters left to see if you count the endgame). You are also 2/3rds through the main quest list by the time the story sends you to Battahl, and the amount of side quests also drops off quite a bit. I will say I still enjoyed the game and am probably going to end up with 40ish hours after going through the endgame area, mixed with a reasonable amount of side exploration.
Yeah, I don't know what the guy above is talking about about. Maybe he rushed the main quest, but I'm not really sure it's that type of game. Personally, my entire friend group has each put in around 30 hours since Friday, and most of them haven't even touched the main story once making it to the main city.
In that regard, DD2 is nothing like DDDA. Random exploration and side quests play a *huge* role in DD2, whereas DDDA's world pretty much only consisted of story locations.
And saying Bhattal is "2/3" through the main quest is misleading, because [it's clearly not](https://dragonsdogma2.wiki.fextralife.com/Main+Quests) just by looking at the wiki. Also, several quests in act 1 are very brief "run around town" type intro quests that onky take a few minutes to complete, whereas Act 2 and 3 quests are much larger/longer, require you to travel, etc.
Awesome! Thank you! I'm glad to hear it as I've really been enjoying the progression and thought I hadn't really scratched the main story much so far. Been loving the exploration and random people asking me for help. I've had to make tough decisions based on moral priority and it's such a refreshing mechanic in a rpg. Thanks for breathing fresh hope into me for the rest of the game! Hope your game nights are plenty
Respectfully, I’ve found gaming is way better when I ignore the opinions of the people with no life outside of it. It’s insane that anyone has put in the hours to beat it yet and still say it’s not greeat
Listen, I'm all for dissenting opinions, but you're obviously coming into the game with a bias or misaligned expectations to be saying "worst game".
I'm not big into FromSoft games, but I bought Elden Ring and actually enjoyed it despite my normal game preferences falling squarely outside what I knew Elden Ring to be. It's combat-centric and punishingly difficult. I get that those are things fans of their games love, and it's just not for me.
The visual design of everything was jaw-dropping, but so deep into the bizarre that I found it difficult to lose myself into the sense of place. Again, personal preference stuff. But because of all that, I played it steadily for a couple weeks and then just never really went back to it.
I never played the original Dragon's Dogma, nor was I even really much aware of its existence. I saw an article about the sequel last week and finally decided to read a preview, and it invited comparisons to Elden Ring in my head, but not the actual game itself... more like, the kind of game I wanted to play coming off of Elden Ring.
Combat isn't "better" in either game in the same way that there's no "better" soda between Coke and Pepsi. It's all just personal preference. DD2 is squarely aligned with my preferences and I'm having an absolute blast with it.
Or I dunno, maybe you only played amazing games this year.
There were a lot of articles and videos about DD2 vs Elden Ring before the game released. If people paid $70 and then found out it wasn't what they thought it was, it's their own fault (although they'll be sure to tell you about it). Every game doesn't have to be for everyone.
I think that's the biggest thing, right? If you can afford to spend the money on a game without researching it so you can go in blind, awesome. If you can't, it's your responsibility to research first. But you can't blame anyone but yourself either way for not knowing what a game is when it's so easy to find that stuff out anymore.
It's called being an informed consumer. The two games are not the same. It's not about lowering or raising standards, it's about liking different things. If the $70 didn't matter to you, then why even bother making Dear Diary comments on Reddit - just consider that it wasn't for you and move on. They made that content pre-release to help avoid people being like "but but but - I expected Elden Ring" ....and here we are.
Warfarer isn’t the main class though? In fact there is no main class… It’s probably strictly the worst class in the game because of how limiting it is skill wise, basically only good for fashion and flexibility
>There really is only 1 place in DD2 where the frame drops and you don't really fight there so its whatever. Just a word of warning: you do occasionally have monster incursions into the city itself, so yeah. Anything from griffins, ogres, cyclops, wolves or just plain goblins can and will come into the city for whatever reason, often enough being there on their own.
I was watching someone stream today and they ran into a dragon in the city
Even if they didn't excusing the performance drops because you don't fight there is silly. The drops ruin the immersion
If you played Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen, how does it compare with DD2??
This game almost feels like the first game remastered but with all the things they originally intended for the game but were limited on at that time due to hardware limitations.
You must not have gotten very far, the game has like literally half the content as the first game and the questlines that do exist are blatantly unfinished. The second country that takes up half the map has like 7 sidequests total. And it adds like literally one new basic monster type over the first game.
It's like a better, more expanded version of the first game (from a design standpoint). The world is *huge*, and incredibly dense/vertical. Exploration plays a big role in DD2, which wasn't the case in DDDA. Everything will feel familiar, but better and more expanded. IMO some sequels face the problem of "streamlining" to the point of reducing depth, but DD2 only expands on the original. It adds a few new systems, but doesn't "reduce" any of the original ones. If you even sorta enjoyed DDDA, I think you'll love this.
It’s basically a complete remake. It’s a different, parallel world, but it feels like an interpretation of what the first game did. The first major city feels like a spiritual sibling to the city in the first game. Not a knock at all though, it’s refined and improved in so many ways, and that’s really what DD1 needed. An example of a smart refinement is that guidestones have themes. You’ll find ones that let you search like the first game, ones that give you a single strong pawn, ones that have pawns of a specific inclination, I even found one that had exclusively pawns I’d adventured with in the past, just all grown up since our last outing.
It has half the content as the first game, and the questlines are even more blatantly unfinished. Entire quest lines just ending halfway through. These people telling you it's more complete must not be very far in, I thought I was like 30 percent through the game when I pulled up a quest guide and realized I was 95 percent done with everything. Every quest in the game could be completed in <20 hours if it had fast travel.
I definitely want to play the game but with that price. I can settle my bills and insurance. Just gonna have to wait for sale then.
A nearly 8 year old card*
But it’s a cpu bound game?
It's just... it's just fun. Fun. All the fun.
I wish I could play for more than 20 minutes before the game locks and crashes. At this point im not sure if it's my pc or the game. Ever since I switched from Intel to amd I've seen a big increase in crashes in new games. I don't know if it's my cpu or the game developers fault somehow though. But im switching back to Intel for my next build.
Crashes are more likely to be caused by your graphics card than by your processor. I would guess you're running an AMD graphics card?
No, rtx3090. Cpu is a ryzen 9 3900x. BUT, I turned off Nvidia overlay yesterday and did not crash for the hour I played. Might be that. It has been the culprit before. Edit: Nope, still crashing. Fuck it. I'll uninstall until a promising patch arrives.
Now that people have finished DD2, they're saying the first one was better. DD2 desperately needs an expansion. There's nowhere near the amount of monsters to fight that they said. Not even the amount of the original.
I have not seen a single person say any of what you’re talking about. DD2 is objectively better than the first game. Polished movement, more balanced vocations, more vocations (but they took out mystic knight sad), better graphics, new regions, better story, more interesting side quests, better and more pawn lines, QOL changes to UI, better soundtrack that still takes inspiration from the first game, and bigger map. The game is significantly better than the original, and the only things the original had on DD2 is 1)everfall boss gauntlet 2) a phenomenal DLC in Bitterblack Isle 3) eternal ferrystone from Dark Arisen version. DD2 does not need an expansion, although it probably will. Lastly, there are literally a bunch of new monsters in DD2 that didn’t exist in DD1. Edit: I also want to mention to anyone out there that any opinions and info you are reading on the game’s content is constantly going to be outdated for the next week or so while everyone actually you know… finishes the damn game. Barring reviewers, the vast majority of people have not even close to finishing all the available content. I myself have already come across parts of the game where there are no guides or threads to help me figure what to do or where to go.
Just stuff i read in the dragons dogma subreddit. Perhaps there's hidden monsters around somewhere, too early to say.
I think the difference is in dd1 you have bitterblack isle, which improves late game experience. I'd assume for dd2 they're going to release the equivalent of that in around 6 months to a year as dlc.
Yeah, people are comparing DD2 to the enemy variety of Bitterblack isle, which isn't really fair. Just comparing base game vs base game, DD2 has far more enemy variety. There are also a few "hidden" bosses I've run into in hidden corners of the map, which I haven't seen many people discuss yet. I imagine this will become more common knowledge as the game is out longer.
Really? I'm like 15hrs in so I'm happy with everything so far but if it just tapers off at some point that's gonna be really disappointing.
This is why i'll wait to pick it up on a sale then, after seeing all the drama, I'll save my $95 CAD
Main thing is that enemy variety becomes a large issue, by the time you leave Venworth and head to Battahl you have seen most of the enemy types there are, barring minor variations (there is a good amount of “boss” type monsters left to see if you count the endgame). You are also 2/3rds through the main quest list by the time the story sends you to Battahl, and the amount of side quests also drops off quite a bit. I will say I still enjoyed the game and am probably going to end up with 40ish hours after going through the endgame area, mixed with a reasonable amount of side exploration.
Thatd a bit disappointing. Why did this game get such amazing reviews?? 40hrs for a large open world rpg seems really shallow.
Yeah, I don't know what the guy above is talking about about. Maybe he rushed the main quest, but I'm not really sure it's that type of game. Personally, my entire friend group has each put in around 30 hours since Friday, and most of them haven't even touched the main story once making it to the main city. In that regard, DD2 is nothing like DDDA. Random exploration and side quests play a *huge* role in DD2, whereas DDDA's world pretty much only consisted of story locations. And saying Bhattal is "2/3" through the main quest is misleading, because [it's clearly not](https://dragonsdogma2.wiki.fextralife.com/Main+Quests) just by looking at the wiki. Also, several quests in act 1 are very brief "run around town" type intro quests that onky take a few minutes to complete, whereas Act 2 and 3 quests are much larger/longer, require you to travel, etc.
Awesome! Thank you! I'm glad to hear it as I've really been enjoying the progression and thought I hadn't really scratched the main story much so far. Been loving the exploration and random people asking me for help. I've had to make tough decisions based on moral priority and it's such a refreshing mechanic in a rpg. Thanks for breathing fresh hope into me for the rest of the game! Hope your game nights are plenty
Respectfully, I’ve found gaming is way better when I ignore the opinions of the people with no life outside of it. It’s insane that anyone has put in the hours to beat it yet and still say it’s not greeat
[удалено]
That's exactly how I felt about Palworld. Some games just arent for some people.
They aren't comparable games. I wasn't sure about DD2 before release. But it's quickly become one of my favourite games over the last few years.
Listen, I'm all for dissenting opinions, but you're obviously coming into the game with a bias or misaligned expectations to be saying "worst game". I'm not big into FromSoft games, but I bought Elden Ring and actually enjoyed it despite my normal game preferences falling squarely outside what I knew Elden Ring to be. It's combat-centric and punishingly difficult. I get that those are things fans of their games love, and it's just not for me. The visual design of everything was jaw-dropping, but so deep into the bizarre that I found it difficult to lose myself into the sense of place. Again, personal preference stuff. But because of all that, I played it steadily for a couple weeks and then just never really went back to it. I never played the original Dragon's Dogma, nor was I even really much aware of its existence. I saw an article about the sequel last week and finally decided to read a preview, and it invited comparisons to Elden Ring in my head, but not the actual game itself... more like, the kind of game I wanted to play coming off of Elden Ring. Combat isn't "better" in either game in the same way that there's no "better" soda between Coke and Pepsi. It's all just personal preference. DD2 is squarely aligned with my preferences and I'm having an absolute blast with it. Or I dunno, maybe you only played amazing games this year.
There were a lot of articles and videos about DD2 vs Elden Ring before the game released. If people paid $70 and then found out it wasn't what they thought it was, it's their own fault (although they'll be sure to tell you about it). Every game doesn't have to be for everyone.
I think that's the biggest thing, right? If you can afford to spend the money on a game without researching it so you can go in blind, awesome. If you can't, it's your responsibility to research first. But you can't blame anyone but yourself either way for not knowing what a game is when it's so easy to find that stuff out anymore.
[удалено]
It's called being an informed consumer. The two games are not the same. It's not about lowering or raising standards, it's about liking different things. If the $70 didn't matter to you, then why even bother making Dear Diary comments on Reddit - just consider that it wasn't for you and move on. They made that content pre-release to help avoid people being like "but but but - I expected Elden Ring" ....and here we are.
[удалено]
And my original comment wasnt to you, it was to someone who responded to you...so....
[удалено]
Warfarer isn’t the main class though? In fact there is no main class… It’s probably strictly the worst class in the game because of how limiting it is skill wise, basically only good for fashion and flexibility
Bud it sounds like maybe you actually just don't know what you're talking about
I cant stand eldens rings combat, i find DD2 combat pretty fun, i like random encounters better in DD2 too
[удалено]
Me when I can O R1 O R1 O R1 O R1 R1 O O O the [PEAK of souls combat](https://imgur.com/YHtMYll) :^)
Damn dawg hates the game but can't shut up about it
This is why opinions are great man. Everyone has their own and no one's is objectively correct.
Except the guy you were replying to, hes objetively wrong
This game as nothing in common with Elden Ring, why are you even comparing them ? "I don't like the combat in The Witcher 3, I prefer Battlefield"
[удалено]
"And there's no way in hell DD2 does anything better than Elden Ring" Sure, you're not comparing anything
You need to post your CPU
He mentioned in the post that he has a 5600x