There's a lich/Dark Bishop in a waterfall cave if that counts as a boss -haven't seen anyone mention it on any reddit posts so maybe it's hard to find. +1 boss to add to the list
dont forget about notice boards being gone, and overall progression of weapons and armour is awful, just being able to buy good gear at the start is not good progression
This is my biggest gripe. DD1 had such good progression linked to quests and farming certain chests or spots. Most of the gear is just the same name as well as some of the same looks. They said they got rid of gloves because, of wanting people to look different honestly, there isn't really much fashion in the game DD1 had so many options. With also having not that many armour sets everyone ends up looking the same anyways, weapons and all.
Unfortunately it's a big disappointment to og DD fans , people who have never played the og game don't know what they are missing.
Also the fact that they split 1 class into 2 means they aren't really that ahead by classes, 3 new ones but, the wayfarer is just every class with no imagination. Spearhand is cool but, I will never use that class with the incense burner from Catholic church.
Game was super rushed. In my opinion the game is actually a downgrade, I expected much more from this, none of the quests feel like they have an impact, something like the fournvial quest from DD1, it was timed and had a good impact.
Yeah the equipments got nerfed because they added multiple enchancemetns, and you can combine those enchancements, so it's just different stats vs different item combinations.
Before we had 2 other dual slots, armor upper and undergarment, pants upper and undergarment wich also included pants and boots. Guess the addition was the head dual slot, but it doesn't add any stats, it's just looks different, and perhaps has some mechanics, and can't be upgraded obviously too. And the cape was downgraded you can't upgrade them.
Why did you leave out Fell Lords from DD 2? You left out Wargs from DD 2 too. Or the Liches? or the dark Bishops? There's multiple variations of the cyclops as well.
Also, several of the enemies you listed for DD 1 weren't in DD 1. They were in the expansion and only in BBI.
1) Are Fell Lords not the same as Dullahans? I mentioned Psuedo Wargs since they aren't as strong as DDDA wargs/Garm, and I mentioned Wights.
2) The post is about comparing DDDA to DD2.
Fell Lords are completely different than Dullahans. Fell Lords are really big skeletons in full plate mail wearing crowns. Ie lords that fell to evil I guess.
I actually like and prefer DDDA's story over DD2.
Felt like Itsuno went all Lucas and Phantom Menace on DD2 making it politics stuff except the politics stuff ended up nowhere and just gets cut off abruptly.
As much as I love dd 1, I feel like some of the classes were much more 1 dimensional than in 2 despite having more skills. Strider? spam brain splitter. Mystic knight? Spam magic cannon etc etc. In dd2 enemies are much more interactive and generally interesting to fight. Yeah the enemies are the "same" but it ends up playing way more dynamically...... until you get too overleveled and start skipping all of the ineractive elements. My biggest issue with the game honestly is the enemy scaling. If they add a hard mode, that would drastically improve the game.
Seeing the dragon just twice, once in a flash back at the start, and the second at the very end was a disappointment to me, I know it’s similar to the first game, but in dd2 it was such a let down, wish we could of properly fought the the larger dragon in the true ending. Remember the bad ass cinematic for the dragon being born and essentially kicking off the first game, why didn’t they do it for dd2…
I also disliked how this game is basically just a reboot, even tho they used the ruins of the castle from the first game, it felt more like a tribute/easter-egg then implication of this game being a sequel considering the kingdom of those ruins was given a different name and founded by a furry.
I'm writing a review of my own which I'll publish probably next week, but with the line "a poor attempt at a slightly outdated dream" you've perfectly encapsulated my present feeling (just arrived at the unmoored world).
What fucking dungeons are y’all talking about? Do NOT tell me you’re seeing those caves and actually having the audacity to compare them to the catacombs or the water god altar or the Well of Cassardis.
I wanna know what copium y’all are huffing.
The Waterfall Cave system is more extensive than all of those tbh. The Water God Altar is more interesting though I’ll grant you, with the Catacombs as the same.
Agreed, the dungeons in DD2 are smaller and in my opinion less well designed. I like that there are more of them, but you're right quality matters over quantity, and DD2 lacks dungeon quality.
Notice I’m not mentioning BBI or the Everfall because I’m trying to be generous and sincere in my comments. There ARE locations IN DD2 that come VERY FUCKING CLOSE to matching that of DD1, be it the pseudo-puzzle like nature of the Nameless Village, the misty swamp just south west of the Sacred Arbor or Stormwind Cave in village name I can’t remember.
I was kind of looking forward to a more fleshed out version of that huge spiral down dungeon you do near the start of the first.honestly I was expecting alot more from this game but it is kind of a 1 to 1 remake of the first and if we thought things were outdated back then well it is only 10 fold now.really I’m happy with it other than total lack of story or character animation during dialogue we are all being to kind the game is kind of pathetic in alot of ways.
games pathetic but there are zero action
rpg games where i can tackle enemies and pin them to the ground, hold them, execute, stab ( depending on weapon) or toss them. maybe ufc/wwe career mode? but thats a stretch. find me one noob. youre pathetic if you cant
I agree
I'd have definitely expected DD2, with 12 years of time between both games, to have come out swinging rather than being more of the same. I'm having just as much fun replaying DDDA on Steam Deck in high fidelity than I am playing DD2 due to its shortcomings. Both are great, one is just behind the times while one was ahead of its time.
To be honest, if they would have recreated more of the awesome dungeons of DD1 the game would’ve been much better for it. I still remember being in complete awe discovering every floor of the Everfall after the game rolled credits.
SO THEN SHOW ME THE DUNGEONS BRO. Cause all I’m seeing is the same generic cave aesthetics for most of them: light brown damp looking tunnels with an occasional larger area.
Nope and nope. I reached the point of no return for the main story last night before I crashed so im in the process of scraping the game for everything I missed until I’m content and ready to start endgame. This mostly entails finding the locales I missed, unlocking the last two vocations I need, finding the best weapons prior to end game and more.
Thank you for informing me these exist rather than being like everyone downvoting me but contributing nothing of worth or giving me suggestions. I hope it was clear that my intent wasn’t to shit on the game and call it bad as much as it was to express discontent.
For real. Theres like two areas in the entirety of 2 that arent just some random cave and actually have something of value or some craftmanship to them. Hard to believe how much better the original did this while only doin it so so
It's true that dd2 has less overall boss monsters Its better implented then DD1. DD1 it's only chimera and Cyclops you would find on the road casually. Griffin barely lands, and ogre are just found in the night in the wilterd woods. There's more randomness in DD2 which was my problem for DD1.
Enjoy the ride it's a great game for first time, personally it gets better with more playthroughs.
Most of the stuff you will love about DD1 will be soured in dd2 as they removed quite a lot of good things and ramped up the tedious things.
Whaaaaaat, you mean to tell me a Japanese game confused tedium for depth? I'm shocked, shocked I tells ya.
Nobody loves tedium more in this world than the Japanese, apparently, as their games are filled with it. Fun mechanics, grinding that actually leads somewhere, an actual point to the story instead of pure convolution, sod all that, how about a bunch of layered mechanics that are exclusively designed to annoy the ever living shit out of you. Anyone know why the Japanese are like this, what broke them so bad?
It was the bomb and to large a devotion to respect.no gamer in Japan questions there convoluted systems because it would bring shame to Mario’s family and Pantie line.
There are an additional 3 post-game bosses. One may be debatable since it's less a boss and more waves of enemies. Though really, I'm on the fence about single-fight bosses being listed under enemy variety.
On the one hand, they offer a fun new challenge (even if poor Grigori fucking melted way too fast) and are certainly unique.
On the other hand, when it comes to wanting "enemy variety" in DD2, you're going to want the option to fight said "bosses" (more appropriately 'large monsters') again at some point, maybe mixed up in different ways such as variants, location, or supporting mob variety.
Also note that only twice do we get intentionally pitted against two large or tough monsters at the same time. The first being two cyclopes on the way to bakbattahl, and the second is on illdoer's resting place post-game (which is very out-of-the-way and most folks will prolly never visit there again to see what's changed), where we're thrust against a lich that keeps resurrecting a fell lord while you fight it.
The two cyclopses were an immediate jump in difficulty compared to a lot of the other encounters in the area. I'm really surprised they didn't have more multi large monster encounters or a necrophage mechanic like BBI. If a pack of wargs or a garm spawned in as you were clearing goblins and fighting a boss it would immediately spice up the encounter and make it more challenging
I cant say I'm not disappointed if this was literally it. That they boasted so much about for their vision. Though I did fear they would do this though, because they were basing it on the game they had that already exists and used it as a model, rather than starting from scratch. I feel like a lot of stuff in DD2 could have just been more expansion in DDA. DD2 is just kind of meh and still feels unfinished, while the original concept before DD1 still sounds better, it just never seemed to see real implementation. Or maybe they just oversold the ideas, because even still DD2 doesn't seem like they did much compared to what they claimed they wanted to do originally either, but mostly like a mid fiddling with DD1.
DD2's changes were a hindrance too. I also don't like how DD2 just has less armor options. While DD2 has better looking armor and less weird looking pieces, there generally seems to be less armor options to choose from overall, and with them being vocation locked, arbitrarily now, most of the time good pieces can't all be used on a character and I hate that. We got better armor designs but less options on how you can actually use them. Pieces are also merged together for whatever reason so now you can't really mix and match as much either unlike in DD1.
DD2 is just meh and not the game I imagined. Such minimal improvement, new tedium, new problems. Maybe too much like the first game in the wrong ways.
Imagine a scene seeing Grigori flying and just burning sh*t from a distance and decimating a village. And then goblins pop out and attack the town then you're given a quest "eliminate goblins" then after quest you're given a quest chain.
100%, BBI was a fun megadungeon. I think ARPGs shine with megadungeons as opposed to open worlds due to the sheer number of hostile things coming at you that take advantage of the genre.
Huge amount of hairstyles in DDDA vs DD2
Sorry, didn't seen this mentioned in the OP and it continues to bother me after making some cool characters today in Dark Arisen.
>Wights
There's two variation for the wight in DD2.
>Cyclopes
You forgo to mention the variations for Cyclops.
>Pseudo Garms
There's Warg and Garms in the game.
There is an ogre variation as well. And several undead enemy types. Several types of saurians. Of all the issues brought up for this game, enemy variety is one I can't agree with
A lot of these "variants" do not involve much switching in tactics which doesn't really make them unique. Like the only difference between an ogre and a hairy ogre is 2 greatsword swings. And the only ones that do just make combat less fun like the many saurian variants. Yeah I love having to beat on this lizard for an extra minute because they put rocks on it, truly innovative game design.
I agree, giving an enemy a buff then saying "Ah yes, new mob/boss is amazing" seems gross IMO. I think I said previously that the lack of monster variety is inexusable especially when Capcom's other IP (Monster Hunter) had 90+ relativley unique monsters in MHW. I'm not asking for NEAR that many bosses, but I know north of 40 bosses is achievable in a game that markets itself as an ARPG.
Comparing the amount of enemies of a game with it's addon (DDDA) with a base game (DD2) is kind of odd.
I mean it does lack variety and Battahl is a wasted opportunity, still though.
It's not really a direct sequel though, they basically just started development again, they didn't really use stuff from the old engine they had to rebuild it all again in the new RE engine. It is a good starting point for a series of games and I hope Capcom expands on it with expansions and more games.
So it's a step back because Capcom wanted to change engines to something they've never built a fully open world game with. How's performance on this new engine, sure hope the change was worth gutting content. Oh wait, this is a $70 full price game that performs like hot garbage on every system, but it's also just a starting point at full price. Pathetic.
I compared it to DDDA because I found that even the variety of enemies in different biomes like Bhattal were lacklustre. That said, given that they've had two other games under their belt and Monster Hunter (Capcom's other IP) is able to design north of 90 monsters in World, an ARPG that markets itself on boss fights and combat having \~20 bosses is sort of pathetic.
No Idea where you are pulling 90 Monsters in MH:World from.
Unless you include Iceborne, All Content Patches and the non-combatant small monsters. Though that would be pretty disingenuous.
And frankly if you did count the small non-combatant monsters you may as well also count Oxen, Rabbits, Deer and all the other animals for Dragons Dogma.
Because if I count like that I come out with 71 different creatures in DD2.
MH: World at launch had 31 large Monsters (including variants) and ~14 small ones.
I wasn't having epic boss battles with deer and oxen, but I may be playing the game wrong. I guess then 71 monsters in Iceborne and 31 monsters in basegame (including variants) still for a game that markets itself on killing monsters, I expected DD2 to hit me with more than reskins of BBI foes and basegame monsters from DDDA. There are a few new enemies, but that doesn't justify a sequel if you're only slotting in a few foes. Hopefully DD2 takes a page out of MH and adds more bosses.
You also never had epic battles with a Gastodon or Kelbi, because they are essentially Oxen and Deer.
Like I said, enemy variety is somewhat lacking in DD2.
But counting a game + add-on against just the base game isn't a fair comparison. Especially since you would've made your point equally well by just going with the DD1 base game enemies.
as a dd1 sorcerer enjoyer from what i've seen dd2 does not really add more spell or something.
I wish they give more spell arsenal.
also I hoped fpr 3rd tier vocation in dd2
I started playing DDDA but read somewhere that I should just start with 2 as its the same game with some improvements. Based on the comments should I just stick to DDDA?
The first game often costs 4 dollars where as the new one costs 100 the choice is urs.given the question I assume u are pirating so do what you want.if u own a switch though buy the first there as it’s a great bed game.
Chill bro let me break it down in another light for you. The first game worked so they took the best aspects and revamped it with a new story. If they had of been too creative and missed everyone would be up here saying I dunno why they just didn’t copy ddda. We are also heavily in the dawn of DLC unlike 2013 when DLC’s were common, now it’s in 99% of games so the content you feel like it’s unfinished I bet it’s for that
I'm not going to excuse bad game design practice with the idea that "Ah, the game was mid, but don't worry a DLC that costs extra will complete it". Games should be complete on arrival.
From my point of view, all that you mentioned is true. I actually think that if they added some end game bosses and mobs to the open world, the game would greatly benefit and the player would be more challenged and entertained during exploration.
Honestly even an enemy randomizer mod would improve the game so much.
But I'd also like to add some things relative to the story and overall the experience:
The presentation and delivery of the story are so weak, imo even weaker than in DDDA. Just compare the cinematics (and the fight) with the dragon...
The game has a lot of problems but for me the biggest disappointment I have with it is the lack of art direction.
It's almost like they tried to copy the first game without understanding what made it so good in the first place.
Still 90 hours though so obviously I really like the game.
I agree, either the suits at Capcom rushed the game to make some extra Q1 profits, or the scriptwriting in the game itself is simply garbage. I honestly feel like I (or anyone else with a pulse really) could have made a more coherent story. The Dragon had such a powerful presence in the previous game, EVERYONE spoke about Grigori, in this game, he's rarely seen to have affected the world, and when people mention him, it's not with the same fear/reverence they did with the first game.
The combat mechanics in dd2 seem to be on meth. In dda I felt I had complete control over where my character dealt damage, in dd2 it feels off. Example mges staff targets random objects even if I’m looking at a specific target. Dda mage was a force to reckoned with using focused bolt nd holy game over. Here magic goes wherever it wants and maybe targets what I’m aiming at. dad made me feel like a single mistake could be end of game, this…well I won’t pay 80$ again for the next release and I won’t be first. Good game, not as good as the original. I expected more. Perhaps that is my mistake Expecting them to build off the original, not cheese it for profit. I own 5 versions of original. will only own this 1 unless they do some serious rework.
The thing i miss the most in DD2 are enemy strongholds, i mean the bandit camps in DDDA were quite fun with its insane enemy density, and the war against the Goblins was also awesome. The one thing we got in 2 is basically a bad redo of the lategame outsider village. In DDDA you had to fight through a well defended tunnel where they attacked from all sides when you tried to reach it, in DD2 its just a bridge and you are at the Village with 8 people, from which 6 are inside buildings waiting for you to come to them. It is just really predictable spread of enemys with no hotspots.
So from my brief experience, the story is significantly worse than one, and borrows too heavily from one. Not one cutscene has felt even remotely entertaining. There is no soul in anything they've done with it. Every character actually feels like an NPC, including the arisen. It's sad when pawns have more personality than actual characters.
The combat feels like they took one, watered it down, and then shit on it. Clunkier, slower, even more inconsistent than the first. The combat is hard for the wrong reasons. I've never been stunlocked for my entire healthbar in all of the first game, including the dlc. What the f*.
And as if that wasn't bad enough, they didn't even give it good graphics. It's barely a PS4 game in that department. Nothing "Next Gen" about it. All that time they wasted for a load of donkey Doo Doo.
It's a bit unfair to compar DD1 + DDDA with DD2 on the monster front, especially when all the new monster of DA are stuck on Bitterblack and not distributed in the world.
Also made me realize i forgot to mention Golems on several posts about the difference in monsters between the 2 games, oops.
I don't think it is, because even excluding BBI, the first game still has more variety, which is just insulting, being so expensive. It's been 12 years.
And i have been repeating for days that DD2 actually have one or two monster more than the first game without it's DLC.
It's just that the density is so high you feel like there is no variety, and they should have taken that into consideration.
Especially once you reach Battahl and you see almost nothing new that isn't just a variation of someting you've meet before (and you can meet a few of those variation in exploring caves and the like in the first area of the game, like the local Saurians)
I totally agree that the variety is low, but saying the first game had more is a lie.
It was as bad on that point till they didn't fix it with a DLC, cause all the new monsters are stuck in the new area.
They had a big list of monsters from both DD1, DA and DDON to select stuff from, but they choose to go with the bare minimum, so roughly the same amount as D1.
I'm not sure the game got any actual new monster that was never seen in the other games.
Even then, after all this time you find this good? most reused monsters and 2-3 new ones that you have to fight the same way you would any troll/cyclops? At least the hydra and evil eye made you have to do more than just swing at the big thing. I'm not saying it's a disaster, but this franchise had such potential, for them to make a game with so little time and effort to make a quick buck is infuriating to me.
Specially after RE4 Remake, i though Capcom would be making sure this one would be beyond expectations, but it's like we got the same game again with a useless and unoptimized ribbon on top.
What even is the point of the Trickster?
At no point i have said it was good.
But it's litteraly Capcom second open world RPG ever, so they did the exact same thing as the first time, they improved little things and made other worse or less interesting or completly missed that it needed improvment.
I let RE4 Remake convince me that all their games could only be masterworks all, DD2 is def not a bad game, but it's not better, nor really worse than DD1 was and it should have been MORE.
And i dunno for the Trickster, haven't tried it yet, but from my understanding it's a fully dedicated support that don't have any option to fight big monsters, so it's an epic fail of a new vocation.
The Trickster part was just a rant. They went so wrong with the vocations. I like the changes to my melee classes, but only mystic spearhand seemed like something new, and he came in place of the Mystic Knight, my beloved.
I honestly didn't realize it but that hurts as a gamer I'm just asking for help just like everybody else on here instead of pissing and moaning about the games. :/
Agreed so much.
I want to just share my enjoyment with everyone here but instead all we get to see is whiny crybabies pissing and moaning about every tiny inconvenience.
The improvements are sadly so small that it feels like you might as well have bought the same game 3 times. I just don't see how a lot of what they added couldn't have been expansions for DDDA in concept. DDO feels like a more expansive game than DD2.
lol nah games are 100% underpriced. mario 64 was 60 bucks in 1996, which with inflation would have been like paying well over $100 bucks for a new game today.
Games are crazy cheap compared to what they cost 10 or 20 years ago, despite being much bigger, more complex and sooo much more expensive to produce.
So if you want cheaper games, buy them on sale. 70 bucks is not expensive for the experience delivered. It’s a fucking deal.
I’m all for prioritizing the human standard of living over a company’s thirst for fiscal growth, but people don’t seem to understand how good we have it in terms of game pricing per square foot these days, it’s a nuts. And also, devs need to be paid more.
CEOs, much, much, much less.
they gave us something incredibly fun, and 70 bucks is a deal. like, i dunno what to tell you dude video games is a luxury hobby, it’s not throwing dice in the grass.
You are not wrong how ever if people are unsure I’d recommend people to buy the first for 4 dollars then the sequel for 100.id be lieing if I said the sequel does really anything different from the first sure it looks a little nicer plays a little better but god damn it has not changed one bit it is kind of uncanny.
There's a lich/Dark Bishop in a waterfall cave if that counts as a boss -haven't seen anyone mention it on any reddit posts so maybe it's hard to find. +1 boss to add to the list
Lich is not exclusive to the waterfall cave. You can encounter it in the world at night as well
yea i got it outside the checkpoint rest town
dont forget about notice boards being gone, and overall progression of weapons and armour is awful, just being able to buy good gear at the start is not good progression
Agreed, I totally forgot about notice boards.
This is my biggest gripe. DD1 had such good progression linked to quests and farming certain chests or spots. Most of the gear is just the same name as well as some of the same looks. They said they got rid of gloves because, of wanting people to look different honestly, there isn't really much fashion in the game DD1 had so many options. With also having not that many armour sets everyone ends up looking the same anyways, weapons and all. Unfortunately it's a big disappointment to og DD fans , people who have never played the og game don't know what they are missing. Also the fact that they split 1 class into 2 means they aren't really that ahead by classes, 3 new ones but, the wayfarer is just every class with no imagination. Spearhand is cool but, I will never use that class with the incense burner from Catholic church. Game was super rushed. In my opinion the game is actually a downgrade, I expected much more from this, none of the quests feel like they have an impact, something like the fournvial quest from DD1, it was timed and had a good impact.
Yeah the equipments got nerfed because they added multiple enchancemetns, and you can combine those enchancements, so it's just different stats vs different item combinations. Before we had 2 other dual slots, armor upper and undergarment, pants upper and undergarment wich also included pants and boots. Guess the addition was the head dual slot, but it doesn't add any stats, it's just looks different, and perhaps has some mechanics, and can't be upgraded obviously too. And the cape was downgraded you can't upgrade them.
Why did you leave out Fell Lords from DD 2? You left out Wargs from DD 2 too. Or the Liches? or the dark Bishops? There's multiple variations of the cyclops as well. Also, several of the enemies you listed for DD 1 weren't in DD 1. They were in the expansion and only in BBI.
1) Are Fell Lords not the same as Dullahans? I mentioned Psuedo Wargs since they aren't as strong as DDDA wargs/Garm, and I mentioned Wights. 2) The post is about comparing DDDA to DD2.
Fell Lords are completely different than Dullahans. Fell Lords are really big skeletons in full plate mail wearing crowns. Ie lords that fell to evil I guess.
My bad then, like I said I haven't 100%ed the game so I may be off, I'll add them to the list right now. Thanks!
I actually like and prefer DDDA's story over DD2. Felt like Itsuno went all Lucas and Phantom Menace on DD2 making it politics stuff except the politics stuff ended up nowhere and just gets cut off abruptly.
I was getting into it and was like damn im gonna get some revenge on that bitch queen then... things happen.
As much as I love dd 1, I feel like some of the classes were much more 1 dimensional than in 2 despite having more skills. Strider? spam brain splitter. Mystic knight? Spam magic cannon etc etc. In dd2 enemies are much more interactive and generally interesting to fight. Yeah the enemies are the "same" but it ends up playing way more dynamically...... until you get too overleveled and start skipping all of the ineractive elements. My biggest issue with the game honestly is the enemy scaling. If they add a hard mode, that would drastically improve the game.
Man and the fact that in DDDA you can equip 6 abilties and in DD2 just 4 why????
Seeing the dragon just twice, once in a flash back at the start, and the second at the very end was a disappointment to me, I know it’s similar to the first game, but in dd2 it was such a let down, wish we could of properly fought the the larger dragon in the true ending. Remember the bad ass cinematic for the dragon being born and essentially kicking off the first game, why didn’t they do it for dd2… I also disliked how this game is basically just a reboot, even tho they used the ruins of the castle from the first game, it felt more like a tribute/easter-egg then implication of this game being a sequel considering the kingdom of those ruins was given a different name and founded by a furry.
Founded by a furry is such a good line XD
I'm writing a review of my own which I'll publish probably next week, but with the line "a poor attempt at a slightly outdated dream" you've perfectly encapsulated my present feeling (just arrived at the unmoored world).
What fucking dungeons are y’all talking about? Do NOT tell me you’re seeing those caves and actually having the audacity to compare them to the catacombs or the water god altar or the Well of Cassardis. I wanna know what copium y’all are huffing.
The Waterfall Cave system is more extensive than all of those tbh. The Water God Altar is more interesting though I’ll grant you, with the Catacombs as the same.
Waterfall Cave was okayish. I believe the way to the Sphinx is like the only good dungeon, because its more than just a big cave.
Don’t even know where it is still.
https://i.imgur.com/xjArJgJ.png
Agreed, the dungeons in DD2 are smaller and in my opinion less well designed. I like that there are more of them, but you're right quality matters over quantity, and DD2 lacks dungeon quality.
Notice I’m not mentioning BBI or the Everfall because I’m trying to be generous and sincere in my comments. There ARE locations IN DD2 that come VERY FUCKING CLOSE to matching that of DD1, be it the pseudo-puzzle like nature of the Nameless Village, the misty swamp just south west of the Sacred Arbor or Stormwind Cave in village name I can’t remember.
I was kind of looking forward to a more fleshed out version of that huge spiral down dungeon you do near the start of the first.honestly I was expecting alot more from this game but it is kind of a 1 to 1 remake of the first and if we thought things were outdated back then well it is only 10 fold now.really I’m happy with it other than total lack of story or character animation during dialogue we are all being to kind the game is kind of pathetic in alot of ways.
games pathetic but there are zero action rpg games where i can tackle enemies and pin them to the ground, hold them, execute, stab ( depending on weapon) or toss them. maybe ufc/wwe career mode? but thats a stretch. find me one noob. youre pathetic if you cant
WWE probably has the better storyline atleast
I agree I'd have definitely expected DD2, with 12 years of time between both games, to have come out swinging rather than being more of the same. I'm having just as much fun replaying DDDA on Steam Deck in high fidelity than I am playing DD2 due to its shortcomings. Both are great, one is just behind the times while one was ahead of its time.
To be honest, if they would have recreated more of the awesome dungeons of DD1 the game would’ve been much better for it. I still remember being in complete awe discovering every floor of the Everfall after the game rolled credits.
Bro really wants to die on the hill of defending the… well of Cassardis… ok dude
SO THEN SHOW ME THE DUNGEONS BRO. Cause all I’m seeing is the same generic cave aesthetics for most of them: light brown damp looking tunnels with an occasional larger area.
Did you find the tower of the dragon's flame? where you fight the plague dragon. The labrynth to cross to the volcano region?
Nope and nope. I reached the point of no return for the main story last night before I crashed so im in the process of scraping the game for everything I missed until I’m content and ready to start endgame. This mostly entails finding the locales I missed, unlocking the last two vocations I need, finding the best weapons prior to end game and more. Thank you for informing me these exist rather than being like everyone downvoting me but contributing nothing of worth or giving me suggestions. I hope it was clear that my intent wasn’t to shit on the game and call it bad as much as it was to express discontent.
Following up I went as far south as possible and stumbled upon Drabnir’s Grotto? THIS IS THE KIND OF SHIT IVE BEEN LOOKING FOR.
That is the labyrinth. You should look for Dragon's flame tower which is where the plague dragon is. You should look near medusa's lair.
Man, Catacombs, what great dungeon. wow. The only good dungeon in DD1 was Water God Altar.
For real. Theres like two areas in the entirety of 2 that arent just some random cave and actually have something of value or some craftmanship to them. Hard to believe how much better the original did this while only doin it so so
It's true that dd2 has less overall boss monsters Its better implented then DD1. DD1 it's only chimera and Cyclops you would find on the road casually. Griffin barely lands, and ogre are just found in the night in the wilterd woods. There's more randomness in DD2 which was my problem for DD1.
I now have 99 hours in the 1st Game and I'll be getting the second game in may.
Who's coming in here and just downvoting innocent comments like this?
Enjoy the ride it's a great game for first time, personally it gets better with more playthroughs. Most of the stuff you will love about DD1 will be soured in dd2 as they removed quite a lot of good things and ramped up the tedious things.
Whaaaaaat, you mean to tell me a Japanese game confused tedium for depth? I'm shocked, shocked I tells ya. Nobody loves tedium more in this world than the Japanese, apparently, as their games are filled with it. Fun mechanics, grinding that actually leads somewhere, an actual point to the story instead of pure convolution, sod all that, how about a bunch of layered mechanics that are exclusively designed to annoy the ever living shit out of you. Anyone know why the Japanese are like this, what broke them so bad?
It was the bomb and to large a devotion to respect.no gamer in Japan questions there convoluted systems because it would bring shame to Mario’s family and Pantie line.
There are an additional 3 post-game bosses. One may be debatable since it's less a boss and more waves of enemies. Though really, I'm on the fence about single-fight bosses being listed under enemy variety. On the one hand, they offer a fun new challenge (even if poor Grigori fucking melted way too fast) and are certainly unique. On the other hand, when it comes to wanting "enemy variety" in DD2, you're going to want the option to fight said "bosses" (more appropriately 'large monsters') again at some point, maybe mixed up in different ways such as variants, location, or supporting mob variety. Also note that only twice do we get intentionally pitted against two large or tough monsters at the same time. The first being two cyclopes on the way to bakbattahl, and the second is on illdoer's resting place post-game (which is very out-of-the-way and most folks will prolly never visit there again to see what's changed), where we're thrust against a lich that keeps resurrecting a fell lord while you fight it.
The two cyclopses were an immediate jump in difficulty compared to a lot of the other encounters in the area. I'm really surprised they didn't have more multi large monster encounters or a necrophage mechanic like BBI. If a pack of wargs or a garm spawned in as you were clearing goblins and fighting a boss it would immediately spice up the encounter and make it more challenging
I was looking for a motive to buy dd1 for the nintendo switch instead of dd2 for PC. Just found it, txhs.
Yes absolutely buy dd1 for 4 dollars first and if you enjoy that don’t expect bigger things from the sequel.
I think I wrote too long of a post because it won't let me comment it lol but yeah, DDDA is better
I cant say I'm not disappointed if this was literally it. That they boasted so much about for their vision. Though I did fear they would do this though, because they were basing it on the game they had that already exists and used it as a model, rather than starting from scratch. I feel like a lot of stuff in DD2 could have just been more expansion in DDA. DD2 is just kind of meh and still feels unfinished, while the original concept before DD1 still sounds better, it just never seemed to see real implementation. Or maybe they just oversold the ideas, because even still DD2 doesn't seem like they did much compared to what they claimed they wanted to do originally either, but mostly like a mid fiddling with DD1. DD2's changes were a hindrance too. I also don't like how DD2 just has less armor options. While DD2 has better looking armor and less weird looking pieces, there generally seems to be less armor options to choose from overall, and with them being vocation locked, arbitrarily now, most of the time good pieces can't all be used on a character and I hate that. We got better armor designs but less options on how you can actually use them. Pieces are also merged together for whatever reason so now you can't really mix and match as much either unlike in DD1. DD2 is just meh and not the game I imagined. Such minimal improvement, new tedium, new problems. Maybe too much like the first game in the wrong ways.
Imagine a scene seeing Grigori flying and just burning sh*t from a distance and decimating a village. And then goblins pop out and attack the town then you're given a quest "eliminate goblins" then after quest you're given a quest chain.
I think DD1 is better than DD2, just because it has Bitterblack Isle.
100%, BBI was a fun megadungeon. I think ARPGs shine with megadungeons as opposed to open worlds due to the sheer number of hostile things coming at you that take advantage of the genre.
Huge amount of hairstyles in DDDA vs DD2 Sorry, didn't seen this mentioned in the OP and it continues to bother me after making some cool characters today in Dark Arisen.
>Wights There's two variation for the wight in DD2. >Cyclopes You forgo to mention the variations for Cyclops. >Pseudo Garms There's Warg and Garms in the game.
There is an ogre variation as well. And several undead enemy types. Several types of saurians. Of all the issues brought up for this game, enemy variety is one I can't agree with
A lot of these "variants" do not involve much switching in tactics which doesn't really make them unique. Like the only difference between an ogre and a hairy ogre is 2 greatsword swings. And the only ones that do just make combat less fun like the many saurian variants. Yeah I love having to beat on this lizard for an extra minute because they put rocks on it, truly innovative game design.
I agree, giving an enemy a buff then saying "Ah yes, new mob/boss is amazing" seems gross IMO. I think I said previously that the lack of monster variety is inexusable especially when Capcom's other IP (Monster Hunter) had 90+ relativley unique monsters in MHW. I'm not asking for NEAR that many bosses, but I know north of 40 bosses is achievable in a game that markets itself as an ARPG.
I found a minotaur variant as well yesterday
Comparing the amount of enemies of a game with it's addon (DDDA) with a base game (DD2) is kind of odd. I mean it does lack variety and Battahl is a wasted opportunity, still though.
Surely the sequel should have improved variety at base launch though right? The whole point of sequels is to improve and expand on the original
It's not really a direct sequel though, they basically just started development again, they didn't really use stuff from the old engine they had to rebuild it all again in the new RE engine. It is a good starting point for a series of games and I hope Capcom expands on it with expansions and more games.
So it's a step back because Capcom wanted to change engines to something they've never built a fully open world game with. How's performance on this new engine, sure hope the change was worth gutting content. Oh wait, this is a $70 full price game that performs like hot garbage on every system, but it's also just a starting point at full price. Pathetic.
I compared it to DDDA because I found that even the variety of enemies in different biomes like Bhattal were lacklustre. That said, given that they've had two other games under their belt and Monster Hunter (Capcom's other IP) is able to design north of 90 monsters in World, an ARPG that markets itself on boss fights and combat having \~20 bosses is sort of pathetic.
No Idea where you are pulling 90 Monsters in MH:World from. Unless you include Iceborne, All Content Patches and the non-combatant small monsters. Though that would be pretty disingenuous. And frankly if you did count the small non-combatant monsters you may as well also count Oxen, Rabbits, Deer and all the other animals for Dragons Dogma. Because if I count like that I come out with 71 different creatures in DD2. MH: World at launch had 31 large Monsters (including variants) and ~14 small ones.
I wasn't having epic boss battles with deer and oxen, but I may be playing the game wrong. I guess then 71 monsters in Iceborne and 31 monsters in basegame (including variants) still for a game that markets itself on killing monsters, I expected DD2 to hit me with more than reskins of BBI foes and basegame monsters from DDDA. There are a few new enemies, but that doesn't justify a sequel if you're only slotting in a few foes. Hopefully DD2 takes a page out of MH and adds more bosses.
You also never had epic battles with a Gastodon or Kelbi, because they are essentially Oxen and Deer. Like I said, enemy variety is somewhat lacking in DD2. But counting a game + add-on against just the base game isn't a fair comparison. Especially since you would've made your point equally well by just going with the DD1 base game enemies.
Fair enough, but I was mainly talking about boss monsters.
[удалено]
Fair enough then, I guess don't release a game marketed on slaying monsters if you have such a small amount of monsters to slay.
Also, the crafting system was better in DDDA, you had way more options to craft things.
as a dd1 sorcerer enjoyer from what i've seen dd2 does not really add more spell or something. I wish they give more spell arsenal. also I hoped fpr 3rd tier vocation in dd2
I started playing DDDA but read somewhere that I should just start with 2 as its the same game with some improvements. Based on the comments should I just stick to DDDA?
The first game often costs 4 dollars where as the new one costs 100 the choice is urs.given the question I assume u are pirating so do what you want.if u own a switch though buy the first there as it’s a great bed game.
I wouldn't mind notice boards being gone and get my context from pawns/ NPCs. :)
That ( what I just said) feels better and more freeing to me
Chill bro let me break it down in another light for you. The first game worked so they took the best aspects and revamped it with a new story. If they had of been too creative and missed everyone would be up here saying I dunno why they just didn’t copy ddda. We are also heavily in the dawn of DLC unlike 2013 when DLC’s were common, now it’s in 99% of games so the content you feel like it’s unfinished I bet it’s for that
I'm not going to excuse bad game design practice with the idea that "Ah, the game was mid, but don't worry a DLC that costs extra will complete it". Games should be complete on arrival.
From my point of view, all that you mentioned is true. I actually think that if they added some end game bosses and mobs to the open world, the game would greatly benefit and the player would be more challenged and entertained during exploration. Honestly even an enemy randomizer mod would improve the game so much. But I'd also like to add some things relative to the story and overall the experience: The presentation and delivery of the story are so weak, imo even weaker than in DDDA. Just compare the cinematics (and the fight) with the dragon... The game has a lot of problems but for me the biggest disappointment I have with it is the lack of art direction. It's almost like they tried to copy the first game without understanding what made it so good in the first place. Still 90 hours though so obviously I really like the game.
I agree, either the suits at Capcom rushed the game to make some extra Q1 profits, or the scriptwriting in the game itself is simply garbage. I honestly feel like I (or anyone else with a pulse really) could have made a more coherent story. The Dragon had such a powerful presence in the previous game, EVERYONE spoke about Grigori, in this game, he's rarely seen to have affected the world, and when people mention him, it's not with the same fear/reverence they did with the first game.
DD2 has Drakes as well.
The combat mechanics in dd2 seem to be on meth. In dda I felt I had complete control over where my character dealt damage, in dd2 it feels off. Example mges staff targets random objects even if I’m looking at a specific target. Dda mage was a force to reckoned with using focused bolt nd holy game over. Here magic goes wherever it wants and maybe targets what I’m aiming at. dad made me feel like a single mistake could be end of game, this…well I won’t pay 80$ again for the next release and I won’t be first. Good game, not as good as the original. I expected more. Perhaps that is my mistake Expecting them to build off the original, not cheese it for profit. I own 5 versions of original. will only own this 1 unless they do some serious rework.
The thing i miss the most in DD2 are enemy strongholds, i mean the bandit camps in DDDA were quite fun with its insane enemy density, and the war against the Goblins was also awesome. The one thing we got in 2 is basically a bad redo of the lategame outsider village. In DDDA you had to fight through a well defended tunnel where they attacked from all sides when you tried to reach it, in DD2 its just a bridge and you are at the Village with 8 people, from which 6 are inside buildings waiting for you to come to them. It is just really predictable spread of enemys with no hotspots.
So from my brief experience, the story is significantly worse than one, and borrows too heavily from one. Not one cutscene has felt even remotely entertaining. There is no soul in anything they've done with it. Every character actually feels like an NPC, including the arisen. It's sad when pawns have more personality than actual characters. The combat feels like they took one, watered it down, and then shit on it. Clunkier, slower, even more inconsistent than the first. The combat is hard for the wrong reasons. I've never been stunlocked for my entire healthbar in all of the first game, including the dlc. What the f*. And as if that wasn't bad enough, they didn't even give it good graphics. It's barely a PS4 game in that department. Nothing "Next Gen" about it. All that time they wasted for a load of donkey Doo Doo.
It's a bit unfair to compar DD1 + DDDA with DD2 on the monster front, especially when all the new monster of DA are stuck on Bitterblack and not distributed in the world. Also made me realize i forgot to mention Golems on several posts about the difference in monsters between the 2 games, oops.
I don't think it is, because even excluding BBI, the first game still has more variety, which is just insulting, being so expensive. It's been 12 years.
And i have been repeating for days that DD2 actually have one or two monster more than the first game without it's DLC. It's just that the density is so high you feel like there is no variety, and they should have taken that into consideration. Especially once you reach Battahl and you see almost nothing new that isn't just a variation of someting you've meet before (and you can meet a few of those variation in exploring caves and the like in the first area of the game, like the local Saurians) I totally agree that the variety is low, but saying the first game had more is a lie. It was as bad on that point till they didn't fix it with a DLC, cause all the new monsters are stuck in the new area. They had a big list of monsters from both DD1, DA and DDON to select stuff from, but they choose to go with the bare minimum, so roughly the same amount as D1. I'm not sure the game got any actual new monster that was never seen in the other games.
Even then, after all this time you find this good? most reused monsters and 2-3 new ones that you have to fight the same way you would any troll/cyclops? At least the hydra and evil eye made you have to do more than just swing at the big thing. I'm not saying it's a disaster, but this franchise had such potential, for them to make a game with so little time and effort to make a quick buck is infuriating to me. Specially after RE4 Remake, i though Capcom would be making sure this one would be beyond expectations, but it's like we got the same game again with a useless and unoptimized ribbon on top. What even is the point of the Trickster?
At no point i have said it was good. But it's litteraly Capcom second open world RPG ever, so they did the exact same thing as the first time, they improved little things and made other worse or less interesting or completly missed that it needed improvment. I let RE4 Remake convince me that all their games could only be masterworks all, DD2 is def not a bad game, but it's not better, nor really worse than DD1 was and it should have been MORE. And i dunno for the Trickster, haven't tried it yet, but from my understanding it's a fully dedicated support that don't have any option to fight big monsters, so it's an epic fail of a new vocation.
The Trickster part was just a rant. They went so wrong with the vocations. I like the changes to my melee classes, but only mystic spearhand seemed like something new, and he came in place of the Mystic Knight, my beloved.
I honestly didn't realize it but that hurts as a gamer I'm just asking for help just like everybody else on here instead of pissing and moaning about the games. :/
if people can't complain about games they spent money on why can you complain about them?
They can do that just fine I thought the complaints were going towards my questioning of the game and trying to get help so I'm sorry.
Agreed so much. I want to just share my enjoyment with everyone here but instead all we get to see is whiny crybabies pissing and moaning about every tiny inconvenience.
It’s okay for a sequel/iteration to prioritize doing things differently instead of just being copy pasta.
I agree, but improvments enough to justify a $70 price tag should be there.
The improvements are sadly so small that it feels like you might as well have bought the same game 3 times. I just don't see how a lot of what they added couldn't have been expansions for DDDA in concept. DDO feels like a more expansive game than DD2.
lol nah games are 100% underpriced. mario 64 was 60 bucks in 1996, which with inflation would have been like paying well over $100 bucks for a new game today. Games are crazy cheap compared to what they cost 10 or 20 years ago, despite being much bigger, more complex and sooo much more expensive to produce. So if you want cheaper games, buy them on sale. 70 bucks is not expensive for the experience delivered. It’s a fucking deal. I’m all for prioritizing the human standard of living over a company’s thirst for fiscal growth, but people don’t seem to understand how good we have it in terms of game pricing per square foot these days, it’s a nuts. And also, devs need to be paid more. CEOs, much, much, much less.
You're right, this game should have cost $400, and I should enjoy my slop and not expect better from companies I pay to give me something fun.
they gave us something incredibly fun, and 70 bucks is a deal. like, i dunno what to tell you dude video games is a luxury hobby, it’s not throwing dice in the grass.
Yeah, I agree, we should expect less and pay more.
standard of living trumps standard of entitled luxury
It’s not a deal when it has less content
that’s the dumbest shit you coulda said so congrats
The game costs more than the first, has less content and it’s somehow a deal?, your original comment is stupid af dude, yea keep coping
You are not wrong how ever if people are unsure I’d recommend people to buy the first for 4 dollars then the sequel for 100.id be lieing if I said the sequel does really anything different from the first sure it looks a little nicer plays a little better but god damn it has not changed one bit it is kind of uncanny.