I seen kotaku preview they said the game is full of graphical glitches but they really liked it
-
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.
Dragon's Dogma Demo Impressions
- Thread starter Bukana
- Start date
I seen kotaku preview they said the game is full of graphical glitches but they really liked it
It's funny, reviewers are constantly slamming games for not taking enough risks or for not trying to offer something of it's own to make it stand out. Yet, when a game comes along that does these things, they say that it is "trying too hard" or "it mixes too many elements and is not sure what it wants to be." Always something along those lines.
When I read shit like that, the only thing I get out of it is it was written by someone who is jaded to hell and back and nothing is ever quite good enough to get them excited anymore. It's either too much of the same or it's trying too hard because it dares to be different... Then the next COD comes out and gets glowing reviews, lol. Go figure.
They really put no multiplayer as a negative? Jesus Christ. Capcom never said there was going to be a multiplayer. I wander if they list it as a negative for every singleplayer game?
I don't see why. It's perfectly understandable that people would want to play this type of game with friends. Especially with such reliance on AI partners.
I mean, I'm still going to get it. But if it had multiplayer, a bunch of my friends would, too.
Riposte
Member
It is quite silly because I significantly doubt they would ever say that for something like Skyrim. I shouldn't need to remind anyone that had AI companions as well, of which seem far worse than what we are getting in Dragon's Dogma.
Never played and don't care about skyrim. I do know that I'm saddled with an AI companion by default in this game, and I'd rather that be a friend.
Multiplayer makes things better for some people. If it's not a negative to you, disregard that aspect of the review.
Onion_Relish
Member
I remember this cropping up with killzone 2 as well. It got dinged for no campaign co-op which it was never supposed to have. You cannot punish a game for not having something it explicitly set out not to have.
My problem is that multiplayer is not needed for everything and in some cases doesn't make sense when you look at what something is suppose to be. A game should be reviews on it's own merits, not on what one wishes was in the game. Especially if the developers never intended for something to be in the game. Would it be right to knock a FPS for not having a third person view? Sure some would like it but why hold it against the game when it's suppose to be a first person shooter? This happens to many times with gaming media. Reviewing a game with what they wish it had in mind instead of reviewing the game as it is and as the developers intended it to be.
Exactly. It would be akin to a restaurant critic going out to a wonderful Italian restaurant, and then marking it down because it didn't have Pad Thai. I mean, Pad Thai is great and a lot of people love Pad Thai, but it's not what the restaurant does, you know?
It makes no sense to count something against a game when it was never a feature. Its like playing Mario and saying that Mario not having an arm cannon like Megaman is a negative.
Yep. It's an agenda like that from reviewers that is ultimately the reason why seemingly every single game has unnecessary MP or co-op elements. They dock points and list it as a negative and it affects metacritic, then next thing you know DD 2 will have 4 player co-op and it will absolutely ruin the game.
So enjoy this one while it lasts people. I know I will.
radios shipping overview
Member
My quick impressions after a few runs through (nothing new to this thread, I'm sure):
+ Very polished graphical look, especially when it comes to light. The way it handles night reminds me of that New Vegas mod that gives you pitch darkness
+ Character creation was great. I like the grids of preset choices it gives you. Character faces look great. Too bad all that depth is a total tease for the demo.
+ Nonstandard body types (including the ability to make females that aren't tiny waifs) are a huge plus and a step forward for player choice
- I wanted to explore, but the demo cut that short with glass walls and two messy and short fights
- Combat feels really mashy and flat (maybe this is intentional for the demo)
- The party dynamic makes it feel like the pawns are doing most of the work and I'm just along for the ride
- Way too much crap on the screen until you turn off most of the UI options
- Framerate makes it hard to follow all the action onscreen (PS3 version)
- Feels very focus-grouped and smoothed-over, like the game won't offer too many genuine surprises or identity of its own. The game seems terrified that it will alienate me
What will make this game for me is how much it lets me explore and how much reward I get for going out of my way and play the way I want to. I'm worried that they're trying too hard to make this appeal to some nebulous average gamer, when that could suck a lot of the game's identity out of it. Monster Hunter is quirky and that's okay. I hope DD is, too.
+ Very polished graphical look, especially when it comes to light. The way it handles night reminds me of that New Vegas mod that gives you pitch darkness
+ Character creation was great. I like the grids of preset choices it gives you. Character faces look great. Too bad all that depth is a total tease for the demo.
+ Nonstandard body types (including the ability to make females that aren't tiny waifs) are a huge plus and a step forward for player choice
- I wanted to explore, but the demo cut that short with glass walls and two messy and short fights
- Combat feels really mashy and flat (maybe this is intentional for the demo)
- The party dynamic makes it feel like the pawns are doing most of the work and I'm just along for the ride
- Way too much crap on the screen until you turn off most of the UI options
- Framerate makes it hard to follow all the action onscreen (PS3 version)
- Feels very focus-grouped and smoothed-over, like the game won't offer too many genuine surprises or identity of its own. The game seems terrified that it will alienate me
What will make this game for me is how much it lets me explore and how much reward I get for going out of my way and play the way I want to. I'm worried that they're trying too hard to make this appeal to some nebulous average gamer, when that could suck a lot of the game's identity out of it. Monster Hunter is quirky and that's okay. I hope DD is, too.
Baconsammy
Banned
I felt the same way after I played the demo. The first time. Then I played it again and turned off cinematics, turned off all the silly nonsense that was going on in the UI, and controlled my pawns better and the game started to get much better. The main problem is that the demo sucks. It drops you in on two fights and then it's over. Comparing it to the Amalur demo is fair. And that demo is far superior to DD's demo, but the final product wasn't. Watching videos of DD's final product shows off why the pawns are great, and why you'll want them and need them.
I much prefer Amalur's combat and visual style, but they destroyed that game by not properly balance testing it. So no matter what good it has, I overlook it because the game itself on the highest difficulty setting is a bore due to it being so damn easy. And I'm not the kind of gamer that specifically seeks out difficult games, but I can't stand easy RPG.
Between the bad, yet promising, demo and all the positive previews, I personally deemed it worthy of a release-day purchase. Obviously that could change if more 70ish reviews come out (with more valid complaints than "hurrrr no multiplayer"), but I won't wait long to get it.
MagicWithEarvin
Member
Co-op would only improve the experience in a game like Dragon's Dogma, especially if the co-op isn't forced and you can still play offline with your Pawns. I really hope they go that route if this franchise takes off.
Onion_Relish
Member
To me it is more like criticising a truck with a short box for not having a long box. Yes they can both carry loads, but the short box isn't designed to carry huge ass things of lumber or tow big loads, it is built for similar but sometimes unrelated activities. And let's be real here, this game is supposedly huge, imagine how much worse it would be with trying to shoehorn in mp? How many people are actually going to have a contiguous experience with a friend in a game well over 30 hours long? How disorienting would it be to pop into someone's game demons souls style and not know what the person you're playing with wants to do? It's a bunch of nonsense and doesn't hold up to any kind of reasonable scrutiny. I look forward to hiring gaf pawns and letting gaffers know what they did or didn't do.
Okay, I lied. I'm not done.
You assume I give a fuck about a continuous experience. I don't.
I'm in this to kill monsters and get cool gear. Being able to call on a friend when I'm going to take down monsters would be awesome.
So, yeah, the fact that' I'm forced to play with some shitty AI pawn the entire game without the option to play with a friend is a negative in my eyes.
MagicWithEarvin
Member
First review from GamePro (German)? User on GameFAQs posted this:
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/626514-dragons-dogma/62693897
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/626514-dragons-dogma/62693897
You can disagree but you're wrong. You are, in fact, criticizing it for something that was never even hinted at for it. It isn't often one of those "my opinion" stances can be wrong but it is wrong.
For example, right now I am going to say that my house is an asshole because it doesn't have ice cream in it. Now, its my fault for expecting it to have ice cream not the houses and you can tell me I'm wrong, but I am pissed off and going to tell people on a forum why they are wrong even though I most likely am.
Especially since I can get my ice cream elsewhere.
OH SNAP
Edit:
"So, yeah, the fact that' I'm forced to play with some shitty AI pawn the entire game without the option to play with a friend is a negative in my eyes"
Damn that entire 2nd post was bitchy but this one line takes the cake. How about someone like me who when multiplayer is tacked onto a game it is a negative in my eyes? Oh wait, tacked on multiplayer pisses EVERYONE off except apparently you and reviewers. Fuck forced multiplayer not every god damn game needs to have it and I most likely wont buy it.
Baconsammy
Banned
It's a party-focused game with no co-op. I can actually see why some reviewers will ding it for that. I already decided it wasn't a deal breaker for me personally.
Hahaha, you quoted someone that quoted someone from here.
Hahaha, you quoted someone that quoted someone from here.
Dusk Golem
A 21st Century Rockefeller
My stance on it is that it's unfair to weigh the game not having co-op as a negative against the game, BUT it is fair to say that a co-op element would have both increased replay value and consumer interest marginally and can easily be seen as a feature that would work well with the game's mechanics.
It's kind of like how I feel about New Super Mario Bros Wii and Kirby Returns to Dreamland not having online. I would never knock down my score of them for not having them, but you can't help but think that it would of been nice to have online in those games.
It's kind of like how I feel about New Super Mario Bros Wii and Kirby Returns to Dreamland not having online. I would never knock down my score of them for not having them, but you can't help but think that it would of been nice to have online in those games.
MagicWithEarvin
Member
Doing some research, looks like that GamePro German review is legit.
Man, I really enjoyed the demo. Reminds me a lot of monster hunter but in a more over-the-top way. I hate the pawns though and no co-op is a deal breaker for me personally.
I'm with the crew that thinks it's stupid to ding this game in reviews for not having multiplayer. It's obviously intended as a single player game, so rating it on it's multiplayer experience seems like an exercise in stupid. Nonetheless, co-op would have made this a day one purchase for me. As it stands now I'll wait until it's cheaper and hope that the sequel (if there is one) has co-op proper.
I also don't understand why co-op would "ruin" this game. Obviously if they added it now it would unbalance everything and cock it up, but if they had planned co-op from the beginning then I think it would be fine. It is 2012, co-op is kinda a big thing for lots of people.
I'm with the crew that thinks it's stupid to ding this game in reviews for not having multiplayer. It's obviously intended as a single player game, so rating it on it's multiplayer experience seems like an exercise in stupid. Nonetheless, co-op would have made this a day one purchase for me. As it stands now I'll wait until it's cheaper and hope that the sequel (if there is one) has co-op proper.
I also don't understand why co-op would "ruin" this game. Obviously if they added it now it would unbalance everything and cock it up, but if they had planned co-op from the beginning then I think it would be fine. It is 2012, co-op is kinda a big thing for lots of people.
My opinion can't be wrong. And my opinion is that it would be better to play with a friend than an AI party member. That I'm forced to play with AI is a negative to me, since I don't enjoy relying on AI, and I would rather not. I don't see how coop would be tacked on in this instance since I'm forced to play with a 2nd player at all times. If you enjoy the AI, that's on you. I don't and would like the option of playing with a friend. The lack of that option is a criticism I have against the game. I also don't play very many games with multiplayer (pretty much only fighters), so I don't know what that has to do with what you're saying to me.
What is it with people and metaphors? lol. Ice cream, trucks, restaurants...hahaha.
I disagree based on the sole experience I have with pawns in the demo. 1 of them was constantly trying to throw me up to the floating griffon and another would heal us when it was needed and throw a fire buff spell at me that lit my arrows on fire to help bring the griffon down easier when it was flying in the air.
I can't depend on humans to do that and do it at the proper time. Other humans are incredibly unreliable.
Meccanical
Member
One time that mage pawn perfectly timed a comestion spell while the Griffin was nearing the ground to set it on fire mid flight and send it crashing to the ground.
That is some skill right there, the A.I. is fantastic and I don't see this shit as an issue.
That is some skill right there, the A.I. is fantastic and I don't see this shit as an issue.
I saw the pad thai and the truck box reference and didn't want to be left out is all...
Seriously though, you can't FAULT it for something that you want and it doesn't have. That is why you are wrong, you are asking for something they never took away from you. I mean people throw 'entitled' around all the time here but this is an ACTUAL example of it!
Also, wheres my fucking ice cream?
Don't generalize. Adding real Co-op isn't something you can attack. Also Adding Co-op doesn't mean it won't have pawns.
The real danger in adding co-op is having to balance the game.
In basically all instances, a human player will act much more efficiently and effectively than an AI pawn. To balance for that, encounter difficulty would have to be tuned up, or the co-op players may be bored out of their minds. Tune up the difficulty too much, and you make the game unplayably difficult for a segment of the single-player population.
Witness already the legion of people in this thread complaining about difficulty. Now imagine the studio having to tune the entire game for single-player and co-op.
That's not an inconsequential amount of resources being expended. Not to mention the time needed to program in the co-op mode itself. That's potentially time that could be spent improving the single-player experience.
That being said, I'm not necessarily opposed to including co-op in future titles in this series. I just think dinging this game for not having it when it was never scoped to have it is unfair.
MagicWithEarvin
Member
LOL, come guys. If a game clearly has the mechanics set up for co-op, then I believe it's fair to question the design in question, but of course not be overly critical of the game for its exclusion. Enough with the food and truck metaphor bullshit, haha.
While I understand why the co-op crowd wants it here, the game was designed to be a single player experience with a unique interactive element from day one. That element being the Pawn System. It should be judged squarely on whether or not that said element works well within the context of what the game is. Not have points deducted because the reviewer wished it had multiplayer. That is just plain misinformed, self-centered reviewing that lacks any real objectivity. In other words, the worst kind of review.
Shadow of the BEAST
Banned
ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NAILED IT.
A big problem with multiplayer rpg: your not really leveling the same speed as your friends. despite the fact that you only play together and never alone.
itsuno said it in an interview, with DD you are not dependant on your buddies scedule.
i really appreciate that way of thinking. i played Monster Hunter with a buddy who was far more experienced than me. sure, i learned a lot from him, but there was never a real challenge beating the quests until i reached the level cap myself...
in phantasy star universe it was the same. every day i hadn't time to play, my buddies gained level after level and finally i lost the interest in playing the game. i couldn't join their quests anymore, alone it wasn't fun, random people i played with were 90% morons ...
i think i spent most of my time then searching for nice people to play with.
same with my girlfriend. she likes to play games like this, but i play a little bit more per week. so i am outleveling her in a matter of days ... sure, i can play two chars, but these kind of games (DD or MH) have a fair amount of grinding. doing this multiple times is also really boring.
i understand, that people miss multiplayer in DD, but i don't understand how this could be a deal breaker. but well... 24 days for me left til all discussion is obsolete
itsuno said it in an interview, with DD you are not dependant on your buddies scedule.
i really appreciate that way of thinking. i played Monster Hunter with a buddy who was far more experienced than me. sure, i learned a lot from him, but there was never a real challenge beating the quests until i reached the level cap myself...
in phantasy star universe it was the same. every day i hadn't time to play, my buddies gained level after level and finally i lost the interest in playing the game. i couldn't join their quests anymore, alone it wasn't fun, random people i played with were 90% morons ...
i think i spent most of my time then searching for nice people to play with.
same with my girlfriend. she likes to play games like this, but i play a little bit more per week. so i am outleveling her in a matter of days ... sure, i can play two chars, but these kind of games (DD or MH) have a fair amount of grinding. doing this multiple times is also really boring.
i understand, that people miss multiplayer in DD, but i don't understand how this could be a deal breaker. but well... 24 days for me left til all discussion is obsolete
Windom Earle
Member
Not sure if it's reason enough to deduct one point from the X360 version, but the game does look better on PS3. Sharper overall look and less blurry textures.
I don't mind having both MP and SP in my game, but the focus and criticism should be on the faulty AIs since that's actually part of the concept they were going for and feature of the game, and not something they never planned to put in.
Rico AI sucks in Killzone 2, and that should've been the focus, not complaining about coop, uncharted's story campaign don't have multiplayer, but it works with AIs teammate because they were not annoying, adding coop isn't going to make some of those parts better either considering how small and scripted those areas are, so complaining about coop is kind of silly there and it would most likely be silly here.
Reviewers and gamers should really judge the game based on what it's going for, deduct a point if it doesn't work, it would be reasonable.
Rico AI sucks in Killzone 2, and that should've been the focus, not complaining about coop, uncharted's story campaign don't have multiplayer, but it works with AIs teammate because they were not annoying, adding coop isn't going to make some of those parts better either considering how small and scripted those areas are, so complaining about coop is kind of silly there and it would most likely be silly here.
Reviewers and gamers should really judge the game based on what it's going for, deduct a point if it doesn't work, it would be reasonable.
That would be true to skyrim but Dogma is already balanced for many players (pawns).
As of your Co-Op demanding aspect. Bunch of modders already have working Co-OP in skyrim. So if modders can do it then it isn't as demanding as probably you see it.
Also why the hell game should be balanced completly diffrent for one player and 3. That's look like poor design of game world.
Notice Dark souls Co-oP. 0 Balancing for 2-3-4 players. What Co-op gives you ? Real Help.
Thanks to Coop you can fights with stronger enemies.
What Coop gives you in most games is changing HP and quantity of monsters.
Onion_Relish
Member
I guess the ultimate point to take from all of the bitching and complaining is the fact that if we actually had the game we could be discussing its merits rather than what could have been. Anyone got a time machine?
I'm not asking for something. I'm saying it would make me enjoy the game more. I am required to play with an AI member. I would rather have the option to A: play with a friend or B: play alone. The game is already balanced around having many pawns. I really don't see how that's entitlement, since I'm commenting on something I know would allow for more entertainment for me, and would be an option that takes away nothing from those who prefer single player.
We will have to see about that
since people are already wondering if pawns will just make the game extremely easy.A big problem with multiplayer rpg: your not really leveling the same speed as your friends. despite the fact that you only play together and never alone.
itsuno said it in an interview, with DD you are not dependent on your buddies schedule.
i really appreciate that way of thinking. i played Monster Hunter with a buddy who was far more experienced than me. sure, i learned a lot from him, but there was never a real challenge beating the quests until i reached the level cap myself...
in phantasy star universe it was the same. every day i hadn't time to play, my buddies gained level after level and finally i lost the interest in playing the game. i couldn't join their quests anymore, alone it wasn't fun, random people i played with were 90% morons ...
i think i spent most of my time then searching for nice people to play with.
same with my girlfriend. she likes to play games like this, but i play a little bit more per week. so i am outleveling her in a matter of days ... sure, i can play two chars, but these kind of games (DD or MH) have a fair amount of grinding. doing this multiple times is also really boring.
i understand, that people miss multiplayer in DD, but i don't understand how this could be a deal breaker. but well... 24 days for me left til all discussion is obsolete
Pretty much. Of course, no AI partners are going to be quite as effective as playing with real people, but it does have benefits. In a game like this, I want to turn the lights out and get absorbed in the world and go at my pace. I don't want to have to deal with people talking, acting stupid, wanting me to follow them around, quitting during quests, etc. That would just plain suck.
Of course there is the argument that co-op could have just been added in addition to the single player. But at what expense? Sure, the co-op crowd would be happy, but there is the other side who would not want the single player content compromised. In the end, you can't please everyone, but thankfully there are more than enough multiplayer-centric games for those who want that to be the primary focus. Meanwhile, let us single player fans have our games as well. There is room enough for us all.
New interview with Kobayashi: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2012/may/01/interview-dragons-dogma-producer
If there was co op then, while it'd be fun to run around with some friends punching monsters in the face, it might end up like my experiences with playing with strangers on games such as Crackdown 2 and Borderlands. Specifically I'd be playing away but there'd be people with incredibly powerful weapons/higher stats etc completing the game for me.
I actually saw the credits roll for Crackdown 2 after I'd completed two of the islands because some sods were away off bouncing up the Agency tower doing the final mission. That sucked. Some other people finished of Borderlands for me. And when I saw that kind of thing happening again on Dead Island, I had to play it offline from there on.
So, yep, I'm not missing co op in DD.
I actually saw the credits roll for Crackdown 2 after I'd completed two of the islands because some sods were away off bouncing up the Agency tower doing the final mission. That sucked. Some other people finished of Borderlands for me. And when I saw that kind of thing happening again on Dead Island, I had to play it offline from there on.
So, yep, I'm not missing co op in DD.
Shadow of the BEAST
Banned
Im glad capcom had the balls not to make it coop. Brave move.
Games designed around coop usually end up being a completely different experience. We have already seen how they ruined resident evil with that shit.
Games designed around coop usually end up being a completely different experience. We have already seen how they ruined resident evil with that shit.
Kobayashi is just making shit up now about the traveling hours, I'm sure Itsuno says an hour or two in the first stream
MagicWithEarvin
Member
Dragon's Dogma |OT| Fence Sitters, there is no damn co-op and it isn't Monster Hunter
Dragon's Dogma |OT| Fence Sitters, there is no damn co-op and it isn't Monster Hunter and it's definitely not souls either
is that too long?
need to add skyrim in there somewhere
The amount of attention modders can give a game can often dwarf what an actual developer can do. The result of not having a budget or time limit, and the fact that it's a labor of love.
And simply increasing the amount of HP and quantity is the lazy way to do balance.
I'd just say "no damn multiplayer", because some people may still hope for PVP a la Souls.