• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

After seeing Dragons Dogma, Witcher 3's Griffin fight was disappointing

Sarcasm said:
Hated Witcher's combat, especially in 1.
Click to expand...

I thought it was a good evolution of hack and slash combat and was sad when no Diablo clones ever tried to replicate it.

I mean, sure, it wasn't perfect, but the necessity to time the clicks felt like such a huge improvement over typical mindless clicking, which always kills those kind of games for me. I can easily ignore dull combat in favor of other aspects of the game, but combat is the only thin all those Diablo clones have...ughh..
 
We think the same way


also after watching the Dragon fight from the Dragon age 3 demos

How can you make a fight with a dragon so boring????

even in skyrim the first couple fights were somewhat interesting.

I don't think any rpg can come close to the greatness that was Dragon's dogma combat
They actually made Sorcery/ Mage and magic classes fun for me and I hated spells/magic using in pretty much every rpg til then

Dark Souls combat is awesome but it's not the same type of badassness that was in DD

pls Capcom do the right thing
 
Morrigan Stark said:
I really hated that. Then again you don't strafe in DD and yet it works, so I don't know why it's so clunky in The Witcher, but somehow it is.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I said! :D

Screaming Meat said:
W2 doesn't have a lock-on let you strafe and the combat is a pain in the ass, so much so that I stopped playing it after an hour.

DD doesn't have a lock-on let you strafe and the combat is fabulous, so much so that I'm still playing it after a year.

Weird.
Click to expand...
 
I'm with the OP here. I played both Witchers so far (I kinda had fun with W2's combat back in the day, actually) and I'm really excited for part 3, but after watching that Griffin video, I was all "meh."

It's not just about the over the top nature of Dogma, as that wouldn't really fit in the Witcher games (not like they don't have over the top moments, but w/e). It's about variation, the number of options, the natural feel of the fight. It's about the fact that my several first Griffin battles in Dogma ended in a draw, because a wounded Griffin just flew away.

One can't help it that a brain is going to naturally make comparisons after seeing a similar feature implemented in a superior manner. So the OP has the right to feel underwhelmed as the Witcher 3 gameplay showcase was obviously meant to impress, and failed to do so.
 
SparkTR said:
'Action' RPG genre, TW3 isn't in that genre. Combat is just one aspect of TW3 as opposed to a centerpiece, there's so much more important stuff to focus on than making fights more action-oriented. I'm more concerned about how deep the C&C will extend in the game, considering the development time/complexity and whatnot.
Click to expand...

How is it not an ARPG?
 
Really though, Dragon's Dogma is just second-to-none in the combat arena. It is simply the best there is. So, to be fair, everything looks bad next to it.

In fact, I wouldn't complain at all if every game developer under the sun started using it as a model for how to do action combat right in an ARPG. That would be the best possible scenario. Unfortunately, I get the impression that even while using it as a reference, there are very few developers in the world who could pull it off competently. What a shame.
 
Taruranto said:
Yeah, but on other hand DD was awful in everything but the combat system.
Click to expand...

DD was awful in everything but gameplay, environments, character progression, and enemies? Oh no.

On the other hand, Witcher 1 & 2 were awful in everything except graphics, branching story, and soft-core porn. Actually, the storytelling was hamfisted and glitchy and the soft-core porn was pretty awful as well. So, really just graphics.

CDPR needs to up their game.
 
The Witcher 3 as a whole looks dull and unimaginative (also it has one of the worst walking/running animations I've ever seen).
 
emag said:
DD was awful in everything but gameplay, environments, character progression, and enemies? Oh no.

On the other hand, Witcher 1 & 2 were awful in everything except graphics, branching story, and soft-core porn. Actually, the storytelling was hamfisted and glitchy and the soft-core porn was pretty awful as well. So, really just graphics.

CDPR needs to up their game.
Click to expand...

Replace gameplay with combat system. There is more to what makes gameplay than just the gameplay.

And since when are DD's environments anywhere near good?
 
Taruranto said:
Yeah, but on other hand DD was awful in everything but the combat system.
Click to expand...

That kind of comment is somewhat silly. We can pull apart games and discuss their individual elements and make judgements about those elements. The point of this thread isn't "Dragon's Dogma is a better game than The Witcher 3", it is "The Witcher series would be even more awesome if it took combat gameplay cues from Dragon's Dogma".

A game's battle system, it's lore, it's storytelling, and so forth are independent elements: there is nothing stopping a game with great writing and exploration from also having an excellent combat system. So it is reasonable for consumers to expect more from a series like The Witcher if they found an element in it lacking compared to other games in the same genre.
 
Wendler said:
It's okay, everyone noticed by now.



And that's basically it.

There is a reason why when you see people gushing over Dragon's Dogma, it's only about the combat.
Click to expand...

To be fair you're spending like 85% of your time fighting things in that game. If you were going to pick one thing to really nail in a video game, the gameplay seems like a good choice.
 
Wendler said:
It's okay, everyone noticed by now.



And that's basically it.

There is a reason why when you see people gushing over Dragon's Dogma, it's only about the combat.
Click to expand...

But Dogma still had all of the other aspects, it just needs to improve on them, which seems very doable with more time and budget. I think Dogma proves that it is possible to have a big open world RPG with story and character and awesome, deep combat. Personally I think it would be easier for Dogma to improve it's storytelling and world than for Dragon Age/Witcher/Skyrim to redo their entire combat system, but the biggest thing Dogma has done is show that you don't need to settle for mediocre combat in a RPG.
 
SkyOdin said:
That kind of comment is somewhat silly. We can pull apart games and discuss their individual elements and make judgements about those elements. The point of this thread isn't "Dragon's Dogma is a better game than The Witcher 3", it is "The Witcher series would be even more awesome if it took combat gameplay cues from Dragon's Dogma".

A game's battle system, it's lore, it's storytelling, and so forth are independent elements: there is nothing stopping a game with great writing and exploration from also having an excellent combat system. So it is reasonable for consumers to expect more from a series like The Witcher if they found an element in it lacking compared to other games in the same genre.
Click to expand...

Thank you for this post. It's weird that you seem to be the one guy here that gets it.
 
Morrigan Stark said:
FTFY ;)
Click to expand...
Disagree.

The Souls system is fine for the type of game series it is but is extremely basic and heavily limits your options (much of the time, especially for melee characters, boiling down to 'avoid attacks until there is an opening, swing, rinse, repeat'). It does do a very good job of making sure you know that you fucked up, with a very strong emphasis on timing and knowing your enemy, but at least half of that is simply because of the way numbers work in the game (with damage outstripping defense and HP by a very large margin unless you stack it). The animations and sound effects are also meaty and visceral, but that has less to do with the system and more to do with their artists and sound design team.

Dragon's Dogma, meanwhile, just loves to throw tools at you and lets you go to work. The magic alone is far superior to ANY GAME EVER MADE. It is literally the best magic you will ever find in a video game. Even Final Fantasy limit breaks pale in comparison to the grand majesty of Dragon's Dogma's incredible high-level magic spells. And then there's the climbing. Why it took this long for a game to finally implement climbing on big monsters is a mystery to me. It makes so much sense. It completely changes the way you approach encounters, actually trying to find a way to make purchase on a big monster's head instead of literally nipping at its heels until it keels over.

And mind you, I do love the Souls games. But I would be outright lying to say that its combat system is in any way superior to Dragon's Dogma.
 
I didn't like the combat of the Witcher 2 at all.
Overall the Game itself was a bit of a letdown after the fantastic Witcher 1 in everything but Graphics
While i hope that 3 will be great, i don't have high hopes regarding combat.


Both Dragon's Dogma and the Souls games combat stand head and shoulders above every other (real time) combat system i have played in the last years.

The last western Game with such a great combat system was probably something like Severence: Blade of Darkness over a decade ago.



I want Dragon's Dogma 2
 
emag said:
DD was awful in everything but gameplay, environments, character progression, and enemies? Oh no.

On the other hand, Witcher 1 & 2 were awful in everything except graphics, branching story, and soft-core porn. Actually, the storytelling was hamfisted and glitchy and the soft-core porn was pretty awful as well. So, really just graphics.

CDPR needs to up their game.
Click to expand...
Ouch. But I can't say I disagree. I also snickered when they defended their use of said softcore porn in the game because "we want to tell mature stories" and "we don't want to insult the players". lol, just admit you want to look at tits, jesus, claims like this are what's insulting really.

Teremap said:
Disagree.

The Souls system is fine for the type of game series it is but is extremely basic and heavily limits your options (much of the time, especially for melee characters, boiling down to 'avoid attacks until there is an opening, swing, rinse, repeat'). It does do a very good job of making sure you know that you fucked up, with a very strong emphasis on timing and knowing your enemy, but at least half of that is simply because of the way numbers work in the game (with damage outstripping defense and HP by a very large margin unless you stack it). The animations and sound effects are also meaty and visceral, but that has less to do with the system and more to do with their artists and sound design team.

Dragon's Dogma, meanwhile, just loves to throw tools at you and lets you go to work. The magic alone is far superior to ANY GAME EVER MADE. It is literally the best magic you will ever find in a video game. Even Final Fantasy limit breaks pale in comparison to the grand majesty of Dragon's Dogma's incredible high-level magic spells. And then there's the climbing. Why it took this long for a game to finally implement climbing on big monsters is a mystery to me. It makes so much sense. It completely changes the way you approach encounters, actually trying to find a way to make purchase on a big monster's head instead of literally nipping at its heels until it keels over.

And mind you, I do love the Souls games. But I would be outright lying to say that its combat system is in any way superior to Dragon's Dogma.
Click to expand...
I agree the magic is probably better and far more creative in DD, but what makes Souls superior to me is how precise and unforgiving it is, and there is actual tension to the combat. DD is too forgiving and very button-mashy at times. Also, I hated going into the inventory to use consumables, I prefer the real-time animation of Souls and Monster Hunter because otherwise it kinda kills the danger when you can just pause and refill your health and stamina without consequence (oh and why not stack a bunch of Periapts while you're at it, even though you're hanging to the monster dearly for your life, now spam Thousand Kisses for a while and watch HP bars melt).

But yes, it's true that the climbing is great. One thing I do find a bit annoying is whacking at a giant creature's heels until it dies (excepted when it makes sense, such as the Tower Knight). Mixing the fully real-time, hyper-tense Souls combat + climbing + DD-like magic would make the best combat ever.
 
emag said:
DD was awful in everything but gameplay, environments, character progression, and enemies? Oh no.

On the other hand, Witcher 1 & 2 were awful in everything except graphics, branching story, and soft-core porn. Actually, the storytelling was hamfisted and glitchy and the soft-core porn was pretty awful as well. So, really just graphics.

CDPR needs to up their game.
Click to expand...

Actually most of DD's gameplay was awful except for a few fights..

Exploration was dreadful, story was dreadful, most enemies are brainless and extremely repetitive , the pawn system is a mess and their chatter was dreadful..

Dragon's dogma could've been better if it were a linear or more focused game..The open world approach and the lack of meaningful enemy variety in the game makes it fall flat on its face imo
 
Surface of Me said:
I feel DS had more of an emphasis on blocking while WItcher more for parrying/dodges.
Click to expand...
Dark Souls combat is about methodical spacing, patience, and keeping calm, even on the edge of death.

Blocking is only viable on the most basic of levels. There are plenty of bosses in the series that punishes you for hiding behind your shield.
 
The minds behind DMC4 made DD. Never expect thr Withcer 3 to get near their combat experience, however as a package some may find Witcher 3 worthwhile
 
Teremap said:
Dragon's Dogma, meanwhile, just loves to throw tools at you and lets you go to work. The magic alone is far superior to ANY GAME EVER MADE. It is literally the best magic you will ever find in a video game. Even Final Fantasy limit breaks pale in comparison to the grand majesty of Dragon's Dogma's incredible high-level magic spells. And then there's the climbing. Why it took this long for a game to finally implement climbing on big monsters is a mystery to me. It makes so much sense. It completely changes the way you approach encounters, actually trying to find a way to make purchase on a big monster's head instead of literally nipping at its heels until it keels over.

And mind you, I do love the Souls games. But I would be outright lying to say that its combat system is in any way superior to Dragon's Dogma.
Click to expand...
For example: compare fighting Kalameet to fighting a Drake in Dragon's Dogma, or fighting Ancient Dragon to Grigori (or Ur-Dragon).

I love Dark Souls combat, but it is lacking compared to Dragon's Dogma. They have different goals, but fighting big monsters in Dragon's Dogma is much more dynamic and rewarding, in my opinion.
 
Shadowhaxor said:
I don't know about that. There have been tons of 'Non-Japanese" games that have fantastic boss fights. And not to derail this thread but a good example is the dragon fight that was teased in Dragon Age: Inquisition.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQQtOiFOYtk

Does this not satisfy you?
Click to expand...

I'm looking forward to Inquisition, but let's reserve the accolades for the game until we actually have a chance to play it instead of judging it on the basis of a trailer.
 
AdrianWerner said:
It's nice magic system, but let's not get overboard.
Click to expand...
You'd have to point me to a game with superior magic, because I cannot think of a single one.

Morrigan Stark said:
I agree the magic is probably better and far more creative in DD, but what makes Souls superior to me is how precise and unforgiving it is, and there is actual tension to the combat. DD is too forgiving and very button-mashy at times. Also, I hated going into the inventory to use consumables, I prefer the real-time animation of Souls and Monster Hunter because otherwise it kinda kills the danger when you can just pause and refill your health and stamina without consequence (oh and why not stack a bunch of Periapts while you're at it, even though you're hanging to the monster dearly for your life, now spam Thousand Kisses for a while and watch HP bars melt).

But yes, it's true that the climbing is great. One thing I do find a bit annoying is whacking at a giant creature's heels until it dies (excepted when it makes sense, such as the Tower Knight). Mixing the fully real-time, hyper-tense Souls combat + climbing + DD-like magic would make the best combat ever.
Click to expand...
That's more a function of the game's stats and difficulty level than anything else, and I would agree with any assessment that the game's emphasis on stats is too strong for such an action-oriented game. Leveling up to level 200 should only have made you roughly thrice as strong as a level 1 character, which would have made it possible for them to retain the tension in the combat AND keep things more balanced over the long haul. And yes, the pausing to use items is quite silly.

But even Dark Souls eventually reaches a point where you are just sleepwalking through encounters, and that's when the faults of the combat system really become noticeable. It's just... really, really basic, when it comes right down to it. It does what it does well, I can give it that, but it has no depth to it. If the movesets were larger and more varied (and the magic better), and yeah, if it had the option of climbing, I would probably put it at the top of the list as well. But it doesn't, so I can't.
 
SeventhSon said:
For example: compare fighting Kalameet to fighting a Drake in Dragon's Dogma, or fighting Ancient Dragon to Grigori (or Ur-Dragon).
Click to expand...
Ancient Dragon was shit, yes, but Kalameet? No way. Kalameet and Sinh are way more fun and intense than fighting any DD drake. At some point, climbing on the drake belly, fighting with the camera to position yourself on the heart, and mashing square gets a wee bit stale. And don't get me started on the clusterfuck that is the Ur-Dragon (5 FPS and if you have no ranged attacks the game tells you "hahaha fuck you").

Teremap said:
But even Dark Souls eventually reaches a point where you are just sleepwalking through encounters, and that's when the faults of the combat system really become noticeable. It's just... really, really basic, when it comes right down to it. It does what it does well, I can give it that, but it has no depth to it.
Click to expand...
Really disagree with this. Even if it's basic and simple, it still has tons of depth. There are so many different ways and strategies you can use, and the most fun part of the Souls games is making different builds and experimenting.
And if you're sleepwalking through Manus, Kalameet, the Fume Knight or Sir Alonne, then congrats on being a gaming god I guess. But in that case I imagine that even Daimon or Death would become the ultimate zzz for you...
 
JoeTheBlow said:
Do you HAVE to buy it?
The lore and gameplay of Witcher 1 left me cold, which is why 2 goes unplayed (Steam sale) and I'll be skipping 3.
Plenty of other games, life is short.
Click to expand...

No I've changed my mind. Witcher 3 is no longer on the buy list. I shall wait for reviews, more videos/impressions to see if its worth it.

Error said:
The Griffin quest in DD is so epic, It has no scripted QTE filled garbage and it manages to feel more epic than all these QTE-fest scenes you see in action games nowadays.

the whole journey to Bluemoon Tower was epiccccc.

Landing an arc of deliverance on the griffin's head and taking two chunks of its life bar YES YES!!
Click to expand...

Thats one of the greatest things about DD. It doesn't need scripting or QTE's to have epic moments. The combat, animations and AI are so good that its not needed at all.

tumblr_mp9rbcQ3SC1sy0ueqo1_250.gif


Landing Arc of Deliverance on the final dragon as he dove towards me.....and then seeing him hurtle towards the floor behind me.......sogood.gif

Looking through this thread I want to address some stuff:

1) Why do people have this notion that DD is not really an rpg? It has character stats, armour, weapon stats, tonnes of resources to be found from the surroundings/enemies, you can combine items, level progression, side quests, npc's, some towns....like I don't get it.

2) This thread has not subdued my fears.....if anything its made them much worse. So many people agreeing that the Witcher's combat is not good, that people play these games for the story and graphics. This is sounding just like Skyrim to me. For me battle systems are very important. Thats what you're going to be doing a lot of the time through the game and where the challenge of the game comes from: fighting enemies.

3) A lot of my questions are unanswered? Is there stamina in this game? Whats stopping me from constantly dodging? Don't you think the way geralt is able to attack and dodge before the enemy even reacts is OP? Can geralt use different melee weapons and have consequently different attacks?
 
Psycho_Mantis said:
Looking through this thread I want to address some stuff:

1) Why do people have this notion that DD is not really an rpg? It has character stats, armour, weapon stats, tonnes of resources to be found from the surroundings/enemies, you can combine items, level progression, side quests, npc's, some towns....like I don't get it.

2) This thread has not subdued my fears.....if anything its made them much worse. So many people agreeing that the Witcher's combat is not good, that people play these games for the story and graphics. This is sounding just like Skyrim to me. For me battle systems are very important. Thats what you're going to be doing a lot of the time through the game and where the challenge of the game comes from: fighting enemies.

3) A lot of my questions are unanswered? Is there stamina in this game? Whats stopping me from constantly dodging? Don't you think the way geralt is able to attack and dodge before the enemy even reacts is OP? Can geralt use different melee weapons and have consequently different attacks?
Click to expand...

1. Strawman, a lot of people aren't saying this. A lot of people are saying its more action based, which is true. All of the RPG elements in Dragon's Dogma besides building your character/pawn are either subpar or really bad.

2. The story in Skyrim is terrible, do all Western RPGs blend in together for you? People don't play The Witcher series exclusively for combat, whereas Dragon's Dogma is the exact opposite. Why have you ignored those points? Why is Skyrim the most relevant reference for you?

3. There isn't a stamina bar, yes you could dodge forever, you can dodge forever in a Souls game once you understand the enemy patterns. There are different weapons, no idea if each weapon has different attacks.

The Witcher 2&3 probably aren't for you OP.
 
The level of fanboy argument in this thread is insane. Even though all the games discussed here are technically the same genre (Action RPGs), it's still sort of an apples-to-oranges comparison, if for no other reason than the experience of the developers who make these games.

Comparing Dragon's Dogma -- a game made by the Devil May Cry team, to The Witcher, is like saying Destiny is a better game than Fallout New Vegas because it has better shooting mechanics.
 
MormaPope said:
1. Strawman, a lot of people aren't saying this. A lot of people are saying its more action based, which is true. All of the RPG elements in Dragon's Dogma besides building your character/pawn are either subpar or really bad.

2. The story in Skyrim is terrible, do all Western RPGs blend in together for you? People don't play The Witcher series exclusively for combat, whereas Dragon's Dogma is the exact opposite. Why have you ignored those points? Why is Skyrim the most relevant reference for you?

3. There isn't a stamina bar, yes you could dodge forever, you can dodge forever in a Souls game once you understand the enemy patterns. There are different weapons, no idea if each weapon has different attacks.

The Witcher 2&3 probably aren't for you OP.
Click to expand...

1) Yeah thats more like what they said.....its more action based. Thats what I would want in an action rpg but it still has the intricacies you would expect in a rpg.

2) I've always thought that people held Skyrim's lore and story in high regards.....truth be told I never completed the game. I just explored till my hearts content and though the world was pretty and I did have some fun discovering new places, every time I came across an enemy it was such a bore. I reckon thats what caused my loss of interest more than anything else and again thats what I'm seeing might happen with Witcher 3. Oh and nope people don't play DD exclusively for the combat. Before this gets into a DD thread the point of this thread was specifically the combat system of Witcher 3 and my worries that Witcher's battle system is a dull one. I simply used DD as a good example of a fantastic battle system. Reading the thread has not changed my opinion at all.....if anything its strengthened it which is a a shame.

3) No you can't dodge forever in a Souls game. You continually tap the dodge button and you will run out of stamina.....the entire point of the system. So whats stopping me from continuously mashing the dodge button/attack button in Witcher? Is there no consequence? What different weapons are there? Arre there different classes like greatswords, katana's, hammers etc or is it just the change in appearance and stats with the weapon just being another straight sword with the same animations?
 
Unfair to compare any standard RPG/ActionRpg to the GOAT Dragon's Dogma.

It just passes on the left to every other ARPG combat system or game out there. Far and away the most dynamic, intense, creative and fun combat you'll ever see in an RPG.

Play The Witcher for other things and enjoy the combat it presents to you as it is meant to be enjoyed. If you start comparing it to DD you'll just be disappointed for no reason.
 
Psycho_Mantis said:
1) Yeah thats more like what they said.....its more action based. Thats what I would want in an action rpg but it still has the intricacies you would expect in a rpg.
Click to expand...

The great problem with action RPGs is that no game has ever actually perfectly balanced the "action" and "RPG" elements. Every game ends up being noticeably better at one than the other. Usually this is indicated by the developer, which tends to come from either an action or RPG background.

BioWare is trying to make action RPGs these days, and being a company with an RPG past, its recent games definitely fall short in the action combat department compared to the role-playing and storytelling department. CDPR is kind of similar actually, but a lot of people think their storytelling and role-playing is better than BioWare's, not to mention their art direction and graphics engine. People have also praised the Witcher games for their complex crafting and potion systems. In my opinion melee combat is one area where Japanese developers generally have an advantage. Even there it's only in the case of some Japanese developers. Kingdom Hearts is definitely a stronger RPG than it is an action game. Same with Rogue Galaxy. I don't expect any western developer any time soon to produce a combat system as good as a Capcom, Platinum, or Ninja Theory game. People simply play BioWare and CDPR games for different reasons.

The Souls games are probably the closest to mastering the balance between action and RPG combat. Even then, their world-building and storytelling elements are very differnt from what you find in more traditional RPGs like Square Enix or BioWare games.

In my mind in the perfect Action RPG:

The lore and art direction would be done by From Software
The FMVs would be done by Square Enix
The dialogue would be done by BioWare
The story and role-playing would be done by CDProjekt RED (or Obsidian)
The open world would be crafted by Rockstar
The combat would be done by Platinum
 
I'm probably anticipating The Witcher 3 more than any other game at the moment (well, more than any other game I know for sure it's coming, at least) and I still would be pleasantly surprised if the combat would be anything above average.
Dragon's Dogma will beat it in the combat department? It's very likely.
It's also very likely for a lot of other games, and I read tons of less-than-enthusiastic takes on Dragon's Dogma as well, which usually boiled down to "it has some neat idea and it looks cool, but in the end it's button mashing".

Anyway, even taking at face value that combat in DD will prove to be a million times better than TW4, is that, by itself, a solid argument to prove DD will be a better game than TW3 overall? Arguable at best.
Combat is just not where the Witcher series shines; it's not where the series focuses and it's not even what fans of the series care the most about.
A lot of NPC interaction, interesting characters and dialogues, branching storytelling and exploration are going to be the main selling point of the game for its fanbase.

That said, I won't bury my head in the sand pretending I wouldn't enjoy a Witcher game even more if it could come with a genuinely awesome combat system.
Yes, I wish CDPR could be better in that area.
 
2014: The official year of disappointment.

(C'mon now, that Griffon fight looks awesome. Dragon's Dogma one is awesome too, but it's possible for two things to be good. Witcher 3 is going to bring much more than just combat to the table as well.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Witcher 3 Online Mod
2
237
The Cockatrice replied
Dragons Dogma 2 is such a disappointment. Underwhelming doesn't even describe it.
2 3
108
6K
BbMajor7th replied
Microsoft loses $357 billion of market cap in one day after disappointing quarterly earnings report
2 3 4
158
1K
Loomy replied
The Witcher 3: Project R.O.A.C.H. Official Trailer
News Trailer 
7
223
analog_future replied
Dragon's Dogma 2 receives mysterious 77GB steamdb update sparking more DLC rumors
Rumor 
45
443
Gojiira replied
Top Bottom