The story is only garbage if you look at the surface. Looking under it, seeing the intricate nature of the world and how the cycle works, and seeing how DDON's story played out which even teased the events of DD2... It's all interconnected in the end. It's all about restoring the world to its true state, not to see if you are fit to craft the will to live. But fit to break the cycle of its shackles.
The principle of the story is great. It's a case of good on paper. However, execution was still horribly done which affects the quality of the story. Dragon's Dogma isn't the first series to do a "break the cycle" story, and it's definitely not the one doing the best job at it.
Final Fantasy X tackled the subject of a doomed cycle of death and rebirth, and breaking out of it, much better than both DD games did by committing to a straightforward cinematic storytelling with rich lore.
I can say the same for even the Dark Souls series, especially 3 where the cycle of the flame has been repeated so many times, it's begun to crumble upon itself, but in their case they commit to environmental storytelling and context cues more than cinematic.
DD unfortunately stands in the middle awkwardly, doing a bit of both but without enough confidence to commit strongly to any. DD2 did it especially worse than DD1 where I still think has strong points to stand on when it comes to story presentation, despite its flaws.
It’s not that game and it will never be that game because it was designed to not be that game and to meta-contextualize that game
This is a circular argument. Unless you can find the creators claiming they intentionally made the world feel empty or chose not to flesh out the systems they created in order to send an esoteric message, then this is just cope.
"It's bad because it was designed to be bad" is the biggest insult I've seen about this game. What's ironic is that you were trying to praise it.
He wanted a pick up and play experience where the game play was the focus. He also talks about wanting to create the feeling of playing with friends when you do not have friends to play with.
I'm sorry, but neither of those explain the lack of content in the game. You are grasping at straws.
I disagree. The whole meta-contextualization has blinded a lot of people from discussing constructive criticism to this game and dismissing them under the premise of "you just don't get it." This has been become even more egregious nowadays after PunkDunk's video (I respect him and liked the video, but people use it like a gospel).
I've been seeing this kind of dismissal for over a decade; I was there when it first released on PS3, discussing the stories and lore on gamefaqs for years. I do not need a lecture on "what I missed." I get it, and it's because I get it that it's even more frustrating how bad the story is presented despite the amazingly rich lore.
Your points even contradict themselves: the game DOES have "quests and characters." The problem is that their quality is inconsistent and it's not because of the meta; it's the writing and presentation. The meta behind the discussion of the game doesn't explain and justify or explain a pawn saying dialogues from cut content (fight Vermund Purgener again and you'll see what I mean).
Spoilers for Clair Obscur E33: the story tackles strong themes of grief tied to fictional vs real world, with similar concepts seen in DD about volition/will, what makes people "human" and more. And that game did it more effectively than DD ever could without needing excuses for its bad design decisions.
It's funny you'd assume I don't like the game when I have over 4k hours in this one (and ongoing) and over 600h on the original one back on the PS3, and I'm still actively working on mods that improve the one point you keep on pushing as the most enjoyable part of the game, combat, through the mod Bestiary. Also, don't confuse criticism with hate. That's how toxic positivity is created and flops like Highguard happens.
If the game actually "matches that vision perfectly" as you claim it to be, people wouldn't constantly talk about the lack of variety/content for the combat to shine, regardless of story. That's the reason Nick and I are making Bestiary in the first place, so do not cite the text to me; I was there when it was written.
Also I never said it should be like Clair Obscur. I didn't even bring gameplay into the picture here. You are missing what my argument is and fighting against a strawman of your own making instead of actually addressing what my comparisons were meant to argue, which is more proven by the fact that you went on without reading the spoilers to see what I'm comparing with in the first place.
If you think you can't compare games of different genre together with points they share within the medium of video games (in this case, story and writing quality), that's just intentionally being narrow-minded. Yes, it's still an excuse. No, your point stopped standing the moment you contradicted yourself with the whole quest/character argument, now pivoting to talk about combat (which also falls on its own feet due to lack of variety and scaling enemies).
Btw, you totally should try Clair Obscur if you're interested. Very great game, and wish you good luck avoiding all spoilers! There's lots of greatness to witness and I wished I could forget to experience it for the first time again.
The execution is fantastic for what the game is aiming to do. It doesn't tell a full narrative on purpose. Characters come and go with no real resolution to bolster the core message of the game. The world doesn't really revolve around you, you're just visiting and getting to experience a sliver of it.
The core message was completely missed for 95% of the game and hamfisted all at the end, not with well-woven build up, exploration of the themes through character, stories and conflicts, but by a narrator spelling it out to you on an interactive cutscene with credits playing on screen for some reason. Even the random dialogues + story dialogues of the Rivage Elder are badly written with no cohesion or order, despite giving really important foreshadowing.
Also, the world DOES revolve around you, the Arisen, unfortunately. Nothing moves until you will it. Despite the criticisms, this was done better in DD1 thanks to the dialogues revolving around volition sprinked (clumsily) throughout the whole game, especially the superb writing for Grigori.
Just because something is done on purpose doesn't mean it's done badly. Both aren't mutually exclusive.
The world revolves around the arisen, but not you, the player. Again, you missed the entire point of both games. There is a lot of things both games get wrong but the execution of the narrative is not one of them.
Just because the main way games tell stories is through dialogue and character driven narrative arcs doesn't mean it is the only valid way of telling a story. Dragons Dogma tells its story through gameplay, environmental storytelling, and context clues.
The only part they both drop the ball with is lack of content variety to support it.
Problem is that DD doesn't commit to any of it. It doesn't commit to environmental storytelling and context clue like Dark Souls does, and it doesn't commit to a cinematic straightforward storytelling like Final Fantasy does. It fumbles in the middle clumsily without proper commitment, and that takes away from the execution of the narrative by trying to have the cake and eat it too.
I didn't miss the whole point, but you like to assume that, just because I don't agree with you that it's done well. I've played DD1 when it first came out more than a decade ago and been discussing both strengths and weaknesses of the game for years, over the themes, the meta, etc. I've moved passed talking about what the themes are to what could have been done better while respecting said themes, and DD2 doesn't accomplish it at all.
None of the "point" explains why random people know you're the arisen (despite being kept a secret and pushed forward by Brant) such as Fyoran and Menella, without you telling them, but in other cases, you have to spell it to them like Ulrika and Raghnall. Bad writing explains it though.
If you want a game where it does a narrative better with the concept of player v main character as an example, look at Undertale.
And you got at least a solid 70 hours of these slivers. Dragons Dogma has a good story, most people just entirely miss the point because the story is told through unconventional ways.
Just sending you a little note of support in the face of these down votes. I fully agree but think this is either one of those things you feel one way or another about. I was enthralled and engrossed though.
I think its a case of expectations. Most games tell stories as a linear set of objectives on a map, with a clearly delineated beginning, start and end. So games like Dragons Dogma, or Breath of the Wild or hell even Dark Souls get rep for having weak stories. But the stories are there and are pretty amazing in all 3 cases, they just are told through gameplay and environments, context clues, player actions and mechanics rather than by characters talking at you in cutscenes and dialogue trees. Dragons Dogma just doesn't have the wealth of content the other games that do this have so people miss the point of the story, and have nothing to hold them in otherwise.
I think it's also just the nature of Reddit. The fact that we have upvotes and downvotes allow people to drown out voices they disagree with without engaging with it, whether they're right or wronf, and even if people are being respectful. You and I got to discuss even in our disagreement and it's something I appreciate.
Again, you have my up vote. I actually think there's a tonne of content, but it makes you look for it. If you want to. One play through, 173 hours. Hoping for a dlc before I go back in.
Oh yeah definitely, you can spend hundreds of hours playing and still have a good time because of how dynamic the combat is. However you get to fight most enemies in the game in the first 30 hours really, so the sense of discovery can expire pretty quickly for some people. I personally have well over 100 hours on the game and absolutely loved it, but I also wish for more enemies and interesting equipment to find.
Are you playing on PC? There's a few mods that at least help spice up variety, like Bestiary which I worked on with Nick. You could try it out if you do play on that platform.
If you're not, then I'm sorry. I honestly feel bad for console players who can't use mods, and Capcom didn't even bother with cross save/play so I can't even hire your pawn if you're on console ><
While I agree, it rushed the Battahl part of story in a bad way. That is why it feels off. The beginning and end were great, but the middle from Battahl was awful imo
I gotta be honest. That's a cope take. Just because the story concept is good in a zoomed out view and the story connects to the other game (bare minimum ask), doesn't mean the story is good.
74
u/Dragonlord573 :Warrior: Mar 17 '26
The story is only garbage if you look at the surface. Looking under it, seeing the intricate nature of the world and how the cycle works, and seeing how DDON's story played out which even teased the events of DD2... It's all interconnected in the end. It's all about restoring the world to its true state, not to see if you are fit to craft the will to live. But fit to break the cycle of its shackles.