The Baffling Design Decisions of Dragons Dogma 2 | Design Delve 

Excuse my recent rants we shall be backed to our scheduled teachings soon enough! Let me know what topics/games you'd like to see me and Ludo cover down below! If you enjoy our content and want to help support it check out our patreon! www.patreon.com/SecondWindGroup

the fact he and yathz had the same experience with the save system, and both had the same reaction, basically sums it up for me

The fact every single youtube/twitch personality I've seen play this game, encountered the exact same "oh the last inn option loses hours of progress", makes me wonder what kind of QA progress they had for this game.

It seems like what they actually need to do is put a counter next to the "load inn save" button saying how many minutes or hours it's been since that save, so that people are less likely to load it without realizing they'd lose a bunch of progress and then quite reasonably put the game down.

There's a reason why Pokemon and Dark Souls use the exact same system for punishing players for losing. Taking my money makes me want to beat you up harder, Taking my max health makes me want to leave and never return.

This is the most sudden increase in spiciness since I confused the hot sauce and ketchup packets

the subtitles uses porn instead of pawn

7:45 I thought this was called a failure cascade, where one failure leads to more failure.

What is simultaneously baffling and interesting is the sharp divide of people who absolutely love DD2 and those that absolutely despise it. I think exploring that would make an interesting video.

> Like butter, spread over too much bread Oh, cultured. Them LotR quotes.

My hot take on why DD2 is very divisive is that so few of it's systems work together. Over and over I kept getting the sensation that I'd ordered a delicious French Onion Soup, and to dip in it I got a well cooked Fillet steak instead of some fresh bread - yeah, they're both great but they don't complement each other. This is inevitably going to annoy some people, and not others. A prime example is what I think is DD2s greatest strength - the adventure out in the wild. The exploration elements are great, it's stunning to look at, you "want to go over there" all the time to see what that thing is. It has a draw to it, and one where I think the lack of fast travel and how the day-night cycle dynamically changes the game and incentivises camping work brilliantly. But then the carry capacity system, enemy repetition and density, lack of exploration rewards, loss meter, and poor quest design get involved.......all these systems work directly against the liberating feeling of an open world RPG turning it into a tedious, finickity, disjointed mess of wonder and annoyance. And it happens all the time - the combat is varied and thrilling and unique, and then you get knocked over and have to wait 15 seconds to get off the floor. The quests require deeper investigation rather than relying of quest markers, but the world and NPCs are bland, dull, and poorly programmed. The pawn system is unique and interesting, but can you get a mage to levitate to that chest when you need it to? Hell no! The save system is supposed to make you weigh your choices, but the chaotic randomness of all these systems intereacting can just make choices for you. It's all fighting against itself. That's why I think there's a lot of admiration out there for it, but final impressions vary so wildly - if you can ignore, mitigate, or tolerate the jank systems you can love the ones that appeal to you the most. It's just a shame mostly that I didn't like the game as much as I could've done, and as much as others clearly do.

Just FYI, there is an alt control scheme in settings that unbinds run from B.

To change vocations you have to be at a pawn guild, which are always in a settlement with access to your item storage. So when you unlock a new vocation and get the starting gear you can immediately deposit your old gear.

I adapted to the save issue by quitting if things are going badly or running away the fact that you can heal while at 0 hp helps too.

DD1 is one of my favorite games, but I'll probably wait until DD2 gets its Dark Arisen equivalent. That's sure to come with some necessary system updates.

One of the weirdest decisions is sticking with almost entirely the old line up of the game. And excluding some of the cooler monsters from the original at the same time. If we do get a dlc, which I sure hope for, I half expect it to be the BBI line up of baddies with 2-3 new monsters. Also it seems he had the same issue the first game did, which is the barrier to entry. Sorcery is not spammy. You really shouldnt use the basic attack for much of anything. Yet players wont know that. Players wont understand that a boss with more health bars also has an additive armor system that makes their attacks do less damage, down to doing barely any. DD1 didn't explain it and neither does dd2. Loved the first game but genuinely, these devs did nothing to help players understand the math behind the game or what works in combat.

One thing stuck out to me about my relation to my pawns: One the one hand they are so annoying when they repeat their few lines time and time again but then after you travelled a lot of time with them one said that we kinda felt like family and I Noticed: yea, actually they do. I am genuinely sad when someone dies, they feel so alive and then the next minute they don't and I cant really put my finger on it

i like dd2-- currently have over 200 hours into it, but it's one of those games that if i recommend it i'd have to add so many caveats. part of my play experience being enjoyable is being familiar with dd1's quirks. that's not something that many current players of dd2 will have, of course. and quirks from a game 12 years ago will be much more polarizing in a modern title

I just would love it if it didn't treat my CPU like an all-you-can-eat buffet. Like most of the sins I can forgive. But 70$ for a game they want you to pay even more for to skip and chews through your hardware for an experience you can get faster/sleeker in other titles is a high asking cost.

There have been in plenty of fights that I couldn't have won but I have never used the return to inn option. Running is a perfectly valid option and should be used. It create a sense of fear of the world (especially at night) and plays with disempowerment to give you a taste of the challenge and stops you from just ramming your head against the wall until either you or the wall breaks. I do agree that the "load at last inn" is way to punishing and should be more like "load at last settlement" or safe-zone.

I like how the exact same thing caused both J and Yahtzee to just quit the game and their video. And yeah, getting sent back hours of progress, especially slow/grind progress sucks hard. Really just makes you question why. I had the same thing happen near the end of Subnautica with one of my expensive endgame gear glitching into the floor and my last save being hours old. So I used cheats to spawn new stuff in and that just sorta soured the ending. Also meant I just wanted the game over with, rather than carrying out my base building plan.

I feel like the only person that didn't walk into the Load at last Inn save trap. I outwitted Dragon's Dogma 2

Bro's so mad he made Cyclops into Trolls I like the combat because it rewards well placed agression, similarly to how I much prefer Bloodborne to any other Souls. That being said, I think DDDA and the MMO were better games than DD2 and it's baffling why they didn't include the quality of life improvements from Dark Arisen or more enemy variety from the MMO

I mean I guess they don’t spell it out for you but you could always run away it’s a game where you choose your own fights (most of the time)

I kinda love the emphasis on the journey through the health loss mechanics and lack of fast travel items (I have like 30 now, having used maybe 10, but I still choose to travel by foot or oxcart cuz I gotta get those seeker’s tokens!) and the interaction of that with camping, which has high weight and cash requirements and apparently were unknown to Yahtz and Ludo. Those incentives combined with the content density+amount of hidden stuff of virtually the entire map - on par with Skyrim or Elden ring and more than BOTW if memory serves - for me improved on the experience of those games qua “set off on a fantasy adventure” type games. As for combat, there is something unshakeably janky and unintuitive about it, and pretty gross amounts of input lag are a big part of the problem, but the underlying mechanics plus the pawn team come together in a super satisfying way that no other game can replicate.

I can sympathize with your experience with this game, because I've had really frustrating experiences with games that had unintuitive mechanics in the past. Notable, when I first played dark souls 1, I was just baffled by how everything was clunky, and confusing, and poorly explained, and I didn't understand why it was so beloved until years later when I came back to it with a bit more background knowledge. Maybe I just got lucky with this game, but for every complaint you list here - the inventory system, the combat feel, the punishing save system, and the dialogue - I actually found them to be positives - they aligned with my expectations, and I enjoyed them. The save system lead to some really cool moments where I had to buckle in and really try my hardest to get out of some dungeons with my new loot so I didn't have to go back to the last inn save. I realized early on that the inn saves were kind of like the bonfires of dark souls, and treated them as such - checkpoints between adventures that raised the stakes of each adventure by giving me something to lose. The dialogue system I really appreciate despite its clunkyness because it makes replaying the game a lot more seamless (easy and fast to skip through all dialouge) - I can see wanting the lines to auto advance, but it doesn't really bother me personally. The inventory system was also really interesting to me. It reminds me of the best parts of Fallout 4's inventory and loot where you had to be really discerning about your loadout, and which loot was actually worth picking up. I will admit that it isn't very intuitive that you talk to the innkeeper to manage your storage, but tbf it is literally listed as the second option when you talk to them. As for the controller issues, I was playing on kbm so I can't comment - I will say the mouse odditites in this game really suck though. Fortunately aiming isn't really important for most vocations, and the hitboxes were very forgiving when I played ranger. I'm hoping they fix that sooner rather than later. The combat in this game is also a real high point for me. At first I was confused by the low damage of the basic attacks, but it was extremely satisfying for me to learn which skills worked well against certain enemies. I wasn't just always spamming my highest dps attack because the combat is so focused on exploiting each enemies individual design. It gives a really great sense of mastery in my opinion when you learn how to annihilate enemies in seconds that would take a minute or more to kill if you just spammed basic attacks. Some vocations seemed less balanced than others, but of the ones I've tried all of them feel like really capable fighters, though some are more dependent on your pawns behaving and drawing aggro. I'll acknowledge that public opinion on this one seems to be really mixed, but it's interesting to me just how different people's experiences of this game are.

Only major point of disagreement is on the "rarity" of "cinematic events" needing to be more common. The key to making a truly good and memorable open world game (or really any game at all) is having the courage to not care if players miss stuff. Exploration is only rewarding if you're genuinely missing out by not doing it (and it's only exciting if it's not constantly, predictably rewarding). This is a huge part of why people love Fromsoft's games.

The odd design decisions in DD2 worked out so much better in DD1. The main problem for me is that they didnt even try to improve a single thing outside of combat/controls and in some ways went backwards. The limited fast travel system for example could be brilliant, but there are a few things i think held it back. 1) too easy to circumvent, just making it feel like a clunky tax rather than a core feature. 2) the physical world layout and balance feels off. its hard to explain but an example of what i mean is static port crystals locations or lack there of. 3) a lack of a living and changing world. Its 2024 we can do better than manufactured ludonarrative. We can have random (or logic based) boss spawns with roaming fauna that migrate and interact with eachother. A bandit base should be a bandit base until murdered then next time you go there its undead. A goblin cave should get overrun by scavenger animals eating their corpses. You should be able to find more random chimeras than like 2 in the entire overworld. stuff like that. Its needs a real ecosystem for itsunos "vision" of having a world where you dont want to fast travel to come to fruition.

The punishment for loading a save is a hard deal-breaker for me. I don't care how cool the rest of it is, I won't play a game with the stress of it getting harder if I fail.

It's a mess, just like Dragon's Dogma 1 baby! We're so fucking back.

I think I've noticed a trend seeing this, the FR review and others where everyone only followed the main quests and the markers. And when encountering a monster, keep on trying and dying, relying on the auto saves and losing progress with loading the Last Inn before qutting. Meanwhile I ignored the main quest, ran straight out in the wilderness, met tough monsters and fled further into the dark night. Ended up on the other side of the world, kept changing vocations, spent money on gear, hired new pawns. Ninety hours later I have yet to meet Brant in the pub while the exploration, layout and connectivity of the world and dungeons and how fun Warrior is to send enemies flying has made DD2 one of my favorites games of all time.

Absolutely love DD2 and don't have an issue with most of these critiques - in fact I think they add a lot. Choosing between saves and actually having to pay attention to resting, and being careful about what challenges you're ready for, is something I find very rewarding. Most games now resort to the Bethesda approach which is obsessed with everything being seamless, basically allowing you to go anywhere and do anything at any point, or the newer Assassin's Creed approach where arbitrary numbers block certain areas off. I like Bethesda games a lot, but I don't want that experience in every game. DD2 (and DD1) offers something different, and (to me) clunky in an endearing way. It's as if the developers spent a decade playing nothing but their own game, it's so resistant to modern design tropes and I love that

I'm baffled, because I've played about 20 hours of Dragon's Dogma 2 and I never lost health by reloading a save during a fight I was losing/dying. You do lose max health when you take heavy damage, so what I think happened is that their game somehow saved mid-combat, didn't save the enemy health which is fine since saves are not supposed to happen mid-killing someone, so respawned them with their mid-combat stade and the enemy fresh.

I've been enjoying my time with the game so far, but yeah, the save system and not having a lock on during combat are two of the gripes I have with it. In fact I actually chose to quit the game and reload myself when fighting a dragon just so I wouldn't lose health when coming back to try agian.

Tbh. I like the save system. It stops one from save scumming, while it auto saves before a battle you always have the option to disengage an enemy. It makes the world feel dangerous and combat, while chaotic, rewarding as slaying a drake etc. Is a task that you are not able brute force

The combat carried it for me. All the things you said are true, but the combat and classes really made me stick through it. Just very cool and well done (if you ignore the step backs from the first game)

I played the original Dragon's Dogma back in 2013 on the PS3, then got the Dark Arisen expansion... and I adored it, still do. Despite its janky features, something about it was so addictive to me. Now, while many things in the game are not explained at all (which sucks), once you've informed yourself or figured it out, things work really well. Dragon's Dogma 2 is, I would say, about 80% the exact same, maybe with some improvements (I mean, even the sounds are exactly the same as in DD1). Especially regarding the Pawns, how they interact with the world, you, enemies and eachother has been improved a LOT. While they still comment on everything thousands of times ("'Tis a Portcrystal!" became "Look Arisen, a ladder!"), you don't have to constantly drag them into a chair and tell them to stfu. Inclinations have also been made easier to comprehend. The combat is still fun (preventing a Griffin from flying by setting it on fire, stabbing out a Cyclops' eye, bringing in a female to attract the attention of the ogre, cutting off a Medusa's head to later use it to petrify enemies... it's so much fun!) But the amount of enemies is ridiculous. In DD, you could run away from an encounter and be fine. In DD2, you run from combat and by the time the combat music ends, you find yourself in another battle, mainly against the same small mob enemies (goblins, wolves, harpies, saurians, bandits and their respective alternative versions). And the world has been made even larger, with sidequests that almost never get resolved in the same location. Every quest usually makes you travel halfway across the map and back (sometimes, it makes you travel half the world just to let someone know you did the job). The original DD also had 2 permanent Portcrystals, but they were sufficiently far away. In DD2, the 2 permanent ones are so close to one another... and then the rest of the world is so open. It's hard to get Portcrystals because you can't just purchase them and the Ferrystones cost an immense amount of gold, even with merchant discounts. All that does is make me not want to explore anywhere until I have a proper reason to go there (at least 1 or more quest objectives). The camping feature is nice, so you're not screwed whenever you're out of town, getting dragonforged items is no longer based on RNGesus and there are different upgrading styles depending on whether you want to balance or specialise. The new vocations are pretty fun, though I'm sad we had to give up Mystic Knight and Assassin in return. Also, I (personally) hate that the Strider class got split up between Thief (melee) and Archer (range), especially because you can't just go to your Pawn and issue a direct command such as "Shoot this boulder over there with your bow and arrow so it starts rolling down and squishing the enemies". A lot of strategising has been taken away for the sake of simplifying things. Welcome for some, more frustrating for others. The worst part though, for me, is the Affinity system, which was awful even back in DD and DD:DA. Not to mention the fact that despite being able to "romance" everyone (aka increase their affinity to max), only 2 NPCs are actual true romance options with scenes reflecting that (kissing etc.)... and those scenes are forced on the player after completing their quests (I, a straight woman playing a straight female character, was VERY confused when I helped this one lady in her quest and our characters then kissed and banged without me getting a say in it). And both of those romanceable characters are female. There are no true male romance options, despite very interesting and story relevant male NPCs existing (Brant, Sven, Glyndwr etc.). Even back in DD, male romance was ignored (only the female "main" romance options got a special scene at the end, not the males. Even the "main" males like Julien, Valmiro and Reynard jsut got treated like regular NPCs). Everything in DD1 and DD2 still feels as if they're assuming every player is a straight male. The thing is, there is nothing wrong with having no romance. Or having the main character be male with only female romance options (like in the Witcher 3). But don't give us the options of choosing who we are and look like, only to then go "oh but btw, if you want the good outcome for this questline, you're going to have to bang this woman here - we assume you don't mind!" And then, even if a player wants to romance one of those 2 options, chances are, their final "beloved" in the end, for whom they care for so dearly, lorewise..... chances are, their beloved is just some random merchant, or some old guy they helped out. Or any other random NPC. Because the game is not clear on how the system works. It can absolutely ruin a story jsut by breaking someone's immersion or roleplay. Like a Dungeonmaster wrestling control from your character to do something you didn't want them doing. ... Still, despite ranting, I still love this game. I don't know why, but despite the frustrating world/travel mechanics, hordes of enemies and horrible romance, I somehow can't stop playing it, just like the first one. Something pulls me in and makes me just... have fun. I love Dragon's Dogma 2 in this weird, toxic relationship sort of way and after waiting for over 10 years to get another game like it, I'm glad that it is out and I'm having fun. If anyone reading this wishes to travel with my PS5 Pawn (Konishi (Konnor) Straightforward Warrior, lvl 50 as of writing), his Pawn ID is G75T9KEYVMAB), you are more than welcome to bring him along :) Just look out for symptoms of the Dragonplague (which is another interesting addition into the game). Now if you'll excuse me, I have some Golems to kill while complaining about having to kill Golems, only to seek out more Golems.

It's odd that you didn't deposit your excess gear into storage upon changing vocations. Most, if not all, vocation guilds are within spitting distance of an inn to access your storage. That would have avoided the situation of your Hawker pawn from selling your equipment.

I know you joked about the game doing it for the sake of being “different I guess” - but that’s actually what I love about it. The game handles and has such a different feel, that it’s just hard to think of another game that scratches the same itch. I’d rather play a mediocre but memorable game, than an impressive but forgettable one. As odd as that sounds.

If I had a nickel for every video in the second wind channel where they complain about the respawn mechanics of dragons dogma 2 id have 2 nickels, which isnt a lot but its weird that it happened twice

I thought that this video was of much poorer quality than usual… and the he mentioned the save game issue. Fair, it’s a bad system, but it’s pretty clear that one incident poised him against the rest of the game and overwrote any good judgement and interesting insight.

I wanted to hear you rant more! I was just getting into it. Please rant more in future videos.

ngl the shot of the absolutely JACKED wizard shooting glintstone pebbles might have been the funniest thing I've seen in a while

I mean, a lot of this feels like a confluence of two complaints that, while not unique to your situation, feel like they aren't as universal as might be expected. The first is that you expect a game made for someone who plays video games serially and professionally, where you can't afford to spend much time on any given game and so need it to get to the meat and potatoes. I call this the 'Ebert effect', after the movie critic who famously panned any movie requiring that you get invested in a setting or situation that doesn't map 1-to-1 with the 'real world' - fantasy films, science fiction movies, speculative fiction movies, etc. Obviously, for video games, this is a little different, but it means that where you see the lack of easy fast travel as a form of disrespect because you've got six other games you're expected to have something interesting to say about, I see it as a way for me to enjoy exploring and leisurely making my way through the game world. Another way to think of it is: it's not an epic adventure story a la Lord of the Rings, it's a picaresque about me examining the nooks and crannies of the game world. The game isn't ABOUT the epic boss fight moments and shareable Twitter clips, it's about me wandering into a goblin cave that turns out to have a manticore in the back surrounded by goblin skeletons. The epic boss fight moments are just my excuse for going THIS way instead of THAT way. Of course, I'll agree that the fact that it sells itself as the former rather than the latter IS a failing, but it's a failing of the sales campaign and advertising, rather than game design. The second is that you seem to have not played the first one, and the impression I got very strongly from the sales/advertising was that DD2 was meant to be 'the first one, but even more of it'. Most of your complaints about it were complaints that could easily apply to the first, and while there's a strong argument to be made that the second one should have changed some of these - why? It's not a From Software soulsbourne, and expecting it to be isn't a flaw of the game itself, but a flaw of your expectations of it. (Now, as I alluded to above, this could easily be a failure of the sales and advertising campaigns, but your show isn't called "Advert Delve", it's called "Design Delve".) I didn't find combat especially 'spammy' once I bought and upgraded new equipment (and my main pawn's equipment) - unless you think 'it takes two hits instead of one to kill things' is 'spammy' - but if you're expecting the Soulsborne "you can complete the game with just your starting gear" model of gearing, then you will be disappointed - but again, that's not because of the actual design flaws, it's because you're expecting the game to be something it isn't, and never was supposed to be. No argument that the save system is UTTER bullshit, though I'd like to point out that your 'counterexample' - Dark Souls - did literally the same thing, except it only gave you the 'inn rest' option. That was bullshit then, and it's bullshit now - however, there is one important tactic that allows you to both advance the game, and work around this issue, and that is running away. There are comparatively fewer 'you must win this fight' moments in DD2, and especially early on, I found that simply running around and past massive enemies often worked just as well as standing and fighting.

I feel for your progress loss. It auto saving before the troll isn't ideal but you can just turn and run away? Call your pawns to you. As long as it's not a dragon throwing magic, running works pretty fine for me so far.

im excited for the Estus flasks. I've always thought being locked to 5/10 or the empowered later led to super tight balancing because you can directly control how many resources a player is likely to have allowing you to have a hidden progression loop (i used less resorces) an incentive to explore (once you know shortcuts are a thing you want more because less resources being used) and good level desgin because you can appropriately space your checkpoints. Elden ring's brilliant evolution was allowing for refils based on clearing packs to adapt that system to an open world. Im excited to hear more but the flask was one of the best desgin decisions Souls had IMO

Having sprint on both Normal and The Dark Souls Button is certainly a weird choice, but at least you can make the Interact button only interact instead of interact/sprint.

The game has some issues, but most of the issues he brought up in the video are either very minor, or actually positives. Like reverting to an inn-save instead of just running away from the enemy. Early on I had a similar issue with a chimera, which is very tough at low level. So... I ran away. And if he has issues with the control layout, just change it to another layout? With videos like these people that haven't played the game yet may avoid it with people complaining about non-issues like these. And regarding the microtransaction. What makes the microtransactions in this game any worse than what we get in other games? I mean, having microtransactions in games is bad, but it's something we have to live with in this day and age apparently. So when the things you can buy for microtransactions are as pointless as they are in this game, and doesn't affect the game at all for most people, that's a good thing. The ones you find in Ubisoft games are MUCH MUCH worse.

There are teleports between towns, they're disguised as ox carts. There's even limited use items to teleport back to town from the overworld. You can set it so Circle (or B) is Interact only, leaving Left Stick click as the Run toggle. The unsheathe and sheathe weapon is a mechanic for interacting with the many many many NPCs in population centers versus out in the wilds.

Manufactured Ludonarrative reminds me of Half Life 2's ragdoll magnets designed to make enemies fall over railings to make the player feel satisfied with a totally mundane kill that the game conspires to turn into a hilarious spectacle.

I've... actually had a good time with the game, personally. It was definitely an adjustment getting used to the game's save system, but if you just save at an inn before you leave town, you're typically fine. I strongly recommend to everyone playing that before heading out, you do all the main plotline quests up until "Feast Of Deception", the game's first major "softlock". Don't start it, just head out These easy early quests give plenty of exp and gold so you can give your character decent gear and exp. The thing about the combat that I've experienced is that you need to understand your character class' role if you want to succeed. A mage is meant to be a support caster. If you want to use big damage spells, you need to be a sorcerer. A fighter is meant to draw aggro and use parries and counters to deal high damage. If you just want to deal large amounts of physical damage, you need to be a warrior. A thief is meant to use their skills to take enemies off balance and then going in for high damage. If you want to specifically target enemy weak points for high damage, you need to be an archer. The other classes, Magick Archer, Mystic Spearhand, and Warfarer, are a lot more complex, but also have their intended uses in combat. Knowing how your skills work and how to use them is critical to mastering combat. Combat is extremely strategic in this game, and it isn't simply about hitting enemies until they die. Knockdown is king, and learning when and how to strike so that an enemy will fall down is critical. A jumping grab lets you tackle smaller enemies like goblins, pinning them so you can just stab them to death. This works for all melee classes, from fighter to warrior to thief. Hitting large enemy legs and heads will off-balance them, then grabbing their legs and pushing or pulling will often make them fall. Once a big enemy is downed, using a strong attack against their weak point will often melt an entire health bar. This can be an excellent game, once you understand how to play it. I can see why he had a hard time with this: Thief is meant for taking enemies off balance for damaging critical attacks and not just spamming normal hits, and a mage is for supporting other characters and not dropping big damage bombs. He played a thief like it was a warrior and a mage like it was a sorcerer, so he had a bad time. The game is eccentric. We've all complained about how AAA games are "All the same" and if you've played one Ubisoft game you've played them all. This game is different, but people are trying to play it like they've played other games and are complaining when that doesn't work. We've been ruined by formulaic games to the point that, despite all our begging for a game that breaks the mold, when a game comes along that does break the mold we complain because it doesn't conform to the mold we we've become accustomed to.

Haven't played the game, probably never will, but to everyone saying "just leave" when you hit that failure cascade, is it possible to get in a situation where you can't "just leave"? Like, is fucking off **always** an option? Also, is there always something to do otherwise?

"insane microtransactions" did you assume that they sold ferrystones on the store without even taking 5 minutes to check like Yahtzee did? All that aside, all these "bad" mechanics (aside from the combat, your complaints there are valid) aren't by accident and the purpose of them is actually incredibly intentional and it's to create stress. Not moment to moment stress or "tighten and release" stress like Dark Souls, real, actually weighty stress. The way the inn save works, losing max health on reloading autosaves, fucking Dragonblight, even how you can lose items if you're not careful with pawns. This is something all conventional game design would tell you that you're supposed to avoid at all costs - in that way, Dragon's Dogma 2 is a sort of postmodernist game design, intentionally breaking these rules with intent. The lack of fast travel is part of this intent - you are going out on outings and they're supposed to be an adventure, and adventures come with stakes - if you aren't careful you can fuck up and have to return to an inn save and lose a bunch of progress, but this threat is there existentially as a risk, even if it can be avoided by being careful. To give a quick example of the benefits of this, there was a quest where I needed to thwart an assassin which means I needed to pick someone out of the crowd and tackle them based on just two indicators. In a constantly autosaving game like Dark Souls this would be too punishing as quest to create, and in a game like Skyrim this quest would be boring an unmemorable because you can just quicksave your way out of it. However, due to the generous autosaves combined with a reliable (usually - be wary of dragonblight) but punishing backup if you REALLY need to un-fuck-up, when the quest giver stresses you not to tackle an innocent, you REALLY feel the stakes and the pressure of what would normally be a simple and un-memorable sidequest in any other game, and I can not tell you how much more satisfying and relieving it was when I finally committed and tackled the person who turned out to be the right guy. I definitely think this type of thing is not for everyone. Hell, before I played the game, I'd have thought it wasn't for me either. But the amount of weighty stress this game creates in how its gameplay mechanics work is why I am so incredibly addicted despite its meh combat, and all of this "bad game design" is the reason. If I had to compare it to another game it would probably be Rainworld.

I like to think of Ludo as us, the audience, who when asked for input always say "talk about dark souls more"

I'm having fun but I hate the feeling that I could screw up things with the save system at any time. My main issue is hard to describe, but there's this constant feeling of jankiness in everything. Like sliding off something I thought I could walk on, totally losing control, and failing to my death.

its interesting to hear how different people playthoughs are, i played thief and the dodge button lets you i-frame all dmg i don't think i ever had to reload outside of a drake killing my pawn ( i didnt know i could get him from town)

I feel like the reason I wasn’t bothered by Dragon’s Dogma 2’s issues is because: they’re mostly the same issues the first game had and I just learned to accept them as part of the experience. The save system is archaic, but not too different from Dark Souls (or any other game that has just auto save and nothing else). I recognized early that losing progress was going to be an issue, so I kept close mental tabs of my last inn save, and opted to simply walk away from bad encounters. If something happened late into a quest I didn’t like, I just simply said “welp, it is what it is.” That’s how it was in the first game. Frustrating to be sure, but I think that’s something people are missing. People are seeing the “two saves” and thinking “I have two saves.” And the thing is, this confusion can’t be placed entirely on the devs because they make it clear that this is how the game is supposed to function. But somehow people are getting repeatedly confused and frustrated as if they’re being lied to. It’d be a different story if it was simply “I don’t like the system the devs made.” But it seems more often “I don’t like the system because I didn’t understand it.” I don’t like the health loss system. It feels like the hollowing mechanic in Dark Souls 2 which feels more punishing than anything else. The last game had recoverable health that could be reduced below your max health, but it also had items that restored your max health. If the game had more max health restoring items this wouldn’t be an issue. (There’s one item I know of and it’s even rarer than the fast travel items). And on that topic: I don’t mind the fast travel system. Dragons Dogma Dark Arisen had the same system of limited port crystals so I just learned to plan my quest routes and carry ferry stones with me. Ferry stones aren’t rare. They aren’t common, but there’s at least one at every town merchant, and they’re semi-common rewards in quests and chests. Players (if they’re actually playing the game and not sprinting through it) should have a healthy pool of them at any given time. I do wish portcrystal locations were more common, I’ll admit. They’re sparse and it takes a long time before you can obtain more that you can place yourself. And I don’t think this is designed to push people to buy fast travel with real money. The devs want people to actually *play* the game rather than teleporting everywhere. So just like in Dragon’s Dogma 1 I learned to enjoy taking strolls. It makes it so nice that there are little camps everywhere to serve as rest stops. And I carry a ferry stone in case things get overcumbered or hectic. If I had to guess the micro transactions were put there because someone from capcom thought it would be a good idea in case people didn’t jive with the lack of fast travel and wanted to make it easier. So they took the DMC5 approach, and that’s backfiring on them. I think people are going into Dragon’s Dogma with skewed expectations and getting upset when the game doesn’t fulfill them. The game is designed to be played slower and more methodically, and while it’s a gross oversimplification of player feelings: I think people are just too impatient. Does that mean the game doesn’t have its issues? No; a better fast travel and save system in 2024 would be greatly appreciated. And dragonsplague is a terrible idea; that shit needs to go. Otherwise I’ve been enjoying the combat and going around exploring this game’s world. But as someone in another comment said, I’m hoping there’s a “Dark Arisen” version of the game that addresses some of the issues players are having. But considering how divisive this game has been for general players, there might not be one unfortunately.

"The b*tch sold my shoes!" killed me. Laughed harder than I did at Yahtz' review XD

I've got about 25 hours as a warrior now (the two hander build) and I find the fluid soft lock on system pretty flawless, I gesture my mouse at whatever enemy I want to hit next and input an attack and the character just kind of hits them, even if they're not the closes thing to me. I was shocked by how easy it was to move through a fight, barging and swiping different enemies to manage a large group with the ease I wouldn't expect from such a slow build. The save system has been kind of a nothing burger for me, I've died twice, once to jumping off a cliff I shouldn't have and once to getting drop kicked into water by an ogre (hilarious), and I returned to the last autosave and camped before reattempting the challenge. I can see how it'd be a problem especially with the timed quests and the reportedly buggy inn saves. but I really haven't experienced it yet. My mage Pawn gets smacked around quite a lot, but only if I'm not doing my job keeping them safe. i can definitely see how it'd be a pain to be a mage player, but i didn't really like the magic in the original either so... warrior life I guess. Overall it's been a pretty enjoyable experience, if a bit mentally exhausting because of how long some of the monster fights can be (I'm looking at you drakes that refuse to land)

I haven't played the game myself, but an alternative view is on the "writing on games" channel, where in the "why perfect games are boring" video he argues that "wasting a player's time" is a contradiction for what is supposed to be a leisure activity.

if you keep losing to an enemy, RUN AWAY YOU GIBBON.

I completed almost all the content available in the game, and my biggest issue was how braindead easy the combat becomes relatively quickly. That, and how the save system can screw you with some of the bugs and jank flubbing the intended outcomes of some quests. Oh, and the main quest should be a lot longer, and just overall executed better. And, the enemy variety is not good. If only they could have delivered on something that built upon and enhanced the strong points of Dark Arisen.

jumping when talking to an npc that doesn't have that press-next-mechanic

3:23 "Troll". The fact that J doesn't even know to call the cyclops a cyclops makes me wonder how much of this game he's actually played, if any. Especially given the fact that pawns will constantly call out the name of a monster, and the game constantly names the monsters you fight. Every time you fight a cyclops (and you fight one in the literal tutorial) you'll hear or see the name "cyclops" at least 4 times. Not a good look honestly.

8:10 - Why not just run away from the encounter?

As someone that enjoyed DD1, DD2 was an enjoyable upgrade... with some odd steps backwards. The positives: A much grander open world which rewards thorough exploration and very memorable encounters resulting from the various systems working together, or sometimes against each other. The negatives: On top of the things mentioned here and in Fully Ramblomatic, traversal abilities needed to explore are tied to certain vocations and many quests provide so little guidance (to encourage the players to rely on their pawns) that they make the player doubt their approach and/or the game working properly (one example being a quest to shadow someone for an entire in-game day without anything interesting happening and requiring the player to patiently wait in front of a locked door for several minutes for it to eventually open). Edit: Forgot to mention Dragon Plague which turns random pawns into ticking time bombs that can wipe out entire cities, including main quest NPCs.

For every single thing that I love about DD2, there is also a thing that I absolutely hate.

While there are definitely some good points here I can't say I really sympathize with a lot of the gripes listed here, which is a first for this series. I'm having a blast in the game and it's odd to me seeing complaints about the fast travel and the largely ignorable microtransactions, especially considering I think the former is a great design decision. The world is fun to explore and it emphasizes planning and the journey to the destination. The first time the player decides to go to bakbattahl is an adventure, where you have to plan and trudge your way to a far-off place and when you finally get there it's very satisfying. No auto-lock targeting wasn't an issue in monster hunter, which shares a lot of DNA with this game, so I don't find it an issue here. The health system is similar to Demon's Souls and it didn't seem to be an issue there. I agree the Inn saves destroying progress 100% needs to be resolved and I think it's unfortunate that seemed to stop the Second Wind team in their tracks.

You made some good points, I just wanted to complain about one of them. Did you consider that if an enemy was too tough for you that you could just walk away? Some games reward retrying until it works out, and some ask you to be tactical. For perspective, if this was a game that displayed levels and you could see the cyclops was many levels higher then most people would reason that you should try it later. Instead you decided it wasn't fair that you couldn't beat it with a dwindling health pool. You could've ran past or back and returned with better gear and a higher level/vocation rank or taken the time to learn how it attacks and its weaknesses. Lesson for all open exploration games, not just this one. It isn't everyone's cup of tea though. However it also isn't bad design because there is 100% a player base that likes to find and overcome these challenging situations or to feel like the world isn't just a field of weaklings to mow down.

Love the fact that this is the first DD video where I've realised Ludo's name is a ludonarrative dissonance reference

Huh what to say i think the main issue on some points is, At once the difference in the saving system, since this seems to be designed to have you " take the decisions you made, and to live with them, and if u really want to redo it.... You have to reload either you quicksave if it didnt save on time or sacrifice everything you did until your last fixed savepoint. And thats something that will have a big impact on your few of the game, positive or negative. The second thing is the restricted fast travel, ...travel is an adventure , the game forces you to interact with the world, and makes you, have to plan your trips etc. and i think thats one main aspect of the game. And if u hate that or love it, in that case the expierience can vastly differ.Also depending on the point if u think they did a good job for the world or not. The story is very flat but improved to the first part id say at least.(and i think if u want to play it solely for the story.. eh, not the best choice for this game) xD The battle system can variable throughout the classes, but at the beginning it is really repetetive. leveling up unlocks skills and also core- and passive skills. while core skills are a fixed part of the class, which advances their basic battle gameplay. skills on the other hand can be selected in limited slots fitting for the build you wanna play. Passive skills can also be selected and used in a limited amount of slots, but once received, can be used throughout all classes. which gives you a complete new spectrum of making builds with different classes, while rewarding you for trying out different classes. In that way also motivating you to test out which class suits your play style the most. In a way you can really say its unconfortable by designchoice, to deliver a certain Experience ( if it does good job in that depends on your taste, like actually most games lol) Also you can say it triesb to be believable, by making real aspects of traveling etc. into game mechanics (and thats one thing that can really hurt or hype a game) in short the Main Aspects of this game are: - a save system that forces you to live with ur choices - A world that forces you to interakt with it by traveling through it, wiht uncofortable mechanics to make it belivable. - A Battlesystem that can be repeatetive, but also variable through its classes Also in point of Capcoms Microtransactionspolitik. This one shot DD2 really in the foot, espically in that kind of game design, which can make you really feel scammed if you dont know thats intended. In my case I played the first game so i knew, nothing in my expierience was withhold from me." Confortable-items" a rare you, have to find them and decide if u wanna sacrifice them because of a situation or not. This Game can be a Real Pain if u dont like that kind of stuff or dont want to deal with it, for the sake of other aspects of the game. On the other Hand a Game cant be liked by everyone. The first was a niche and this time it reached a greater audience. So also more people with other tastes. On the other Hand i like that it tries to make something different even if it fails.( i think you can guess by know that i had a positive expierience , and that stuff suits my taste.) Despite that its definitly NOT perfect really! But i can see the improvments in the vision from the first Game. And i think the next One (if happening) can improve it as well, there is still a lot of room for it xD (For example- npc social interacting and dialog parts.) And also i think that your max hp is also reduced when you got beaten up by a monster and not using a wakestone but reloading save should be fixed for example. Also for me at least in terms of pawns, other than in the first game, the ones i summoned started growing on me while traveling, so i tried to resummonen the same often if i could( they dont level up so i have to actuallize them). I think thats what is one of the visions on this. Which i had not in the first game. BUt they can also get totally on your nerves, depending on the flexebility of your nerves xD. So thats it for my experience and perspective, it can be a thrilling experience or total disaster. Funny so far from others i saw nothing in between those two. Also sorry for my grammar mistakes etc. i tried to find my words in english, but like the game its not perfect.

See, I've had the opposite problem with the save system. Most of my deaths have been to griffins I almost had down, so I reload to right before the griffin fight, ready for round two and... the griffin is gone... As for the fast travel thing, I actually like that design choice. Fast travel isn't too hard to get access to, but it's just hard enough to encourage you to explore the world on foot instead of just bamf-ing around everywhere. I also totally understand why this would be a negative for others, but I feel like it's a more nuanced discussion than simply saying it doesn't respect player time.

There’s a toggle in the settings to make O only interact. No idea why even have run and interact mapped that way by default

4:11 you sounded uncannily close to Zach Hadel with that voice, I loved it.

Some of the decisions seem to be attempts to correct things in the first game, some of which needed fixing (you could blow DP on a vocation switch and end up without the gold for equipment), some of which didn't (the dialogue system in DD1 was actually more functional due to the text boxes).

ARISEN, YOU ARE CARRYING TOO MUCH SELL OR STORE YOUR ITEMS! ARISEN, IT IS NIGHT TIME WE SHOULD REST AT AN INN! ARISEN, THE FOREST COULD HIDE MANY DANGERS! ARISEN, THIS FOE IS BEYOND OUR STRENGTH! Reviewer: "omg shut up"

When you play DD1 you think, 'wow this is such a weird game, they're going to fix like half of it in the sequel.' Then DD2 does all that nonsense again. It's all intentional! I can only assume Dragons Dogma exists in a Lynchian space of pure auteur expression. I could be mad, or give it a bad score, but frankly I don't think Dragon's Dogma cares. And that's why I love it.

I remember playing OG Dragons Dogma vaguely. Still has my favourite character creation of all time, but man, combat was rough. And I still sometimes hear, "wolves hunt in packs!" in my dreams.

To be honest I think you just want this to be a different game. I played way over 100 hours of this game and I love the dynamism of the combat system. I love the limited fast travel and the adventures I go on because I walk most of the time. I feel like the developers had very specific intensions with their design. I agree that there is plenty to criticise in Dragons Dogma 2 but implementing more features that are considered best practices would rob it of what makes it special. We have so many polished open world games with all the conveniences a player could want but we only get a Dragons Dogma a decade.

The game loop is "outings." That's why the save system is like that, that's why the health penalty is like that, and that's why carry weight fairly low. The game tells you to rest at an inn often because your inn rest is your hard save and everything revolves around that. Guild halls where you change your vocation are generally near inns, shops are generally near inns, item storage is handled through inn, Riftstones are generally near inns, and inns are one of the only ways you can restore your health penalty from damage/respawns. You are meant to prepare yourself, your main pawn, and pick 2 other pawns to round out your party before going on an "outing" with your team. You can generally recover from an "outing" going sour, but if all else fails and you truly feel you can't recover, you bite the bullet and reload your inn save. Some of the best moments I had with this game were just from being able to see a town in the distance and limping back to to it with my max HP ad just 20% normal after just barely surviving a surprise griffin attack. It's truly something I haven't experienced in another game. These things are here purposely to impose friction. For example, Itsuno has stated he thinks it's too easy to fast travel in games and that it trivializes them, something that a decent chunk of Skyrim players also agree with based on the fact there are multiple mods that remove the function, each with tens of thousands of downloads. That's why fast travel is restricted to oxcarts and Ferrystones, and that's why your save slots are so limited. I simply wouldn't have had the same tension fighting that griffin and fearing a goblin ambush in the aftermath if I could just, at any time, press pause and fast travel to Harve. The systems that enabled that experience rely on me not being able to do that. I never played DD1 and didn't expect to play DD2 until these design choices were explained on a podcast I listen to by someone who really loves DD1. I went in knowing what to expect from them, knowing they'd be different from typical game design, and I loved my 110 hour playthrough enough to immediately hit new game plus after the credits rolled. If I hadn't I might have had a similar experience to what you and Yahtzee did. Unfortunately, the stink of the MTX did nothing to help the perception of this game's design. A lot of discourse has posited that the game was designed like this in order to sell these items to you but that's not the case. The first game was the same way (as described by the podcast I mentioned), and didn't have any MTX other than the expansion DLC. Capcom has been putting in this style of MTX for the better part of a decade (DMC5 had similar ones, as do the RE remakes) and it's stupid every time. It must be some sort of mandate from the marketing/publishing branch of Capcom, and it's a real shame they keep insisting on it.

JM8 made a character that looks like Dabarella's runty little brother

Yeah, I feel like your criticisms are pretty valid. Yesterday, I was playing the game, I got an escort quest to half way across the map and there was no way I could fast travel to it. How could that have been fun, I have no idea. I feel like the save system, combined with the lack of good fast travel options really hampers the exploration in this game. I am always scared to explore because everything could potentially setback the progress by an hour or two, at the very least. Personally, having an eternal ferrystone(instead of consumable ferrystone), with more portcrystals, giving us a choices of setting up our own fast travel point. Furthermore, saving whenever the party camps, will go a long way to alleviate these problems. Personally, I enjoyed the combat a lot, but that is perhaps because I am used to it from my Dragon's Dogma Dark Arisen playthrough.

The lack of lock on is an understandable gripe, but as a Monster Hunter veteran, when you need precise part targetting and you fight big monsters often, lock on can be a detriment since the camera will swing too much, too quickly. Even when Monster Hunter implemented a lock on, many people just don’t use it. Either since it’s too stiff because it strictly locks at the main body and not the appendages, or it’s just easier to precisely target tails without the lock on. But Dragon’s Dogma 2 does feature a lot of small-sized enemies, so lock on is still beneficial either way. When they do implement one, though, they need to remember how should it work with the big monsters.

The past two Dragon's Dogma videos on the channel have felt weird for me, since both you and Yahtzee both had the experience of reloading at the inn save after finding a hard fight. Maybe I already had the conditioning from playing the original DD a lot, but when I found a hard fight I couldn't do at the moment I just ran away. Sometimes finding a camp site to get my HP back to max and take another go at the fight that I ran from. DD2 100% has it's flaws but I never had much gripes when it came to it's design decisions, honestly it was the opposite for the most part. Either way still always interesting to hear people's takes on things!

Every time you come back from out in the wilds you should go to the inn or your house to deposit everything you picked up and save by sleeping. Once you get that habit down dragons dogma 2 gets easy.

My guy, it has one eye. That’s a cyclops, not a troll.

I think "Patchwork" or "Patchy" might have been the better choice for the antonym of "Seamless."

I do enjoy this show, but this is the first time I have some real criticism of the observations here. Some of these complaints are perfectly valid; the controls are a bit wonky, the pawn selling equipment is a bit silly (although it looked like they only sold the starter crap that isn't worth having anyway), and things like the CYCLOPS falling and making bridges or other set pieces are certainly too sparse (why is there only one medusa in the whole map?). The game really needs some clean up, and should be more upfront about how serious the consequences of your actions can be, on many levels. All of that said, some of the combat complaints are... a bit opinionated feeling. Classes don't have a universal defensive option because they are VASTLY different, and certain classes lack of defense is purposeful, to make team building and positioning an important consideration. Magic and arrows are powerful tools, but you actually feel the threat of enemies when they approach and you realize "oh crap, I'm about to be bullied because I didn't create space and I am not a melee character." Conversely, melee characters can struggle against flying enemies, requiring the aid of their pawns to bring them down or having to use their skills and items to make openings. Dark souls needs a universal option because the game is mostly designed around a solo player character with a lot of options. They HAVE to be able to overcome by themselves, and thus need a tool for everything, especially defense. DD2 wants you to make a party and go adventuring, which means each member should have recognizable and exploitable weaknesses, or else you would just bring 4 of the best class available (the most boring tabletop party makeup ever, and the sign of a flawed system). The reinforcement loop against large enemies is also overblown. Yes you take a health penalty, its incentivizing you to stop trying to brute force an enemy. If it was a close fight, then by all means, fight them again with your new found knowledge about the fight and avoid taking that damage. If the enemy is so overwhelming that 10% hp difference cripples you, then it wasn't an enemy you were prepared to face anyway. Discretion is the better part of valor, and DD2 does not shame or punish you for running from foes you are no match for yet. Resting at a camp site refills your missing health, and campsites are plentiful, only being a precious resource if your caught wandering around in the dark at night with no idea where you are (which is your own fault). The game says "last inn save," which is pretty obviously, if your out and about adventuring, a long time ago. I don't really feel bad for people who pick that option and are then bummed about losing progress. It says what it is exactly on the tin, why would you not expect to lose all the progress in between? Yes, its gives you less of an option than Skyrim or other multisave games, and yes I agree DD2 should have multiple character slots. But I don't mind that I can't just rotate my saves and never face adversity. Being far from town, in a new area, at night, with a dwindling health pool, can make for some of the tensest encounters possible, and its entirely THE PLAYERS FAULT if they find themselves in that predicament. If I could just reset to 30 minutes ago and decide to head back to town now knowing what lies ahead... then what risk was there in forging ahead? I ventured nothing and gained everything. That's not necessarily bad, but its not the kind of adventure DD2 wants you to have. Commit to and learn from your choices and mistakes, they are the result of your own will and nothing else, that is one of the main themes of the game. DD2 is by no means perfect, maybe not even great, but I feel like its a very unique experience, and that it problems are mostly systematic, not with the moment to moment gameplay or options presented to the player. DD2 does respect your time (usually), it just wants you to respect your own time and commit to what you are using it for. Still, a fine video as always, even if I disagree with the points made.

I don't agree at all with the "find a game that respects your time" when Dragon's Dogma 2 respects you more than most games. It doesn't hold your hand. It's like trying to argue roguelikes are bad because they "don't respect your intelligence" when it's the exact opposite. Is DD2 flawless? Not by any means. But the game definitely does go "okay, you better learn how this works or you're gonna have a bad time." If you don't reciprocate that respect you are going to have said bad time. Games don't need to be designed for all players, or even welcoming to them all. It is up to you to decide where your line is.

There's a very simple check you should do whenever you load an inn save. Ask yourself if you remember when exactly you last rested at an inn, and if you don't, then don't load it! Sure the system sucks, but it's not that complicated to at least not get fucked over by it!

You can save your game at basically any time outside of combat.

As a person who played dragons dogma 1 I was expecting the single save system and limited teleportation and never questioned it dragons dogma 2 doesn't expect you to win every combat off the bat if you die and reload you still always have the option to run (it tried to save before the monster sees you even) and you can yell at your pawns to follow you so they don't bash there head against a troll for an hour. every microtransaction item is obtainable in game and while not good feels like an obligation to CEO decision makeing (you can look at many recent capcom titles to see similar trends) I just ignore the existence of them. I see a lot of people upset about this as a departure of modern day gaming when it's more the challenge of older games (i personally like limiting of fast travel making it so you need to pick and choose what you do). I love the combat as well many of the classes feel great and I am playing through new game plus without pawns and having a great time! infact the thing I think that is the most antethetical is the end game having limited time (since it's the only place to get some resources) and dragon blight which is a mechanic that suprised many people locking them out of many quests.

The intent is to run away from monsters too powerful to fight. A quick tactical retreat has led to some of my best moments: navigating the wilderness on a desperate, wounded trek to civilization is a unique experience. I don't blame anyone for not realizing this, though. Games have conditioned us for years that combat to the death of either side is the only viable outcome.

I never had to many issues with the save system, mainly because once you get farther into the game, it just becomes piss poor easy and you will never need to reload from inn. Which uh... Was an issue in itself. That said, the games travel system really, REALLY disrespects your time. Portcrystals are incredibly rare, as so are the consumables needed to use them. This leads to you having to run everywhere, and just the smallest, most dull quests take forever. I didn't want to explore anywhere because I knew it would take so long to run back to where I needed to go.

5:20 There's no universal dodge system because each class has their flavor and identity. If every game has a dodge roll, the need for skill that keep aggro on Warrior and Fighter doesn't really matter or augments that lower your aggro lose their purpose. If a Mage or Sorcerer can simply dodge out of any attack, their Maelstorm and Bolides are spell have reason consequences and that make Thief less unique as a clas being the nimble fighter. If Warrior could just block or roll, you wouldn't need to learn I-frame from Barge or the Guard point that they gain via a augment that give you hyper armor during their charge attacks. There's a clearly intention in making you rely on party. This isn't Dark Souls where you're lonely Husk fighting Gods, this Adventure party based game where you have pawns that learn and become more human because you teach them via your actions.

I love the combat myself but i'm a huge fan of the DD1. However i do feel that the magic classes are not as good as the first game. And while i cannot defend the save system i don't think the things you don't like is the game doing things just to be different but rather because its what the first game did and they didn't want to change ti for what ever reason. I would have recommended doing a bit of research on DD1 before making this video to see whats actually a unique thing to DD2 and whats from DD1.

Yeah but I also feel like having to press the button to go to the next dialogue option was only added because let's face it how many people spam through games text options and then get pissed when they don't remember or accuse the game of not giving them information

I was wondering if he would talk about this when he mentioned it on the gigantic stream! Hope this means we get a few “how to play” episodes as well

Many design choices in DD2 were based on it being a slow burn game. You're supposed to take longer, to stop and think. The story takes a back-seat to organic exploration. Of course, that's not to say it works 100%. I agree with your criticism, although I'm loving the game. Maybe, just maybe, the idea behind chipping away your max HP on every reload was to make you more afraid of combat and better pick your fights... but the combat gets easier with higher levels anyway, so what's the point in bullying new players?

You weren't stuck in a loop with that ogre. You could have ran away. Also, the fact you tried to climb it shows you didn't grasp the role of a mage at all.