I never thought about the ending as the Arisen "dooming" the world To me, it was the contrary. By sacrificing himself, the Arisen is giving the world the responsibility of willing itself into being, almost spreading his love of life and existence onto every living being. That is demonstrated by the player giving their life force to their pawn as they die, performing the "bestowal of spirit" and making the pawn become fully human. With your face nonetheless. The final text even describes your former pawn as "Nameless, this soul awakens, eyes gleaming with the will to live, and all things worth living for". It's a really powerful and beautiful ending to me.
It is the ultimate metaphor for growing old and mentoring the young. You nurture this young soul, give them the tools to choose, then let them inherit the world to do as they will.
The witch in the forest in DD1 adopted her pawn and treat it as her daughter and by the time she die. The pawn will take the arisen form and be a fully human with a soul.
It is said that the dragon's dogma world is doomed to die without a seneschal's will shaping it to life. when seneschal becomes too tired of work and his will falters, he sends the dragon to find a new arisen to become his fresh replacement with unflinching will. so yes, when you commit sucicide whithout finding a substitute for yourself, you doom the world, it simply cant exist without a seneschal. cycle is broken and the world will just wither out sooner or later. may sound a little weird and depressing but in the end the whole story focused a lot around you, the arisen, having the will to make your own decisions and pursue your own fate regardless of any factors. even if its the responsibility of "keeping the world alive" you have the will to reject it if you want. game doesnt even force you to use godsbane in the end, there is no objective in the last quest to do it, no hints even. if you do it, its out of your own volition because you just want it.
One of the cooler aspects of the story is how each of the alternate endings point to a different NPC in the world that made the same choice. The Dragonforged either never faced the dragon or couldn't defeat it (there are contradicting lines about it). The Duke took the Dragon's bargain by choosing to sacrifice his love and gain sovereignty. Grigori faced a Seneschal and lost, being turned into a Dragon to go find someone stronger. Savan, the character you control in the prologue, defeats and takes the place of the Seneschal, repeating the cycle, and it's hinted that many have either faced him and failed or took the "Peace" illusion option. You can tell they put some thought into how the world was put together.
@@Houston810it is hinted, during Bitterblack Island, that multiple Arisens can exist at the same time, but it isn't clear if there's more than one per "period" or even if one or more are created during the same period. A cycle can last for untold years, so it's logical to assume that probably many are created at the same time
@@Houston810no, because to take the bargain means that the arisen failed, and the dragon did not find a worthy challenger to take the mantle of seneschal meaning that the search for a truly arisen is still going on. The dragon even says as such in the final battle essentially “I’ll leave so that the people will think you slayed me, but we both know what actually happened here” and therefore the dragon will be back to search for another arisen after a time.
My take was that the Dragonforged saw emotional attachments as a weakness and so he never had anyone that was special to him. Because of this the Dragon had nothing to bargain with, so he refused to even meet with the Dragonforged.
Honestly, a much more fitting song altogether compared to "Into Free" from the non Dark Arisen version of the game lol... Still a great thing to bring up to people who don't know about that super out of place title song.
@@fieryrebirthdude I LOVED that the night theme from the base game became the main menu music for dark arisen, the ideas of this game are so tightly woven
@@Tatsitimdeadit was so perfect though, the juxtaposition of these dark fantasy backdrops and dragons with wings unfurled with that anime intro song will always hold a special place in my heart, it was the moment I knew this game was going to be a different experience than I was used to.
Fun tip: If you start a new game plus, switch to offline in the options before facing Senechal, and the Senechal will reveal itself as your previous Arisen.
@@yaqubebased1961 They are talking about new game plus, not the intro of the game. The senechal becomes the character from your previous playthrough when you play offline.
I think the greatest tragedy in Dragon's Dogma is how nearly every one of the "villains" we meet are actually just victims of the cruel cycle. Grigori was once an Arisen who faced off against the Seneschal, but lost and became the Dragon. Savan was also an Arisen who managed to win against the Seneschal, but was cursed with being the life battery for the world. So much so, that when you stab him, he remarks that he's finally free of immortality. He was glad to be dead at that point. Ashe, similar to the aforementioned two, was an Arisen who became Daimon because he couldn't make a the cruel choice of killing his mother or sacrificing his lover. Even Elysion is technically a victim, as his village was burned during the Dragon's rampage, which made him deeply insane and nihilistic. Julien is the only one who's technically not directly affected by it, but even his actions are a result of Grigori's appearance, which caused political turmoil within the various nations. On a side note, I really love how in New Game+ if you play in offline mode, you get to fight your past Arisen in the end. This is a cool detail, because it shows that you never truly "broke" the cycle by stabbing yourself in the heart.
So it feels like is a world in which is sustained by the sacrifices of the strong-willed. But such kind of world can only breed villains that will lash out against this system.
Dragon's Dogma always struck me as a gnostic world; the revelation all save the arisen are essentially pawns [which you could call hylics] has always been interesting to me.
Add on to that each Arisen ultimately is forced to become the next false god with no means to escape or change the cycle. The false world is inescapable.
Yet, at the same time "grigori" (the name of the dragon) are the fallen angels / watchers of the Book of Enoch. There are a lot of ideas in Dragon's Dogma. The dragon as a "fallen angel" is just one. It'll be interesting to see how elves and beast men work into the lore and philosophy of 2.
The fast travel system is actually amazing. You have to earn the right to use it, be strategic about it, and the fact that you can't rely on it in the early game means that you have to... you know, actually interact with the map? There are more than enough overworld encounters to make travelling on foot into an adventure every time.
True, I’d say that the uses of a ferrystones is rather lame, but maybe if we borrow from something like Horizon Zero Dawn with their supplies of food, water and beds, would it make better sense as a fast traveling items, especially when that can heal and restore you back up as well, sort of like Baldur’s Gate 3
Yeah I actually think it has one of my ideal fast travel systems. I only wish there were more in universe options, which it looks like is being addressed in the sequel with ox carts and balloon travel.
If you get the ferrystone that doesn't get used up, you just have to travel wherever you need to go on foot and you can fast travel back & forth after.
He also is not a willing participant either, he doesnt take pleasure or satisfaction at the destruction he brings, he does it because he is coerced by the dogma to do all these horrible things to forge the next seneschall into being. He is a terrifying and powerfull force of destruction, but hes not evil
Hi Max! Just a few clarifications on the Dragon's Bargain: Ashe didn't turn into Daimon because of having too much "bad feelings" At a moment of indecisiveness, he wished to curse "the endless cycle of the Arisen, the world, and its creator for his cruel fate." Grette saw that hatred as his true desire and took it as an acceptance of the bargain. The Dragon's Power is limited, it can't grant a wish that screws over the reality of the Seneschal (technically it's master) in an instant, but it CAN grant an Arisen the power to achieve it. The result of this work around was Daimon. A personification of the cursed cycle, a mockery of both Dragon and Arisen melted together. A master of its own domain capable of ending the world, but a slave bound to its endless realities. And that's an interesting detail: Grette's bargain was offering a wish, while Grigori just offered us the duchy. Grette's version was most likely a retcon from Capcom's part, but I believe her version of the bargain was the original intention for the base game. It's no secret that Dragon's Dogma was heavily inspired by Berserk, the game is coated from head to toe with it, figuratively AND literally! (the PS version officially had Guts and Griffith's armors and weapons). So it's safe to assume that The Dragon's Bargain was supposed to be a homage to Berserk's "Sacrificial Ceremony" where a character is given power by demon overlords to "do as thou wilt" in exchange for the people they love. But there's also the known fact that Dragon's Dogma had a very small budget that led to more than 50-60% of content being cut. They might've had to reword the bargain so that it would only funnel into one ending because that's all they could afford for that part of the development. It's my guess that when the game did fairly well commercially and had a chance for a DLC, that's when the devs had the opportunity to explore the lore further and was able to style it closer to its Berserk influences.
Yeah, I saw Daimon's curse as being forced to take both options of the bargain. He couldn't choose, so his result was a yes to both circumstances as best as could be. Rather than a rejection of the cycle altogether, he was forced to embody it all at once.
@@thefelsage I see it a bit differently: he did reject the cycle, that is why he is luring arisen from all the parralel worlds to bitter black isle to kill them. Its a trap created by his hate, madness and powers granted to him by the dragon interpreting his wish. To deny arisen to the cycle and to wear the cycle down and finaly breaking it. Only that you cant break the cycle that way at all cause theres an inifnite amount of dragons and arisen, so those dragons that are now without an arisen will just pick another person to fill the void, and those arisen might not even go to bitterblack isle. Making his trap at best a minor slow down to the cycles of those worlds.
@bananainacup What I was trying to express was that he makes it out like we think DD1 is bad in comparison to DD2. Though, as we see it, we already love the first game for what it is, and we're excited because the sequel will be more of it, not simply because we're looking forward to DD2 eclipsing the first.
I understood it was budget cut for like half of the scope of their game. Plus, even when I first played the original, I felt underwhelmed at the beginning until I leveled up enough to realize the full potential of this…but also it’s many pitfalls such as the monster materials and grindfest it takes to get to that powerful point. Plus, one shot bandits/ox escort at the beginning do not help new players enjoy the game.
We live in a post Skyrim world yet it was Dragons Dogma, released not long after, that showed me what a true contest of might and will against a dragon is like. A being of intelligence and wisdom as deep as the abyss, demanding that you fight with every fiber of your being. And now more than ten years later we get to see it again, for good or ill. Hype doesn't begin to describe the amount of anticipation I have. I await the contest the Dragon is preparing for us all.
Oh yes, Dragon's Dogma, one of the only video games I had through high school. I got to new game plus 13 before I found out about Dark Arisen edition lmao.
Maaan DD is one of my favourite games of all time, it's great to see your take on its philosopy. The supposed "plot hole" about the wold being doomed if the dragon dies its explained by the game itself. When you learn about the identity of the Seneschal, you see he is a previous arisen, wich means he has defeated his own dragon, yet the world remains. That, coupled with the fact it is literally shown and told that the Seneschal can create life means there is other ways to create Dragons. Also, i think it is important to explain why the eternal chain/cycle exist. When the Seneschal ascends, it gains godly powers but their will remains human. With time, the burden of providing purpose to the entire world bercomes unbearable, so a new strong willed Arisen is needed to take their place so the world doesn't become a empty husk devoid of purpose. Basically, the game story propose the fucked up reality that life is fueled by conflict and the need to overcome it, the moment a Seneschal dissapears from the world without anyone to replace it, most conflict ceases to exist, and all living things devolve in time into husks without any will, aka "pawns"
Personally, I have no strong feelings for the ferrystones and especially for the infinite ferrystones, I just think they get the job done right, but it’s not the point of Dragon’s Dogma, the point of Dragon’s Dogma is to take in the world that you’re walking your character and party through and experience a fantasy game similar to DnD without all of the technical and turn-based side. It’s that immersive and I hope the open world in the next game becomes dynamic and alive in it’s monsters like in Monster Hunter World.
One of the things I loved about the game was the methodology of the eternal wheel/chain. It first needs a will strong enough to stand against an indomitable threat, then one to not grow idle with immortality, to not seek out an easy path now that age and sickness no longer effect you, it filters those to confront the Dragon, filters those again to choose to sacrifice all they care for for personal gain. Only then when you reject the Dragons bargains does it filter via force(of will). Only an arisen tempered enough can over come the sheer physicality of the Dragon, to be filtered via the Rift Chasm once more with ever increasing physical threat, this time with out your unlimited lifespan you could utilize against the Dragon prior. Then you a filtered yet again in the face of the Seneschals might, his pure dominion over matter and essence. To face him true you are filtered against the impossibility of facing down a god, a god true. Filtered against your mortal life and the connections that enabled you to stand against the Dragon must now be sacrificed to advance towards the realm of a divine. And then and only then can you become the next chain by toppling the will of a god. Its implied rather directly our arisen finally breaks this cycle with the gods bane sword, thus removing an seneschal, dragon and possible need to rule the realm. Possibly the world exists now under its own will power, every life now truly independent of a creator recycling again and again. Maybe it falls to entropy? Maybe it doesn't. It possibly doesn't matter, its the first time its free to live and die by its own merits...just like the Pawn who takes your place.
I agree. BBL and the fight with Daiemon helped clear up the lore better and then to add the "Coils of "Light" song during the fight, and end credits really put it into perspective more.
As always we have a great video analysis on the game which I was disinterested completely, but now thanks to you I might keep an eye on it. Btw, thanks to you, I started again to look closely on what authors of ANY media try to tell in their story and what message they want to deliver to people. Also, love addition of humor, makes great videos even better.
hard disagree on the fast travel point. I will say it was a tad too restricted. To many games these days use the very lazy map travel system, you just chose a place and go anywhere you want, but for many games it comes at the cost of the feeling the game brings you. In dragons dogma you have to actually journey to places to get things done. it brought the world a little more to life, trying to get back to town before the sun goes down wouldnt have the same feeling if i could just push a button on a map and get there instantly. Something the game could have done with to expand on the system they already provided is in world forms of transportation. The arisen doesnt need his own carriage, but he could surely rent one to travel to a near by settlement. There are probably many other options for in world fast travel. Make each one dependent on where you're going to or coming from.
I liked how the fast travel isn't something you can always rely on and is pretty much up to you to decide which places prioritized importance to justify using up a limited amount of portcrystals that you can only find if you choose to explore.
Man, i loved this game so much since back when i played the vanilla version on PS3. To imagine i would find a vídeo of you talking about it is so good. Kinda unrelated too, but, your video messed me up bad, like, i've had a really, really bad time these last couple month. I had to vent and i happened to start playing this on my switch, the ending hit me way more emotionally than before, since it was also loaded by nostalgia, and sadly, both times were loaded with sadness and depressive moments in my life. The icing of the cake, is, back when i was playing this 10 or so years ago, i was also playing P3P on my PSP, another game overloaded with nihilistic, depressive and philosophical themes, which i also love. And the fact your video was sponsored by P3R messed mt brain so badly i had to take it as a signal to do something woth my life, i can't spyral back to that again... And the fact Dragons dogma is a game about "bad" loops it's too much of a coincidence, think im going crazy haha...
I believe that you've made a mistake when talking about the plot. You do not break the cycle when you use the Godsbane, but accept your place as the new Seneschal. This is why your pawn takes over your body and your previous Arisen is the new Seneschal in NG+
But is morphing the pawn in to a doppelganger REALLY necessary after you give them more will? I feel like that should be a choice, MY Arisen wouldn't do that. But it's probably a gameplay specific choice, since it doesn't really make sense why that would be necessary.
@@Skynet5885 Well, it is said multiple times that paws are not life, but a shadow of it, a shadow trying to fit the mold of the real thing. As per lore, a main pawn who exposes himself long enough to his master, ends up acquiring his appearance, all out of mimicking so much of it's master, not only his will but his whole being down to appearance, that so it acquired true will itself. So I don't think our body was taken over in the ending, instead, our pawn became so much of us. While the arisen true body probably just sunk in the ocean or evaporated.
This was amazing, I really enjoyed your perspective on the ideas of Dragon's Dogma, and yes I would enjoy seeing you make another video about the sequel
Well, the OG fast travel was dog, sure. But the Dark Arisen fix made it one of my favorite fast travel systems. If there was just a little bit more portcrystals in the first playthrough....
I'm so glad you done this one, personally. And it was a perfect time to get views with the second one coming out. This is one of my all time favorite games. If the second one doesn't fail us, at least you'll have a good video about it, hopefully!
In regards to the lack of a dragon if an Arisen actually beats the Seneschal, I’ve got three theories on how that matter is resolved which it seemingly has to be given that there was a dragon after the one that the Seneschal beat. The first and simplest, is that the new Seneschal can simply create one using their power. Second is that the Seneschal can send their Pawn to serve as the first dragon of their reign, with the Pawn possessing its own pseudo sense of Will shaped during its time with its Arisen. Third and most out there, is that the timeline in which you defeat the Seneschal and become the dragon exist at the same time as the interior and exterior sides of our eternal ring. When facing the Seneschal there is a scene in which we seemingly strike them down only to see our own face when we pull back the hood. It’s implied that this is simply a lifeless copy of our Arisen, like a doll used to shock us. I like to think however that in that moment we truly do cut down the weakest parts of ourself at which point we are both guaranteed to fail and become dragon as well as win and become Seneschal. Meanwhile the third choice of slaying yourself exists as the void space at the middle of every ring. It is a sacrifice which serves as the finger upon which our ring rests.
I see DD as an analogy to the concept of samsara - clad in a western guise. Nietzsche continues the dialogue, so I see the comparison. There is just something very inescapable "Asian" about the whole production. It's their cultural roots and it shows. I don't think they had to read western philosophy to arrive at this story, is what Im getting at. The west is late to this thought experiment. But the analysis is good either way.
I’m basically who you describe, but I don’t really think everything should be about philosophy, sometimes things just happen and we must accept our roles into our worlds as is, same goes for Dragon’s Dogma, but sometimes, you have to break that mould to find the real you, even if it is quite an ugly sight. 😅
So on the point of the Arisen becomming god, as hinted by the prologue Arisen becomming god before us a dragon is not always created by a dead Arisen but by the will of the cycle, to further this point in game the last Arisen known to the world before our own character is the Duke as we know he took the bargin to sacrifice what he loved and while its hinted that its the same dragon he dealt with before the case could also be made that each dragon is born anew each time the cycle demands it regardless of an Arisen's actions.
Love the video. I would like to note that even if you use the Godsbane on yourself, it doesn’t seem to end the cycle. But rather seems to be the final step towards becoming Seneschal, freeing you of your mortal body and bestowing a will to your pawn. Not sure how that fits into philosophical messages undertones though.
it's not a logical error, because you become the new dragon if you loose doesn't mean that there is no other way for a dragon to be born, i mean the Seneschal literally created pawns and copies of people right in front of you, so it wouldn't be strange if the Seneschal can create a copy of the previews dragon. also no you don't end the cycle with the ending, you just missed or ignored a lot of information, firstly the Seneschal gave you the sword that can kill him by pulling it out of his chest (don't just ignore that), second is that the pawn of an arisen is fated to go inside the body of the arisen (it's learned from a side quest i think i don't remember), if Selene becomes your beloved then at the ending she says to your pawn in your body that, you are like me aren't you (and a lot of other things), also with Selene's quests we know that she was a pawn and became a human. do you still believe that the story has a loophole?
So glad you did a video on DD. I myself started playing it for the first time last summer but i knew of the game since it was relesed back 2012. I used to read about it in gaming magazines at the time and I remember being utterly amazed by it. Especialy about how you could climb up monsters, namely Griffins. I still remember watching a trailer even before release and it made me think that this game was anouncing a new era epic fantasy games. Anyway great video as always! Would like if you would do some more. Also just meant to disclaim about Senechal and the Dragon. If you manage to defeat Senechal you replace him, but the Dragon (Gregori), the one you already defeated resumes his position as a Dragon once more. Only by being killed by the Senechal will you replace Gregori as the new Dragon. Also, I really like the idea of Senechal killing himself and thus ending the world, it kinda reminds me of letting The First Flame fade in DS.
My man I really hope you do a part 2 of this because I am so frustrated, DD2's lore is super cool and definetely added to the original, but once again Capcom refuses to explain things, I have so many questions 😭
MAX WHY MUST YOU DO THIS TO ME!? THE DRAGON DOESNT PROMISE TO LEAVE FOREVER, ONLY FOR 70 YEARS. HENCE WHY MOST OF THE QUESTS OF THE GAME ARE JUST THE DUKE THROWING YOU AT PROBLEMS HOPING YOU'LL DIE. HE MADE THE BARGAIN WITH RHE SAME DRAGON AND THAT IS WHY HE HAS PTSD.
The Eternal Return is of Greek origin, got quite popular with stoic philosophy. Nietzsche just liked this philosophy. This theory of eternity is actually really really old, and can be found in many cultures, although again, quite sure it stems from Bronze Age Greece, and got a lot more popular with the stoics. After all, Greeks were great mathematicians, and believed that time itself flows in a closed circle, lacking start or end.
The moment I knew Dragons Dogma was special was when I went to confront the Frost Wyrm in the water cave area (forget the name), and as I approached I realized he wasn't roaming freely like the Drake and Wyvern, he was just planted at the back of the hall staring at me. Soon as I got close he began to speak to me and it suddenly hit me just how much intelligence was in the creature I was fighting. There are so many little things philosophically in this game that, while not particularly fleshed out, hints at much deeper motives by the characters. I just found the lack of answers to add to the realism of the world. In real life, you will often never discover the full motives of another.
I really do like the philosophy despite not understanding it clearly other than seeing the story of Dragon’s Dogma seeing a familiar philosophy reference of Nietzsche’s quote “If you stare into the abyss, it’ll stare back at you.” when encountering the finale of the endless Everfall. One thing I might add is that in spite of Dark Arisen’s supposed fate of it’s final boss, you are still very much another Arisen who freed the lost soul in Daimon and restore their existence’s fulfillments in some such ways. So it does prove Nietzsche’s philosophy. Any and all who wields the will of the Arisen can absolutely change those around them.
It should be noted that Nietzsche's Eternal Return thought experiment was not necessarily designed to explore the acceptance or rejection of an arguably cruel fate, but rather to posit that one should live their life in such a way that they would happily embrace this fate. This tied into Nietzsche's critique of contemporary religious doctrine that proposed life should be lived in preparation for the afterlife, instead proposing life should be lived to its fullest and richest such that one would be happy to repeat their one life for all eternity. Applying this notion to Dragon's Dogma gives us the contrast between our Arisen's journey where they seek to overcome themselves time and again through a will to power (reminiscent of Nietzsche's depiction of the overman) and ultimately embolden their own pawn to live the same life they did, and the journey's of two other Arisen: the Duke and the Dragonforged. These other two Arisen lament about the cycle and their role in it, likely in no small part due to the decisions they made in pursuit of self preservation in the hopes that the cycle would one day be broken for them and they would be free of it. They essentially lived in preparation for a life outside the cycle, a life which never came and likely left them with a great deal of regret.
You mention that Ashe became Daimon because he succumbed to despair and transformed. What actually happened is that he cursed the cycle of eternal return, which the dragon Grette interpreted as his wish and granted by transforming him into a being powerful enough to end the cycle, hence why Bitterblack Isle is essentially a place where Arisen are drawn to be killed, damning the cycle for many worlds across the Rift. In other words, you can think of Dragon's Dogma as the story of when the cycle goes right, and Dark Arisen as the story of when the cycle goes horribly wrong.
Hard disagree about the fast travel system, if anything it made the world feel much more immersive and real because every journey you took to complete a quest was rife with danger and perils, you couldn’t just on a whim teleport to any location you wanted, and merely visiting the location once wasn't enough, you had to work for it, the world wasn't tailored for you, it was mostly hostile and sometimes totally indifferent. You actually had to think and use the various game systems to create your own fast travel system, there was no hand holding in the game, you take the rare rift crystals, then go to the black market and duplicate them, then designate the most important points of interest on the map and go there on foot to plant the rift crystals there specifically to create your own fast travel network, each one of those journeys was an adventure on its own, that's what really made me fall in love with this game.
I don't thinkk any true Dogma fans can be upset at you saying that the first game had unfulfilled potential, this is a fact that a big chunk of Itsuno's vision remained on the cutting room floor and hopefully they make it to the sequel.
Some clarifications to the record on the story, for I am a lore nerd. Though some of the problems of the Seneschal and Next Dragon conundrum aren't addressed directly, there are some possible alternatives. For example, the DLC explicitly states that the world of Dragon's Dogma spans a near-infinite multiverse, and each universe contains a dragon of their own with possibly different variations of the Arisen's charge, or the bargain that the Dragon offers to the Arisen as a test. Though it isn't stated whether or not there are multiple Seneschals for each universe or there's only one for the entire continuum, there is an implication that the Seneschal governs at least one world, and that this world may not be the same world that the Arisen came from. There's a few details that corroborate this while touring as the Seneschal. The first, that Gran Soren is rebuilt as it once was, while the city was essentially in ruins when we left it, and those who died in the destruction are alive and well. The second, that the town crier (Flavian) announces that the Dragon has recently awakened, and that the Arisen has already been chosen. Therefore, this version of Gran Soren you're touring as the Seneschal is either from a different but similar universe (as in, another player's game world) or that the cycle has progressed to the point that it's looped back around to itself (which seems unlikely, given the timeline of events in Ashe's story after Grette departed to the Seneschal's realm). If it's the former, then it means that there are multiple universes tied to the Seneschal (perhaps not an infinite number, but at least an indefinite amount), and new Arisen and Dragons can be created from these worlds that could be considered already-in-progress for the cycle. Perhaps this could result in some universes stagnating and dying out, but considering the amount of universes present within the multiverse is theoretically infinite, this is of little consequence. There are also minor details within the earlier parts of the story that set up the depth and philosophy at the end, but not major ones. Namely, the political intrigue the Arisen has no choice but to get involved in acts as a foil to the Arisen having no choice but to be involved in the Cycle, in some way or another. The political intrigue seems trite in the face of gods and world-ending dragons, yet it is just as ensnaring. There are also some minor characters who help encapsulate the feeling of the cycle - Milberowe in the Venery is an amazing example. As far as the Will goes, the interpretation is mostly correct. However, it is important to note that the Seneschal themselves is not truly able to utilize their will. Savan directly states to the Arisen that "we are prisoners" and that he is not only resigned to his end, but welcomes it. This mirrors the Dragons, who seem as all-powerful agents of destruction, but have their actions controlled by the Seneschal, and they are helpless to do anything else but watch as their powers are used to destroy and demand an Arisen from the world - thus, the Dragonforged mentions that the Dragon has an air of resignation, and that Grigori seems to cheer on the Arisen during the final battle. So although the Seneschal may be the Will that sustains the world, they are still bound by something else, and essentially sucked dry to serve the purposes of the Cycle. In this model, the Will only results in one being forced into progressively greater responsibility. A Will that surpasses these bonds results in the use of the Godsbane to slay oneself and seemingly end the cycle ("[an end] penned by your own hand, no less" as referred to by the game), and leaves one's own Pawn to carry on one's own Will. This particular end is described by neither Nietzche or Schopenhauer, as it rejects one's fate to serve the Cycle yet does not reject the beauty within the will to live (the ending screen of text just before the credits is highly elucidating in this). There's a bit more complexity to Daimon beyond just a funny way of spelling Demon (plus potential references to the Daimon as it is seen in Ancient Greece, particularly the Daimon of Socrates), but the picture of Will I described is furthered by Daimon's existence, as Ashe is grateful to the Arisen for freeing him from his bondage as a godlike being of hatred, yet the Daimon still persists even after Ashe is gone - there is still something that powered his intense hatred and massive power, as told by Olra and the presence of the "true Daimon" after Ashe is freed. Perhaps this is Grette, who also cursed the cycle and was bound by it, or perhaps it is the thing that binds the Seneschal to their fate as a Will factory - as with some of the finer points of Dragon's Dogma, the mystery remains unresolved.
The Seneschal has strong overtones with the Platonic Demiurge as an intermediate and imperfect divinity that maintains the material world's structure. It lack the inherent malignant nature of the Gnostic Demiurge, though nothing would prevent a Seneschal from developing a cruel nature from what we know of the world's metaphysical nature.
A Max Derrat video about Dragon's Dogma with a goddamn Persona 3 Reload sponsorship of all things? I'm only a couple minutes in but this video feels almost personal already.
the ending was one of the only few that made me think "deep", confused and mindblown at the same time. i wasn't sure if the game was being philosophical and told myself that i'm just overanalyzing it, the story wasn't award winning quality but from the start until i reached the grigori sacrifice or fight choice, i tried my best finishing side quests helping people and playing the role of the fantasy hero. so the choice of killing grigori was obvious, then i reached the seneschal and the big reveal of the arisen cycle was so mindblowing that i had to pause the game and take in the information, and accept that everything you've done to that point would just lead to the cycle repeating story wise but also gameplay wise a.k.a newgame+. the player basically ends up as god. when I thought this game was about a quest for revenge on the dragon not only because of the heart but because i genuinely believed the role of arisen was just any other anime fantasy hero which was my entire mindset when enjoying the world and being immersed in it. (this is the first game i played that had ng+ so it had extra cool points for me how ng+ was "connected" story wise)
DD1 has it all......the existential crisis themes of anime that came from postwar japan(e.g. akira, gits, fireflies) , the philosophical influences of the foreign world (germany, rest of asia), the medievial feudalismn and fantasy tropes, all wrapped up in the best action combat and enemy design and - most importantly - 1000000% meme-worthy pawn interactions and NPCs.
Always loved Dragon's Dogma since release, have analyzed the esoteric meanings of the story as thoroughly as humanly possible. Now let's see if one of my favorite youtubers will do the game justice! Although I already know you will. Thanks for this video, this game is one of the greatest games of all time to me.
Despite being a unexpected masterpiece I thought you were going to mention the original games terrible questing system, whole quest lines could be missed entirely, but I forgot this is a philosophy channel not dealing with mechanical criticisms.
This is what this RU-vidr refuses to recognize, the entire first game’s quest designs are completely botched in terms of difficulty requirement or whereabouts of their existence (due to no quest markers on map or ANYWHERE aside from running into said NPCs or looking up a wiki), I refuse to believe this RU-vidr guy named Max has it all figured out saying it is good, when it is a contrivances burned all to hell for inconvenience. :/
@@aquilliusranger2137 Don’t get me wrong I still love DD1, but being the developers first stab at an open world “RPG” it did so much right, but was rough in other instances. I could understand if quest lines were obscure if DD1 was a rouge lite where the life of an Arisen and his/her pawn are short and brutal, owing go multiple play throughs and running into various NPCs on each run, but for an over 40 to 60 he game. The quest design was criminal.
The worlds are all interconnected. Their is an endless supply of arisens and dragons. Even still, i always assumed that the first dragon the senschel would send out when he felt his will begin to waiver was none other than his loyal pawn.
I would not say that Buddha’s solution was to retreat inward. Rather Buddha is said to have become one with all things, and all things are said to be derived from the Primordial Buddha, and so all things are said to carry the “Buddha nature”. There’s no self to retreat into if the self is denied, after all! In that regard, Buddha is absolutely not thought to have no will, or have no karma, but is a being of *great* will and karma, who was formerly human. The Seneschal itself is a position of self denial in order to fuel the will of the world, but with the distinction of having attachments to the world, and this sapping their will and karma-this attachment binds them to the chain of existence, and so they are not truly enlightened. It is in self-denial, the denial of attachments to the world that the player finds enlightenment and frees themselves from samsara, the cycle of death and rebirth. I don’t think the question of where the next dragon comes from is a plot hole, but rather an intentional discrepancy. At some point one would challenge the Seneschal, or a dragon would will itself into existence, much as the rest of the world is formed out of the Seneschal’s will. The Seneschal is not the beginning-at some point there must have been nothing from which everything came into existence, or the first Seneschal came into being and from there the world, but then if that’s so, is the dissolution of the world the end? No, of course not. Merely it would mark the end of the Kalpa.
Savan = Seven. If you are the 8th seneschal, maybe you are the one who will put and end to the cycle, as long as you are crossing the (7) planetary spheres right to eternity
The implication is that there is always a seneschal even if you kill yourself. Maybe another seneschal from another world, there some stuff about this in the dlc.
From my understanding its implied that when you defeat the Seneschal, Gregori is still the dragon that is summoned when the next Arisen comes by. Until that same Arisen becomes the new dragon if they are defeated by your Seneschal.
A few thoughts. I don't believe becoming the Seneschal dooms the world. It's true that there's the open question of who becomes the next dragon when the current dragon is slain and its slayer doesn't go on to become a dragon themselves, but it's hardly impossible to imagine a godlike figure having some other way to create a dragon besides the way we see in the game. More importantly, becoming the Seneschal is an essential part of sustaining the world. When the previous Seneschal tires of their duty and their will starts to waver, they must seek out a new Seneschal with a will strong enough to sustain the world in their stead. This cycle is implied to be infinite and has happened many times before the player gets involved. Since that's the obvious case, it's highly unlikely that the very act of sustaining the world, which has already happened many, many times (possibly an infinite number), would doom the world. In addition, I don't believe committing suicide dooms the world either. There are multiple possible interpretation of what the suicide ending actually means, but since it is more or less presented as the "true ending", especially as becoming the Dragon isn't much of an ending and becoming the Seneschal isn't an ending at all, this implies that it's what's meant to happen. It's meant to be bittersweet for sure, with the player ending themselves and the Pawn taking over their entire identity and earthly life, including the person you value the most (i.e. your beloved), but there's no indication that it's a bad thing. There is also a detail in the suicide ending that I think hints at something more than simply the player dying. When the previous Senschal got tired of living, they sent out the Dragon to find a new Arisen and encourage the rise of a new Seneschal to take their place. The player does no such thing, and simply ends themselves without creating a new dragon or finding a new Arisen. It's not an invalid interpretation that this ends the cycle and dooms the world, but since it's both unsatisfying and doesn't fit the established idea of the cycle repeating eternally I prefer a different interpretation. When you become the Seneschal, there's only two things you can do. First, you can roam the world as an immortal spirit. This is neat for a while at first, but quickly starts feeling like a pointless waste of time since you can't really affect anything and nothing can affect you. You can't interact with the world in any meaningful way anymore. The second option is to commit suicide and end the game. As little as we know about the Seneschal, neither of these things sound like the kind of thing someone sustaining the world and motivating its people with their own willpower would do. So my interpretation of the suicide ending isn't a literal ending of the self, but rather ending the worldly attachment of the Arisen and finally, truly become the Seneschal. When you no longer desire to roam the world and give up your role in it, you're finally ready to assume the mantle of true godhood instead of just a human spirit. I admit that there's no direct evidence for this theory, but the ending with your pawn hinting at new beginning and the fact that on an offline NG+ run will have your "dead" Arisen as the Seneschal (or another player's Arisen if you're online) does seem to disagree with the game having a true, final ending. This would also be another reason why the Seneschal will give you the option to return to your peaceful life as a fisher, despite already having proven that your will is stronger than that. If your attachment to your mortal life is too strong, there's no point in trying to make you the next Seneschal. There's a minor mistake in your diagram of the cycle and its branches. I don't think there's any good reason to assume the Dragonforged took the dragon's bargain and exchanged his empire for knowledge. We know that the Dragonforged fought the dragon and lost, breaking his weapon and getting "forged" in dragonfire, but somehow surviving. It's illogical to think that the Dragonforged would fight the dragon if he took the bargain, since that avoids the fight entirely. And we also know that the dragon won't offer his bargain if you fight him and lose. As such, it seems more logical to assume that despite his defeat he manged to escape the dragon and hide, that his empire was not freely sacrificed but rather destroyed by the dragon (perhaps as penalty for losing, perhaps as punishment for running away), and that his knowledge is simply a result of his first-hand experience as well as having lived a very, very long time due to the immortality granted to all Arisen. The fact that the Dragonforged still has his pawn also supports this, since Duke Edmun (who we know for a fact took the bargain) doesn't have his pawn anymore and, as far as we can see, neither does the player in the ending where you take the dragon's bargain yourself. Finally, this is another relatively minor point, but Ashe didn't simply become Daimon out of the pain and anger of having to choose between killing his mother figure or his lover. He cursed the cycle and told the dragon he would rather doom the cruel world that created this unfair situation than choose either option. In a twist of cruel irony, the dragon accepted this "bargain" and turned him into Daimon, giving him the power to lure in Arisens from many different universes and kill them before they could play out their role in perpetuating the hated cycle. Not only does this (sort of) grant Ashe the ability to fulfill his wish fuelled by the hate he feels for the cycle, it also provides a convenient additional way to test the will of any Arisen who encounters the extradimensional "island". This even goes beyond simply kiling the Arisen, as illustrated by Barroch, who also rejected the cycle and embraced his dragon-gifted immortality as a boon too valuable to be risked. Which conveniently also ties back into my earlier point about suicide being a symbol for rejecting the material world: Barroch is too attached to the material world and his life in it, thus proving himself unsuited as an Arisen. This might also explain why Barroch doesn't have a pawn, despite being Arisen.
The biggest gripe I had with pawns, was them not shooting things like Talismans floating about, or things like it, that was only way to damage certain enemies. So I basically always stuck with ranged class, so I could deal with those annoying obstacles xD
A Seneschal is the steward of a lord. The fact that the god-like figure is called The Seneschal implies that there is a creator, though they seem to be absent and the seneschal is holding things together in their absence.
Intriguingly enough, if you defeat Daimon and get to his awakened form, it says, "Slave to a broken order... dare you look upon the truth?" Assuming it's correct, that would imply the order of the world has become broken. Perhaps the reason why a Seneschal is necessary is because the original creator of their universe left and is now gone.
What I love about DD is that it uses gaming conventions about story and gameplay separation smartly to tell an interesting story while still maximizing its game systems. There are only really 3 plot points that really matter - the opening scene at the village, the fight with Grigori the Dragon, and the confrontation with the Seneschal; i.e. the Beginning, the Middle, and The End. 99% of the rest of the game is just build up to those points, and it's just monster hunting action with little bits of extra lore and side info with some medieval european fantasy tropes (the mad king, the rival national politics, the secret cult, the forest witch etc) and none of it actually matters at all and the game doesn't even try to pretend that it does. It's all cheesy nonsense and the game is super aware that it's cheesy nonsense because the grander meta plot around it is so much bigger than it. As a result, a LOT of the lesser plots and quests are actually quite variable and have a ton of outcomes for the player to choose or end up with. You can help a dude collect the rent from his tenants or kick them out for them. You can later convict that landlord or prove his innocence in a trial. You protect the Casca expy when she goes to confront the French dude or stand back and watch her lose the fight. You can start quests with NPCs and almost (?) ALL of them can be killed and the quest can fail in them if you're not careful, cutting off whole quest chains that require them. You can be a jerk and attack random NPCs and get thrown into the dungeons or be a law abiding champion. There is very, very little handholding when it comes to player autonomy and few guardrails protecting NPC lives because ultimately, none of those details matter when all that actually does is: Get to Dragon - > Get to Seneschal. The result is a very, very open game when it comes to player choice and freedom while still having direct and permanent consequences for player choices. It's really quite refreshing to see a game with such respect for the player, especially when it came out and 90% of games were handholding the player through them from beginning to end and making sure they couldn't do anything beyond very narrow bounds. In fact, really the only other game that was doing the same stuff at the time was Dark Souls, which beat DD by a year and had the "it's really hard" reputation to draw people in. I still think that if Dark Souls hadn't come out, or if it had come out *after* DD, it wouldn't have stolen Dragon's Dogma's thunder and way more people would have given it a shot and we wouldn't be talking about Souls-likes today, but Dogma-likes instead.
Currently playing, the thing that has me unnerved the most so far is how npcs react to Pawns. The way they describe the helpers is as to a horror story. Unfeeling companions that might resemble human but are not. Rentable dolls.
I love this game. Bought it for my son for $4.99. He taught me how to play video games and played this since. . Lvl 138 Magic Archer with mage pawn Camelot. Previously in NG+ 163 but Steam lost all my saved files. Had to start from scratch. . Cant wait for DD2
Personally, I thought relegating a lot of its storytelling and revelations to the final act is part of the game's brilliance. There's all these struggles and conflicts you witness and endure between various characters but in the end, you realize it's all ephemeral, small pieces on a board to be wiped clean as part of a grander design. That revelation and the emotions it spawned for me was one-of-a-kind. It's a sort of bait-and-switch and I think if the revelations about the cycle of eternal return were drip-fed into the story too early, it would've distracted me from falling for that bait-and-switch.
Well, aside of the fact that after becoming God/Seneschal you can kill yourself an item called godsbane. The game literally as only meaningful task after becoming god leaves the option of suicide. A lot of Nietzsche there mixed in with existentialism indeed.
Crazy how the top comment on this incredibly thoughtful video is someone completely over-reacting to one throwaway sentence in the intro. Also crazy how the sponsor for this video is just Persona. That's dope. Go Max.
one thing I never understood about Ash was wheter he killed Grette and that made him into Daimon or he found a way to circumbent his fate and spare Grette while also saving Olra which made him Deimon as punishment for his twisting of fate.
We should certainly be willing to switch philosophies depending on the situation Nobody is going to give you a medal for your principles, especially if those principles steer you into catastrophe That doesn't mean you shouldn't have principles, but that you should be reflecting on if they serve you
I remember finding Dragon's Dogma a good few years after it came out, I picked it up because hey, Medieval Fantasy is my jam and I'm always willing to give those sorts of games a shot, and proceeded to be *blown away* by it. I couldn't believe I had just found it by chance, and that I hadn't heard of it before. I wasn't particularly good at navigating the slightly opaque style of speech and decoding the obviously quite profound philosophical ideas that were in there, but even if I couldn't quite put it into words it still spoke to me and really got me thinking. Thanks for this video helping me understand a little better the ideas they were trying to convey. This game deserves way more people talking about it, and I was over the moon when Dragon's Dogma 2 was announced! I'll be one of the first people to pick it up when it releases, and I can't wait to see what's in store for us!
Maybe accepting Grigori’s offer and Grigori just leaving means going to a world that Seneschal used Godsbane in? Continuing the seemingly broken cycle?
Woah, sponsored by Atlus?! Good work, man! I don't do things like play M rated games, but I certainly enjoy your detailed, deep analysis of various games I have never or may never play.
00:50 - Personally I loved the portcrystal system. The fast travel i this game is really cool IMO. I agree with what you said about the AI tho. I also like the boss battles and the climbing/weak points mechanic. The climbing is one of my favorite parts. Skyrim has personally been my favorite game of all time for the last decade (DDDA is top 5 tho) and i think based on what i've seen that DD2 might be my new all time favorite when it comes out. 1:45 - The original DD1 definitely is brilliant and ahead of its time when it came out. I think DD2 is enough to win GotY fasho.
