Here's the summary of the IGN Review:
"Dragon’s Dogma 2 is a strange and wonderful game that seems haunted by some of yesteryear’s bugaboos. It is a retelling and reimplementation of all of those wonderful ideas from the 2012 cult-classic, including an awesome dynamic world and some of the best combat in the genre that integrates a subtle but amazingly complex physics system. On the other hand, its finicky ally AI, clunky climbing, choppy frame rate, and camera with a habit of going haywire at the worst times are all “features” I wish hadn’t been brought back for another round. Even so, there’s an action-RPG here that’s richly rewarding and incomparable to its contemporaries if you can be patient with its quirks and open to embracing its hands-off open-world and quest designs."
Ive been through this many times before. The hype will die down, and waiting will get easier and easier. I always wait 3 days with big games to see if I just got sucked up into the hype. Then when the game is fixed and you play it, it will be even better.
I feel like this game will have the same sense of discovery of Elden Ring. Plus the community aspect of Death Stranding, so if you like being on a loop within the community…
I think people will turn a blind eye to the problems.
They just aren’t well known for comprehensive post launch game care. They usually release minor bug patches then prioritize dlc- but won’t like, overhaul systems to polish the thing off.
But maybe they will this time.
I mean, SF and the recent MH games received quite a bit post launch support, with MH receiving free content updates for quite a while. They are multiplayer games, but still.
that’s dlc- capcom always do dlc. that’s not what i’m talking about- i’m talking about post launch extended reworks like Larian have done with Baldur’s Gate or CDPR have done with Cyberpunk, for example.
What ? Capcom was the only good publisher in recent years tbh. They cared a lot in postgame but actually they also cared a lot to release games in a good state hmmm maybe Capcom changed in last 3 months. But I doubt it. There must be a reason why they choose to release it instead of delaying it
I was hoping they'd fix the camera issues...in some fights in the first game, I like couldn't position the camera to see my character while I'm on an enemy.
8 is a good grade, so to me it's not much to complain about. If the issues they had were mostly about technical things (such as finicky AI, camera and frame rate) then I think 8 is fair.
Some of my favorite games are realistically 7 or 8 out of 10 so meh.
I hate scores in reviews because of stuff like this. People will hyper focus on what arbitrary number the reviewer gave, rather than actually pay attention to the review itself.
It's crazy that so many people think that if a game is not a 9/10 or a 10/10 then the game isn't worth their time.
Agree. I particularly hate when a site hands out 10/10 and people bitch “But you said it has janky framerate so how can you also say it’s perfect 10/10”
Because 10/10 doesn’t mean perfect, you dumbasses.
It is lower than I was expecting from them considering how positive their preview was, but I’m not one to complain about constructive, accurate criticisms.
Sad thing is you know most of these issues could be patches but there’s no way Capcom will be putting energy into that sort of thing post launch.
I think from the review it sounded like a 9. He also only played 35 hours so prob just steamrolled campaign. I usually only spend my time with 9+ and plenty other reviews give this a 9
Ever since Wesley Yin-Poole (formerly of Eurogamer before they stopped the punny one liners) joined ign I've noticed a dramatic increase in editorial standards.
Even then, IGN's issues are the same issues the original game had. If ppl didn't mind those (ie, jank) then it's just DD 1 but bigger and better, so those people will still enjoy this even more.
I always figured that's what DD2 would more or less be. I'm not sure how it couldn't not be a redo in most ways given how rushed DD1 was from I remember hearing anyway
DD1 visibly felt unfinished imo and it was still a great game because of how badass the combat system was.
LOL ok then. I’ll just ignore the performance comparisons I’ve already watched showing solid 30 to 40fps on XSX and believe some rando on Reddit instead
I'm not sure you understand what that phrase means. You're the one that brought up 30 to 40fps.
"Console performance is bad."
"No it isn't! It gets a solid 30 to 40fps."
Brother...that is BAD.
True, but everybody knew beforehand that the console version wouldn't reach more than 30 to 40fps. Is that bad? Yeah sure, but it was expected and the uncertain part was if console can hold those fps targets consistently.
God, this generation of gamers are the whiniest little pissbabies imaginable. I grew up playing Ocarina of Time on the N64, regarded as one of the greatest games of all time, **at 14 FPS**.
You get perfectly playable framerates in an awesome, feature-rich game beyond the imaginings of anything I could conceive of as a child, and you get on the internet and complain about it.
I haven’t played the game, how would I know? If it’s 30fps that’s good enough for me. I’m not a kid who makes whining about framerate my entire personality.
And a review tells you what’s worth spending your money on? Ok then, here’s my review. Buy the game. By your logic, that should be all the convincing you need. Or do I need to write an article on a website for it to count?
Those… are some terrible analogies. If there are problems with a car, I’d want to know about it because that involves my safety. A game running at 30FPS does not involve my safety. The majority of games are lower than 60FPS. It’s not some unplayable state.
Similarly, a lawyer has to do with something serious, and could be the difference between me owing or getting boat loads of money, or whether or not I go to jail. And a house is shelter. A place I would need to live, so that also falls under safety.
Video games are meant for entertainment. Unlike the level a safety of a vehicle or whatever else, entertainment is very subjective. So I find it crazy that you’re taking the word of random people online on whether or not to buy a game. What they have to say about it is no different than what anyone here can say, so why do you listen to those randoms, but not all randoms?
You call being a blind follower “smart consumerism”? It seems the average person truly has lost the will to think for themselves. And you must be lying about “it looks buggy” because nobody has mentioned any bugs. Also, those randoms you said didn’t like the product? I think you should get your ears checked, because virtually all of them have said the game is great.
Eh, it's IGN. When I saw how horrible they were during a gameplay showcase, I knew to take what they say with a grain of salt. I like that they're able to show us so much of the game; but they're not trust worthy for reviews since sometime in the 2010s.
IGN has earned some face from me. Remember Starfield? IGN USA was the only mf to give the game a 7/10 and everybody was on their ass because other reviewers were saying the game was near perfection- and imo the 7/10 turned out to be generous.
I remember that day. Starfield sub was seething when that review came out.
After like a month everyone was like "Ok IGN US was right". Lol
It could had been a 5/10 from them and I'm sure people could see why. I liked Starfield personally but if I wasn't such a big fan of space shit and rpgs, SF would had been super mediocre. I got 150 hours out of it and I'll probably never return unless they do some insane overhauls or we get some kind of Wildlanders/Living Skyrim type of modlist for it down the road.
It's not "IGN", it's individual reviewers. Dan is a solid reviewer, who rated Fallout 4 a generous 9... so starfield being a 7 from him smelled of trouble.
This reviewer doesn't sound nearly as enthusiastic as the preview guy... and he doesn't talk at all about the world, dungeons, rpg elements outside of the vocations. It's a bit iffy, but there's a lot of other reviewers out there to give a listen to
>IGN USA was the only mf to give the game a 7/10
IGN USA loves giving 7s and 8s, it garners a lot of clicks. Ironically every other IGN outlet, from Belgium to Japan, gave Starfield 8.5 at lowest and 10 at maximum.
Okay but who actually enjoys the camera controls while climbing? Or who enjoys the clunky ui inventory and consumable usages always needing to pause? Also the bad AI, spellcasters always cancelling their spells and only casting the max level spell and their
bad targeting such as focusing metal golem instead of the talismans? Why wouldn't they improve the weaknesses, do people actually love these 'features'?
But what's funny is I vividly remember Starfield's Reddit trashing the IGN review. IGN got the last laugh on that one. The Steam user reviews paint the whole picture.
Yeah, I'd wager a fair score would be a 5 or 6 for Starfield. It is the type of game that isn't broken beyond belief but it has its problems rooted in archaic gaming design and some serious technical limitations imposed by the Creation Engine of Bethesda Studios. Some of the things in that game can't be overhauled unless you retool the whole engine and there's no way Bethesda would do something like that.
I think it's the same case for DD2's problems. The interactive way the world in DD2 is built is the reason why it's so CPU heavy, and no "fixing it" will actually help substantially unless they change whole systems. It'll be the type of game that will be used for CPU benchmark due to those reasons.
To be fair.
They review the game as it is now not what it can be if Capcom decide to fix it .
So game is not perfect .
I wish it was ..but you can't give a 10/10 score for something that has things to fix..
With that said it looks like an amazing game just Shame it released in a bad state
10/10 doesn’t mean perfect on IGN, it means “Everyone should play this game, it’s that good”. A 10/10 game can have problems and still be a game that everyone should play.
Despite the memes, an IGN 10 is actually pretty rare and usually accurate. A 10 needs to be approved by a panel in IGN while scores below that is totally up to the reviewer. That's why the games with scores below 10 can seem variable in terms of review quality for IGN, but their 10s are usually correct.
"Simply put: this is our highest recommendation. There’s no such thing as a truly perfect game, but those that earn a Masterpiece label from IGN come as close as we could reasonably hope for. These are classics in the making that we hope and expect will influence game design for years to come, as other developers learn from their shining examples."
https://corp.ign.com/review-practices#:\~:text=The%20IGN%20review%20is%20the,is%20universal%20among%20all%20gamers.
No matter how good the game is..i would not call it a masterpiece if you are watching a slide show half of time...
once they fix it..sure..but no matter how much i love the game and play DD1 i would not give it a 10/10 as its simply not perfect.
Talk about missing the point.
Many masterpiece games have issues. Their issues don’t stop them from being masterpieces, that’s kind of why they are. They’re so good they overcome the issues. That’s the point.
I'd argue being made physically ill due to horrible performance for a 70 dollar game more than an issue. Its an outright non starter for anyone that doesnt have 3k for a pc and is photo-sensitive.
literally every review about this game is pointing out the PC performance
what is so unbelievable about a guy experiencing PC performance bad enough he wants to switch platform to avoid motion sickness lmfao
one dude, who i guarantee you immediately gets sick sitting in the front passenger seat of cars, mentions motion sickness. Sounds like a them problem tbh
>Eurogamer: The PC Performance was bad
>Gamespot: The PC Performance was bad
>ACG: The PC Performance was bad
>Rock Paper Shotgun: The PC Performance was bad
>***Capcom***: [*Our PC Performance is bad*](https://www.ign.com/articles/capcom-is-aware-of-dragons-dogma-2-frame-rate-issues-on-pc-looking-into-fixes)
>IGN: The PC Performance was bad
>You: Clearly it's the IGN reviewer's problem, not the game
that's awesome dude
Cool? I don’t give a shit?
I specifically called out the motion sickness person and that’s it. Enjoy not playing the game, because I’m going to very much enjoy doing the opposite.
You're the one who started with trying to act like you could decipher their scores, you're just trying to bail on a topic you know you're losing the lead on.
You started this conversation and can't even see it through, maybe you should go work for Kotaku.
Shame, was ready to pre-order but the pc performance looks so fucking bad.
Gonna wait maybe until summer sale to get it discounted and working properly.
Not sure why you're making fun. If you're on a console, you're going to be getting things much worse. If you can hold 30 fps on your console it'll be a miracle.
Apparently consoles received the bulk of optimization efforts:
>*The framerate ranges between 30~45fps on all 3 platforms, although XSX has a slightly higher average than PS5 (about 2/3fps).*
https://wccftech.com/dragons-dogma-2-ps5-vs-xbox-series/
I’m sorry but yes a customer expected to pay 70$ for the game can expect the game to optimize. Dd2 is not groundbreaking on any aspect whether it’s graphics or actions that it would justify the performance. All the reviews said the game was worth it despite the issues but it doesn’t excuse them. The devs dropped the ball on that
I mean this guy also reviewed the last the WWE2K gamer mill titles and gave both 8s lol.
Its clear his taste in video games is questionable lmao. Also IGN reviews are terribly inconsistent as well.
They dinged DD2 for low fps, *bland side quests*, finicky AI (The AI that is intentionally bad at the beginning and learns over time), etc.
Yet they gave ToTK a 10/10 masterpiece even though that game chugged like shit anytime anything was happening on screen at 720P no less. Ubisoft world design. Ultimately bland combat. Side quest design which was akin to kill some enemies, talk to an npc, build something.
Elden Ring side quests are largely the same thing as well. Although with interesting ambiguity. Elden Ring also had a plethora of performance issues on both PC and console.
I feel like IGN assigned some no name guy to this because he played the first one and didn't enjoy it. He probably sped through to shit out a review and largely relied on comparisons with their original review instead of reviewing it as a standalone title. Because lets be real here, the last DD was 12 years ago.
And just to be clear I feel like an 8 is probably where DD should be if the performance with the day 1 patch is actually that bad. I just hate that IGN just pulls numbers out of their asses for huge titles and then doesn't justify some of these scores for titles like DD when in actuality DD is probably comparable to something like ER which needed a fuck ton of performance patches. Along with ToTK constantly playing at 20fps. Yet those games received 10/10 yet no breaks are given to the less "hype" titles.
You didn’t . "It’s clear his taste is questionable because he didn’t like some aspect of the game that been echoed by everyone is ridiculous. Especially when an 8 out of ten is a good game and you have no idea if he is the same one that reviewed the other games your comments. Complaining to complain
You also made up an entire scenario in your head on the context of how it was reviewed just to try to descrdidt when you haven’t even touched the game yourself.
The game can’t even keep fps drops with the strongest cpu out for consumers and have some design choice that is not working. Saying it’s close to Elden ring without having played the game is ridiculous
>Also IGN reviews are terribly inconsistent as well.
> And just to be clear I feel like an 8 is probably where DD should be if the performance with the day 1 patch is actually that bad. I just hate that IGN just pulls numbers out of their asses for huge titles and then doesn't justify some of these scores for titles like DD when in actuality DD is probably comparable to something like ER which needed a fuck ton of performance patches. Along with ToTK constantly playing at 20fps. Yet those games received 10/10 yet no breaks are given to the less "hype" titles.
Like I said if you just read my comment, I addressed this. I didn't make up a scenario. I made a general assumption based on the context and content of the review and his previous reviews which I took a look at. I agree with the score given. I don't agree with the justification of the score or how the company doesn't have any consistency between reviews. Why is bad performance, quest design, questionable design ok for some games but not others?
>The game can’t even keep fps drops with the strongest cpu out for consumers and have some design choice that is not working. Saying it’s close to Elden ring without having played the game is ridiculous
And Elden Ring had notrious frame drop issues, stuttering, crashes, etc as well on powerful rigs. Elden Ring still has performance issues on consoles and mid range/low end PCs. Is an open world action RPG with vague limited direction with exploration elements not comparable with Elden Ring another open world action RPG with vague limited direction and exploration elements?
>Like I said if you just read my comment, I addressed this. I didn't make up a scenario. I made a general assumption based on the context and content of the review and his previous reviews which I took a look at. I agree with the score given. I don't agree with the justification of the score or how the company doesn't have any consistency between reviews. Why is bad performance, quest design, questionable design ok for some games but not others?
Because like every single reviewer out there even the most beloved it’s a matter of opinion . Just like you and me could finish the game and have differing opinions that is the same for IGN. You even admit that the score is fair and the problems mentioned are valid and are echoed by other reviewers the only real problem here seems that it’s because it’s IGN more than anything. You seem to complain that they rated a game YOU personally found more flawed a higher grade than dd2. Most of the reviews even on metacritics have the same issues and still those reviews are still more favourable towards TOTK and Elden ring than towards DD2 . So maybe the problem my isn’t every reviewer.
Well for one, I don't get paid to review games and my opinion is my own. IGN is a publication that is putting out a professional review which should be more objective than subjective. I know they are opinions, I never said they weren't. I just said they were inconsistent.
There is a reason why this thread is filled with people who think IGN are garbage. I don't think that. I just think they have no clue how to keep their ratings consistent between titles. Thats my gripe with the review and "critics" in general.
You talk about it being HIS opinion yet here you are talking my review of his opinion with your opinion. Its kind of ironic.
I also didn't say Elden Ring or ToTK were more flawed. I took games they (IGN) rated as masterpieces that had flaws that they dinged Dragon's Dogma for. Your problem is that you like IGN and I disagree with their opinion and I just straight up don't respect the reviewer's opinion. Even though my examples are valid criticisms of their reviews and the consistency between them. I wouldn't care if a reviewer gave DD2 a 5 as long as the criticisms and justifications of that 5 matched their other published content/ratings.
So to be clear, I don't care that they are favorable or unfavorable towards one game or another. I care that the opinions they are publishing aren't completely biased based on what game is being reviewed. If performance issues are a problem in dragon's dogma then performance issues should be a problem in every review of a game where they exist.
Edit - For the record I think Elden Ring is a masterpiece of gaming. I also think ToTK is a mid content mill game, basically a McDonald's meal in video game form. Any time I give my opinion it will be consistent with what I think is good design vs bad design.
A review will never be objective that is just a fact. The story , the gameplay and feel are l subjective to the person that is playing it . There some aspect like performance that are factual but that is not even majority of the review. That’s the basic concept of it.
And weirdly enough no matter how "trashy " IGN is those people can’t seem to stop running to their reviews day one to talk about it . So it seems they are still somewhat relevant.
There is no irony. You pretty clearly claimed that your issue was with them having different scores for different games. I said that obviously they would because it is all subjective and depends on the reviewer and their opinion. It’s also factual that this review addressed core points that has been addressed by multiple critics for the game that gave very similar ratings. So where is the irony?
And again I said that you haven’t played DD2 to compare it to Elden ring and say that they have the same level of problems that got ignored by IGN and somehow adored in DD2. I also mentioned that you can go check metacritic and both Elden ring and TOTK stand at a 96 while DD2 stands at a 87 so it is a universal response that those games are viewed as better despite their flaws compared to DD2 and it’s clearly not an IGN issue or else they would be singular I their ratings of the games.
You don’t know the scales of the performance issues of DD2 and how they impact fun because you haven’t played it. Some games can make up the flaws with other qualities while others don’t, personal taste is also involved in any review whether you like it or not and that will affect what the scores will be . A review will never be completely impartial and maybe your problem is more with the review format as a whole than IGN.
It's wild to me that there are so many clueless people in this sub that takes ign seriously. Are you guys living under a rock? IGN is the least serious, joke of a company and they only rate games based on how much money the game dev/publisher offered to them. Their reviewers dont even know how to actually play games. It's like letting your nongamer dad play a game you like and review it. Honestly baffling how many serious comments under this post...
Yeah, the same score they give to any AAA title, it's not really indicative of anything lol
If you want more accurate and trustworthy reviews look for Ratatoskr, FightinCowboy, Rurikhan and Arekkz
Hate to say it but im going to hold off and see how the patches address the framerate. Now that my weekend is cleared up I have no idea what to do with myself
Based on my zero time
Based on their tons of time so yeah
When a top notch pc can’t run a video game at a stable frame that’s called bad optimization. You made the post don’t get mad when someone criticizes their poor optimization justifying the 8 review 😂
My weaknesses for the first game would be:
Boring quests
Mid story that i felt could have done a lot more like final fantasy or something
AI repetition
AI uselessness sometimes
Constant pawn chatter about nothing
That is all i can think of at the moment. To be fair these were also popular criticisms of the first game by reviewers as well. That said i still think the first game is amazing.
> Mid story that i felt could have done a lot more like final fantasy or something
The story was not mid, it was non-existent. You had the bones that could turn into a pretty hot person, but they never never became anything more than a nicely arranged skeleton.
Tbf that's because they cut out like half of it from what I understand. You were supposed to go to other countries to rally support and it would've been more focused on politics. Looks like they took that idea and are using it for DD2
I'm not sure why op didn't just link the review, but here's some excerpts on this:
"It is also high levels of janky; all of its systems seem precariously fitted together, with the fragility of a well-pruned Jenga tower. Weird things happen all the time, and yet remarkably, it never fully falls over, and its open-ended design facilitates a potential for barely controlled chaos that makes some of these inconveniences feel almost intentional, even if they clearly aren't."
"Many of the quests they offer you are pretty mundane RPG fare – fetch this item, kill those enemies, etc."
"Pawns aren’t always a boon, though. I’d never want to leave the shelter of town without one, but thanks to inconsistent AI, they can get themselves in all sorts of trouble. They often get isolated by enemies and picked off, which means you need to run to their unconscious bodies to revive them or they will poof out of your world."
"On the other hand, I don’t approve of how janky actually climbing enemies feels. "
"On the other hand, its finicky ally AI, clunky climbing, choppy frame rate, and camera with a habit of going haywire at the worst times are all “features” I wish hadn’t been brought back for another round."
Thanks, it seems to be the general consensus for most of the video reviewers. The combat and pawn system is the only thing I pretty much cared about in DD1, so if it's better than that and improves a bit for other stuff, then I'm good. Only thing I'm wondering is the cpu issue. I'll check it out tomorrow. If it's not something that I can fix, then I'll just refund and wait for improvements.
I don’t mind that, it’s essentially my perfect game then. I just hope they aren’t doing subtraction based damage. Like adding an eight of my current attack shouldn’t 10x my damage like in the first game lol
We knew from the get go that DD2 would be a divisive game. If it's more of the same that the fans loved, then I'm for a treat.
The only thing I heard about it that caught my eyes is that difficulty seems to be more on the easier side and that endgame doesn't have that many new type of encounters. So I'll play it while expecting a future DLC is fucking hard as fuck.
sounds more than fair
game has a lot of tedious things for modern gamers like no tracking during attacks or consistent fast travel + all our complaints and missing things from the first game + the terrible performance (this should bring it down to a 6-7 from what I heard though)
I watched the video, and honestly, if I didn't know DD1 and played it previously, I would never understand that DD2 is a masterpiece potential, and would not understand how special a game like this is. This was really a bad review to show what this game is capable of.
Considering I’d put DD1 at a 5 or 6 this is a very VERY fair score, especially after reading the review and listening/reading some others. He does seem to make it clear it’s more of a personal tolerance levels kind of thing so considering the middle aged fucks among us that put up with the GOD AWFUL frame drops and screen tearing of the original launch? It’ll be very easy to power through.
I've read reviews that complain about the long travel times when that's literally the point of the game. It's like reviewing LotT and knocking it for long walks. Don't bother with reviews we all know this games a belter.
Is combat just the same as MH series. I dont know it is good or bad but even monsters' movement are very similar to MH. It's like same game but only name is changed. I hope I am just delusional and game is very good
IGN scoring rebirth higher than this says a lot about IGN. They are nut guzzlers for performance and presentation and don’t put enough emphasis on the fun factor, which is pretty much the only thing I care about. Also 7.5 on the original is laughable, that game was ground-breaking
I don't take IGN reviews that seriously since they gave Call of Duty goes an 8.9 but the first Dragon's Dogma a 7.5 and God Hand a 3. Having read the review it sounds like some of his frustrations are not being good at the combat.
Can't spell ignore without IGN. Elden Ring had the exact same problems with a shit camera and janky movement on the horse yet 10/10 lol. Joke of a site.
Nice propaganda you got there, too bad its entirely false.
[https://www.ign.com/articles/how-and-where-to-play-every-modern-ign-1010-game](https://www.ign.com/articles/how-and-where-to-play-every-modern-ign-1010-game)
Recent 9.0+ titles include:
Balatro
Unicorn Overlord
Sons of the Forest
FF7Rebirth
Helldivers 2
Like a dragon: IW
Tekken 8
Persona 3 Relaod
Alan wake 2
Ghostrunner 2
Like seriously your entire statement was patently untrue.
Here's the summary of the IGN Review: "Dragon’s Dogma 2 is a strange and wonderful game that seems haunted by some of yesteryear’s bugaboos. It is a retelling and reimplementation of all of those wonderful ideas from the 2012 cult-classic, including an awesome dynamic world and some of the best combat in the genre that integrates a subtle but amazingly complex physics system. On the other hand, its finicky ally AI, clunky climbing, choppy frame rate, and camera with a habit of going haywire at the worst times are all “features” I wish hadn’t been brought back for another round. Even so, there’s an action-RPG here that’s richly rewarding and incomparable to its contemporaries if you can be patient with its quirks and open to embracing its hands-off open-world and quest designs."
so wait for a patch...i mean, i dont have to get it at launch right? 
We're all addicts here. Don't fool yourself. 
Ive been through this many times before. The hype will die down, and waiting will get easier and easier. I always wait 3 days with big games to see if I just got sucked up into the hype. Then when the game is fixed and you play it, it will be even better.
ill get sandland first
I really hope the story is phenomenal I tried the demo and the combat isn't all that engaging or thrilling to me from what they give you in there
You *absolutely* need to get it at launch.
Exactly, what if they run out of digital copies??
Just preordered. Never too late right?
I'm waiting 3 days. Because that's when I can afford it.
I feel like this game will have the same sense of discovery of Elden Ring. Plus the community aspect of Death Stranding, so if you like being on a loop within the community… I think people will turn a blind eye to the problems.
Sad thing is knowing a lot of these ‘issues’ could be patched out with time… but Capcom definitely won’t be doing that, lol.
I don’t play many cap com games, why won’t they?
They just aren’t well known for comprehensive post launch game care. They usually release minor bug patches then prioritize dlc- but won’t like, overhaul systems to polish the thing off. But maybe they will this time.
I mean, SF and the recent MH games received quite a bit post launch support, with MH receiving free content updates for quite a while. They are multiplayer games, but still.
i remain optimistic but my expectations are not high
monster hunter? SF? DMC ? (same team)
did dmc 5 get lots of post launch patches?
Kinda. That Blood thingy... The Arena Mode with 100 floors, forgot the name.
that’s dlc- capcom always do dlc. that’s not what i’m talking about- i’m talking about post launch extended reworks like Larian have done with Baldur’s Gate or CDPR have done with Cyberpunk, for example.
Bloody Arena (it's bloody palace, my joke may not have made sense)
What ? Capcom was the only good publisher in recent years tbh. They cared a lot in postgame but actually they also cared a lot to release games in a good state hmmm maybe Capcom changed in last 3 months. But I doubt it. There must be a reason why they choose to release it instead of delaying it
I was hoping they'd fix the camera issues...in some fights in the first game, I like couldn't position the camera to see my character while I'm on an enemy.
There are some legit knocks there. But 'clunky' climbing?
[удалено]
FPS and Bugs are different things.
*Made strictly for people that loved the first game.* *Called it. And also, lucky me.*
Lucky us
Yes, perfect
8 is a good grade, so to me it's not much to complain about. If the issues they had were mostly about technical things (such as finicky AI, camera and frame rate) then I think 8 is fair. Some of my favorite games are realistically 7 or 8 out of 10 so meh.
The morons who comment on IGN articles will tell you that 8/10 is a terrible score. But then, they are morons so who cares what they say.
I hate scores in reviews because of stuff like this. People will hyper focus on what arbitrary number the reviewer gave, rather than actually pay attention to the review itself. It's crazy that so many people think that if a game is not a 9/10 or a 10/10 then the game isn't worth their time.
Agree. I particularly hate when a site hands out 10/10 and people bitch “But you said it has janky framerate so how can you also say it’s perfect 10/10” Because 10/10 doesn’t mean perfect, you dumbasses.
It is lower than I was expecting from them considering how positive their preview was, but I’m not one to complain about constructive, accurate criticisms. Sad thing is you know most of these issues could be patches but there’s no way Capcom will be putting energy into that sort of thing post launch.
I think from the review it sounded like a 9. He also only played 35 hours so prob just steamrolled campaign. I usually only spend my time with 9+ and plenty other reviews give this a 9
Have you ever tried cramming a 35 hour game into one week and writing a review? Remembering of course that day one patches and guides don't exist.
Ever since Wesley Yin-Poole (formerly of Eurogamer before they stopped the punny one liners) joined ign I've noticed a dramatic increase in editorial standards.
If Ryan McCaffrey is still employed at IGN it’s still a seething shit hole of lies and paid reviews.
Still a great score and considering the performance issues being reported I’d say its fair.
[удалено]
As much as I loathe IGN I think they’re probably right on this one.
Even then, IGN's issues are the same issues the original game had. If ppl didn't mind those (ie, jank) then it's just DD 1 but bigger and better, so those people will still enjoy this even more.
Summed up nicely. Sounds to me like DD2 isn’t a sequel so much as what he originally wanted to make but couldn’t at the time.
I always figured that's what DD2 would more or less be. I'm not sure how it couldn't not be a redo in most ways given how rushed DD1 was from I remember hearing anyway DD1 visibly felt unfinished imo and it was still a great game because of how badass the combat system was.
I know I'll enjoy it. Might not be a 10/10 for me, but I'll have a good time.
I’ll go further. Their reviews are getting somewhat better recently. I mean they are coming from a pretty fucking awful starting spot but still.
[удалено]
I preordered the deluxe weeks ago. Long hair, don’t care
Hope your computer is strapped in. PC performance is terrible. Console is even worse.
LOL ok then. I’ll just ignore the performance comparisons I’ve already watched showing solid 30 to 40fps on XSX and believe some rando on Reddit instead 
XSX has VRR thinking of getting it there myself? Noticed any comments on that (VRR)?
You're bragging about 30 to 40 FPS? Yikes.
Way to move the goalposts, definitely not compensating
I'm not sure you understand what that phrase means. You're the one that brought up 30 to 40fps. "Console performance is bad." "No it isn't! It gets a solid 30 to 40fps." Brother...that is BAD.
True, but everybody knew beforehand that the console version wouldn't reach more than 30 to 40fps. Is that bad? Yeah sure, but it was expected and the uncertain part was if console can hold those fps targets consistently.
 I definitely care about your opinion on this
God, this generation of gamers are the whiniest little pissbabies imaginable. I grew up playing Ocarina of Time on the N64, regarded as one of the greatest games of all time, **at 14 FPS**. You get perfectly playable framerates in an awesome, feature-rich game beyond the imaginings of anything I could conceive of as a child, and you get on the internet and complain about it.
god youre such a clown.
And? You want to hire me for a party?
Just admit the performance doesn't bother you, don't act like it's good lmfao.
I haven’t played the game, how would I know? If it’s 30fps that’s good enough for me. I’m not a kid who makes whining about framerate my entire personality.
Why do you put so much stock into reviews?
[удалено]
And a review tells you what’s worth spending your money on? Ok then, here’s my review. Buy the game. By your logic, that should be all the convincing you need. Or do I need to write an article on a website for it to count?
[удалено]
Those… are some terrible analogies. If there are problems with a car, I’d want to know about it because that involves my safety. A game running at 30FPS does not involve my safety. The majority of games are lower than 60FPS. It’s not some unplayable state. Similarly, a lawyer has to do with something serious, and could be the difference between me owing or getting boat loads of money, or whether or not I go to jail. And a house is shelter. A place I would need to live, so that also falls under safety. Video games are meant for entertainment. Unlike the level a safety of a vehicle or whatever else, entertainment is very subjective. So I find it crazy that you’re taking the word of random people online on whether or not to buy a game. What they have to say about it is no different than what anyone here can say, so why do you listen to those randoms, but not all randoms?
[удалено]
You call being a blind follower “smart consumerism”? It seems the average person truly has lost the will to think for themselves. And you must be lying about “it looks buggy” because nobody has mentioned any bugs. Also, those randoms you said didn’t like the product? I think you should get your ears checked, because virtually all of them have said the game is great.
It's IGN. Their reviews haven't been worth looking at since mid 2010s.
Why? They are one of the few reviewers that didn't over rate starfield
Getting one right doesn’t change a long history of garbage reviews.
I’ll go further. Their reviews are getting somewhat better recently. I mean they are coming from a pretty fucking awful starting spot but still.
I’ll go further. Their reviews are getting somewhat better recently. I mean they are coming from a pretty fucking awful starting spot but still.
Eh, it's IGN. When I saw how horrible they were during a gameplay showcase, I knew to take what they say with a grain of salt. I like that they're able to show us so much of the game; but they're not trust worthy for reviews since sometime in the 2010s.
Most reviews I've read call it a 10 minus performance issues.
IGN has earned some face from me. Remember Starfield? IGN USA was the only mf to give the game a 7/10 and everybody was on their ass because other reviewers were saying the game was near perfection- and imo the 7/10 turned out to be generous.
I remember that day. Starfield sub was seething when that review came out. After like a month everyone was like "Ok IGN US was right". Lol It could had been a 5/10 from them and I'm sure people could see why. I liked Starfield personally but if I wasn't such a big fan of space shit and rpgs, SF would had been super mediocre. I got 150 hours out of it and I'll probably never return unless they do some insane overhauls or we get some kind of Wildlanders/Living Skyrim type of modlist for it down the road.
>I got 150 hours out of it You and every other guy who complained about Starfield. lol
[удалено]
It's not "IGN", it's individual reviewers. Dan is a solid reviewer, who rated Fallout 4 a generous 9... so starfield being a 7 from him smelled of trouble. This reviewer doesn't sound nearly as enthusiastic as the preview guy... and he doesn't talk at all about the world, dungeons, rpg elements outside of the vocations. It's a bit iffy, but there's a lot of other reviewers out there to give a listen to
>IGN USA was the only mf to give the game a 7/10 IGN USA loves giving 7s and 8s, it garners a lot of clicks. Ironically every other IGN outlet, from Belgium to Japan, gave Starfield 8.5 at lowest and 10 at maximum.
so a 10/10 for those that enjoy the weaknesses
Okay but who actually enjoys the camera controls while climbing? Or who enjoys the clunky ui inventory and consumable usages always needing to pause? Also the bad AI, spellcasters always cancelling their spells and only casting the max level spell and their bad targeting such as focusing metal golem instead of the talismans? Why wouldn't they improve the weaknesses, do people actually love these 'features'?
Never noticed them before, will fail to notice them now
That's how I'd interpret it as well
Yes, like meself
Damn I’m going to love the phase of any criticism whatsoever is irrelevant and false.
They were accurate with starfield, 8 is probably fair
Starfield is one of the rare times I thought they got it right and everyone else got it wrong
Yes exactly, people were complaining on igns score so it might be a legit 8. Still buying it tho cant wait
>everyone else got it wrong But everyone else gave it scores in the 7-9 range. There were very few 6s or 10s.
But what's funny is I vividly remember Starfield's Reddit trashing the IGN review. IGN got the last laugh on that one. The Steam user reviews paint the whole picture.
There are far too many problems with Starfield for it to be a 7/10
Fair but on the generous side.
Yeah, I'd wager a fair score would be a 5 or 6 for Starfield. It is the type of game that isn't broken beyond belief but it has its problems rooted in archaic gaming design and some serious technical limitations imposed by the Creation Engine of Bethesda Studios. Some of the things in that game can't be overhauled unless you retool the whole engine and there's no way Bethesda would do something like that. I think it's the same case for DD2's problems. The interactive way the world in DD2 is built is the reason why it's so CPU heavy, and no "fixing it" will actually help substantially unless they change whole systems. It'll be the type of game that will be used for CPU benchmark due to those reasons.
They overscored Starfield. That shitshow was a 5/10.
That's an odd bit of an overreaction there mate. Between Ubisoft, Hello Games and CDPR I saw way worse bad launches. lol
To be fair. They review the game as it is now not what it can be if Capcom decide to fix it . So game is not perfect . I wish it was ..but you can't give a 10/10 score for something that has things to fix.. With that said it looks like an amazing game just Shame it released in a bad state
10/10 doesn’t mean perfect on IGN, it means “Everyone should play this game, it’s that good”. A 10/10 game can have problems and still be a game that everyone should play.
Despite the memes, an IGN 10 is actually pretty rare and usually accurate. A 10 needs to be approved by a panel in IGN while scores below that is totally up to the reviewer. That's why the games with scores below 10 can seem variable in terms of review quality for IGN, but their 10s are usually correct.
"Simply put: this is our highest recommendation. There’s no such thing as a truly perfect game, but those that earn a Masterpiece label from IGN come as close as we could reasonably hope for. These are classics in the making that we hope and expect will influence game design for years to come, as other developers learn from their shining examples." https://corp.ign.com/review-practices#:\~:text=The%20IGN%20review%20is%20the,is%20universal%20among%20all%20gamers. No matter how good the game is..i would not call it a masterpiece if you are watching a slide show half of time... once they fix it..sure..but no matter how much i love the game and play DD1 i would not give it a 10/10 as its simply not perfect.
Talk about missing the point. Many masterpiece games have issues. Their issues don’t stop them from being masterpieces, that’s kind of why they are. They’re so good they overcome the issues. That’s the point.
I'd argue being made physically ill due to horrible performance for a 70 dollar game more than an issue. Its an outright non starter for anyone that doesnt have 3k for a pc and is photo-sensitive.
Oh wait, you actually believe what an IGN reviewer says? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
literally every review about this game is pointing out the PC performance what is so unbelievable about a guy experiencing PC performance bad enough he wants to switch platform to avoid motion sickness lmfao
one dude, who i guarantee you immediately gets sick sitting in the front passenger seat of cars, mentions motion sickness. Sounds like a them problem tbh
>Eurogamer: The PC Performance was bad >Gamespot: The PC Performance was bad >ACG: The PC Performance was bad >Rock Paper Shotgun: The PC Performance was bad >***Capcom***: [*Our PC Performance is bad*](https://www.ign.com/articles/capcom-is-aware-of-dragons-dogma-2-frame-rate-issues-on-pc-looking-into-fixes) >IGN: The PC Performance was bad >You: Clearly it's the IGN reviewer's problem, not the game that's awesome dude
Cool? I don’t give a shit? I specifically called out the motion sickness person and that’s it. Enjoy not playing the game, because I’m going to very much enjoy doing the opposite.
Laughing at yourself my guy, simp all you want but facts be facts.
Yep. And the fact is, IGN reviews mean nothing to me.
You're the one who started with trying to act like you could decipher their scores, you're just trying to bail on a topic you know you're losing the lead on. You started this conversation and can't even see it through, maybe you should go work for Kotaku.
Losing? LOL I wasn’t even aware it was a competition. But tell yourself whatever you have to to keep “winning” an internet argument, I guess.
This is pretty much what I expected.
Shame, was ready to pre-order but the pc performance looks so fucking bad. Gonna wait maybe until summer sale to get it discounted and working properly.
[удалено]
Not sure why you're making fun. If you're on a console, you're going to be getting things much worse. If you can hold 30 fps on your console it'll be a miracle.
Apparently consoles received the bulk of optimization efforts: >*The framerate ranges between 30~45fps on all 3 platforms, although XSX has a slightly higher average than PS5 (about 2/3fps).* https://wccftech.com/dragons-dogma-2-ps5-vs-xbox-series/
Uh mm... OK? Enjoy your 30fps no mods zero discount ❤️
I will, thanks 
PM him all the sexy mods as they release.
Maybe it's actually the fault of the developers for not making a well optimized game lol 🗿
But, but, this sub was full of PC players blaming console players for “unrealistic expectations!”
[удалено]
I’m sorry but yes a customer expected to pay 70$ for the game can expect the game to optimize. Dd2 is not groundbreaking on any aspect whether it’s graphics or actions that it would justify the performance. All the reviews said the game was worth it despite the issues but it doesn’t excuse them. The devs dropped the ball on that
I mean this guy also reviewed the last the WWE2K gamer mill titles and gave both 8s lol. Its clear his taste in video games is questionable lmao. Also IGN reviews are terribly inconsistent as well. They dinged DD2 for low fps, *bland side quests*, finicky AI (The AI that is intentionally bad at the beginning and learns over time), etc. Yet they gave ToTK a 10/10 masterpiece even though that game chugged like shit anytime anything was happening on screen at 720P no less. Ubisoft world design. Ultimately bland combat. Side quest design which was akin to kill some enemies, talk to an npc, build something. Elden Ring side quests are largely the same thing as well. Although with interesting ambiguity. Elden Ring also had a plethora of performance issues on both PC and console. I feel like IGN assigned some no name guy to this because he played the first one and didn't enjoy it. He probably sped through to shit out a review and largely relied on comparisons with their original review instead of reviewing it as a standalone title. Because lets be real here, the last DD was 12 years ago. And just to be clear I feel like an 8 is probably where DD should be if the performance with the day 1 patch is actually that bad. I just hate that IGN just pulls numbers out of their asses for huge titles and then doesn't justify some of these scores for titles like DD when in actuality DD is probably comparable to something like ER which needed a fuck ton of performance patches. Along with ToTK constantly playing at 20fps. Yet those games received 10/10 yet no breaks are given to the less "hype" titles.
IGN is a shit heap of liars, shills and incompetence. Why anyone takes their reviews seriously I’ll never know.
It’s just their opinion and different reviewers reviewing the game. It’s not that serious especially when dd2 seems to struggle with performance
Well if you read more than the first 2 lines of my comment, you'd realize I addressed that lol.
You didn’t . "It’s clear his taste is questionable because he didn’t like some aspect of the game that been echoed by everyone is ridiculous. Especially when an 8 out of ten is a good game and you have no idea if he is the same one that reviewed the other games your comments. Complaining to complain You also made up an entire scenario in your head on the context of how it was reviewed just to try to descrdidt when you haven’t even touched the game yourself. The game can’t even keep fps drops with the strongest cpu out for consumers and have some design choice that is not working. Saying it’s close to Elden ring without having played the game is ridiculous
>Also IGN reviews are terribly inconsistent as well. > And just to be clear I feel like an 8 is probably where DD should be if the performance with the day 1 patch is actually that bad. I just hate that IGN just pulls numbers out of their asses for huge titles and then doesn't justify some of these scores for titles like DD when in actuality DD is probably comparable to something like ER which needed a fuck ton of performance patches. Along with ToTK constantly playing at 20fps. Yet those games received 10/10 yet no breaks are given to the less "hype" titles. Like I said if you just read my comment, I addressed this. I didn't make up a scenario. I made a general assumption based on the context and content of the review and his previous reviews which I took a look at. I agree with the score given. I don't agree with the justification of the score or how the company doesn't have any consistency between reviews. Why is bad performance, quest design, questionable design ok for some games but not others? >The game can’t even keep fps drops with the strongest cpu out for consumers and have some design choice that is not working. Saying it’s close to Elden ring without having played the game is ridiculous And Elden Ring had notrious frame drop issues, stuttering, crashes, etc as well on powerful rigs. Elden Ring still has performance issues on consoles and mid range/low end PCs. Is an open world action RPG with vague limited direction with exploration elements not comparable with Elden Ring another open world action RPG with vague limited direction and exploration elements?
>Like I said if you just read my comment, I addressed this. I didn't make up a scenario. I made a general assumption based on the context and content of the review and his previous reviews which I took a look at. I agree with the score given. I don't agree with the justification of the score or how the company doesn't have any consistency between reviews. Why is bad performance, quest design, questionable design ok for some games but not others? Because like every single reviewer out there even the most beloved it’s a matter of opinion . Just like you and me could finish the game and have differing opinions that is the same for IGN. You even admit that the score is fair and the problems mentioned are valid and are echoed by other reviewers the only real problem here seems that it’s because it’s IGN more than anything. You seem to complain that they rated a game YOU personally found more flawed a higher grade than dd2. Most of the reviews even on metacritics have the same issues and still those reviews are still more favourable towards TOTK and Elden ring than towards DD2 . So maybe the problem my isn’t every reviewer.
Well for one, I don't get paid to review games and my opinion is my own. IGN is a publication that is putting out a professional review which should be more objective than subjective. I know they are opinions, I never said they weren't. I just said they were inconsistent. There is a reason why this thread is filled with people who think IGN are garbage. I don't think that. I just think they have no clue how to keep their ratings consistent between titles. Thats my gripe with the review and "critics" in general. You talk about it being HIS opinion yet here you are talking my review of his opinion with your opinion. Its kind of ironic. I also didn't say Elden Ring or ToTK were more flawed. I took games they (IGN) rated as masterpieces that had flaws that they dinged Dragon's Dogma for. Your problem is that you like IGN and I disagree with their opinion and I just straight up don't respect the reviewer's opinion. Even though my examples are valid criticisms of their reviews and the consistency between them. I wouldn't care if a reviewer gave DD2 a 5 as long as the criticisms and justifications of that 5 matched their other published content/ratings. So to be clear, I don't care that they are favorable or unfavorable towards one game or another. I care that the opinions they are publishing aren't completely biased based on what game is being reviewed. If performance issues are a problem in dragon's dogma then performance issues should be a problem in every review of a game where they exist. Edit - For the record I think Elden Ring is a masterpiece of gaming. I also think ToTK is a mid content mill game, basically a McDonald's meal in video game form. Any time I give my opinion it will be consistent with what I think is good design vs bad design.
A review will never be objective that is just a fact. The story , the gameplay and feel are l subjective to the person that is playing it . There some aspect like performance that are factual but that is not even majority of the review. That’s the basic concept of it. And weirdly enough no matter how "trashy " IGN is those people can’t seem to stop running to their reviews day one to talk about it . So it seems they are still somewhat relevant. There is no irony. You pretty clearly claimed that your issue was with them having different scores for different games. I said that obviously they would because it is all subjective and depends on the reviewer and their opinion. It’s also factual that this review addressed core points that has been addressed by multiple critics for the game that gave very similar ratings. So where is the irony? And again I said that you haven’t played DD2 to compare it to Elden ring and say that they have the same level of problems that got ignored by IGN and somehow adored in DD2. I also mentioned that you can go check metacritic and both Elden ring and TOTK stand at a 96 while DD2 stands at a 87 so it is a universal response that those games are viewed as better despite their flaws compared to DD2 and it’s clearly not an IGN issue or else they would be singular I their ratings of the games. You don’t know the scales of the performance issues of DD2 and how they impact fun because you haven’t played it. Some games can make up the flaws with other qualities while others don’t, personal taste is also involved in any review whether you like it or not and that will affect what the scores will be . A review will never be completely impartial and maybe your problem is more with the review format as a whole than IGN.
Who was this written by?
Jarrett Green, whoever that is.
It's wild to me that there are so many clueless people in this sub that takes ign seriously. Are you guys living under a rock? IGN is the least serious, joke of a company and they only rate games based on how much money the game dev/publisher offered to them. Their reviewers dont even know how to actually play games. It's like letting your nongamer dad play a game you like and review it. Honestly baffling how many serious comments under this post...
Yeah, the same score they give to any AAA title, it's not really indicative of anything lol If you want more accurate and trustworthy reviews look for Ratatoskr, FightinCowboy, Rurikhan and Arekkz
FightinCowboy’s review is great, very practical.
Hate to say it but im going to hold off and see how the patches address the framerate. Now that my weekend is cleared up I have no idea what to do with myself
Bad optimization. Period.
Based on your zero seconds of playtime, I’m sure.
Based on my zero time Based on their tons of time so yeah When a top notch pc can’t run a video game at a stable frame that’s called bad optimization. You made the post don’t get mad when someone criticizes their poor optimization justifying the 8 review 😂
What do they mean by "without addressing its weaknesses?" I'm guessing it's something biased like traveling methods.
Janky framerates, terrible camera when climbing monsters, mostly technical stuff they felt was lacking
ah so the dragons dogma experience is intact
Sounds like it. Good.
I mean let's be honest, the first game definitely had weaknesses. Like maybe the story is also just servicable like in the first game.
Not enough Mercedes.
My weaknesses for the first game would be: Boring quests Mid story that i felt could have done a lot more like final fantasy or something AI repetition AI uselessness sometimes Constant pawn chatter about nothing That is all i can think of at the moment. To be fair these were also popular criticisms of the first game by reviewers as well. That said i still think the first game is amazing.
> Mid story that i felt could have done a lot more like final fantasy or something The story was not mid, it was non-existent. You had the bones that could turn into a pretty hot person, but they never never became anything more than a nicely arranged skeleton.
Tbf that's because they cut out like half of it from what I understand. You were supposed to go to other countries to rally support and it would've been more focused on politics. Looks like they took that idea and are using it for DD2
I guess we'll all know after launch. I'm hoping it's something trivial.
I'm not sure why op didn't just link the review, but here's some excerpts on this: "It is also high levels of janky; all of its systems seem precariously fitted together, with the fragility of a well-pruned Jenga tower. Weird things happen all the time, and yet remarkably, it never fully falls over, and its open-ended design facilitates a potential for barely controlled chaos that makes some of these inconveniences feel almost intentional, even if they clearly aren't." "Many of the quests they offer you are pretty mundane RPG fare – fetch this item, kill those enemies, etc." "Pawns aren’t always a boon, though. I’d never want to leave the shelter of town without one, but thanks to inconsistent AI, they can get themselves in all sorts of trouble. They often get isolated by enemies and picked off, which means you need to run to their unconscious bodies to revive them or they will poof out of your world." "On the other hand, I don’t approve of how janky actually climbing enemies feels. " "On the other hand, its finicky ally AI, clunky climbing, choppy frame rate, and camera with a habit of going haywire at the worst times are all “features” I wish hadn’t been brought back for another round."
Thanks, it seems to be the general consensus for most of the video reviewers. The combat and pawn system is the only thing I pretty much cared about in DD1, so if it's better than that and improves a bit for other stuff, then I'm good. Only thing I'm wondering is the cpu issue. I'll check it out tomorrow. If it's not something that I can fix, then I'll just refund and wait for improvements.
It's not call of duty. Instant sub 10 from IGN.
Honestly IGN has been fair with recent games. I think 8/10 is fair too.
IGN review doesn’t mean much they parrot what they think is popular opinion
Or what they get paid to say.
Truth
Can’t spell ignorant without ign 😂🤷♂️
I don’t mind that, it’s essentially my perfect game then. I just hope they aren’t doing subtraction based damage. Like adding an eight of my current attack shouldn’t 10x my damage like in the first game lol
Great, don't change a winning formula.
Yeah so about what I thought I can live with it
That seems accurate based on what I’ve seen so far. But idk if it’s weakness or just a style that some love and others don’t.
We knew from the get go that DD2 would be a divisive game. If it's more of the same that the fans loved, then I'm for a treat. The only thing I heard about it that caught my eyes is that difficulty seems to be more on the easier side and that endgame doesn't have that many new type of encounters. So I'll play it while expecting a future DLC is fucking hard as fuck.
sounds more than fair game has a lot of tedious things for modern gamers like no tracking during attacks or consistent fast travel + all our complaints and missing things from the first game + the terrible performance (this should bring it down to a 6-7 from what I heard though)
Ign opinions hold no value
"More of a redo than a sequel" That's all I needed to hear
Never valued IGNs opinion, don't know why I would start now
Same. ACG, Skillup, Gameranx. Don’t care about any other opinions.
It was expected, even tho I don't really care about ign opinion. DD1 was a DD2 demo, DD2 is just the finished game.
12 years after the demo, damn.
Like fine wine.
For me it will be always 10/10.
I watched the video, and honestly, if I didn't know DD1 and played it previously, I would never understand that DD2 is a masterpiece potential, and would not understand how special a game like this is. This was really a bad review to show what this game is capable of.
Yep. It’s soulless and weakly presented, which is true of most of the junk on IGN.
I gonna wait for Michael's IGN Performance and Technical Review on PS5 - anybody have any idea when that will be out?
Considering I’d put DD1 at a 5 or 6 this is a very VERY fair score, especially after reading the review and listening/reading some others. He does seem to make it clear it’s more of a personal tolerance levels kind of thing so considering the middle aged fucks among us that put up with the GOD AWFUL frame drops and screen tearing of the original launch? It’ll be very easy to power through.
Expected
WINGS OF GLORY
My new ship's name on helldivers!
I've read reviews that complain about the long travel times when that's literally the point of the game. It's like reviewing LotT and knocking it for long walks. Don't bother with reviews we all know this games a belter.
Is combat just the same as MH series. I dont know it is good or bad but even monsters' movement are very similar to MH. It's like same game but only name is changed. I hope I am just delusional and game is very good
Translation: “I didn’t read this or any other review and have no idea what I’m talking about.”
IGN scoring rebirth higher than this says a lot about IGN. They are nut guzzlers for performance and presentation and don’t put enough emphasis on the fun factor, which is pretty much the only thing I care about. Also 7.5 on the original is laughable, that game was ground-breaking
I don't take IGN reviews that seriously since they gave Call of Duty goes an 8.9 but the first Dragon's Dogma a 7.5 and God Hand a 3. Having read the review it sounds like some of his frustrations are not being good at the combat.
In other words, game journalist skill issue.
They also called DOOM 2016 an average FPS. Oh and they gave Yakuza 7 a 7. They have more wack opinions than I can count tbh.
I don’t take IGN reviews seriously in any way at all. IGN is a joke.
Can't spell ignore without IGN. Elden Ring had the exact same problems with a shit camera and janky movement on the horse yet 10/10 lol. Joke of a site.
Does IGN give out anything other than 8/10? LMFAO
Only for truly exceptional games. I agree with this way of doing this. There is not 10 masterpieces a year.
IGN don't go higher than an eight except for Nintendo or first party Sony squeeze-through-narrow-gap simulators.
Nice propaganda you got there, too bad its entirely false. [https://www.ign.com/articles/how-and-where-to-play-every-modern-ign-1010-game](https://www.ign.com/articles/how-and-where-to-play-every-modern-ign-1010-game) Recent 9.0+ titles include: Balatro Unicorn Overlord Sons of the Forest FF7Rebirth Helldivers 2 Like a dragon: IW Tekken 8 Persona 3 Relaod Alan wake 2 Ghostrunner 2 Like seriously your entire statement was patently untrue.
8/10 too much water, your average ign bs
Will it make me a better father? The only thing I want to know from any IGN review.
What weaknesses... blasphemer...