🌹✊🏿🇵🇷🏳️‍🌈 / avatar by cafzkasoft, header by Argodeonn, pngtuber by gutstosis / i shitpost and stream, i'm cool i guess







https://blinkies.cafe/wall


Twitch streamin'
twitch.tv/tlarn
Twitter I guess
twitter.com/tlarn
Pillowfort (mostly commissioned art)
pillowfort.social/tlarn

dreamcastaway
@dreamcastaway

I've been playing Dragon's Dogma 2 and while I'd love to talk about gameplay or interesting moments, the game's found itself something of a cultural lightning rod. It is a game with many friction points arising in a cultural moment where gamers are, perhaps more than ever, convinced that "consumers" are kings.

Dragon's Dogma 2 is not readily "solvable" and you can't min-max it. You will make mistakes. You will be scraped and bruised and scarred. Pain is sometimes the only bridge that can take us wher ewe need to go. And gaming culture, fed the lie of mastery and player importance, does not understand that scars can be beautiful. I love this game. I think it's a miracle it came out at all.

I also think in spite of the success it's found... that 2024 might be the worst possible year for it to have released.

Let's ramble about it..


tlarn
@tlarn

also wanna add that one of my favorite examples of friction via intentional inconvenience is in Caves of Qud.

the game's economy is largely barter-based, but the measure of value and thus the currency is fresh water. this actually presents multiple problems for the player: your character needs water to live, and water has weight. you can't just carry your wealth with you in water, you'll quickly hit your encumbrance limit. on top of that, you can just find sources of fresh water in the world, sometimes substantially sized sources, but again, you just can't carry it all.

so, there's a constant tug of war you're juggling in Qud where you're carrying enough water both to keep your thirst under control and to have some spending money between visits to merchants. when you go to town to cash out your loot, you don't take it all in fresh water, you buy trade goods and pocket-sized technology that have high value but won't weigh you down. it's neat!!


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @dreamcastaway's post:

I've been playing Dragon's Dogma 1 and, about 15 minutes before this post, I failed an escort quest. I let the NPC die, because I'd specialized my party for damage - two Warriors, a Sorcerer, and a Strider - and neglected to bring any healing for the NPC. So now she's just... gone, dead to a harpy - I think - and I have to live with the consequences of my poor planning. I can't help but think that in another game it might have zoomed in on her reaching out her hand and saying something dramatic, but I almost didn't even notice her on the ground in the panic.

The word unforgiving gets thrown around a lot in regards to games, like unforgiving difficulty or whathaveyou, but I think Dragon's Dogma is... unconcerned, maybe. It presents itself as the way it is, and if the player tries to engage with it in a way that it isn't, then DD's unconcerned with that. Oh, well, guess you've closed some doors - tough luck. I like that friction. Let there be consequences to actions, even the small ones, but not in a punishing sort of way; it's just how it is.

Really enjoyed your writeup o7

I haven't taken the plunge with DD2 yet even though I loved 1, and part of me does worry how/if Capcom will respond to the response to the game's more jagged edges--if I shouldn't try to play it before things get sanded down... I say that as someone who certainly enjoyed the infinite-use Ferrystone in Dark Arisen, though (having gone on plenty of hikes in the original release, at least).

Thank you for the write-up!
I first knew the original Dragon's Dogma as a cryptic and hostile game, and didn't think I was interested in it. I then learned it was a game where you could be a Panzer Dragoon archer, and I decided to brave a cryptic and hostile game so I could be a Panzer Dragoon. And through that process, I came to actually like the crypticness and hostility (especially because some of the systems you expect to be cryptic aren't even as complicated and full of friction as in other games, such as crafting and item upgrades, and I never felt like I could accidentally make a bad character with my progression choices). So it's very surprising to me that DD2 is finding a mass audience that doesn't first know the game as cryptic and hostile but full of weird wonders for those who dare explore it, not unlike the platonic ideal of an RPG dungeon.

I can't really put into words how much this just sold me on the game, but my god do I need to pick this up now!

The very notion of consequence in a game these days... You rarely see it outside of maybe the roguelike genre. Even then, whoops, got a game over buddy? No worries, here's your new character right as rain and ready to go. A lasting impact is downright novel.

there's a real sense of completionism rampant in contemporary design (you could probably draw a line from xbox 360 achievements to fortnite battle pass), but imo a strong memory of a temporary experience is a lot more valuable than having collected all 50 costumes in spider-man or w/e

The inn system is kinda generous, feels like it acts as a deliberate way to save scum (though I've not encountered dragonplague or inn related shenanigans). Set a hard save at the inn, then play as usual. Need to reverse time, load up that inn save. Even if it was 2 hours of playtime ago, it will still work for save scumming.

I appreciate how little the anti cheat systems engage with single player content. No consequence from duplicating portcrystals and ferrystones, golden trove beetles, changing your gold value, but adjusting the friction to the levels that work for the player. (I wouldn't recommend doing any edits to your pawn, bad form and likely would trigger some reaction). Teaches a good lesson too, in that you don't have to oblige by design decisions, and you can make your own, if you are willing to try.
Its quite rewarding to load up cheat engine and figure it out as it were. Here's to solving trials and having a good time!😁

The inn system is absolutely intended to give you a fallback point to bad decisions. But since you have to travel to it and intentionally do it, that seems to bother a lot of people. I've seen people complaining about losing 15 minutes of progress because the walk from town to where they wanted to escort someone was that far away.

I understand folks not wanting to have friction in their games, especially if they're playing games to destress and feel powerful. But not every game needs to give that experience, and it seems that's not an answer that people want to hear these days.

Thank you for expressing this as clearly as you did. Public understanding of the MTX will, hopefully, shift with time. And hopefully it doesn't lead to Capcom forcing more impactful microtransactions in the future.

Thank you for writing this!

It's been a bit surreal hearing about the discourse from the sidelines as someone who played the heck out of Dragon's Dogma 1 because the friction was the point and appeal of the game. It's like being someone who enjoys hiking but everyone keeps asking why you don't just drive to the destination instead.

I think Dragon's Dogma 2 had the right intentions, but fell on its face when it came to the execution. I'm a big fan of friction like difficulty or punishing the player for their actions, but with Dragon's Dogma I rarely felt like the world had a proper reaction to anything I did.

My biggest source of friction was crashes and losing progress (crashing while autosaving can delete the autosave, making you restart from the last inn). This, combined with a few other issues, ended up making for a pretty unenjoyable overall experience.

I clear out Trevo Mine on a major side quest to unlock new vocations, only to be told to go back there immediately for a main quest.

There aren't very many unique enemies in the game, so traveling through the same place multiple times rarely let me experience something new.

Jail felt pointless when you'd just open your cell and the guards would watch you walk out. The game repeatedly warns you about trespassing, but the guards didn't seem to care.

Nearly all my / my party's deaths were due to fall damage from bad collision and pathing. Combat was trivial; near the beginning of the game there's an easily accessible invincible / instakill Thief build that trivializes the game, so I switched to Mystic Spearhand only to quickly gain another invincibility skill (although not nearly as powerful). I had to actively restrict myself from certain skills to make combat interesting.

Quests rarely had interesting rewards, with just about all the best gear being available in shops. The boss of a questline being an enemy you had killed several times on the way there felt wrong to me.

NPCs would die off-screen before I could reach them to rescue them, and anyone I genuinely failed to protect could be revived easily. When I failed an earlier quest that resulted in the death of an NPC, the game just revived them automatically for a later quest.

I feel like Baldur's Gate 3, Elden Ring, Zelda, and Monster Hunter do a much better job at executing story / consequences, difficulty, interactivity, and combat, leaving Dragon's Dogma only with its pawn system to carry it.

Great write up! I've been feeling a key part of the microtransactions furor is the other way modern game design has trained players. We've had years of games that do intentionally pair hostile game design with microtransactions (gachas, looters, mobile boosters, battle passes), and so the presence of both of these things immediately leads to a suspicion there's a scam at play. The audience is primed to see inconvenience not just as bad design, but explicitly predatory. A game like DD2, where the link between hostile design and mtx is more nebulously present if at all, seems impossible to conceive for people.

I've seen multiple people state two very worrying things in response to the MTX stuff, and the first one is mainly that this can be seen as an attempt from Capcom to tread the waters of the kind of predatory MTX peddling that, say, King Games does. (Oh wait, it's Activision Blizzard King now. Ugh.) Even if the claim that you're being sold fast travel is inaccurate right now, it's still a dangerous idea to have floating around.

The other one is that quite frankly, no game designer can demand to have critical analysis of its game not take into account what part of the game is sold additionally on the side. If any part of the experience is available to be bought as an add-in, as DLC, that also says something about the intentionality of the design whether the designer wants it or not - I do think it's unfair to judge a game by common misconceptions and broken telephone even if people like, say, James Stephanie Sterling herself falls into them, but it's not unfair to look at DLC and say "perhaps what was intentional was for me to buy this shit separately instead of whatever the game wants me to do internally".

Also we don't owe shit to AAA game companies, and it'd be IMO wise to withhold any praise we feel we should grant one of their products if they add bullshit on top of it. I'm not saying we shouldn't be allowed to like single-player games with MTX, and I'm not saying people should be called idiots for liking single-player games with MTX, but what I'm saying is that the company that released a single-player game with MTX does not deserve our good reviews and shouldn't get them.

I had to stop playing FFXIV because that game started to feel like it had no friction at all. I wasn't really interested in DD2 (and ignorant of all the discourse), but reading this has made me want to play it.

A very reasonable stance I think.

I am certainly having a blast playing the game, but I know I had to first get over the friction of the first game. You'd think people would be up for it a bit more after the rise of the souls series but I guess that was all talk for these 'gamers'.

Over here wandering around in the middle of no where and finding a second funny riddle gameshow shrine, where I am guessing the show host shows up after you do the first one.

Now of course I have my own critiques but they are mostly soft minor things. With a side of "Hm, not having a defensive move cancel feels iffy and causes me to play like an absolute janky monster", for example the mystic spearhand is just immunity shield uptime simulator. I also think some hitboxes are strange for trying to predict when to parry as fighter. And just simple melee combo wise, if I had somewhere between this and MH level combos on my two attack buttons, that'd be lovely.

Dragon's Dogma is a story factory whose various textures create unprecedented triumphs and memorable failure. a fair few

Either the rest of a sentence got lost, or a fragment of a discarded sentence survived deletion. Based on the following, one sentence paragraph, I think maybe more than once sentence got lost.

Good read, and I find myself wondering why I am finding DD2's systems so easy to engage with, while I have fairly consistently bounced off Souls games. There's a valid comparison there, sure, about how the souls games uncompromisingly make you engage with its systems. But I think the trouble I have with them is that the basic things that it's asking me to do at a high level in Souls games, the flow of the fights themselves, and the degree of precision it demands from me are not something that I have much raw interest in gaining mastery over. And that frustrates me because there's so much about the mood of those worlds, and some of the things that are happening mechanically, and the way you explore the worlds that I DO want to engage with but I feel the game won't let me enjoy those bits.

I've previously said that I find the lack of difficulty modes in those games is a detriment. Not only does it present an accessibility issue, but it prevents them from gaining a whole new type of player which is interested in some of what's going on here, but not all of it the bit where they need to develop an ability to read fights well and make moves with deliberate precision. There's certainly a part of the fanbase of those games who would be against adding difficulty modes even though it wouldn't seem to affect their own experience, and there's something that feels vaguely toxic about that. And I mean that in the truer sense of the word in that this sentiment sort of ends up infecting the whole conversation around those games. I am loathe to bring it up most places because I'll get a slew of people telling me I just don't get it - I do get it, and I don't like it.

I admit I still can't really think of a truly good reason that those games shouldn't present difficulty modes. 'The developer doesn't want to, it conflicts with their vision' doesn't quite cut it for me in this case. It still sounds like a cop-out to me.

But. Reading this piece at least makes me want to interrogate this position a little further.

In the context of DD2 I do find your points ring true. I really do think this is a game that knows what it is and shouldn't compromise that vision just to please people. I find these two viewpoints hard to reconcile, and it forces me to at least soften my position on the Souls games. Even if it still frustrates me that I'm unable to enjoy those games which have a lot to like about them. (And I really have tried. I've played Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, Dark Souls 2 and Bloodborne before finally acknowledging I probably should stop doing this to myself. Bloodborne got the closest to retaining me.)

I've had situations in DD2 where I've, say, completely wasted an hour because of a domino run of mishaps which end up with me accidentally getting flown away on a gryphon before finally leaping to freedom miles away from where I started, in the wrong direction. But I accept that, and wouldn't have it any other way. The uncompromising friction here feels like it's delivering me adventure in a way that I never felt about souls games (with those I felt like the friction was only ever delivering a challenge over which I needed to develop mastery). But here when I suffer a setback more often than not it's because some absolutely wild shit just happened, and it's very hard to be angry at that.

Addendum: having thought about it some more, I think part of the reason the form of friction DD2 presents feels so much more tolerable than Souls games to me, apart from the fact that I just enjoy the mechanics that DD2 is asking me to engage with more, is about context. In Souls games the friction is 'nope, you failed. Dead. Go back, try again. Do better next time.' Maaaybe you can level up enough to make the fight easier, but it basically wants you to get the mechanics right and if you love the way it designs fights and movesets and figuring all that out then that's probably rewarding to work through the problem. DD2's friction feels much more chaotic and unpredictable to me. If Souls is classical then DD2 is jazz, and I guess I like jazz.

Although I've suffered all kinds of setbacks and had to engage with unforgiving systems and go on long treks across the country to avoid the expense of portcrytals, I've only seen a game over screen twice at level 35, and only one of those times was due to hitting a combat challenge I couldn't get out of. Other times even if I'm in dire trouble I've been able to squirrel my way out of it somehow, and the process of squirrelling out has become its own adventure. So if Souls games are about perseverance and trying again, DD2 is a game about instead of trying again, rolling with what you get into and living in the moment.

Frankly all this just makes it even more confusing as to why the MTX are present at all. Creating friction and then offering purchases to ease that friction is a massive red flag, and unless they're completely oblivious, they... had to know that, right? So why is it there? It's the roach on the wedding cake, the baffling own-goal that just begs the question over and over no matter how many times you think about it.

Introducing friction in a world without it was what catapulted Demon's Souls to such massive acclaim, and then that became an entire genre of video games. I guess it would be like if they let you buy just one titanite slab– a confusing decision from any angle.