If you haven’t played the original I see very little reason to not just play that instead. It’s cheaper, runs much much better and there’s shockingly little in the sequel that really is noticeably different or improved upon. I’ve played like 15 hours of Dragons Dogma 2 and genuinely regret the money I spent on it.

Dragons Dogma 1 was cool in 2012 when there was basically no other open-world-rpg with decent combat, but in a world where Elden Ring and its DLC exists, Dragons Dogma feels ridiculously behind the times.

Gotta have a really good rig to play it with high graphics and less stutter. I have a poor-to-medium rig so I can play it but I get a lot of stutter when in the largest city. Gameplay during fighting isn’t slowed as far as I’ve noticed at least. Overall it’s an 8/10 game with all the negatives that come along with it but I’ve enjoyed playing it

Played the first on release, then again when DA dropped, and played this one on release. Let me preface this by acknowledging I have a ton of bias, I loved the first game, and ny tastes have changed in the 12 years it took for DD2 to be released.

Honestly, it’s fun, but it is as shallow as the first one. Don’t get me wrong, combat is very, very fun. Movement in general is weighty but not clunky, the weapons all feel great, and pretty much all skills are useful. But enemy variety suffers, I haven’t the data but it sort of feels like it has less enemy variety than the first one. Wolves and goblins are as ubiquitous as in the first one, and they don’t require much tactics to beat, trolls feel somewhat boring to fight for some reason, griffins are easily worn down, and dragons quickly become a bit of a joke. Undead enemies seem somewhat rare, and you’ll very rarely encounter anything not a zombie or spirit. So, combat is a mixed bag, the tools you have are great, but the problems are repetitive.

The biggest downside are the quests and the story. Completely forgettable. I thought I’d get embroiled in some deadly political cloak and dagger but it was all tedium.

Also, mastery in a vocation means very little when you can use any weapon and nearly any skill with the wayfarer vocation.

The post-game is really interesting though. Not sure if I like it better than the first game, but it was a very interesting approach.

All in all, if you want cool gameplay, go for it. If you want a deeper experience, wait for a sale, you won’t find it in DD2 (or DD1 for that matter). If a 5 is average, DD2 is a solid 6.5 for me. I enjoyed my first playthrough, but there wasn’t much meat on those bones to go for seconds. I probably won’t touch the game again until an expansion like BBI drops. Plus, performance was terrible.

the expansion version of the first one is better. Hopefully they fix it eventually, but as somebody far too many hours in the first 1.5 games I uninstalled rather quickly.

I had a good time with it, despite bad performance on my old rig. I did end up modding it with stuff like weight reduction and increasing drops. I’d probably rate it slightly below DDDA, as what DD2 is missing the most rn is everything I loved about Dark Arisen which was a focused experience. And the first game had better music. The Warfarer class smooths over a lot of issues with exploration like needing access to a movement skill to reach a chest. Spears are cool, though they have a busted defensive skill that trivializes the game. Being able to stand on enemies is a good change to the climbing dynamic, it is extremely risky but allows stamina regeneration or standing attacks/skills. Pawns remain a good system, though some vocations feel less optimal (which has always been the case). Side quests remain bullshit quirky. Post game was neat. If you liked the first game, you’ll probably like 2, but probably not as much.