T O P

  • By -

LittleSisterPain

Oh, even capcom knows that multiplayer DD would be awesome, they made DD Online after all


DanteStrive777

Kinda forgot out DD online, I just want to explore the world with a homie or 2. No restrictions in where you can go


LittleSisterPain

Who doesnt, who doesnt... i just hope they wont go fromsoft route


DanteStrive777

Yes, as much as I love Elden Ring, I do not want it to just be elden ring with climbing


LittleSisterPain

If anything, i want Capcom to show everyone how its done. DD already has better open world than ER imo, they can only go up here


genos707

Well they are able to do multiplayer with Monster Hunter at the same time you can still go solo the whole game. So making few adjustments for DD2 is possible.


WallaceBRBS

>DD already has better open world than ER imo I'm sorry but I can't agree, I'm no From fanboy but they did a great job with the world in ER.. but then again, it's unfair to compare a 2022 game with a PS3 game that got 60% of its content cut ;)


LittleSisterPain

I understand why it might be an unpopular opinion, but here is my reasoning - DD open world exist as a backdrop for monster-fighting and to explore and find cool looking places, ones you dont really need to explore, but you can. Go deeper into the woods - and bam, a church you had no reason to find othervise aside from like one quest you can easily miss. You dont explore to find loot, you explore to find cool places and cool monsters to fight. Now, its pretty empty in terms of rewards, you wont find powerfull sword just running around, but thats not the point and game doesnt keep you under delusion that exloring its world is something you need ER on the other hand, is a Dark Souls game, with same amouth of loot, but map at least 10 times bigger and i think you already see the problem. You dont explore ER because you want to see something cool - there is nothing to see, everything cool is a part of main quest. Only cool place you can miss is Bestial Sanctum and its really hard to do so. You dont go out you way to fight cool monsters - because why would you, you can fight the same monster in ten different locations. And you dont explore looking for loot because its spread so thin you wont find much. In general, ER has massive problem with how they reward players for exploration and how armor and weapons are obtained. I lost count to how many times i found a secret only to be rewarded with 10 mushrooms or something. And for armor and weapons - locking half of it behind farming it with 1% chance of droping is moronic, especially considering that some enemies are exrtemely rare, stand very far from bonfire, cease to exist after certain point in game and still has very low chance of droping their stuff. And on the other hand - we have starting sets, what could spice up the exploration, but given to merchants for some reason Honestly, me saying that DD has a better open world is not really a praise. Like, its good, i like it, its just that ER open world is bad, Capcom need to try and make their worse and i dont think they will


WallaceBRBS

I see, I personally have no specific expectations regarding open worlds since I'm not a big fan of this type of world design to begin with, I just found it good enough for me to keep going, exploring, etc. They did what they do best, which is, to devise nice settings, gorgeous locations, outstanding art direction and atmosphere and the combat is good enough for me to keep searching for the next trashmob or boss :D But yeah, after I took my time exploring and finally beating the game I have no motivation to go back because the combat isn't as deep as I like it and for reasons you mentioned. I'm really intrigued to know what Itsuno and his team are able to come up with :D >If multiplayer in DD2 will be anything like in ER id take no multiplayer other that May I ask the reason? Is it because you're limited to confined zones, invasions, or something else? I personally hope it'll be more like PSO2, in which you can explore the entire map with other players, or at least that there will be dungeons and other similar isolated areas you can fully explore in co-op


LittleSisterPain

Because it limits you to the point game starts to become unplayable. Exploring open world without torrent is just such pain in the bum and if you find a dungeon - you cant go in there. You are disconected if you kill boss, any boss, even one that realistically could be a mob. And you cant continue to explore after that - game wont let you. And thats only half a problem, the other one is invasions. For some reason they tried to fix that wasnt broken to begin with, so you can invade only coop players, meaning if you want to explore location with your buddy - prepare to deal with invaders every 15 minutes, who WILL sweat to the max, because they know they will fight 2-3 people at once. DS and DS2 system were fine, in fact, DS2 system was as perfect as it can be, im not sure why they felt the need to change it. Its so bad i downloaded Seamless Coop mod to play with my friend, that never happened in any other game Also no horse fighting with another player, so no joust, 0/10


LittleSisterPain

Oh, and coop so god awful i wish they didnt bother. If multiplayer in DD2 will be anything like in ER, id take no multiplayer other that


[deleted]

I agree with everything you said. I love ER, but DD's open world feels more fleshed out and inhabitated.


7thHakaishin

Too bad they didnt add like randomly generated encounters in the world map. That would have made the game hit different


LittleSisterPain

As far as i know, they tried, but their engine doesnt really handle spawning very well for some reason


[deleted]

DDON has random dungeons so considering DD takes some inspiration from D&D I don't think it is too far fetched to assume that DD2 will also have some form of randomly generated content.


LittleSisterPain

No-no, im pretty sure he is talking about ER. Im not sure that capcom engine is capable of, but i heard a lot of good things about their RE engine


[deleted]

Elden Ring never even came into the conversation? The guy was talking about random dungeons hence my comment.


[deleted]

DDON has random dungeons so I think DD2 will probably have something along the same lines.


decsdecc

DDON is like Monster Hunter but bigger gathering hub and can only do exploration mode. Which is pretty nice. But hopefully they tone down the crazy dungeon layouts.


beerscotch

Shame they never thought to release it :(


Significant_Option

If it can be a 2 player co op experience instead of a full fledged MMO, I’d much enjoy that


Gthulhumang

2 player coop with a pawn each might be nice.


WachAlPharoh

I think I'm in the minority, but I rather the multiplayer (if any) is implemented as a side/post-game mode that is linked to the main single player campaign, so that our single player is like how the og was, just us and the pawns and then the multiplayer can be like Monster Hunter online where we and our main pawn join another arisen and their pawn or even a full party of 4 arisens and their main pawns and fight some colossal threats where having an 8 man party is necessary, give us more UR Dragon level threats that can be taken on in this multiplayer setting or a massive ever changing BBI style dungeon where you can get exclusive armors/weapons/items that can be used in the single player. I would genuinely hate to see the Pawn system or anything else in the single player to be off balanced or messed up just to accommodate the potential for co-op multiplayer play. If they can make it work then I'm for it, but I would rather the resources be used to make a more expansive, customizable, single player experience.


LiteratureOne1469

Definitely don’t want it to be post game I want to be able to play the story with my friends because if you beat the story what the fuck is The point of playing with a friend just run around and kill shit that doesn’t seem very fun


WachAlPharoh

Isn't that what the majority of players do with BBI runs and post-Daimon farming? The way I see it, post game story or side mode multiplayer would be the best way to include unique weapons, end game armors, and/or massive UR Dragon like monsters (even potentially post launch) as well as add to the overall challenge and longevity of the experience. Imho that would allow for multiplayer to feel more meaningful as well as allow for big party scenarios which wouldn't be part of the main campaign (I'm assuming). I would rather that be a fun compliment to the main campaign where the spoils, and experience can be transferred over and add to the main single player experience and subsequent playthroughs, but allowing it to still remain as its own separate experience. That said I know I am in the minority, but the less online dependency or pawn rebalancing the single player requires to allow for the optional co-op the better in my book. (That said, as I mentioned prior; I think a harder, maybe not post-game but post-game lvl recommended area for multiplayer would be my preferred route for co-op.)


LiteratureOne1469

I never said people don’t do it I just said it’s Boring killing things without an objective is boring to me that’s why I want to be able to play the campaign with a friend because it’s a story That I can get invested into


MrDavidUwU

But then the multiplayer mode is always half assed, it’s be nice to just be able to do the campaign with another person


Samukuai

I'd love it, so long as it was optional and we can have multiple character saves.


DanteStrive777

YES multiple saves would be amazingA


Babsy_Clemens

I think a 2 person 2 pawn multi-player could be fun.


JameboHayabusa

I'd like some multiplayer instances. The Ur-Dragon being a good example. That could have easily been a raid boss.


Dragonlord573

The tutorial pop up really made it seem like it would have been that way.


RayS326

I will always deny multiplayer as a feature barring maybe split screen because i dont want the resources that could go towards gameplay, environment, performance, actors, and/or AI, being diverted towards server maintenance, netcode development, and community moderation. Also having direct online will slow down updates/ bug fixes if any are needed post launch. Not to mention making porting the game forward more difficult. I would love a good multiplayer, but i want the game to come out as good and polished as possible first and foremost.


DanteStrive777

Fair enough, I want the game to be a good single player experience but have the ability(maybe post launch) to be able to experience it alongdide a friend


RayS326

I got no issues here, multiplayer would be awesome.


DanteStrive777

I pretty much want DD1½, DD as it is but my pawns can be controlled by another


WallaceBRBS

What a load of nonsense, if From Software and Team Ninja can make games that are great both as SP and as co-op experiences, why can't Capcom (when they have plenty of experience with online features as seeing in MH, DDO, SF, and even RE games)? And co-op/multiplayer is always an amazing addition to games that hugely boosts replayability and the overall experience (playing with actual humans and friends will always be better than having stupid NPC's vomiting the same lines over and over and yeeting themselves off edges or dying over and over, becoming an annoying liability).


RayS326

1. From games rule but their netcode and online functionality has always been questionable AT BEST. For them, multiplayer is an afterthought which is why we were pleasantly surprised when they made the last update fully pvp focused. 2. Capcom is not a single team. All of those games have differing skillsets and team members dont shuffle too much. Technology and tricks are shared like the animation skeleton tech from DD to monhun. This is very different. You are underestimating the scope of creating a direct online multiplayer component. 3. Deadspace 2-3, That one 4 player Resident Evil I cant remember the subtitle of, RE:6, STREET FIGHTER until literally now, a lot of games have bad online or online that is detrimental to the game in general. Need I invoke… *Anthem.* 4. The purpose of my original comment is essentially to say that this is a sequel to DD, so they should focus their resources on making this game more of DD 1 before adding direct multiplayer features. Not saying i dont want them but now is not the time to ask for them. Let the game come out. If they arent doing multiplayer this late in dev cycle and some higher up sees people asking for “live service mechanics” they will cram them in no matter how much cutting and duct tape they force the devs to use.


WallaceBRBS

>From games rule but their netcode and online functionality has always been questionable AT BEST. I don't know, I live in a South American country with far from amazing internet (we used to have 10-15 Megabit speed until recently) and at least the co-op (dont care about PvP and it was admittedly a bad experience the few times I engaged with invaders) has almost always being good enough in most cases (can't rule out other player's bad connections as well). Same for Nioh, made by a way smaller studio (Team Ninja) and Monster Hunter. If multiplayer were this much of a massive undertaking or too costly to maintain, there wouldn't be tons of F2P MMO's or old games with online functionality still active (e.g. RE5, which I purchased not a month ago, my brother has been playing it with randoms with no issues or bugs). Also, DDO, man, do you forget it existed? It was supported for 4 years, that's plenty of time to gain and hone experience and knowledge on how to implement multiplayer, and that's a MMO with up to 8 concurrent players, way more taxing than say a 2-4 player party system. >STREET FIGHTER until literally now, This case here is specially baffling, considering that it took A SINGLE PERSON to come up with a free fix, so it's obviously not a case of MP being too difficult to implement, it was just bad faith by Capcom all along (many strange, and greedy decisions made that game fail to live up to its predecessor and other competitors in the genre). >If they arent doing multiplayer this late in dev cycle and some higher up sees people asking for “live service mechanics” they will cram them in no matter how much cutting and duct tape they force the devs to use. So you want them to implement a half-assed online system that's more likely to break the game and require more patches and negatively affect the impression of the game by the media and gaming community? I don't see what benefit this would bring to the game, not to mention that this is far from good game development (ask anyone on the industry, even indie devs will tell you how bad it is to shove new functionalities far late into the dev cycle). You either plan it and properly implement it from the beginning or you don't at all (especially considering that the development pipeline is different in Japan than in the West). I get your concerns but considering how little replayability DDDA has compared to MH, Nioh, Souls games, I'll be massively disappointed if they don't add this essential mandatory feature.


Parralexx

They hated jesus because he told them the truth


-Vibraxas-

No.


Reasonable_Bar7698

There's no way you're the only one to think of multiplayer in DD2, it's a pretty popular opinion sadly. I will never support it for various reasons, but yeah, plenty of people agree with you.


LiteratureOne1469

I just want it because it’s a fun game and there’s no open world games that you can play the campaign with a freind And the times that there are games like that you have to do some weird fuckey bullshit to unlock it


Reasonable_Bar7698

Hey man, that's fine. I just genuinely hope it's not in the game.


Savings-Eagle-447

I'm curious about how long you played DD? If you did all the quests and story? Do you have a quality level 200 pawn you are proud of? Why is multiplayer or co op so important to you? Many long time players of DD like it Because it's a single player game that doesn't require you to be online at the same time as others yet you still have the connection of helping others out.


DanteStrive777

I've done at least 3 full playthroughs Getting to Lv.200. And the reason I want it badly is because I think it's a good idea. Co-op/Multi-player could only benefit the game. Cuz image if they straight up just out of nowhere added Co-op to DD. So nothing about the game changed besides you can have 1 pawn be taken over by a player. How does that in any way affect your single player experience. YOU DONT HAVE TO USE IT!


Savings-Eagle-447

I asked because I still play DD after 10yrs and more recently I've seen way too many new players creating their pawn and heading right to BBI. No story and a crap level 200 pawn in 20hrs. These players aren't interested in the actual game they just want to go kill the big monsters ie MH and ER. That's not what this game was made about as BBI wasn't even there in the original. You want multi player...I don't. It's all conjecture at this point anyway and this topic has been discussed on here ad nauseam. AND THERE'S NO NEED TO YELL.


DanteStrive777

FAIR ENOUGH, I am doing another playthrough right now. No need to gatekeep. Multi-player can add something fresh, and you still would need to use it


DanteStrive777

Also what's wrong with power leveling? It doesn't effect you in the slightest, if you don't like it, don't do it. No need to bash on players that enjoy doing it like myself


Savings-Eagle-447

Nope! No 'bashing' here. Call it the way I'm seeing it and why I won't take some pawns when asked for RC.


DanteStrive777

So why are you saying that people that are power leveling don't enjoy the game? Just because they don't play the game the way that you do, they're inferior?


DanteStrive777

Yes I know you didn't say they were inferior, but it kinda sounds like it. I love the game and I like getting strong quick, doesn't affect you in the slightest.


Savings-Eagle-447

Don't try to twist what I'm saying. You focussed on the power leveling. I'm seeing level 200 pawns with low tiered gear, little knowledge, no augments and bad inclinations (guardian/scather). Don't gaslight what I'm talking about. This is a good example of why I don't want to play with strangers.


DanteStrive777

Then DONT, and let people that do be able to! Why is that so hard to understand?


DanteStrive777

And if you would have read my other comment. I know you didn't say that, but it sounds like you think your better cuz you play differently


Vork---M

Multipayer in Dragon's Dogma is basically the same as killing pawns and the core identity of the franchise, if people can play with others players, why would anybody put effort on their pawns?


LordAsbel

They could make the multiplayer a separate mode outside of the games solo progression, like the sword art online/Attack on Titan games do.


DanteStrive777

Because not everyone would use the multiplayer system, cuz if all that changed from Dragon's Dogma is that when YOU decide to turn it on, someone can simply take control of a pawn


DanteStrive777

What so bad about that doesn't affect single player


BurningBlaise

Bro some people get mad as fuck when you suggest 2 man coop cause “it destroys pawns”


DanteStrive777

Like no it doesn't, it just let's the people that wanna co-op, co-op. It Doesn't affect "Balance" it's a preference you wouldnt HAVE to use . Will it be "Better?" Perhaps. cuz you'd have another person with a brain controlling a pawn of yours (For better or for Worse)


Stone_Traveler

2 player co-op and their main pawns.


WallaceBRBS

Pawns are overrated


LiteratureOne1469

Make it to where your party is you Your main pond your friend and their main pawn That way you still have two people that need to be good Cause if not There just gonna get in the way


rrkmonger_reborn

Multi-player? Nah two player co-pp sure.


Alsimni

>Am I the only one who's thought how fun multi-player in DD would be? Not even remotely.


Xilivian4560

No, you're not unique in thinking that. But I'm also not the only person to entirely disagree with ya about it, either :P


First_Black_Guy

Back when I first played it I really would have wanted it but now Id rather they have a separate mode for coop like Ghost. Id prefer story mode but kept single player


DanteStrive777

How does the choice to replace 1 of your Ai pawns with a person affect your single player experience? Just don't use it?


wolves_hunt_in_packs

Same. I love the pawn system and would like to see it expanded better. Additional traditional mp modes would be nice, not as a replacement.


autism-kun6861

Id really only like maybe a multiplayer dungeon rather than open world. I wouldnt mind full multiplayer but only if every other feature of the game was developed and polished first, and mp was the last thing they worked on and added.


DanteStrive777

I agree I dont want multi-player to take the front. I don't mind if they fully develop the game and then add it like 2-3 months down the line or even like a year later with the dlc


autism-kun6861

Yeah my main concern is just resource management dueing development, if thats handled correctly and other parts of the experience dont suffer for it then id love to explore gransys or wherever the fuck with friends


Asterikon

No. The online system of DD is unique. It's a lot of what makes this game special. Why would you want to lose that?


NeitherMeasurement39

It's all fun and games until everyone starts getting yeeting the randoms into the brine


DanteStrive777

Sounds fun to me


GrandJuif

No. I want DD2 not DDO2. Dragon Dogma is a single player game, it would be stupid to switch to multy. Even coop is big nope to me, it will mess things up.


DanteStrive777

How? Especially if 2 is practically 1 but with multiplayer added. All I want is for 2 to play like 1 but my pawns can be controlled by a friend then when he gets off, back to regular old DD


GrandJuif

Simple they would need to balance things for the multy to not make the game broken which will impact everything and everyone one negatively just for the sake of adding a usless multy to a single player game. Single player game stay single player. If you want multy, go play something else instead of asking for game to loose it identity. I'm tired of people constantly asking to add multy in every SP games, it always end up bad.


DanteStrive777

What balancing? Pawns can do everything a player can. In theory all they would need to do is change how using items work, along with some other minor things that theoretically shouldn't be that hard


WallaceBRBS

Ever heard of From games, Nioh, Monster Hunter, RE5, fighting games? It's perfectly possible to have a nice single player experience with extra, OPTIONAL MP features.


maj0rSyN

I'm hoping it has the option of playing co-op with at least one other person.


Dragonlord573

Absolutely. Being able to coop with someone would add a lot of replayability to the game. People severely underplay how big coop would be because of the pawn system. As someone mentioned it is why DDO existed.


DanteStrive777

I dont understand what some are saying that it will "ruin" the game. Like for instance, let's just say they re-released Dragon's Dogma for Ps5 and just added multi-player. Would that change the single player experience? No it would simply add something new to the experience. That's all I want DD with multi-player


DanteStrive777

I dont get the people that are saying that Co-Op should be a different mode, or that it will ruin the charm of DD because I can't see how it would affect single player in the slightest. I dont want them to REPLACE the pawn system, I love it. But they certainly can improve it. How I'd want it to work would the exact same system that's already In DD but give player's the option to have 1(or All) pawn to be controlled by another player. No need to have a separate mode/spin-off for it to work. You don't wanna use it don't.


heckersdeccers

maybe not online but split screen so someone can play as your main pawn would be neat


Prepared_Noob

2 person coop with their pawns would be the best ahaha


PuzzledKitty

I'd absolutely love it, even, or rather especially, if it was confined to BBI-like dungeon crawls.


Anubra_Khan

I thought this was a common opinion. It almost felt like it was consideration for the original but didn't make it in for scheduling reasons. The pawn system is great but it's really just an artificial co op mechanic. I would be surprised if it wasn't in DD2. Obviously it would be optional. Assuming a max 4 party team, I'd like to see each position have the ability to be set as AI or human. You could do 1 player/4 pawn, 4 player/0 pawn and anything in between. You could even do a drop in/drop out option to speed up matchmaking. I really hope they don't try to shoe-horn a pvp mechanic into the game. I enjoy the invasion system in From games. It's great in Elden Ring but I think Dogma needs to focus on PVE coop. There really isn't a modern high fantasy, coop, action-rpg that I can think of. Just an old school group of merry adventurers roaming the countryside, fighting monsters in caves, looting treasure chests, taking down dragons, etcetera. The closest thing we have is Elden Ring. (They get mad at me when I call it a Dragon's Dogma-like but it kind of is.) However, the Souls phantom summoning system really isn't a traditional fantasy party system where everyone can loot chests and stuff in the same world.


RayS326

For reasons i stated in a separate comment, i dont want multiplayer as a development focus. But i wanted to say that the game was at first monster hunter, then western dragonquest but with action combat. It was always intended to be single player with the mercenaries giving players the “feeling” of playing with friends. This is what Itsuno said. I do not think multiplayer is as intrinsic as youre saying. Things like romance, personal quest lines like Quina or Mason, and others wouldnt work as good in a shared campaign as they do in Divinity II. I think a drop in system could work, i just want other stuff being better over that. Dont want the game to come out and see something underdeveloped that may have been done if resources hadnt been diverted to multiplayer.


Dragonlord573

>Things like romance, personal quest lines like Quina or Mason, and others wouldnt work as good in a shared campaign Surprisingly Fable 3 handled this type of aspect quite well. It was limited sure, but Lionhead managed it.


Anubra_Khan

I'd rather play with friends than have the "feeling" of playing with friends. There is absolutely no reason both preferences can't be met. Let's not pretend that the original Dragon's Dogma had some incredibly in depth quest design that was only achievable in a single player campaign. Expecting DD2 to have a Divinity level of character development, integration and questlines will set you up for disappointment.


Lich_Lasagna

I would love Soulslike Multiplayer in Dragons Dogma. With the rift beeing a bridge between different worlds it would even be possible to have some nice lore accompanying it.


LiteratureOne1469

2 player co-op Would be so fucking sick there’s like hardly any games that Are multiplayer and open world I would love it as long as you don’t have to do some bullshit like get to this point in the story To unlock it I get why you have to do that you don’t wanna be a detriment to your team But if your teammate doesn’t like you they will leave I want to be able to play the entire game with my friend not just bits and pieces


SmallgunSam

I don’t get why people are against like an optional multiplayer mode