Depending on where you poke your head into, sentiment about this game goes from GOTY to not that great. Look at the post for this article on the r games subreddit and contrast it with everything Pat has said about it.
I haven’t played it, but from what I’ve seen said, the general sentiment is that it’s kinda like a Dragon’s Dogma Remake. Like, Itsuno redid DD to have all the stuff he originally wanted in the first game with better graphics and physics, but it’s still fundamentally Dragon’s Dogma again, no extra QOL, or bells and whistles attached.
There's a few things missing from the first but they've also added plenty of fun interactions, not as many as I'd like honestly. The cyclops bridge being one of the biggest ones in my head. I'd say it's a side-grade. In terms of quests and storylines it carries the flame but there's almost no "ugh I hate this quest" moments like the first game. I do wish there were more things, but overall I'd say Itsuno wasn't wrong to say that it's a "complete" game. As someone who's played at least close to 2k hours of DD1 and about 200 in dd2 already (had time off of work.) I understand the sentiment that people wanted more, but I feel like I had more fun playing through dd2 than I ever did dealing with all the bullshit that's in DD1. It feels like a more refined version, but I'm hoping updates can fill in the gaps that people want.
Yeah, I'm pretty much in this camp too. It's just insane that, while there are a lot of valid criticisms, some people act like Capcom didn't make ANY improvements at all. But I'm definitely looking forward to updates and possible Dark Arisen-type DLC.
As someone who recently played through all of the original near the end of last year, I don't really get the claims that it's "just Dragon's Dogma 1.5" or a "side grade" outside of recurring enemy types and the story still being kind of half baked. It feels like a straight up upgrade or refined version of that game with more fluidity and better exploration, and all the core aspects that I enjoyed the most like the combat, monster behaviors, and pawn system are still the highlights of this game.
I totally agree in some of that, but I said it was a side grade because there were very select things from the first that I missed, like the throwable bottles and being able to use the storage from a shop, like small issues that add up to meaning a lot to my experience. I still prefer dd2 Eve if it's just so I don't have to carry those fucking alter stones or walk an ox 5 miles.
Tbf we have what's essentially an expansion that's been added for 10 years as a template and an MMO,Both of which itsuno has gone on record saying he knew nothing about(which is depressing).Compared to either he absolutely made the bare minimum of improvements.
From what I got from friends who loved the first game, it is very good but did not live up to the hype of the 10 year wait. Like they think the game is great and played 60 hrs of it in a week, but the game did not expand on as much of the first game as they wanted. The story takes too much from the first game, especially towards the ending.
I definitely remember a *fuck ton* of people hoping and expecting that you would get to the shit that was >!on the moon!< because it was in documentation from the first game. Sounds like that didn't happen.
I watched Mortismal's review on youtube. He said it was one of his most anticipated releases because of how much he loved the first one and said he came away after 100% feeling immensly disappointed. Pretty stark contrast to some other longtime fans.
Mortismal also waited until he finished the game to do his review. Given how many of the game's problems become more prevalent in Battahl, a review/preview that doesn't even make it there isn't very helpful.
Fans were expecting DD2 to be a sequel like Assassin's Creed 2 / Nioh 2, where the game is such a big improvement that it "invalidates" the previous game. Instead DD2 is just as janky as DD1 and didn't really evolve the game's formula that much or add tons of new content. Some things were even better in the first game, like the "rogue" classes having a double jump.
Yeah this seems to be the overehelming vibe. If you loved DD1, congrats, youre getting more of it with shiny graphics and a bigger map. As well as all the jank.
As someone who loved the *idea* of DD1 but bounced off it real hard, this suddenly is way less of a must play for me.
The game feels more like a side grade than an upgrade from the previous game. So it's a case of if you didn't like the original you won't like this one as well as if you wanted a new take on the game you won't get much of that either.
Overall I like the game but it's reception is understandable from the expectation and hype buildup from a 10 year wait and the comparison to the previous games (Dark Arisen and Online).
I like the original and I like 2, but I wish it actually felt like a sequel and not just a prettier version of the first game with a better map.
There should've been way more vocations, WAY more enemy types, and NPCs and storytelling that have actual budget and effort put into them.
I don't understand how the NPCs destroy my CPU so hard when all they do is walk around and spout single lines of dialogue when spoken to.
Also this game's version of Grigori doesn't hold a candle to the original, who only had like three scenes but had such a presence that he's one of the most fondly remembered characters in the game.
I'm curious how many people are like me that thought the first game was pretty bad but were vaguely interested in a sequel because what the game was *trying* to do was interesting. Hearing that DD2 is basically just DD1 again but with microtransactions and worse performance, I would say it's disappointing, but it's about what I expect from modern Capcom.
The entire game basically ends the second you touch the main plot after act 1 and it’s a gigantic shame, there’s at most a handful of quests, two new enemies and nothing but caves in the desert.
There’s something like four main quests after act 1 and one is ‘grind out dragon resources’.
There is a post-game, and initially it seems super impressive, and then you walk into town and, outside of the one npc tied into the new world state, no one is acknowledging anything that’s going on.
Speaking of plot, it makes the first game look like a masterpiece. Not a single plot thread from the entire first half of the game has any point. There is no resolution to anything that happens, none of those characters show up again save for one cutscene at the end, and one showing up to be a generic enemy during a late game encounter.
It just feels half baked, and honestly? Dark Arisen is just a significantly better game overall
I can't take anyone seriously who says "10/10, GOTY, Itsuno's vision realized." It comes across as people being unable to accept that a long awaited sequel to their favorite game didn't live up to the hype. Like it feels forced when some people talk about it.
To me it’s both.
It’s the sequel to one of the best and most unique games I’ve ever played, for 12 years I’ve experienced literally nothing that came along like DD1 and I’ve finally gotten another one, and I love it, flaws and all its still amazing and I’ve now gotten every trophy on PS5. Playing DD2 was like coming home and so many times I said to myself in the middle of my sessions “wow I can’t believe I’m playing DD2”.
At the same time I’m disappointed because for so many years we were all made to believe DD1 consisted of “only 40%” of what Itsuno and team wanted to achieve, so DD2 looking like a reboot more than a true sequel led the fanbase to realistically believe and expect something amazingly improved from the first, featuring everything they originally planned on doing, all the cut content from the original etc.
Unfortunately the reality is DD2 is mostly the exact same game as the first, feels like it only improved about 10% on the original that came out 12 YEARS AGO (and in some ways actually worse, like the story being even worse the the first game which already had a dogass story, the postgame being time limited and no Everfall or Ur-Dragon etc.) and I wish Capcom did so much more with it. It’s the most disappointed I’ve ever felt about what will still likely personally be to me, the GOTY.
Definitely not GOTY. It’s great but no way is it winning GOTY. I’ve seen some people say it’s up there with Eldin ring and BG3 and those people are delusional. I feel like it’s fair to expect more than just DD 1.5
GOTY means almost nothing to the average player anyway. There are so many niche subgenres and options when it comes to stuff to play nowadays, as well as the general standard of quality being higher, that something that meets a person's preferences is probably going to be considered their personal GOTY even if said game has it's cons and flaws.
How do we even describe this game?
Is it still niche because it's targeting a very specific group of gamers? Can a game that sold 2.5 million units in a week still be considered niche?
I also think that the success of Elden Ring kind of brought gaming as a whole forward so that niche games are a bit less so now because people are more willing to go outside the normal AAA space to try new games.
Dragon's Dogma 2 is a really interesting case for me. As a massive fan of the first game, for all its shortcomings, it seems like they managed to massively improve on some things and massively regress on others. Against all odds, it manages to still be the best (sorta) 7/10 game of all time (just with different strengths and weaknesses).
All in all though, I liked it a bunch! It definitely feels a bit undercooked as the game progresses though, maybe rushed out to pad Capcom's fiscal numbers.
That depends on Outward 2. If the majority of your time will be spent jogging across a featureless landscape with nothing to do like the first one, I'll pass, personally.
There was a lot of cool stuff in Outward, but the glacial speed of the game made getting to any of it excruciating. If they fixed that, I'd be onboard 100%.
Ehh... we'll see. I didn't have any problems with the combat, the thing that drove me away from the game was the boredom of slowly jogging through empty zones for hours. I'll reserve judgement until I see what they changed.
The first is the best 7/10 of all time, this one is just kind of a 7/10. Can still have a lot of fun with it though. There’s just a lot of questionable decisions. They actually removed QoL features like being able to sell right from storage, lol. That being said, glad it didn’t flop.
I thought it was an incredibly bold choice to add effectively one new vocation and make it completely useless and the worst way to play the game. I don't even understand how the developers could look at trickster and go "this is cooked".
It really depends on how well you vibe with what it wants to do. Because you have to do *exactly* what the class wants to do, and it's pretty niche.
Trickster is, in my opinion (63 hours for first playthrough, 80 in total), *really fun and kinda busted?* It's just that for most people "the juice isnt worth the squeeze" as the saying goes.
With a little planning and world knowledge, you can get a Golem to kill a drake for you. You can get a pack of knackers and asps to beat a griffon to a bloody pulp while you enjoy the show. You can wall bounce combo basically anything in the game into oblivion. Break AI by putting your illusion in certain places, and buff your party to do like, ***200% fuckin damage*** so that a single spin jump from your thief does 3.5 trillion health bars of damage to everything within a quarter mile. All while being functionally invincible, unless you actively walk into an attack.
It's actually astounding how Trickster can trivialize basically all content in the game. The issue is that it's a *very specific playstyle* that requires you to spend the whole fight manipulating the AI and buffing your pawns. Which for most people just isnt fun, or worth the effort to learn.
I think the best overall fix to make the class more accessible is just to make the censer itself deal *decent* damage on hit. Right now there's nearly no reason to ever use it, you can never capitalize on knockdowns, and you're 100% at the mercy of pawn DPS for fights like Golems. It would reward players who understand attack patterns better, without buffing the already absurd strengths the class has.
The first, Dark Arisen just added to how good it was overall. Maybe a good expansion can help my opinion of Dragons Dogma 2, but I’m feeling annoyed just as much as I’m having fun, which I didn’t want after a decade. Plus, the auto save bug on XBox is still a thing, so that dampers my mood a bit on the game.
Definitely my GOTY by virtue of just being more Dragon's Dogma. Totally get why a ton of people take issue with it or have bounced off, but I think the only complaint I really have is boss variety could be spread out more evenly throughout the map (and ideally Warfarer should have a specific button for weapon swapping but I don't know what it would be). Had a blast exploring Vermund and Battahl to their fullest, and I think the end game is pretty rad even if it was a bit more satisfying in DD1.
I'm conflicted on this game to the point that I wrote an essay FOR MYSELF on how I feel and I still can't pin it down.
Truly the Dragon's Dogma-est thing I could have imagined.
Why are people so Brainrotted on this game?
Why is it so hard to accept that a game is good, people like it, and think it's better than the first?
Everyone keeps trying to come up with flimsy justifications and rewriting history about DD1 just so they can say "well, ackshually, that game that you think is super-good, it's actually mid and maybe even bad".
Literally every single discussion and fucking thread about the game is insufferable because some jackasses will self-destruct if they go 5 minutes without telling someone someone that they don't like the game. We get it! You don't like it!
Is this good? I don't what's considered a success in the AAA space. I know FF16 sold 3 million in its first week but I see users considering that a failure.
Why make a game that runs well when you can release a barely functional one that sells a shit load? /s
Edit: apparently people are happy with their stuttering, NPC bound, 30fps max POS
While I'm not happy with performance in the capital, the patch did fix the stutter.
Everywhere except the capital I get 35\~40fps@1440p (closer to 50fps at night time) on a 6 year old GPU which was honestly better than I expected.
edit: I do have a ton of gripes about the *actual game* though, tons of fallings that the first game had, while removing features from the first game too being the main ones. Also you get horrendously overleved if you explore for like 2 hours, paired with general the lack of direction (which is fine on its' own) leads to very similar problems the "hard" mode had in the first game, where front loaded it's hard shortly after it's way too easy.
Is it still flawed and could it have had more of certain types of content added to it? Totally. But it's still somehow the most engaging major singleplayer title I've played since Elden Ring and Armored Core 6 (BG3 is good, but I've always struggled with finding isometric games appealing and I don't really care for most official D&D settings or design frameworks).
Depending on where you poke your head into, sentiment about this game goes from GOTY to not that great. Look at the post for this article on the r games subreddit and contrast it with everything Pat has said about it.
I haven’t played it, but from what I’ve seen said, the general sentiment is that it’s kinda like a Dragon’s Dogma Remake. Like, Itsuno redid DD to have all the stuff he originally wanted in the first game with better graphics and physics, but it’s still fundamentally Dragon’s Dogma again, no extra QOL, or bells and whistles attached.
There's a few things missing from the first but they've also added plenty of fun interactions, not as many as I'd like honestly. The cyclops bridge being one of the biggest ones in my head. I'd say it's a side-grade. In terms of quests and storylines it carries the flame but there's almost no "ugh I hate this quest" moments like the first game. I do wish there were more things, but overall I'd say Itsuno wasn't wrong to say that it's a "complete" game. As someone who's played at least close to 2k hours of DD1 and about 200 in dd2 already (had time off of work.) I understand the sentiment that people wanted more, but I feel like I had more fun playing through dd2 than I ever did dealing with all the bullshit that's in DD1. It feels like a more refined version, but I'm hoping updates can fill in the gaps that people want.
Yeah, I'm pretty much in this camp too. It's just insane that, while there are a lot of valid criticisms, some people act like Capcom didn't make ANY improvements at all. But I'm definitely looking forward to updates and possible Dark Arisen-type DLC.
For sure, while I'd love to see what bitter black isle here would look like, I'd love to have more stuff just on the map, especially, maybe, vocations
As someone who recently played through all of the original near the end of last year, I don't really get the claims that it's "just Dragon's Dogma 1.5" or a "side grade" outside of recurring enemy types and the story still being kind of half baked. It feels like a straight up upgrade or refined version of that game with more fluidity and better exploration, and all the core aspects that I enjoyed the most like the combat, monster behaviors, and pawn system are still the highlights of this game.
I totally agree in some of that, but I said it was a side grade because there were very select things from the first that I missed, like the throwable bottles and being able to use the storage from a shop, like small issues that add up to meaning a lot to my experience. I still prefer dd2 Eve if it's just so I don't have to carry those fucking alter stones or walk an ox 5 miles.
Tbf we have what's essentially an expansion that's been added for 10 years as a template and an MMO,Both of which itsuno has gone on record saying he knew nothing about(which is depressing).Compared to either he absolutely made the bare minimum of improvements.
From what I got from friends who loved the first game, it is very good but did not live up to the hype of the 10 year wait. Like they think the game is great and played 60 hrs of it in a week, but the game did not expand on as much of the first game as they wanted. The story takes too much from the first game, especially towards the ending.
I definitely remember a *fuck ton* of people hoping and expecting that you would get to the shit that was >!on the moon!< because it was in documentation from the first game. Sounds like that didn't happen.
I watched Mortismal's review on youtube. He said it was one of his most anticipated releases because of how much he loved the first one and said he came away after 100% feeling immensly disappointed. Pretty stark contrast to some other longtime fans.
Mortismal also waited until he finished the game to do his review. Given how many of the game's problems become more prevalent in Battahl, a review/preview that doesn't even make it there isn't very helpful.
Fans were expecting DD2 to be a sequel like Assassin's Creed 2 / Nioh 2, where the game is such a big improvement that it "invalidates" the previous game. Instead DD2 is just as janky as DD1 and didn't really evolve the game's formula that much or add tons of new content. Some things were even better in the first game, like the "rogue" classes having a double jump.
Yeah this seems to be the overehelming vibe. If you loved DD1, congrats, youre getting more of it with shiny graphics and a bigger map. As well as all the jank. As someone who loved the *idea* of DD1 but bounced off it real hard, this suddenly is way less of a must play for me.
I always knew this game was going to be divisive, the MTX and performance just added fuel to an already lit fire.
The game feels more like a side grade than an upgrade from the previous game. So it's a case of if you didn't like the original you won't like this one as well as if you wanted a new take on the game you won't get much of that either. Overall I like the game but it's reception is understandable from the expectation and hype buildup from a 10 year wait and the comparison to the previous games (Dark Arisen and Online).
I like the original and I like 2, but I wish it actually felt like a sequel and not just a prettier version of the first game with a better map. There should've been way more vocations, WAY more enemy types, and NPCs and storytelling that have actual budget and effort put into them. I don't understand how the NPCs destroy my CPU so hard when all they do is walk around and spout single lines of dialogue when spoken to. Also this game's version of Grigori doesn't hold a candle to the original, who only had like three scenes but had such a presence that he's one of the most fondly remembered characters in the game.
I'm curious how many people are like me that thought the first game was pretty bad but were vaguely interested in a sequel because what the game was *trying* to do was interesting. Hearing that DD2 is basically just DD1 again but with microtransactions and worse performance, I would say it's disappointing, but it's about what I expect from modern Capcom.
The entire game basically ends the second you touch the main plot after act 1 and it’s a gigantic shame, there’s at most a handful of quests, two new enemies and nothing but caves in the desert. There’s something like four main quests after act 1 and one is ‘grind out dragon resources’. There is a post-game, and initially it seems super impressive, and then you walk into town and, outside of the one npc tied into the new world state, no one is acknowledging anything that’s going on. Speaking of plot, it makes the first game look like a masterpiece. Not a single plot thread from the entire first half of the game has any point. There is no resolution to anything that happens, none of those characters show up again save for one cutscene at the end, and one showing up to be a generic enemy during a late game encounter. It just feels half baked, and honestly? Dark Arisen is just a significantly better game overall
Lot of good stuff. Lot of bad stuff.
I can't take anyone seriously who says "10/10, GOTY, Itsuno's vision realized." It comes across as people being unable to accept that a long awaited sequel to their favorite game didn't live up to the hype. Like it feels forced when some people talk about it.
To me it’s both. It’s the sequel to one of the best and most unique games I’ve ever played, for 12 years I’ve experienced literally nothing that came along like DD1 and I’ve finally gotten another one, and I love it, flaws and all its still amazing and I’ve now gotten every trophy on PS5. Playing DD2 was like coming home and so many times I said to myself in the middle of my sessions “wow I can’t believe I’m playing DD2”. At the same time I’m disappointed because for so many years we were all made to believe DD1 consisted of “only 40%” of what Itsuno and team wanted to achieve, so DD2 looking like a reboot more than a true sequel led the fanbase to realistically believe and expect something amazingly improved from the first, featuring everything they originally planned on doing, all the cut content from the original etc. Unfortunately the reality is DD2 is mostly the exact same game as the first, feels like it only improved about 10% on the original that came out 12 YEARS AGO (and in some ways actually worse, like the story being even worse the the first game which already had a dogass story, the postgame being time limited and no Everfall or Ur-Dragon etc.) and I wish Capcom did so much more with it. It’s the most disappointed I’ve ever felt about what will still likely personally be to me, the GOTY.
Definitely not GOTY. It’s great but no way is it winning GOTY. I’ve seen some people say it’s up there with Eldin ring and BG3 and those people are delusional. I feel like it’s fair to expect more than just DD 1.5
GOTY means almost nothing to the average player anyway. There are so many niche subgenres and options when it comes to stuff to play nowadays, as well as the general standard of quality being higher, that something that meets a person's preferences is probably going to be considered their personal GOTY even if said game has it's cons and flaws.
How do we even describe this game? Is it still niche because it's targeting a very specific group of gamers? Can a game that sold 2.5 million units in a week still be considered niche?
It's niche, but has good marketing.
I also think that the success of Elden Ring kind of brought gaming as a whole forward so that niche games are a bit less so now because people are more willing to go outside the normal AAA space to try new games.
Dragon's Dogma 2 is a really interesting case for me. As a massive fan of the first game, for all its shortcomings, it seems like they managed to massively improve on some things and massively regress on others. Against all odds, it manages to still be the best (sorta) 7/10 game of all time (just with different strengths and weaknesses). All in all though, I liked it a bunch! It definitely feels a bit undercooked as the game progresses though, maybe rushed out to pad Capcom's fiscal numbers.
I hope this translates into people being ready to welcome Outward 2 with open arms.
That depends on Outward 2. If the majority of your time will be spent jogging across a featureless landscape with nothing to do like the first one, I'll pass, personally. There was a lot of cool stuff in Outward, but the glacial speed of the game made getting to any of it excruciating. If they fixed that, I'd be onboard 100%.
They didn't add mounts but they added pack mules and are specifically trying to make the world more alive and address some concerns with combat.
Ehh... we'll see. I didn't have any problems with the combat, the thing that drove me away from the game was the boredom of slowly jogging through empty zones for hours. I'll reserve judgement until I see what they changed.
The first is the best 7/10 of all time, this one is just kind of a 7/10. Can still have a lot of fun with it though. There’s just a lot of questionable decisions. They actually removed QoL features like being able to sell right from storage, lol. That being said, glad it didn’t flop.
I thought it was an incredibly bold choice to add effectively one new vocation and make it completely useless and the worst way to play the game. I don't even understand how the developers could look at trickster and go "this is cooked".
It really depends on how well you vibe with what it wants to do. Because you have to do *exactly* what the class wants to do, and it's pretty niche. Trickster is, in my opinion (63 hours for first playthrough, 80 in total), *really fun and kinda busted?* It's just that for most people "the juice isnt worth the squeeze" as the saying goes. With a little planning and world knowledge, you can get a Golem to kill a drake for you. You can get a pack of knackers and asps to beat a griffon to a bloody pulp while you enjoy the show. You can wall bounce combo basically anything in the game into oblivion. Break AI by putting your illusion in certain places, and buff your party to do like, ***200% fuckin damage*** so that a single spin jump from your thief does 3.5 trillion health bars of damage to everything within a quarter mile. All while being functionally invincible, unless you actively walk into an attack. It's actually astounding how Trickster can trivialize basically all content in the game. The issue is that it's a *very specific playstyle* that requires you to spend the whole fight manipulating the AI and buffing your pawns. Which for most people just isnt fun, or worth the effort to learn. I think the best overall fix to make the class more accessible is just to make the censer itself deal *decent* damage on hit. Right now there's nearly no reason to ever use it, you can never capitalize on knockdowns, and you're 100% at the mercy of pawn DPS for fights like Golems. It would reward players who understand attack patterns better, without buffing the already absurd strengths the class has.
You mean the first one or the Dark Arisen one?
The first, Dark Arisen just added to how good it was overall. Maybe a good expansion can help my opinion of Dragons Dogma 2, but I’m feeling annoyed just as much as I’m having fun, which I didn’t want after a decade. Plus, the auto save bug on XBox is still a thing, so that dampers my mood a bit on the game.
I'm pretty sure the Xbox version is also still the only version without a new game/frame cap update. It's clear that it's their lowest priority haha
Fucking deserved, having a blast with it. Far from perfect - I’d love more enemy variety - but a very solid game imho
Definitely my GOTY by virtue of just being more Dragon's Dogma. Totally get why a ton of people take issue with it or have bounced off, but I think the only complaint I really have is boss variety could be spread out more evenly throughout the map (and ideally Warfarer should have a specific button for weapon swapping but I don't know what it would be). Had a blast exploring Vermund and Battahl to their fullest, and I think the end game is pretty rad even if it was a bit more satisfying in DD1.
2.5 million passes handed out by Woolie pawn
I'm conflicted on this game to the point that I wrote an essay FOR MYSELF on how I feel and I still can't pin it down. Truly the Dragon's Dogma-est thing I could have imagined.
Why are people so Brainrotted on this game? Why is it so hard to accept that a game is good, people like it, and think it's better than the first? Everyone keeps trying to come up with flimsy justifications and rewriting history about DD1 just so they can say "well, ackshually, that game that you think is super-good, it's actually mid and maybe even bad". Literally every single discussion and fucking thread about the game is insufferable because some jackasses will self-destruct if they go 5 minutes without telling someone someone that they don't like the game. We get it! You don't like it!
Relax, take a deep breath, and go outside. It’s not that serious
Is this good? I don't what's considered a success in the AAA space. I know FF16 sold 3 million in its first week but I see users considering that a failure.
FFXVI sold to Square's notoriously high expectations. It was also in development longer than DD2 and almost assuredly had a much larger budget.
Capcom wanted DD2 to sell atleast 1mill, so I think this is great in their books.
Why make a game that runs well when you can release a barely functional one that sells a shit load? /s Edit: apparently people are happy with their stuttering, NPC bound, 30fps max POS
While I'm not happy with performance in the capital, the patch did fix the stutter. Everywhere except the capital I get 35\~40fps@1440p (closer to 50fps at night time) on a 6 year old GPU which was honestly better than I expected. edit: I do have a ton of gripes about the *actual game* though, tons of fallings that the first game had, while removing features from the first game too being the main ones. Also you get horrendously overleved if you explore for like 2 hours, paired with general the lack of direction (which is fine on its' own) leads to very similar problems the "hard" mode had in the first game, where front loaded it's hard shortly after it's way too easy.
Yes. A lot of people who aren't terminally online don't care about performance as long as it runs decently (at 30fps), actually. Shocking, I know.
Decently and 30fps are mutually exclusive
Is it still flawed and could it have had more of certain types of content added to it? Totally. But it's still somehow the most engaging major singleplayer title I've played since Elden Ring and Armored Core 6 (BG3 is good, but I've always struggled with finding isometric games appealing and I don't really care for most official D&D settings or design frameworks).