Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen vs The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

  • 70 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for tiggytog
Posted by TiggyTog (299 posts) 1 year, 5 months ago

Poll: Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen vs The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (52 votes)

Dragon's Dogma 46%
Skyrim 54%

It's time to put the debate to rest, with Skyrim getting released for PS4 and Xbox One, and Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen just recently being announced for PS4 and Xbox One, which is the better game today?

We're talking PC for the most part, but if you've only played on consoles thats fine too.

Mods aren't allowed into the equasion, but all DLC for both games are allowed.

Now that we got that out of the way, discuss!

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
#51 Edited by RSM-HQ (7514 posts) -

@mecha_frieza: DMC4 Special Edition is already on PS4/ X1/ and P.C. as a heavily rebalanced and added Remaster. So adding that towards the collection would make the PS2 trilogy more costly if they included the Definitive edition. I personally don't have much love for DMC4 anyway, while the combat is excellent its issues are very similar to Dragon's Dogma and fails in many other areas. Dragon's Dogmas saving grace was the extended BitterBlack Isle which original owners couldn't even access.

I'm hoping with the extra time a DMC5 is very special because Dante has not impressed me since DMC3. Which is one of my favorite games of all time.

As for Deep Down, I'd be surprised if it hadn't already been scrapped and resources stolen for other projects. It was going to be an always online/ F2P/ micro-transaction game built around. . You guessed it/ Lootboxes. So wouldn't shock me if its been quietly killed due towards the backlash on all those hated practices. Capcom is only now trying to win people back and Deep Down was more focused on the marketing strategy from bad years in the company.

Avatar image for ruthaford_jive
#52 Posted by ruthaford_jive (518 posts) -

Skyrim overall, but DD had better combat and monster fighting by far.

Avatar image for hamodnation
#53 Edited by Hamodnation (5 posts) -

Nicee

Avatar image for tiggytog
#54 Posted by TiggyTog (299 posts) -

@mecha_frieza: It's not the most polished, but its definitely a great RPG, skyrim just doesn't have the same impact, it doesn't feel as "Grand" as Dogma.

There is no feeling like climbing on a monster and slashing away at it as it hurdles into the ground, then taking advantage of its weakpoint and casting a fireball on it, or raining meteors down from the sky and watching them do massive damage to your opponents.

I guess it could be argued for melee combat in favor of Dark Souls, but magic and archery, it just can't, same with Skyrim.

The shouts and stuff are cool, but the combat simply has more variety, and more depth, it feels better to hit people and creatures in Dogma because you feel the impact, when you attack something in Skyrim it feels like you're hitting a training dummy in my experience.

There aren't any twists and turns in Skyrim's main story, it's just rather straight-forward for the most part, whereas Dogma has incredible twist that makes the story much, much better.

In Dogma everything relies on you, the class system is very robust, the skills are interesting and a visual spectacle to behold, the combat is so over-the-top and incredible.

Whereas in most other games you slash away at the ankles of monsters, in this game you climb on em and stab em in the face, and you can SEE the damage you're doing to them, you see them getting more bloody, bruised, and battered, you know that you're wearing them down, its subtle, and thats what makes "wearing them down" a bit better.

In other games you just watch as they like, hunch over for a second, for you to come in and do some damage.

I loved Dark Souls, HOWEVER, I never did beat it, because I was pulled into Dogma.

It was christmas, I got pulled into Dark Souls immediately with the challenges and the combat, dodging, blocking and parrying, backstabbing. I'd never seen a game with combat so good, I got to blighttown, and I got stuck, got frustrated, and decided to switch over to Dogma (which was another game I got on that same christmas, both were for ps3).

I was flabbergasted, the combat in that game made me rethink the combat of every game ever, to me, who always thought Skyrim was the be-all end-all RPG, who marveled at the first-person melee combat mechanics in THAT game. Dogma shocked my system completely and I haven't been able to play any game the same. I eventually tried to go back to Dark Souls, but it seemed so boring in comparison combat-wise, whereas in Dogma I was having a great time in the game, exposing the monster's weak point, climbing onto a Griffin and watching it spin into the ground, it's wings all bloodied and broken, it was pure jubilation.

I could ignore the black bars at both ends, the ferrystones, all of it, because the combat was just THAT good, every time I'd try to play another awesome game like Skyrim or Dark Souls, Witcher 2, or even Monster Hunter, I just couldn't, I couldn't get back into them because they didn't seem satisfying enough.

The argument of Dogma vs Skyrim has been going on since they were first both released, it's still going on to this day. It's probably going on in another forum right now, we won't be the end to it.

Some of the characters sucked in Dogma, but the story overall, the lore of that particular game, the story its trying to tell on top of the combat, is all awesome.

Avatar image for zombieproof
#55 Edited by ZombieProof (359 posts) -

@RSM-HQ said:

@nibbin1191: An Action RPG and an Action RPG, both of which have open world design. If you can't compare games considered to be in the exact same genre. . . what can you, nothing?

I'm fond of the debate because it brings conversation to Dragon's Dogma, a game I don't think gets enough notice.

Design-wise Skyrim and Dragons Dogma have completely different goals.

Skyrim provides you a toolset with which to craft your own adventures that cater to whatever flight of fancy you may have at the time.

While Dragon's Dogma may seem similar on paper, it's focus is on dynamic combat and character builds (hence why the endless dungeon is many people's favorite part of the game).

I don't understand why anyone would compare the two unless you're talking about the shallowest level of aesthetic. They're going for two completely different things. It's like asking someone to compare Rayman Legends and Hollow Knight because they both share platforming and a cartoon aesthetic.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
#56 Edited by RSM-HQ (7514 posts) -

@zombieproof: For starters stop aiding the bump of ancient threads_

Skyrim provides you a toolset with which to craft your own adventures that cater to whatever flight of fancy you may have at the time.

While Dragon's Dogma may seem similar on paper, it's focus is on dynamic combat and character builds (hence why the endless dungeon is many people's favorite part of the game).

What's most fun, and what's in the game are two very different factors. You can roam in Dragon's Dogma like Skyrim, it's just not all that fun because it wasn't developed my a team that knew how to work that in as an interesting feature, hence why locked narrow maps and combat is the games saving grace. Is it really that big a shock when they developed Devil May Cry 3 and 4?

With that stated it's still built under the same design guidelines as most Openworld Action RPGs, you don't have to like it. However just because they both have different cores of enjoyment, doesn't mean it's not the same genre.

It's like asking someone to compare Rayman Legends and Hollow Knight because they both share platforming and a cartoon aesthetic.

Flawed logic!

Hollow Knight is a Metroidvania game; so you'd compare it to something like Guacamelee, or Castlevania: Symphony of the Night.

You're example is is nothing like comparing two games of the same genre.

*Rayman Legends is also a fasted paced Platformer, which is closer towards something like Super Meat Boy or Sonic Maina.

Dragon's Dogma and The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim are bothOpenworld/ Action RPGs. One just does the Openworld part better, the other does the Action part better.

Avatar image for zombieproof
#57 Edited by ZombieProof (359 posts) -

@RSM-HQ said:

@zombieproof: For starters stop aiding the bump of ancient threads_

Skyrim provides you a toolset with which to craft your own adventures that cater to whatever flight of fancy you may have at the time.

While Dragon's Dogma may seem similar on paper, it's focus is on dynamic combat and character builds (hence why the endless dungeon is many people's favorite part of the game).

What's most fun, and what's in the game are two very different factors. You can roam in Dragon's Dogma like Skyrim, it's just not all that fun because it wasn't developed my a team that knew how to work that in as an interesting feature, hence why locked narrow maps and combat is the games saving grace. Is it really that big a shock when they developed Devil May Cry 3 and 4?

With that stated it's still built under the same design guidelines as most Openworld Action RPGs, you don't have to like it. However just because they both have different cores of enjoyment, doesn't mean it's not the same genre.

It's like asking someone to compare Rayman Legends and Hollow Knight because they both share platforming and a cartoon aesthetic.

Flawed logic!

Hollow Knight is a Metroidvania game; so you'd compare it to something like Guacamelee, or Castlevania: Symphony of the Night.

You're example is is nothing like comparing two games of the same genre.

*Rayman Legends is also a fasted paced Platformer, which is closer towards something like Super Meat Boy or Sonic Maina.

Dragon's Dogma and The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim are bothOpenworld/ Action RPGs. One just does the Openworld part better, the other does the Action part better.

"You can roam in Dragon's Dogma like Skyrim, it's just not all that fun because it wasn't developed my a team that knew how to work that in as an interesting feature,"

I guess their design has different goals then, like I said.

"With that stated it's still built under the same design guidelines as most Openworld Action RPGs, you don't have to like it."

I love them both. Again, for what they do well respectively. At no point in playing either have I felt compelled to compare one to the other because the operative elements of engagement are so radically different. It's almost as if there are different goals at the core of each' design.

"Flawed logic!Hollow Knight is a Metroidvania game; so you'd compare it to something like Guacamelee, or Castlevania: Symphony of the Night."

The logic isn't flawed. The basis of my statement was comparing one to the other because the only thing each of the examples have in common are their aesthetics. Dragons Dogma and Skyrim both feature fantasy, swords, armor, monsters, and magic but they play radically different from one another. Hollow Knight and Rayman Legends both have cartoony shape-based character designs on top of hand painted backdrops but they both play radically different. That was the controlling idea of the comparison I made. For confirmation.

"Dragon's Dogma and The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim are bothOpenworld/ Action RPGs. One just does the Openworld part better, the other does the Action part better."

Heh, you make a great point here. It's as if they both have radically different design goals. Why would anyone compare the two?

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
#58 Edited by RSM-HQ (7514 posts) -

@zombieproof:

The logic isn't flawed. The basis of my statement was comparing one to the other because the only thing each of the examples have in common are their aesthetics.

They don't though, Dragon's Dogma and Skyrim use loot, stats, open world design, mix melee combat/ potions/ magic/ and ranged combat, dungeons, flying creatures that leave the area, quest logs, day/night cycle. And I could list more.

All you could use for your bad example is they're both 2D and cute looking. Makes me question why you're sticking with that as a good example. I play a lot of Metroidvania games as well so here is another one more like Hollow Knight. Owlboy_

It's as if they both have radically different design goals. Why would anyone compare the two?

I'm getting the idea you read what you want from my comments. . . And it's fine if you don't think the two games (Dragon's Dogma and The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim) should be compared, you might even just be against comparing any game to another and believe in valuing games on own merits. Which I can respect_

However. Don't mistake the difference between genres (which is put together by many for convenience), and goals of development by the developers.

You should look into Dragon's Dogmas development. Capcoms pitch for Dragon's Dogma was to make a game like The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion after seeing the success of Oblivion no less.

And did so way before the release of The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. And the idea was to have an Openworld RPG (Like The Elder Scrolls) with great combat as Itsuno Hideaki sans development team is known for. In the combat area, they succeeded, however you are wrong to continue thinking they had radically different design goals from Bethesda. When Capcom clearly wanted a game much like The Elder Scrolls and is seen in the game more than just the fantasy setting.

Dragon's Dogma fails in certain areas because it's not Team Itsuno Hideaki sans strength, that doesn't mean they didn't try. To think otherwise, and ignore the oblivious is ignorance itself.

Avatar image for zombieproof
#59 Edited by ZombieProof (359 posts) -

@RSM-HQ:

*edit*

"They don't though, Dragon's Dogma and Skyrim use loot, stats, open world design, mix melee combat/ potions/ magic/ and ranged combat, dungeons, flying creatures that leave the area, quest logs, day/night cycle. And I could list more."

Man, all those things are in Morrowind as well. You gonna tell me that's comparable with Dragons Dogma too?

Your argument fails to make me see how Dragon's Dogma and Skyrim are similar in any way other than superficial because the core philosophy of their mutual game play design are so radically different to me. The intentions of the developers are irrelevant because I'm basing my opinion off of the finished products.

We obviously see and experience things on a completely different spectrum. No use taking this any further. I'll keep thinking they're night and day and you keep seeing the similarities

*tips hat*

Good day.

Avatar image for tiggytog
#60 Edited by TiggyTog (299 posts) -

@zombieproof: I mean, yeah, you could really compare Dogma and Morrowind.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
#61 Posted by RSM-HQ (7514 posts) -
@tiggytog said:

@zombieproof: I mean, yeah, you could really compare Dogma and Morrowind.

You know better than to bump ancient threads at this point Tig.

Avatar image for tiggytog
#62 Posted by TiggyTog (299 posts) -

@RSM-HQ: True, but I hadn't really taken the time before to look at the responses from him.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
#63 Posted by RSM-HQ (7514 posts) -
@tiggytog said:

@RSM-HQ: True, but I hadn't really taken the time before to look at the responses from him.

You could have always made a new thread comparing Dogma to Morrowind then tag ZombieProof for relevance.

Just an idea before you bump more old threads_

Avatar image for tiggytog
#64 Edited by TiggyTog (299 posts) -

@RSM-HQ: I've never really seen the problem with bumping. By bumping old threads, you reduce the risk of more duplicate threads being made which reduces clutter, and narrows the options to post in one thread as opposed to continuing make more and more threads based on the same topic.

I mean, the topic of Dogma vs Skyrim has been discussed on here at least 10,000 different times, so I intended this one to be, well, the final one, what with the recent re-releases of both games. (Also we need Dogma on the switch, C'MON CAPCOM PLEASE!"

Avatar image for zombieproof
#65 Posted by ZombieProof (359 posts) -

Yeah, I don't get the no bump rule either. If a discussion can be had from an old thread what does it hurt? At the rate forums are disappearing left and right, I'd assume that mods would leap at any possibility to generate more traffic and discussion however the opportunity arises.

Avatar image for zombieproof
#66 Edited by ZombieProof (359 posts) -

@tiggytog said:

@zombieproof: I mean, yeah, you could really compare Dogma and Morrowind.

Only if you wanna be cute.

I think I laid out an eloquent enough argument for you to understand why I wouldn't compare the two.

Avatar image for tiggytog
#67 Posted by TiggyTog (299 posts) -

@zombieproof: Yes, but then you also listed why the two can be compared. They're in the same genre and they feature the same things.

What the devs "intended" for the game is irrelevant. They have way more similarities then differences.

Hell, if it can't be compared to Skyrim, what CAN you compare Dogma to?

Avatar image for zombieproof
#68 Edited by ZombieProof (359 posts) -

@tiggytog said:

@zombieproof: Yes, but then you also listed why the two can be compared. They're in the same genre and they feature the same things.

What the devs "intended" for the game is irrelevant. They have way more similarities then differences.

Hell, if it can't be compared to Skyrim, what CAN you compare Dogma to?

Yeah, you're being cute hahahahaha.

Lets try this another way.

Recount your gameplay experience with each game after 10 hours in. When I do that, I walk away with two radically different experiences. Experiences so different that it literally never occurred to me to compare the two of them. Skyrim had me by the wanderlust, walking all lacadaisical through the land and enjoying the surprise of the emergent gameplay. In Dogma, I'd just gotten the hang of the combat, my character build (An assasin), and how best to use my helper to combo with my moveset. Everything from there on out was a journey in making the best and most fun combat build that I could. The world, lore, and story were all second to that. In fact I'm still hard pressed to remember any Dogma lore.

Two completely differnent experiences that are as different as Morrowind and Diablo 3. Both have potions, leveling up, specialized gear, and a fantasy setting but I'd never think to compare the two just like I'd never think to compare Skyrim and Dogma.

Technically you could compare ANY two games, but why would you if the two gameplay philosophies are radically different?

Avatar image for johndmgs
#69 Posted by Johndmgs (316 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

Dragon Dogmas creatures were better than Skyrims repetitive copy pasted dragons. They manage to turn a giant mythical creature shouldered in legend into taking a trip to Mcdonalds for a happy meal, all magic sapped out.

Dragons Dogmas encounters are repeated a few times, but there is a sense of anticipation and excitement sorely lacking from Skyrim, and encounter is an encounter and it generally says that way.

Unfortunately alot of Dragons Dogma is broken. Because beasts generally stick to a single patch of course, it can easily be exploited. While pc games all the way back to Baldurs Gate give you complete control over party members, pawns have almost no commands and usually are pretty useless. This leads to many stupid annoyances compounded by a terrible save system.

A game like DarkSouls uses bonfires spaced out in tight linear environments, while Dragons Dogma can have you running and stopping constantly with stamina drain for 15 minutes only to be instantly killed and thrown right back to the start again. Removing stamina for running, or adding mounts would have helped. Later on you can fast travel, but it's generally still not enough.

In general, Skyrim is a better game imo. It has it's own problems, but on a whole it's better designed.

I agree with your point on the dragons. I think something like a dragon should be a scarce thing, like a boss battle, but I found them more a nuisance than anything with often they'd attack. How's Dragon's Dogma? I was looking for an RPG with a good magic system and a lot of people seem to recommend that one.

Avatar image for Byshop
#70 Posted by Byshop (19195 posts) -

Massive necro bump.

-Byshop