![]() ![]() ![]() Because of that I would recommend watching this one, unless you can somehow put up with that, the story is supposed to be great but I never took the time to find out.Baby-headed dragons and Kain?’s outfits, y’all! Awful inconsistent performance, random freezes and stuttering for seemingly no reason, even outright crashes that where never fixed, add the load times on top of that and you have one hell of a bad time. It's like you bought crysis when it came out to play on your prebuilt integrated graphics PC. Read up/watch stuff about this one if you have to, but it's not really worth the time.ĭrakengard 3- couldn't tell you, this game is one of a handful of games I had to put down because of performance, it's like when companies tried to make PSP ports of their high-end multi-platform titles and they ran at 10fps at best. So it basically looks more impressive in action but is just about as fun to play, except you don't get a great payoff because the story isn't worth it. stuff, I wouldn't even call them improvements, the controls are about the same but with full camera control now, combat has a few new mechanics that sound good but in practice are clunky and unreliable, and from what I could tell flying stages were basically the same overall. Otherwise it plays about the same as the original but with more. The whole thing has an air of 'hopefulness' that shouldn't be. It's a big pet peeve of mine when people dismiss playing it because of this, when not playing it yourself is detrimental to the whole experience, and even the story, especially when the alternative is a handful of garbage let's plays with snarky commentary and cynicism, and a bafflingly popular cringy series overview videos which don't get deep enough anyway.ĭrakengard 2 - everything is better except for what matters, the story and atmosphere are complete garbage here, it's an unnecessary story by a different writer who doesn't seem to grasp the setting, characters, storytelling, and atmosphere that made the first game a sleeper hit. So onto the gameplay, it's a simple Dynasty Warriors clone for the most part but it is by no means 'garbage', it was usually rated a little above /at mediocre in that department for the time, it can be fun and even cathartic if you let it. Gonna play devil's advocate for a moment.ĭrakengard 1 - The story is extremely good, the characters are amazing, it's very comparable to Nier in how good it is at story telling but it goes about it differently, Nier has a much more personal story while Drakengard is more expansive and not all about the main characters. Sadly, the series has abandoned its musou roots.Īlso, torching armies with dragons is way more satisfying in the first game.Īgain, ignore the negative rhetoric Drakengard 1 is awesome. literal hordes, with a brilliantly conceived electro-orchestral soundtrack by Nobuyoshi Sano and Takayuki Aihara and a dark, twisted script by Sawako Natori. :)ĭrakengard 1 is especially unique in that way. What's important to understand is that it's not a generic action rpg rather it's part of the musou subgenre of action rpgs (Dynasty Warriors, 99 Nights, Drago Quest Heroes, etc.)įrom that perspective, the series actually gets more generic with each entry: Drakengard 2 became half musou half generic ARPG, NIER abandoned musou elements altogether and was full on generic ARPG, and Drakengard 3 somehow was even more plain.Īdmittedly I haven't played Automata yet, but it's obviously not musou. It's my favorite of the series specifically in terms of story, music, and gameplay. Please ignore the nonsense about Drakengard 1 having bad gameplay. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |