We had some issues with Dragon's Dogma. Ok, we had more than a few issues, calling it "50 or so hours of mundane drudgery" in our review. That doesn't mean our opinion is the only one that matters. There's a whole internet out there with glowing reviews. Maybe not "glowing," but certainly more accepting.
  • Game Informer (85/100): "Combat feels like a necessary part of the game's design, rather than something that was begrudgingly added to provide interaction between cutscenes. I left the game feeling that I made my mark on Gransys the way I chose to, instead of being escorted from plot point to plot point. When you're talking about an open-world game, I can't think of higher praise."
  • Destructoid (75/100): "Should you play Dragon's Dogma? Yes. The high points are so very worth getting to, and while the main game will be cleared in a number of hours, there are lots of monsters to battle and a dose of end-game content to clear, providing more than enough to rival the Skyrims and Diablos of the world."
  • Eurogamer (70/100): "Expectedly, coming as it does from an action game developer, its jewels are to be found in the dynamic combat, stat-tweaking party-building and defining boss battles. In this way, the game echoes the adventurous, dragon-hunting spirit of its (second- and third-hand) literary influences: that sense of unpredictable peril that could be lurking in every cave and thicket. "
  • OXM (60/100): "Dragon's Dogma has its merits, but for every great idea there's a design fumble that just leaves you scratching your head. Though it's technically sound, the game lacks the spark to elevate it beyond a "sometimes fun, mostly mediocre" experience. Much like the main character's chest cavity, this RPG ultimately feels hollow, with no real heart."

This article was originally published on Joystiq.

Among Japanese developers, Sting quietly thrives