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."