A pretty funny review, although I think Ben pretty much missed the point of the game. He spent a good deal of his review talking about the terrible story, which is evidently not what the game is presenting as its strong suit. To be fair, the dialogue is decently written and (barely) competently voiced, but the main pull of a game like Dragon's Dogma as opposed to its competitors (at this point, that's Skyrim, Kingdoms of Amalur, Dark Souls, and possibly the Witcher 2) is its gameplay.
Skyrim's combat is frankly boring, although it looks visceral at first and the game's great graphics are an asset. Its levelling system too, although better than Oblivion's broken system, is still so-so and fairly boring.
Kingdom's of Amalur had massively boring combat from a gameplay perspective, although it felt and looked great (again, at first. It does wear thin.)
Dark Souls has fantastic combat but it can be inaccessibly tough, and the levelling system, although satisfying, is very particular in how it rewards the player.
The Witcher 2 isn't open world in the same way as the above games, but it's almost there, and its combat system is great, although the emphasis is more on preparation and a few key maneuvers rather than tactical decision-making in combat.
Dragon's Dogma, on the other hand, has a fantastic levelling system, one of the best I've ever seen. You start with your basic 3 streams (Strider (rogue), Fighter, and Mage), and each of these has an upgrade, a sort of prestige class. Then you also have hybridisations of each class with another class; an Assassin is a fighter/strider, for example. Each of these classes can be levelled up to give you access to skills specific to that class. The kicker is that you can pick and choose from a variety of classes and build skill loadout that is massively customised and truly unique.
Dragon's Dogma also has some fighting game DNA in it, eschewing the number fixation of many RPGs. Instead it prefers to reward you with new combat moves on levelling up, which don't necessarily deal more damage, but might instead have a great tactical application. For example, the fighter gains access to a broad spinning sweep that he can perform even while being hit, or the mage gets a new spell that can create an ice platform to reach new places. This makes both levelling and combat far more interesting than simply choosing which numbers get slightly bigger every hour or so of play.
The party-based tactical combat is almost on a par with games like Dragon Age, which is a great achievement considering those games are some of the best in the genre. It even surpasses Dragon Age in its clever sub-boss battles which require you to use specific tactics to defeat larger enemies (like Chimerae, Cyclopes and Griffins). This can involve climbing on them to hit weak spots or using specific elements, but it can also involve luring them over cliffs or simply weighing them down by getting everyone in your party to climb on them. This will actually tip some boss enemies over, making them vulnerable.
Your pawns, although they're repetitive and say things out of context, actually handle the complicated combat system really well, considering how poorly Skyrim's companions fared with that game's simplistic fighting.
The loot system is simply the best in any recent RPG. There's a near-perfect mix of common, uncommon and rare items, and you're almost always looking forward to a great new purchase, many of which look fantastic. The crafting system is present and functional, but not particularly inspiring.
Really, the only things to fault about this game are the story and the graphics (which are mediocre, and given the obvious comparisons with Skyrim and Amalur, it's unlikely to stand up well. NB though, that the art design is very accomplished.) The gameplay is some of the best I've seen in a long time.
Give it a chance, and it will suck you in. Of course, if you start the game as an obese middle aged six foot black woman, then that's not really giving the game much of a chance to begin with.
