you guys really like this?

[im sad *****, oh so sad]

its truly a bad valheim copy... im confused.

[shaxi]

A lot of people agree with you. It's just runescape fanboys defending this nonsense and spamming the discussions to make it appear as if some reviews are good.

[smithwork001]

The claim that RuneScape’s Dragon Wilds is “a bad Valheim copy” is a shallow take that misses the point of how games evolve. Calling a game a “copy” ignores the iterative nature of game design—every game builds on what came before. You can trace a line from early MUDs to RuneScape, Valheim, and Dragon Wilds, each refining or expanding on prior ideas. Dragon Wilds may share survival or open-world mechanics with Valheim, but that’s not copying; it’s evolution, like Minecraft building on Infiniminer or Doom on Wolfenstein. The real issue is execution, not originality.
Dragon Wilds’ progression is a mess, especially in its early access state. The second area feels like a dead zone, offering little to no meaningful advancement and often boiling down to a single quest, making it feel skippable and empty. The third area, where you’re meant to acquire Tier 3 equipment, is a punishing death-running simulator in Tier 2 gear, with brutal difficulty spikes that turn progression into a frustrating grind. These flaws—poor pacing and unbalanced difficulty—are common in early access, particularly for a game this early in development. If this were a full release, these issues would undeniably make it a bad game, as they severely disrupt the player experience.
That said, Dragon Wilds shows potential. The utility aspect of magic, which adds creative and practical depth to survival mechanics, feels like a fresh and promising addition to the genre. This spark of innovation highlights what the game could become with polish and refinement. It’s not a “bad copy” but a rough draft with an identity of its own, hindered by execution. The focus should be on fixing its progression and building on its strengths, not writing it off as derivative.

[im sad *****, oh so sad]

Originally posted by smithwork001:

The claim that RuneScape’s Dragon Wilds is “a bad Valheim copy” is a shallow take that misses the point of how games evolve. Calling a game a “copy” ignores the iterative nature of game design—every game builds on what came before. You can trace a line from early MUDs to RuneScape, Valheim, and Dragon Wilds, each refining or expanding on prior ideas. Dragon Wilds may share survival or open-world mechanics with Valheim, but that’s not copying; it’s evolution, like Minecraft building on Infiniminer or Doom on Wolfenstein. The real issue is execution, not originality.
Dragon Wilds’ progression is a mess, especially in its early access state. The second area feels like a dead zone, offering little to no meaningful advancement and often boiling down to a single quest, making it feel skippable and empty. The third area, where you’re meant to acquire Tier 3 equipment, is a punishing death-running simulator in Tier 2 gear, with brutal difficulty spikes that turn progression into a frustrating grind. These flaws—poor pacing and unbalanced difficulty—are common in early access, particularly for a game this early in development. If this were a full release, these issues would undeniably make it a bad game, as they severely disrupt the player experience.
That said, Dragon Wilds shows potential. The utility aspect of magic, which adds creative and practical depth to survival mechanics, feels like a fresh and promising addition to the genre. This spark of innovation highlights what the game could become with polish and refinement. It’s not a “bad copy” but a rough draft with an identity of its own, hindered by execution. The focus should be on fixing its progression and building on its strengths, not writing it off as derivative.

id agree if it really wasnt just a copy for copy game... yes games build on an idea. this did little to call it building on an idea. this is literally the exact same game with 1 boss? "magic" is a nice way of saying ability like Valheim has

[Rose Brigade]

Originally posted by Tough Lesbian:

Originally posted by smithwork001:

The claim that RuneScape’s Dragon Wilds is “a bad Valheim copy” is a shallow take that misses the point of how games evolve. Calling a game a “copy” ignores the iterative nature of game design—every game builds on what came before. You can trace a line from early MUDs to RuneScape, Valheim, and Dragon Wilds, each refining or expanding on prior ideas. Dragon Wilds may share survival or open-world mechanics with Valheim, but that’s not copying; it’s evolution, like Minecraft building on Infiniminer or Doom on Wolfenstein. The real issue is execution, not originality.
Dragon Wilds’ progression is a mess, especially in its early access state. The second area feels like a dead zone, offering little to no meaningful advancement and often boiling down to a single quest, making it feel skippable and empty. The third area, where you’re meant to acquire Tier 3 equipment, is a punishing death-running simulator in Tier 2 gear, with brutal difficulty spikes that turn progression into a frustrating grind. These flaws—poor pacing and unbalanced difficulty—are common in early access, particularly for a game this early in development. If this were a full release, these issues would undeniably make it a bad game, as they severely disrupt the player experience.
That said, Dragon Wilds shows potential. The utility aspect of magic, which adds creative and practical depth to survival mechanics, feels like a fresh and promising addition to the genre. This spark of innovation highlights what the game could become with polish and refinement. It’s not a “bad copy” but a rough draft with an identity of its own, hindered by execution. The focus should be on fixing its progression and building on its strengths, not writing it off as derivative.

id agree if it really wasnt just a copy for copy game... yes games build on an idea. this did little to call it building on an idea. this is literally the exact same game with 1 boss? "magic" is a nice way of saying ability like Valheim has

Anyone calling the game carbon copy clearly hasn't really played either game enough.
But in reality all survival games have pretty much the same mechanics with a few differences. You comparing Valheim's Forsaken Powers to RSDW's Spells is... grossly inaccurate.. and disingenuous.
Valheim's "abilities" are massive cool downs with just a few buffs like resistances, tree felling damage, stamina reduction. They're all just little 5 minute buffs with big cooldowns. They also require you to kill the bosses for the powers, which is another big difference.
RSDW's Spells are unlocked by using the correlated skill, such as unlocking Eye of Oculus (A spell that gives you Free-cam while building as long as you're using it) only requires to reach a certain level in Construction. All the spells do something special, not just buffs and many of them are spells borrowed from RuneScape itself such as Bones to Peaches. Many of them have cool downs, but not 20 minute cool downs like Valheim, the highest one is around 5 minutes. They can lower the crafting time of fire-based stations like furnaces and cooking pots, break trees or harvest rocks instantly, massively repair your gear, increase food buff durations, jump to high heights to reach new areas or escape danger, and even a personal internal chest that gives you an extra place to store things, on the go or for extra supplies.

The point is, you're complaining about something you absolutely obviously don't have a clue about.

[Mr.Swan]

its not even a good runescape game either lol. its the worst of both games

[GafferGragz]

Cool, then go somewhere else. The ppl that like and the ppl that don't acts like a part of one side exactly like US politics. This just do not work if we all want a better game.

[GafferGragz]

Originally posted by smithwork001:

The second area feels like a dead zone, offering little to no meaningful advancement and often boiling down to a single quest, making it feel skippable and empty. The third area, where you’re meant to acquire Tier 3 equipment, is a punishing death-running simulator in Tier 2 gear, with brutal difficulty spikes that turn progression into a frustrating grind. These flaws—poor pacing and unbalanced difficulty—are common in early access, particularly for a game this early in development. If this were a full release, these issues would undeniably make it a bad game, as they severely disrupt the player experience.
That said, Dragon Wilds shows potential. The utility aspect of magic, which adds creative and practical depth to survival mechanics, feels like a fresh and promising addition to the genre. This spark of innovation highlights what the game could become with polish and refinement. It’s not a “bad copy” but a rough draft with an identity of its own, hindered by execution. The focus should be on fixing its progression and building on its strengths, not writing it off as derivative.

Its the difficulties that is needed to balance the Valley, Swamp and the wilds, and when you come to the lightning area the cycle of feeling tough until you master iron is the same. And the swamp is there to teach you potions and, if you are a master boss player, the early whip.
I've gone through this frustration for every map piece bc I a good skiller but a horrible fighter (I have 10 buttered thumbs and no control of stress, I get problems even just thinking big scary enemy and 'boss' ieew)
It's figuring out how to move forward through the difficult that is FUN. And giving a wide girth to the things you do not want to fight yet. In this game, following the edges of the biomes is a very successful strategy and most encounter are single enemies.

PS! Never stop grinding for combat xp, I will never be out of meals with rat in it :D

[coreycarries]

Originally posted by Tough Lesbian:

its truly a bad valheim copy... im confused.

bad bait

[im sad *****, oh so sad]

Originally posted by Rose Brigade:

Originally posted by Tough Lesbian:

id agree if it really wasnt just a copy for copy game... yes games build on an idea. this did little to call it building on an idea. this is literally the exact same game with 1 boss? "magic" is a nice way of saying ability like Valheim has

Anyone calling the game carbon copy clearly hasn't really played either game enough.
But in reality all survival games have pretty much the same mechanics with a few differences. You comparing Valheim's Forsaken Powers to RSDW's Spells is... grossly inaccurate.. and disingenuous.
Valheim's "abilities" are massive cool downs with just a few buffs like resistances, tree felling damage, stamina reduction. They're all just little 5 minute buffs with big cooldowns. They also require you to kill the bosses for the powers, which is another big difference.
RSDW's Spells are unlocked by using the correlated skill, such as unlocking Eye of Oculus (A spell that gives you Free-cam while building as long as you're using it) only requires to reach a certain level in Construction. All the spells do something special, not just buffs and many of them are spells borrowed from RuneScape itself such as Bones to Peaches. Many of them have cool downs, but not 20 minute cool downs like Valheim, the highest one is around 5 minutes. They can lower the crafting time of fire-based stations like furnaces and cooking pots, break trees or harvest rocks instantly, massively repair your gear, increase food buff durations, jump to high heights to reach new areas or escape danger, and even a personal internal chest that gives you an extra place to store things, on the go or for extra supplies.

The point is, you're complaining about something you absolutely obviously don't have a clue about.

who are you trying to convince. me or yourself. these are literally carbon copy games with different lore. if you think otherwise. let me show you a new think called clear soda. its flavorless, clear, looks like water. but the lore. the LOREEEE. wait till you hear it.

interested?

[im sad *****, oh so sad]

Originally posted by GafferGragz:

Cool, then go somewhere else. The ppl that like and the ppl that don't acts like a part of one side exactly like US politics. This just do not work if we all want a better game.

youre a goober. i paid, i get to complain.

[Jacist]

Originally posted by smithwork001:

The claim that RuneScape’s Dragon Wilds is “a bad Valheim copy” is a shallow take that misses the point of how games evolve. Calling a game a “copy” ignores the iterative nature of game design—every game builds on what came before. You can trace a line from early MUDs to RuneScape, Valheim, and Dragon Wilds, each refining or expanding on prior ideas. Dragon Wilds may share survival or open-world mechanics with Valheim, but that’s not copying; it’s evolution, like Minecraft building on Infiniminer or Doom on Wolfenstein. The real issue is execution, not originality.
Dragon Wilds’ progression is a mess, especially in its early access state. The second area feels like a dead zone, offering little to no meaningful advancement and often boiling down to a single quest, making it feel skippable and empty. The third area, where you’re meant to acquire Tier 3 equipment, is a punishing death-running simulator in Tier 2 gear, with brutal difficulty spikes that turn progression into a frustrating grind. These flaws—poor pacing and unbalanced difficulty—are common in early access, particularly for a game this early in development. If this were a full release, these issues would undeniably make it a bad game, as they severely disrupt the player experience.
That said, Dragon Wilds shows potential. The utility aspect of magic, which adds creative and practical depth to survival mechanics, feels like a fresh and promising addition to the genre. This spark of innovation highlights what the game could become with polish and refinement. It’s not a “bad copy” but a rough draft with an identity of its own, hindered by execution. The focus should be on fixing its progression and building on its strengths, not writing it off as derivative.

Counter point to this second half about it not being a full release. That's on the developers, they chose to release it this way; therefor the criticisms are valid. It may not be a finished product, it's a released product. What you have described is just as unacceptable for a released product as it is for a finished product. Before a game hits early access, it should likely address things like:

Poor pacing, considering the pacing in this game is poor roughly 30 minutes in, that's not just an oversight for late-game pacing.

Second area feels like a deadzone: Once again, an issue with pacing, but also just game and quest design.

Unbalanced Difficulty: A series of playtests before release can easily address these concerns, however what's more common is to release a half finished product and hope people ignore all the downsides while you patch it.

End of the day, the gaming community has had Early access titles for a little over 10 years now. Peoples mindsets and expectations have grown, and many don't tolerate the age old excuse "It's not finished yet, if it was a finished product this would be horrible!" Release to early access when the issues that need fixed are convoluted and not just balancing decisions, core gameplay pacing, etc. Early access for the means of adding more gameplay content to expand a released product which may include bugs? Perfectly reasonable, but not as an excuse for bad core issues of a game.

[GafferGragz]

Originally posted by Tough Lesbian:

Originally posted by GafferGragz:

Cool, then go somewhere else. The ppl that like and the ppl that don't acts like a part of one side exactly like US politics. This just do not work if we all want a better game.

youre a goober. i paid, i get to complain.

Yes I know, its a good point :D and as you do interact in a public space, has to be open to conflicting ideas, right?

[Bear^]

I've been a gamer for nigh on 35 years and it always boils down to the same where people who don't like a game, tries to devalue those who like a game. Isn't it as simple as accepting that some like different games than you do?

Survival games tend to borrow from each other rather heavily and have a lot of the same elements to them. Heck there was a time before FPS was coined that every game after Doom was a "Doom clone".

And yet that is how gaming has progressed. Some take the leap and make the path, others follow the path and improve on it. We wouldn't be were we are today if it wasn't for that.

[Galantir]

Originally posted by Tough Lesbian:

Originally posted by smithwork001:

The claim that RuneScape’s Dragon Wilds is “a bad Valheim copy” is a shallow take that misses the point of how games evolve. Calling a game a “copy” ignores the iterative nature of game design—every game builds on what came before. You can trace a line from early MUDs to RuneScape, Valheim, and Dragon Wilds, each refining or expanding on prior ideas. Dragon Wilds may share survival or open-world mechanics with Valheim, but that’s not copying; it’s evolution, like Minecraft building on Infiniminer or Doom on Wolfenstein. The real issue is execution, not originality.
Dragon Wilds’ progression is a mess, especially in its early access state. The second area feels like a dead zone, offering little to no meaningful advancement and often boiling down to a single quest, making it feel skippable and empty. The third area, where you’re meant to acquire Tier 3 equipment, is a punishing death-running simulator in Tier 2 gear, with brutal difficulty spikes that turn progression into a frustrating grind. These flaws—poor pacing and unbalanced difficulty—are common in early access, particularly for a game this early in development. If this were a full release, these issues would undeniably make it a bad game, as they severely disrupt the player experience.
That said, Dragon Wilds shows potential. The utility aspect of magic, which adds creative and practical depth to survival mechanics, feels like a fresh and promising addition to the genre. This spark of innovation highlights what the game could become with polish and refinement. It’s not a “bad copy” but a rough draft with an identity of its own, hindered by execution. The focus should be on fixing its progression and building on its strengths, not writing it off as derivative.

id agree if it really wasnt just a copy for copy game... yes games build on an idea. this did little to call it building on an idea. this is literally the exact same game with 1 boss? "magic" is a nice way of saying ability like Valheim has

Name any game you like and i'll tell you what it's a copy off using your logic.

[|]

Originally posted by Galantir:

Originally posted by Tough Lesbian:

id agree if it really wasnt just a copy for copy game... yes games build on an idea. this did little to call it building on an idea. this is literally the exact same game with 1 boss? "magic" is a nice way of saying ability like Valheim has

Name any game you like and i'll tell you what it's a copy off using your logic.

Chess