Builders 1 or Builders 2 which one is better ?

[Aegria ۞]

hey, i was builders 2 in my nintendo switch after that and some pc too. and game feels always a little missing something. Builders 1 is a better game ? any comparison from veterans ?

[Atheist]

Builders 2 is better at everything. If you felt like Builders 2 was missing something, then stay away from Builders 1. I also found Builders 2 to "miss something", and what it was missing was an actual goal. You never felt like you achieved anything. Building stuff was tedious and not fulfilling in any way. You built something big and never got any kind of reward, like a better weapon to be able to beat some monster to get into another area. The whole game was just flat.

[stokken]

Imo. Builders 1 is better.
Builders 2 had more blocks. and some QOL improvement, but the campaign was painfully slow and dident let you build like you wanted on most islands. and dont even get me started on that f**king none skippable slow dialog sh*t.
DB1 campaign let the player do a lot of more things freely. have better dialogs and better story overall imo.
Seeing as the steam version will come with all of the android updates and QOL improvements. I feel confident that this will be the definite edition to own.

[Me0wish]

DQB1, it's my first DQ game and I was surprised by the quality of story and writing.

Couldn't even continue with 2, due to the lack of atmosphere and the story being crap.

[Door Into Summer]

Originally posted by Atheist:

I also found Builders 2 to "miss something", and what it was missing was an actual goal. You never felt like you achieved anything. Building stuff was tedious and not fulfilling in any way. You built something big and never got any kind of reward, like a better weapon to be able to beat some monster to get into another area. The whole game was just flat.

Did you even play the DQB2? These statements are just flat out wrong and you have a weird, warped and extremely wrong perception of the game.

[lilisaur]

The reward of any game built around RPG-style play, is to move the story forward. I really don't know how anyone can say there's no goal.

DQB1 is generally considered to have a story that better lines up to the DQ1 source material. It is also more difficult and presents a reasonable challenge. There is a general assumption that players know the DQ1 story before playing (not required, but advised.) DQB1 parallels to DQ1 are extremely obvious to anyone who has played both: same lands, same towns, etc. DQ1 had very limited network interaction, allowing only tiny 32x32 portions of an island to be shared, so it fails to hold onto players for long.

DQB2 is the later game, so more polished with a number of updates to make the building experience better. To accomplish this though it trades off difficulty (its a very easy game) and doesn't get the meat of its story going until about the midway point of the game. DQB2 does kind of drone on a for while with no real introduction of a serious threat to the world until late game. The story is incredibly deep though so its not obvious to a player on the first playthrough, and takes two or three runs to fully wrap their head around. The clear Moonbrooke association aside, DQB2s parallels to DQ2 are also much less obvious than the DQB1-DQ1 connection, but a keen eye will spot things (ie, the presence of exactly two Whackolytes monitoring progress at Khrumbul-dun, the fact the Mirror of Ra is found the southeast corner of a 4-block square swamp on the map in both games, etc.) No prior knowledge of DQ2 is needed to enjoy DQB2, but someone who knows DQ2 well notices a lot more than someone who doesn't. DQB2 also added fantastic network interaction via the Noticeboard, to share photos, share their entire islands, and compete in contests, which has allowed it to keep a sizable fanbase over five years after release. (About the only thing that can beat DQB2 and wrest its long-time players away is a DQB3.)

Which game has the better story is subject to opinion. Both are great, but for different reasons: the first is very obvious in its approach and gets going right away and consistently strong throughout but throws few curveballs, while the second is much more subtle and takes a while to build up to some real surprises late. Both have some drawbacks - DQB1 has had the fortune of getting alot of its difficulty toned down and DQB2-like features added through first the Switch and later mobile releases to be a more enjoyable game to the casual fan than the original Playstation versions. DQB2 is virtually the same on all platforms and still has some really annoying dialogue and overexplanation that hasn't yet been addressed in later ports of the game.

[Neonivek]

Honestly there are only two reasons I like DQBuilders 1 more.

1) You actually are building for a reason. AKA: Everything isn't just aestetic or checkbox based.
2) The game doesn't build FOR YOU!

Playing Dragon Quest builders 2 is like playing on autopilot... I only got halfway through the game because the game kept doing everything for me. "When am I just going to be allowed to build a city, create the amenities, maybe get a few bonuses for the town or shops"... and the game went "NEVER! Now if you'll excuse us we will now shame you by autobuilding a castle 10x better than anything you would make peon!"

The first real boss of DQB1, while it had faults, felt like a much more fun boss than... at least half of DQB2.

Now if DQB2 secretly had a much better part 2 (or post game), I don't know it.

[lilisaur]

You get to build as you wish before heading off to Khrumbul-dun, Moonbrooke, etc. They make you do a few required tablet tasks, but then you can delay the game all you want to free-build, with only the occasional monster-mob to show up to spoil then fun.

And the game is easy enough in the story bits to build what you want becuase the monster mobs are not really serious and rarely do serious damage. This is unlike DQB1 where monster mobs typically do significant damage to the towns. Between the two, DQB2 gives you a lot more time to build what you want (not to mention alot more decorations to spruce up the rooms.)

And the castle is universally mocked as being terrible. The dialogue even mocks it as Lulu berates the townspeople for shoddy workmanship (holes in the wall, uneven staircase, etc.) Things like the Deitree and pyramid are much more impressive structures that tend to humble players more than the castle does.

The boss fights are indeed certainly better in DQB1. As I said, DQB1 is harder and good challenge while DQB2 is very easy. In truth, DQB2 is arguably the easiest DQ game the team has ever made, becuase there is no penalty for death (besides a little lost time) and the island bosses generally can't win (i.e., none of the three are capable of winning by destroying the town; they can only win by player falling to zero HP.) DQB1 on the other hand is a bit on the hard side, not DQ1 or DQ2 hard, but tougher than the recent mainline games in my opinion. Going solo in battles tends to lead to alot more deaths, and with a significantly penalty (drop half your inventory) it can really mess you up if you lost items far from the base.

[Jin Tannis]

2 is better than 1 in every way.

[aki-cat]

Builders 1 and 2 have different game goals.
Therefore, the question of which is better is meaningless.

It is true that 2 is inferior in many respects to 1 because the goals are different, but on the other hand, there are many areas where 2 is better.
It's not about superiority or inferiority, it's about difference.

Speaking from personal preference, 1 was the best and 2 was the worst.
There is no option that 2 is better.

[Zavi]

dqb 2 is better, but dqb 1 is a great game. personally i loved to play it on my vita (yes i was one of the 3 people who baught a vita)
so i thnik it will again be great on steamdeck, ally, or go for example

[kaori]

Builders 2 I thought it had more things to do, and better building style vs 1. 1 was very simple to get into tho and to finish the story up.. never finished up 2 on vita, as 2 it glitched up and stopped working; I believe i had same issue on PC.

2 if you want more variety in stuff, as 1 is limited with building things. If you can afford both, get both, good to collect anyway; good games.

[Aegria ۞]

Originally posted by lilisaur:

You get to build as you wish before heading off to Khrumbul-dun, Moonbrooke, etc. They make you do a few required tablet tasks, but then you can delay the game all you want to free-build, with only the occasional monster-mob to show up to spoil then fun.

And the game is easy enough in the story bits to build what you want becuase the monster mobs are not really serious and rarely do serious damage. This is unlike DQB1 where monster mobs typically do significant damage to the towns. Between the two, DQB2 gives you a lot more time to build what you want (not to mention alot more decorations to spruce up the rooms.)

And the castle is universally mocked as being terrible. The dialogue even mocks it as Lulu berates the townspeople for shoddy workmanship (holes in the wall, uneven staircase, etc.) Things like the Deitree and pyramid are much more impressive structures that tend to humble players more than the castle does.

The boss fights are indeed certainly better in DQB1. As I said, DQB1 is harder and good challenge while DQB2 is very easy. In truth, DQB2 is arguably the easiest DQ game the team has ever made, becuase there is no penalty for death (besides a little lost time) and the island bosses generally can't win (i.e., none of the three are capable of winning by destroying the town; they can only win by player falling to zero HP.) DQB1 on the other hand is a bit on the hard side, not DQ1 or DQ2 hard, but tougher than the recent mainline games in my opinion. Going solo in battles tends to lead to alot more deaths, and with a significantly penalty (drop half your inventory) it can really mess you up if you lost items far from the base.

thanks for details. im interested in 1s system. if i effort buyin i want to try 1 too ^^

[lilisaur]

I can buy the argument that 1s story is better than 2s. Or vice versa. This is highly subjective and since both are really good stories its a toss-up.

DQB1 is the more appropriate challenge, especially the PS4 "Complete chapter in X days" challenges though the "Collect X different items" challenges that replaced it are tolerable. DQB2 is just way too easy with too much overexplanation, a minimap and naviglobes to minimize travel and exploration time, and all but a few tablet targets or enemies requiring little effort. If you rate games based on how they push you to do better, DQB1 is certainly the better.

But DQB2 is clearly the better building experience. There is much greater variety of materials, larger limits, more lively NPCs, and the Noticeboard actions to share photos or islands and compete in contests encourages people to continue playing, years after release. Since DQB1 didn't have any of this in its post-game Terrra Incognita, except sharing a tiny section of an island, the free-build activities were pretty much entirely superceded by DQB2.

[kaintk]

1 is a better story line, simpler, best overall imo
2 is an okay storyline, but not being able to skip dialogue in later run is really bad, it make replayability a chore but is a better builder thought
i prefer 1 over 2 , but i like the 2 game anyway they have their own con and pro the other dont have

[Koru Brighthorn]

1 = better. I finished both.