Hmm that sounds actually pretty good if true. I played Dragon Dogma but never bothered with DLCs. Sounds damn expensive though, almost like overhaul for Cyberpunk 2077.
I still think "game within game" or somekind of "spin-off" is much smarter thing to do. They could change the games rules like Far Cry6's Insanity, or then new kind of spin-off ala Xcom Chimera Squad. My NG+ experiences havent been that good sadly, most of the time its just extra soulless meaningless grind, you repeat the same story etc.
I'd say that the Dark Arisen Expansion is definitely more grindy. It's still fun, and you can get some pretty cool loot, but it's mostly like a single, big dungeon. The main campaign is where most of the cool story stuff is hidden. I'd say that you can get pretty much the entire premise and all of the most important story and lore details after 3 playthroughs (NG++), provided you choose differently at each of the key story moments for each playthrough. Gameplay wise, too, it's so easy to totally switch your character's class, skills, gear, etc. that the game seems to pressure you into switching things up as you play. And it all has a cumulative, macro effect as well. I especially like how they work the "restart" into the story itself, though. That's what really got me.
For CP2077, I don't think the story really lends itself to an NG+ formula. Not that it can't be done -- worked more or less fine with TW3 -- but I'm not sure that there's any way to deliver a "return" on it. Like you, I normally don't even bother with NG+, gaining "prestige" ranks in shooters, etc.
But, like anything else, there are definitely ways to make it work!
Honestly, I don't see the point in a NG+ where you are already maxed out to a very low level (50 is not that much), you can change the difficult at any time and you can't even re-spec your character attributes.
So it just makes sense to start a new character. Which is quite annoying to be honest. I would totally play NG+ if you could unlock more levels, more things etc. Otherwise it's pointless
Well, leveling systems are arbitrary. In the original D&D, characters were max level when they hit 20. They later expanded it to involve "godlike" characters that could reach level 30. That's how most western RPGs rolled for long time. Gaining a level was supposed to be a monumental achievement. Literally game-changing at certain milestones, where characters would attain completely new abilities automatically, based on their class. The focus of the games was much different, as well. Not so much combat-combat-combat. Much more story, lore, teamwork, problem solving, mysteries, etc.
JRPGs normally took on a more number-crunchy approach overall, and in many of their games, characters would gain a level for killing a rat, and 5 minutes later, they'd gain another level for collecting all 5 shiny rocks. This was the more incremental / immediate-reward approach that began to become popular in a gaming crowd that preferred more action-oriented experiences.
Nowadays, we've got some evolutions of that system that blend in the best of both worlds. The whole Diablo style of Action-RPG coupled with other titles that started experimenting with skill "trees" and classless systems directly gave rise to the mechanics that we see with modern RPGs and Action-RPGs. NG+ was the next, logical step, as designers tried to compete with the limitless play offered by MMOs.
But...I'd still argue that it simply won't work
well for everything. If I'm a creator, and I see that my "NG+" will simply be tweaking values for existing weapons, or trying to hamfist new gameplay mechanics into the existing system, that might come across as clunky and lame. I may simply decide, "No, that's not really in-line with my game's design."