Devil May Cry 5 aims to appeal to Western audiences

  • Welcome to the Devil May Cry Community Forum!

    We're a group of fans who are passionate about the Devil May Cry series and video gaming.

    Register Log in

Doing something new for the sake of it, will not always lead to the best results. It can make things worse,. In fact, Ninja Theory wasn't doing much new. The only thing going for them were aesthetics, level design (especially comapred to 4), the weapon switching. You had a story that was just a weak retread/combination of DMC's 1-4. Dante and Vergil was the retread of DMC 1 & 3, Mundus was combination of himself and Arius (evil demon in business suit with a demonic corporate tower), and DmC!Dante was an expy of Nero. The grappling and pulling to demons. When you get down to it, DmC played like a lesser/streamlined version of 4. Dante felt more like a tool, then a fleshed out character, even if his development is weak. Vergil did not feel like a proper rival and I felt he was just thrown in the game at the last minute. Kat I do like, but I prefer Lady, Trish, and Lucia over her. She was more useful than Kyrie, so I'll give her that.

The problem with DmC and other games of the 7th generation was that you had companies reboot franchises or sequels left and right, to make them "dark", "edgy", or grim and gritty to be seen as adult and mature. Bionic Commando, Dead to Rights, Syndicate, Turok, and freaking Bomberman! Either made for mass market or Western appeal. And don't even get me started on Koei-Tecmo's fiasco with Ninja Gaiden 3 or Yaiba. All of them either had crappy story, dialogue character, gameplay, or all of the above. Now, there were some good reboots like Shadow Warrior (though I did not care much for it), Wolfenstein: The New Order (the 2009 version was just alright), Rayman Origins and Doom. The last one is cheating, but it further proves my point that you need more than just gore , swearing, or to make a good game.

I heavily disagree with your opinion on DMC3. The story gets insight on both Dante and Lady as characters and you see a swift and subtle change as both rise to the tower. In fact, Lady is the most developed female character out of any of the women in the entire franchise. You find out why Dante and Vergil are on opposite sides with dialouge and what is being shown. Arkham was more interesting and likeable villain than Sanctus, Arius, and DmC!Mundus. Not mention the demon bosses were all for more interesting than what DmC was doing. Now, not all the bosses I liked: hated Arkham's fight on DMD, Cerberus can get annoying sometimes, and I never cared much for Greyon. With that said, I find them more interesting than the Hunter, Lilith, or DmC!Mundus. Looking back, most people see DmC as an uneeeded attempt to fix a problem that wasn't there. Had the game been called something else or a proper spin-off with giving all of the characters different names, the game might have fared better. Which is ironic, because that's what the original Devil May Cry was. DMC was going to be RE4, but they changed it, due to straying too far and not being scary enough. HA HA! Irony! Why Capcom could not do that again has already been answered.
DmC again still did more to bring it's universe together by actually giving its iteration a better foundation to start fresh and build up from there. DMC1 had that too but then it all went off track with DMC3 and altered already established canon.

Character wise I'd say new!Dante was pretty solid but that's more so my bias since he's my favorite version. Plus I'd say he was way better then Nero was in DMC4. Plus had better gameplay then him as well.

As for DMC3, it's not a bad story but it's not anything special. In the end it's characters, gameplay, and scenery are what catch my attention. Not it's story per-say.

I don't mind dark edgy reboots as long as their good. I hold no extreme attachment to the classic series and would've loved to have seen a DmC2. But I'll settle for DMC5 with DmC elements.
 
DmC again still did more to bring it's universe together by actually giving its iteration a better foundation to start fresh and build up from there. DMC1 had that too but then it all went off track with DMC3 and altered already established canon.

Character wise I'd say new!Dante was pretty solid but that's more so my bias since he's my favorite version. Plus I'd say he was way better then Nero was in DMC4. Plus had better gameplay then him as well.

As for DMC3, it's not a bad story but it's not anything special. In the end it's characters, gameplay, and scenery are what catch my attention. Not it's story per-say.

I don't mind dark edgy reboots as long as their good. I hold no extreme attachment to the classic series and would've loved to have seen a DmC2. But I'll settle for DMC5 with DmC elements.

1. More power to you on that one, but I don't feel that way

2. DmC!Dante is tedious and lacks the charisma of Nero or Dante. I tolerate him now, but hated him back then. If it's any consolation, he's better than Kratos (God of War 1-3)

3. Like I said, none of stories are perfect, but 3 hit the right balance of story and character

4. That's the problem. a majority of those type of reboots failed in sales, and did not go anywhere. In some cases, killed the franchise. See Turok or Bionic Commando.

My points of DmC can be summed up in these two videos. Though the guy talking dislikes DmC way more than me.

>

>
 
Last edited:
Old Vergil didn't really HAVE a point as to what he would REALLY do with all that power. We never really KNOW what he was going to do with it accept that he wanted it.
New Vergil at least had a goal; to rule the world once Mundus was gone. Then after VD, he decided to continue with that goal, but with an army of demons behind him.
Not very innovative but at least there's a clear motive, unlike Vergil whose only clear motive is to just have power just to have it as a son of Sparda, and looking evil.
 
Old Vergil didn't really HAVE a point as to what he would REALLY do with all that power. We never really KNOW what he was going to do with it accept that he wanted it.
New Vergil at least had a goal; to rule the world once Mundus was gone. Then after VD, he decided to continue with that goal, but with an army of demons behind him.
Not very innovative but at least there's a clear motive, unlike Vergil whose only clear motive is to just have power just to have it as a son of Sparda, and looking evil.

DMC3!Vergil did have a point (you're not supposed to agree with him, but you understand why). Dante and Vergil both lost the same mother, and both reacted differently. Dante hated his demon side ("I don't have a father"), and Vergil hated his human side ("Might controls everything"). The elder brother saw humans as weak and he decided to embrace his demonic side. With their mother's death, he saw that as truth. Plus, Vergil wanted to be like daddy; Dante even pointed this out: "What are you gonna do with all that power? You'll never be like father." Note: I am paraphrasing. Though it's prety obvious Vergil wanted to become a full demon and rule the demon world. He didn't give a **** what would happen with humanity caught in the crossfire; especially with the gate opened. The DMC3 manga, a prequel to the game, spells out Dante and Vergil's motivations on a chalkboard for those who didn't get the hint or are new to the franchise.

DmC!Vergil was more of a schemer (and not a good one), but saw humans as weak as well. While DmC!Vergil wanted to "protect" humanity from themselves, DMC3!Vergil held nothing, but contempt for humanity. If both Vergils' were to either meet, DMC3!Vergil would be disgusted by his counterpart's actions. Even though he saw humans as weak, the original version still had love and respect for his mother. Something the reboot version lacked, had favoritism issues, and cut ties to whatever was holding him back. Also, DMC3!Vergil would slice DmC!Vergil's ass any day of the week. DMC3!Vergil is a well written anti-villain, whileDmC!Vergil is a badly written anti-hero and anti-villain. It can't be much of a downfall, if you never had to fall down from to begin with.

Proof:

>

>
 
Last edited:
@Innsmouth I was not trying to, but DragonMaster responded me, so I responded back,

@Jack500 Just so we're clear, it was called trying to prove a point. I call bulllcrap in bad storytelling. If I said all the stories in the old continuity were bad and unbearable, would your reaction be the same? Look, I've made peace with DmC, thanks to DE version, but it further proves the problems with the vanilla version, and Capcom was trying too hard to appeal to the Western market or people who had no interest in Devil May Cry to begin with at the expense of everything else (Devil May Cry wasn't the only one to suffer from this either). I am not going to any further, because I like to keep things positive. I've made my case here and I'm moving on to something else. If you want to add something about DMC5's appeal to Western audiences feel free (sincerity mode).
 
@Innsmouth the topic is about Capcom wanting DMCV to appeal to westerns audiences. Fans were against it because of DmC and so we started to debate the merits of it. After all DmC was promoted as a western reimagining.

To me trying to appeal to Western audiences was not a bad idea. Same with trying to appeal to youth/female audiences in DMC4. Capcom is a bussiness after all and reaching the largest audience is the focus of bussiness.

The execution was just off (DmC/DMC4) or bad (anime).

maybe DMCV will do a better job?
 
@Z218 I agree, but than again imo, Capcom was always fairly progressive compared to many other japanese studios. It's not Compile Heart or NIS. Many of their games like Resident Evil, Onimusha, Dead Rising or Lost Planet aimed to universal audience, instead of limiting themselves to niche japanese market. They just upping their game by mixing crazy action which is uncommon for western games, with photorealistic visuals. I too hope DMCV fairs better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: V's patron
Just so we're clear, it was called trying to prove a point
What point? That you're clearly biased. Because that's the only thing you proven so far.

I call bulllcrap in bad storytelling. If I said all the stories in the old continuity were bad and unbearable, would your reaction be the same?
But you didn't do that. You singled out DmC's story and called it pretentious crap, and then right after went on to praise DMC 3 story as the best in the series.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Demi-fiend
What point? That you're clearly biased. Because that's the only thing you proven so far.


But you didn't do that. You singled out DmC's story and called it pretentious crap, and then right after went on to praise DMC 3 story as the best in the series.


So what? Everyone has a biased for or against something. The reboot was something most fans weren't asking for. Like I told the other guy, if you like everything about DmC, more power to you. I am not going to argue back and forth, and if anyone is getting off topic now, it's you. And I didn't just single out DmC, you clearly ignored what I said about 2. Capcom, or whoever was on the righting staff, clearly did not care or barely cared. I am not dragging this out any further.
 
Last edited:
Alright, enough. All of you.

There is a very clear rule here against DmC bashing. It may be in the DMC5 section but it applies to the entire forum. To put it simply this forum is for all DMC fans, even DmC ones, so if you have something negative to say about that game it needs to be more constructive than it's a 'piece of s***' or, more to the point, 'it's pretentious crap.'

It's not hard: avoid condescending adjectives and present your opinion in a civilized manner. If you think it's pretentious you can present an argument for it. If you don't like it, that's perfectly fine, you can say so and why so, just don't be condescending or malicious about it.

Pretend the game is a dude and you are sitting next to his brother. You can tell him how much you dislike him but you don't want to make him mad and have him start swinging to defend his brother.

This is your only warning, all of you. Any more of it and I'll start banning people from the thread.

and inclusion" bull****.
I know this was a while back but, dude, language.

And here I was about to put my 2 cents on the matter...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lain and V's patron
What does appealing to the west even mean?

Good question. Here's another one. Why would you even increase your efforts in "appealing to the west"? I don't think the series is badly received here.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: V's patron
So I guess we could talk about how should DMC appealed to the west?

What does appealing to the west even mean?

It means for Americans! IN AMERICA! MURICA! And sometimes the UK and Europeans.

Yeah, that's always been Capcom's deal since 1995. Sure, they had plenty of stuff that appealed to the Japanese or were universal, but as the years went on, that started to decrease. Dead Rising, Resident Evil (yes, it was universal, but that was decreasing in the years), and Lost Planet 3 being some of the examples.
 
  • Like
Reactions: V's patron
What does appealing to the west even mean?
It's a Japanese perception of what appeals to the west. Square Enix has been doing the same thing for years. They shifted their focus on the kind of games they used to make to games they think the west are in to, which has an ironic effect since they tend to be very Japanese, anyway, but they're never quite as good as the games they used to make.

Japanese makers seem to have forgotten that it was that Japanese charm that attracted those players in the first place. Their efforts to be more western just makes the product sub par and less appealing since it ends up being what they think the west will like. Square learned that when they found a surprise hit in Bravely Default. Capcom is still trying to make all their games western friendly by leaving behind the Japanese style of storytelling and game making. I think this mentality is why Capcom is pushing the hyper realism so hard, too, because the west seems obsessed with graphics and, from what they might perceive, think it's even more important than the gameplay.

You also have to blame Japan because the shift in what's popular has also affected the kind of games and people who make games. There is a strictly distinct difference between RE1 and RE6. The way people approach games and characters has change drastically and not all for the better.

Why would you even increase your efforts in "appealing to the west"? I don't think the series is badly received here.
Since the US is the biggest consumer of video games in the world it's only natural for game developers to try to appeal to that market. Even Japan no longer buys councils like they used to because they feel like they are not worth the effort. Many gamers there still rather play the PS2 or 3 than bother to get a PS4.

It bothers me quite a bit because some of my favorite games were very distinctly Japanese. Even games like DMC1 and RE4 are clearly Japanese, no one would confuse them for western made, would never be made by a Japanese company in this day and age and that's my problem. The Japanese developers are no longer making the kinds of games that they used to make, the kind I fell in love with.

I also agree a lot with @xMobilemux, foul language aside and the whole 'we're dedicated to diversity' makes me mad for other reasons and I never make those correlations (it's because it's reverse fascism). These statements raise some huge red flags because my least favorite games in the series, DMC4 and DmC, had the exact same press releases. "We're appealing to western audiences."

Referring back to RE4 and DMC1, being my 2 favorite games of all time and Capcom titles, which only helps to emphasise the point. These games were never advertised as being for western audiences, nor were they made with that mentality in mind. They were made with combat, fun, and focus on giving the best experience in mind. That's what games should focus on. Not being appealing to a demographic. If you make a game and work hard to create and experience that's just worth playing it doesn't matter how 'western' or 'Japanese' your game is, you will find an audience, and when you have a huge publisher like Capcom backing you you'll find it faster.

I have friends who are always complaining about game design in Japanese games. Frickin' always. Playing RE1 they're constantly calling out the inconsistencies with reality, the impracticality of the castle, the nonsensical aspects of gameplay, stage design, creature locations and designs and nagging all the time about the story. But as much as they complain about it those are the games they play the most.

All that bitching a whinnying is trivial and just minor nags that everyone complains about and it's why they think that games that don't have those things are the better games. I'd argue that that's a shallow perception because as much praise those changes get and as little as people complain about those characteristics by contrast to the old games they don't play those games as much and they sure as hell aren't as memorable. Nobody defends Horizon Zero Dawn or RE7, maybe even the new Spider-Man, with the same amount of passion as they do RE4. Yeah, refined gameplay, more realism, better story and writing and so on, but those games lack the charm that those old games had. That's what I think we've lost in modern games, what makes those games that focused on being games more than appealing to western audiences.
 
Good question. Here's another one. Why would you even increase your efforts in "appealing to the west"? I don't think the series is badly received here.
Capcom's a business so they wanted to maximize profits. They got 2.5 million units for DMC4 and wanted the Call of Duty numbers (5 million or so).

To me changing the story was the wrong play. They should have focused more on why Hack and slash games don't sell well in the west during that period (2010-2013). More market research like what they did Bioshock Infinite and figuring out how to correct that problem.

@berto ohh ok.
 
Last edited:
Capcom's a business so they wanted to maximize profits. They got 2.5 million units for DMC4 and wanted the Call of Duty numbers (5 million or so).
That was the major problem with generation 7 after COD4. You had too many publishers/developers with overly high or impossible sales figures and expectations. If it wasn't that, it was them trying to make their games more like COD or Gears of War. Most of them ended up being failures, because that target audience they were gunning for either went back to COD/Gears, or never left there space.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: V's patron