DmC: Eastern to Western

[Alittleacorn]

Acorn, about the gay cowboys thing, i think it's more about people thinking: "Why they pick this image? Why with the gay cowboys?", there's really no reason to pick that specific image considering how Dante is. It's not like i type "Cowboys" in Google and the very first image that we see is that specific image, i actually give it a try and one of the very first images showing cowboys standing in some pose was this:

Simple, that film is set in 1873 and they are dressed to that era. So that's probably why they picked Brokeback Mountain, the two were dressed like modern day cowboys and was a more likely film people would recognize, and didn't let homophobia get in the way of their decision.

For example that picture you just showed me of Cowboys & Aliens, what if it turned out those two were actually lovers in the film, would they dress any differently than they are now? The guys in Brokeback Mountain don't, so there's really no problem because homosexuals don't go around wearing a T-shirts with "I'm gay, judge me" written on them.

Forgot it has elements of DMC 3 like story in their, Astro Boy(Mundus boss fight same as bot )

and basically some Animesque qualities

I really enjoyed that Astro Boy film. Yeah it could've been a whole lot darker instead of kid friendly, but I still enjoyed it :3 I actually thought of that film when Mundus showed up at that point.

 

[LysseC]

Justify a rip off by pointing to the source not being original.

Well isn't that just typical.

It's like this:
I say DmC has ripped off from They Live right?
You say "Well They Live has ripped off from something too"
And i think your point is "Because They Live ripped off from something too, then it nullifies DmC ripping off from They Live".

And my point is---> no it doesnt.

When someone says that They Live ripped off something else, is meant as a justification in this sense:

X ripped off Y, and X is criticized because of this
But
Z ripped off W, but you don't criticize Z because of this.
So
Either a rip off is a reason for criticizing, and thus BOTH Z AND X should be criticized, or a rip off is not, and thus NEITHER Z NOR X should be criticized.

I explicitly used Z, instead of using Y again, to show that the fact that Z and Y coincide is not relevant to the pivotal point of the argument (using the same criterion for judging two similar cases).


While your example uses a different structure.
X kills Y
But
Y has killed W
Thus X is justified in killing Z

If you try and do what I did, separating Y into Y and Z,
X kills Y
But
Z has killed W
Thus X is justified in killing Y

You can see that the argument is clearly flawed. That's because your way of interpreting the "rip off argument" makes it a pivotal point that Y and Z coincide.
But if you interpret the "rip off argument" as I did, I repeat, you'll see that for it to work, it is not necessary that Y and Z coincide.

(To be fair, a further specification about the difference between these arguments should be explained, but I don't think this is the right moment to do it.)

And as it has already been beautifully explained, since many things today "rip off" something else (meaning that they take elements of something and put it somewhere else), you can't isolate one of these works and criticize it for ripping off without criticizing ALL THE OTHERS for the same reason, or else you are being inconsistent.

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

When someone says that They Live ripped off something else, is meant as a justification in this sense:

X ripped off Y, and X is criticized because of this
But
Z ripped off W, but you don't criticize Z because of this.
So
Either a rip off is a reason for criticizing, and thus BOTH Z AND X should be criticized, or a rip off is not, and thus NEITHER Z NOR X should be criticized.

I explicitly used Z, instead of using Y again, to show that the fact that Z and Y coincide is not relevant to the pivotal point of the argument (using the same criterion for judging two similar cases).

You are correct. And i am not saying one should not criticize Z. But i am criticizing X because i've been told many times that Ninja theory are great at storytelling.
Anyone can feel free to criticize Z.
I am simply saying that by criticizing Z it won't justify the rip off X has done.

While your example uses a different structure.
X kills Y
But
Y has killed W
Thus X is justified in killing Z

If you try and do what I did, separating Y into Y and Z,
X kills Y
But
Z has killed W
Thus X is justified in killing Y

You can see that the argument is clearly flawed. That's because your way of interpreting the "rip off argument" makes it a pivotal point that Y and Z coincide.
But if you interpret the "rip off argument" as I did, I repeat, you'll see that for it to work, it is not necessary that Y and Z coincide.

(To be fair, a further specification about the difference between these arguments should be explained, but I don't think this is the right moment to do it.)

I don't understand your message. It became to general.

And as it has already been beautifully explained, since many things today "rip off" something else (meaning that they take elements of something and put it somewhere else), you can't isolate one of these works and criticize it for ripping off without criticizing ALL THE OTHERS for the same reason, or else you are being inconsistent.

Why cant i?
I am part of DMC community, and thus i am aware of DmC and DMC's rip offs.

I dont want to go out of my way to find out "What other work has ripped off from They Live like DmC?", and why should i?
However because i am not interested in doing such thing does not mean i have reserved my mind that DmC should be the only thing being criticized for ripping off from They Live. But i am aware of DmC, not anything else. And asking me to criticize other things (movie, games, etc) that rip off from They live requires me to do alot of research, and i dont want to do that. Its because of me being fan of DMC that i know of DmC.
Otherwise i would never know that DmC had ripped off from They Live.

 

[LysseC]

You are correct. And i am not saying one should not criticize Z. But i am criticizing X because i've been told many times that Ninja theory are great at storytelling.
Anyone can feel free to criticize Z.
I am simply saying that by criticizing Z it won't justify the rip off X has done.


I don't understand your message. It became to general.



Why cant i?
I am part of DMC community, and thus i am aware of DmC and DMC's rip offs.

I dont want to go out of my way to find out "What other work has ripped off from They Live like DmC?", and why should i?
However because i am not interested in doing such thing does not mean i have reserved my mind that DmC should be the only thing being criticized for ripping off from They Live. But i am aware of DmC, not anything else. And asking me to criticize other things (movie, games, etc) that rip off from They live requires me to do alot of research, and i dont want to do that. Its because of me being fan of DMC that i know of DmC.
Otherwise i would never know that DmC had ripped off from They Live.

I made quite the mess with my previous examples, but to explain why would simply complicate things more.
I hope you trust me when I say that the problem is simply that while we all agree that killing is wrong, we don't always agree that ripping off is a problem.

Now, to be precise, we should define ripping off: is it just taking inspiration or is it plagiarism? The first is something that is acceptable, and sometimes even constitutes a good thing (even for someone who wants to create a good plot), while the second is not.

As some posters before have said, "ripping off" happens quite often: ideas are taken from a source and used in other contexts. This does not happen only with DmC and They Live.
For example, Game of Thrones is clearly inspired by the War of the Roses that happened in England (just think about the name Lannister and the compare it with Lancaster...). But we don't "criticize" it for this (criticize meaning giving it less value because it took inspiration from something else).
When I say that many things rip off many others, I mean everything (or almost everything), not only things that rip off from They Live.

The rip off that you say DmC has done with They Live is, if I understand what other people who actually watched it say, is not plagiarism, because, alhtough maintaining some elements of They Live, it still changed many things.
Since I watched V for Vendetta, I can say from first hand experience that the same goes for the connection between DmC Vergil and V.
The fact that their masks are very similar is not a problem of little inventive on NT's part, but a case of explicit citation, something that, if inserted in a contexts of "changed things" doesn't constitute plagarism.

Now, that being said, as always, you can still dislike DmC, I wouldn't impose on you to like it, you know me...

When I say "you should also criticize other things" I don't obviously mean that you should write down a list and here and now criticize all things that took inspiration from something else, it would be silly. I just say that, if you criticize DmC here and now for taking inspiration from V for Vendetta, then if and when you watch Game of Thrones, you should criticize it for taking inspiration from the War of the Roses, or, if and when you watch the movie Equilibrium you should criticize it for taking inspiration from the book 1984 from George Orwell, and so on and so on...
Maybe you will dislike Equilibrium and GoT, it's not a problem af an overall judgement, but is simply and strictly a matter of thinking they have a higher or lower value depending on the "rip off issue".

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

I'll take your word for it that my analogy of murder was flawed. I tried hard to get a good analogy to illustrate my point, i guess i failed lol.

Anyway, i never said DmC plagirized They Live, but i do think they ripped idea off They Live.

I dont consider it a very bad thing as you said alot people do it, and its scale is pretty small. And i dont mind that to much, but that doesnt mean i dont think its not a rip off.

As for V for Vendetta - thats more of a issue than They Live in my eyes. It's not a very general idea they have ripped off.

The idea they took from V was a man speaking on tv with a mask about how there is "lies". A DISTINCT IDEA.
In contrast to a idea they were INSPIRED by from They Live, which is the idea of "something to keep humans in check".
In They Live it was a antenna, in DmC they went based on the foundation (the idea) and ripped it then off from Futurama (a drink).

So yeah i find Futurama and V rip off(s) to be more serious than They Live. Because those are distinct things your taking from other people's work, and if you claim to be leading developers within story telling --- then you should have a mindset that encourages originality to a better degree.

I think i've even noticed DmC ripping off distinct ideas from a other game.
I'd argue that it's close to plagiarism.

 

[LysseC]

As for Vergil and V, I personally don't think it's plagiarism because, although it being a definite idea that it was taken from V for Vendetta, in this case we are talking about an open citation of a previous work that becam quite iconic of its genre.
I don't think that NT, by outting scenes that were so clearly inspired by V, is feigning originality, but is explicitly citing another work. By doing so, it's like saying: "my merit is not in having invented something new, but in having knowledge that a masterpiece speaking of these issues has already been created, and here I am giving homage to that masterpiece".

But I can admit that this is debeatable.

Edit: oh, and I don't think your analogy was completely flawed, just that it needed much more clarification than I did. My fault, in that.

Edit n.2:
Oh, I think I have a good explanation fo why it is not plagiarism: because DmC doesn't take ideas ONLY from V. DmC is maybe constituted in a good part of distinct idea coming from V, but is also adds in other ideas (like those coming from They Live, or the idea, that comes from DMC obviously, of demons and the conflict between brothers). If DmC was simply a videogame rendition of V for Vendetta, then, ok, it would've been clearly plagiarism. But since there are other ideas that concurred in its formation, then it doesn't constitute plagiarism imo.

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

I don't think because DmC story being a mix of DMC, They Live and V for Vendetta makes it a good argument for why it is not plagiarism.
Perhaps it's not plagiarism because they live in UK, and V was a british novel no?
But that would be clarified if the author of the novel said "I dont mind that", but without knowing if the author has given conscent or not, we can't conclude its not plagiarism based soley on NT's intent.

It's a very small idea: A masked man speaks to public about lies.

I look at plagiarism not from a big perspective i.e small dinstinct ideas can be plagiarized. Because even ideas can be plagarizied. I dont look at DmC and think "Well there are alot of things different from V for Vendetta therefor V for Vergil is not plagiarism".

e.g imagine a sword named "Argonsax", and it has dinstinct trait.
If someone goes and implements Argonsax into their game, changes the name to "Cutter" but the same distinct features Argonsax has is in Cutter only with a different pencil:
Wouldnt that be plagiarism( independt of how trivial a sword may be)?

 

[VineBigBoss]

Simple, that film is set in 1873 and they are dressed to that era. So that's probably why they picked Brokeback Mountain, the two were dressed like modern day cowboys and was a more likely film people would recognize, and didn't let homophobia get in the way of their decision.

For example that picture you just showed me of Cowboys & Aliens, what if it turned out those two were actually lovers in the film, would they dress any differently than they are now? The guys in Brokeback Mountain don't, so there's really no problem because homosexuals don't go around wearing a T-shirts with "I'm gay, judge me" written on them.

This ends as pure damage control, neither you or i knows for sure what were NT intentions and ideas behind this. And even if they "don't let homophobia get in the way of their decision" they know that it's not a good idea to portray a character a lot of people love as a gay cowboy; if they want to live as a studio they have to learn at least a little about the meaning of "respecting a potential buyer".

But, yeah, no point in this discussion anymore. All things there ends is the mostly subjective level possible.

 

[Chancey289]

All you are doing Demon is nit picking. It's like a strawman argument. After all, you admitted you've never even seen They Live.

DmC's plot is actually a pretty standard sci-fi plot. The passive aggressive fist secretly controlling the world. How many times have we seen this stuff? Oh and it's not the first to take jabs at capitalism and corporate America.

You have to understand something about fiction. I tends to feed off of itself and it influences other off shoots like LysseC pointed out.

-William Gibson's Neuromancer and 1984
-J.R.R. Tolkien's legacy
-films like Halloween (also by John Carpenter)

-Arthur C. Clarke's 2001: A Space Odyssey
ETC. ETC.

Works like that have been so influential they have even spawned sub genres. DmC will not be the last time you see a story like this. Stories like this will be used time and time again because it's like in a cultural conscious. EVERY piece of fiction is at least inspired by something else. Sometimes liberally. If you tried you can point out similarities in just about everything. There's a fine line between taking inspiration from something and straight up plagiarism though.

And some of the most successful stories are even far from original. Take Halo for example.
A ringed shape world huh? Let me introduce you to a book that came out about 30 years before Halo even showed up.

Total rip-off right? I would personally say yea because I also think Ringworld is the better story but Halo takes from other things too. The entire Covenant vs. humans war is inspired by the Persian war (what the movie 300 was based on so you can understand better) The Covenant was an army of different aliens that were even slaves forced in to this war so it was very diverse just like the Persian army. And who did they fight? Spartans. Halo flat out names their super soldier program Spartans.

I can also point out the Ender's Game and Starship Troopers similarities but I'd be arguing semantic and also nitpicking. You see the point I'm making about fiction here? . No one makes a truly original story anymore and the only reason you're trying to diss DmC so much is simply because you don't like it. Simple as that.

 

[Alittleacorn]

This ends as pure damage control, neither you or i knows for sure what were NT intentions and ideas behind this. And even if they "don't let homophobia get in the way of their decision" they know that it's not a good idea to portray a character a lot of people love as a gay cowboy; if they want to live as a studio they have to learn at least a little about the meaning of "respecting a potential buyer".

But, yeah, no point in this discussion anymore. All things there ends is the mostly subjective level possible.

Why do I keep hearing this word, damage control? All they're doing is showing how they made a game. There's no damage control in that. It doesn't matter what they say though, because people will have it in for them no matter what and jump to their own conclusions by saying they called Dante gay, even though those men dress, nor act no different than anybody else.

 

[LysseC]

I agree with what Chancey said, in general terms, and I disagree with your definition of plagiarism: plagiarism is indeed a grave accusation, that involves the whole work we are discussing about. There is no plagiarism of "small things", so your Argosax example couldn't be considered plagiarism.
Take another example: the Lion King. Would you say that this is a case of plagiarism from Shakespeare's Hamlet? After all, the overall structure of the two stories is very similar: the protagonist is a prince whose father is killed by his uncle, so that said uncle can take the throne. The prince is sent away from the kingdom, but in the end returns and eliminates the usurper. We also have the apparition of the father's ghost to the son.
Those details are not small things at all, they constitute the very bones of the story. But I am far away from accusing The Liong King of being a case of plagiarism.
That's because those two works are very different from each other, and because it is most probable that the Lion King knowingly used the same structure of Hamlet, meaning it as an "homage" to Shakespeare.

That's why, to talk of plagiarism, I think we need two elements that must both be present: one, it involves the whole work, not just elements of it (in the sense that there is nothing else to my work than things taken from a single other source); and two, no recognition, on the creator's part, of the source of inspiration (which is, pretending that my work is not inspired by anything else).
I don't think this is the case for DmC. I am quite sure NT was recognizing the merits of V for Vendetta, and that's why it's not plagiarism, exactly how Disney was recognizing the merits of Hamlet when using it.

 

[VineBigBoss]

Why do I keep hearing this word, damage control? All they're doing is showing how they made a game. There's no damage control in that. It doesn't matter what they say though, because people will have it in for them no matter what and jump to their own conclusions by saying they called Dante gay, even though those men dress, nor act no different than anybody else.

Because that's what a good portion of DmC fans are trying to do regarding Ninja Theory's behaviour. If you take a quick look at the comments in this site, for example, you'll see that it's not just people from the DMC fanbase that actually was displeased with Capcom's and NT's attitude towards the fanbase in general:

http://n4g.com/news/1208615/npd-dmc-devil-may-cry-bombs-badly-in-february-ni-no-kuni-sells-more

The problem isn't what they are doing, Acorn, the problem is the choices they made to do this; how they are doing. We would not even having this discussion if they just showed the two cowboys i posted or not tried to generalize all japanese culture as these people who dress in a strange fashion, for example . They've wanted to poke the fanbase not just once, but multiple times and DmC fans still are trying to force their interpretations into other people's heads of NT's actions. NT burrys their own graves as devs when they do this and they will have to work double hard to clean all this mess they made, if your job and you work depends on audience it becomes your problem what messages you pass on to them.

As i said before: i don't really care about the entire mess, just some individual things like Tameem and big reviewers generally speaking as the entire DMC fanbase (that i'm part off) are "entlitled" trying to portray us as big villains of the failure of this game, which for the most is simple the majority of us not supporting the game and not buying it; but some people do care about all the **** they have done, and well, that's their problem. If NT actually make a good game that's not related to the Devil May Cry franchise in the future, i'm probably buying it, but if they keep this arrogant and self-centred attitude it will just hurt them as games developers because there are people who dislike this.

 

[OppressedWriter]

Because that'

But Ninja Theory didn't release this, it was at a developers conference and mainly about the art style of the game (a canned 10 minute presentation at that). It's not even meant to be regular publicity or PR for the game. It was only reported because famitsu and other magazines realized its click bait. You don't see all the other companies presentations being discussed at GDC like this one.

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

Why do I keep hearing this word, damage control? All they're doing is showing how they made a game. There's no damage control in that. It doesn't matter what they say though, because people will have it in for them no matter what and jump to their own conclusions by saying they called Dante gay, even though those men dress, nor act no different than anybody else.

Is people misunderstanding Ninja theory any different than:

People assuming white hair was a reason for why people hated on DmC?
In this thread i argumented for why people hated on DmC because of CHANGE OF CHARACTER, not because of white hair, and i feel that i made a really reasonable point.

But does my reasonable point help dissolve the perception that people disliked DmC because they dont like black hair? No, people still posted in the thread about "Hating DmC for White hair", obviously the issue is MORE than that.

I watched EventStatus video, and he seemed to either have misunderstood NT's intent with the brokeback mountain picture or he was just twisting the truth.
And i told him "Hey thats actually not true, NT wasnt insinuating that Dante was gay".
I lost quite a bit respect for him because of that.


However, i think NT in a way deserves whats coming to them. Why did they pick that picture in particular?
+ Why did they have that wig scene in DmC?
+ Why did Tameem need to speak of original Dante not being cool and would get laughed out if Reboot Dante wasn't original Dante and was a rebooted character which by default means not the same character i.e changed one.

I think Tameem is one of the most disrespectful people ive seen in gaming industry. I recall reading twitter messages of his where he was making fun of "What character should i reboot next".

 

[VineBigBoss]

But Ninja Theory didn't release this, it was at a developers conference and mainly about the art style of the game (a canned 10 minute presentation at that). It's not even meant to be regular publicity or PR for the game. It was only reported because famitsu and other magazines realized its click bait. You don't see all the other companies presentations being discussed at GDC like this one.

I understand that, Sam. But the same way: they've bring doom themselves to their heads, if they had taken a more discreet attitude on how they were compare the "old" and the "new" they wouldn't bring more reasons to hate on them and their game, you give people some reason to make a loud and controversial picture of you, be certain that they will ensure to spread it.

 

[LysseC]

I understand that, Sam. But the same way: they've bring doom themselves to their heads, if they had taken a more discreet attitude on how they were compare the "old" and the "new" they wouldn't bring more reasons to hate on them and their game, you give people some reason to make a loud and controversial picture of you, be certain that they will ensure to spread it.

Yep, although I may agree with Acorn's interpretation of what NT meant to say with those pictures, you're completely right in saying that the way they put things was not the most... sensible one.
If NT had been more careful in how they traded, maybe the division between fans would not be so hard as it is now.

It's the same thing that happens when debating on this forum, if we think about it. If I start putting forth my opinion with an harsh language, I cannot expect people taking it well, and it may even cause an escalation leading to a flamewar.
If, on the contrary, I state my opinion in a respectful way, then it's more probable that people will react well to it, and even give it much more consideration.
I think that in this case NT was not very smart in how they put things. Then we must consider that fans too were having this "blind hater" attitude, that maybe riled NT up.
I'm not saying it's all NT's fault, but neither is all the fans' fault too. When I was young, my mother always said to me "Who has more brains should use them", meaning that a smart person should know when it's not the case of using certain ways of speaking and such, because there is a risk of creating a war... Well, maybe NT in this case was not the one with the most brains...

 

[Bazilican]

First of all, Prove on how dante is gay. If you can't, then you can't call him gay. And that's the bottom line.

Video game character. Not real person. No big deal.

Jus calling people sad when they are actually making logical statements on why dante cannot be called gay is pathetic beyond comprehension. Your statements are self-contradictory. You say dante is jus a game character which is implicit that he cannot have sex, yet you want to call him gay. You're jus wasting everyone's time.

When did I ever call him gay?

For someone who does not give a flying f*ck about DMC,

I depict his character on how he was designed to act. Nowhere in there did I say he looked or dressed gay.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

Those details are not small things at all, they constitute the very bones of the story. But I am far away from accusing The Liong King of being a case of plagiarism.
That's because those two works are very different from each other, and because it is most probable that the Lion King knowingly used the same structure of Hamlet, meaning it as an "homage" to Shakespeare.

Funny you mention bones :3

I think Tameem is one of the most disrespectful people ive seen in gaming industry. I recall reading twitter messages of his where he was making fun of "What character should i reboot next".

Then you've obviously never seen David Jaffe or Peter Molyneux.

The greater problem with Tameem is that people judged every word he said, and then did everything in their power to give it a negative connotation. Cockmonglers like EventStatus and GameFAQs board members made sure of that. It's so absurd that people could believe a person trying to sell a product would be able to sling insults at his potential consumers, especially when he's speaking for not one, but two different companies. If he really was talking sh!t about DMC fans, do you think he would have been able to continue for two friggin' years? Wouldn't he have been gagged and replaced with someone much more amicable for PR, like any other company trying to sell a product has done? Use your brains, kiddies.

Is Tameem a wank-off sometimes? Yes, but his words didn't even have half the venom people claimed they did :/

 

[VineBigBoss]

Funny you mention bones :3




Then you've obviously never seen David Jaffe or Peter Molyneux.

The greater problem with Tameem is that people judged every word he said, and then did everything in their power to give it a negative connotation. Cockmonglers like EventStatus and GameFAQs board members made sure of that. It's so absurd that people could believe a person trying to sell a product would be able to sling insults at his potential consumers, especially when he's speaking for not one, but two different companies. If he really was talking sh!t about DMC fans, do you think he would have been able to continue for two friggin' years? Wouldn't he have been gagged and replaced with someone much more amicable for PR, like any other company trying to sell a product has done? Use your brains, kiddies.

Is Tameem a wank-off sometimes? Yes, but his words didn't even have half the venom people claimed they did :/

But Tameem asked for this, like i said before: if you have to deal with some audience to make your product sell, then what you say becomes a issue if it **** people off; he went too far with his jokes even if they are really innocent, and to sum up with his jokes there are the tensions regarding all the reboot itself, that TGS 2010 trailer is one of the most easy example to use about this; personally i don't believe he was innocent regarding his actions, he went to the level of poking the old fanbase in the very final product itself and you don't just do this "accidentaly". He was stupid by giving attention to upset fans and diging even more in the scar the idea of a reboot itself (which is a Capcom decision, it's worth to remember this) had created in the fans minds. And about he not been taken away from the interviews and things like this, i think it came from both Capcom and Ninja Theory unreal expectations regarding the impact this game would create by itself, it ended to an opposite direction they first imagine (being the worst selling title instead figuring as one of the best sellers at least), until now Capcom don't had to deal with fans "voting with their wallets", i think this is one of the first times this happens with them.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

Yeah, he didn't do himself any favors by starting to talk back to his detractors, but I'm also not going to blame him. They made him out to be a pariah from word Go, and he probably just got tired of staying silent in the wake of their sh!t. And it's not like anything said by 2011 was going to change a lot of those detractor's minds, they were dead-set on ****ing on Tameem, NT, and DmC.

At that point all Tameem is guilty of is fighting back and digging in when he should have just let it slide. Although he also did that a lot, playing it passively, especially to some really f#cked up detractors (like the "AntiTameem" guy on twitter who kept 'shopping Tam's face on gay dudes and just berating him like...everyday).

I still think people were way too oversensitive about the wig joke in DmC, though :/ You have to ignore the complete irony that comes at the end of the game when Dante gets his iconic hair color. People just can't take a joke, and need to lighten the f#ck up.

In any case, I stand by what I say; people went out of their way to make everything that was said sound way worse than it really was.

But yeah, you wanna really see the worst of the worst, David Jaffe, while he makes great games, is an unapologetic, sometimes standoffish guy who doesn't compromise. I can only imagine how things would have gone if Tameem had Jaffe's personality @_@

Peter Molyneux is probably my personal worst person in the game industry. For all three of his games (Fable) he pathologically lied to consumer's faces, promising things like being able to go to those mountains in the distance (you couldn't), and having revolutionary fully realized co-op (you couldn't go very far from the host player, and couldn't even play as your own character). He didn't just pull some PR fluff to make his game sound better, he literally promised functions in his products that they ultimately lacked. He also has his head shoved so firmly up his own butt that he can see his spleen, and he carries the aura of someone who actually thinks they're a genius :/

Anyway, I'm not going to debate Tameem and devs and whatnot anymore. I'm tired of repeating myself to people who ultimately aren't going to listen.