majeh116
Well-known Member
yeah your overestimating human's complexity XD
Does "Hate" mean "Different"?
- Thread starter MegaMad9
- Start date
But to say that all hate only comes from something being different is narrowminded! Hate can come from many other things as well. Say, if your kid was beaten up by a group of people, then you wouldn't hate those people because they are different. Or if some b*tch talked smack about you behind your back and you found out about it, hatred towards her wouldn't be because she is different either.
Unreasonable hate... now THAT is where this theory makes sense.
Unreasonable hate... now THAT is where this theory makes sense.
TWOxACROSS
Hot-blooded God of Guns
I was just going to say. To see different types of hate, you can even look at Dante in DmC. He doesn't hate the demons for being different, he hates them because they essentially ruined his life. Sometimes hate is bred by prejudice and a fear of something different, but people really are a bit more complex a lot of the time.
Everyone has their own reason for hating this or that, but, sometimes it's not just such a clear cut definition that can be explained so easily.
Everyone has their own reason for hating this or that, but, sometimes it's not just such a clear cut definition that can be explained so easily.
V
Oldschool DMC fan
Precisely. 'Old' DMC is only as 'stale' as the creators were willing to make it and believe that it should be. Bayonetta is very much as J-style, sublimely ridiculous and OTT as the old DMC and yet still popular. It was their decisions along the way that led to this perceived and self-perceived staleness in the DMC franchise. Why does something become stale? If the blame is going to rest anywhere, with the times, the fans or the creators— I'd blame the creators foremost because they have near-infinite creative things they can do with any given IP, just as an artist I would blame myself if my art work is not up to scratch and just not impressing people. I don't blame the times and the trends, or the customers, because I hold all the cards and can do exactly what I like with them as the creator. It is up to me to deliver, not for everyone to automatically like what I spew out. My work does not 'grow stale' all on its own or by the hand of someone other than myself if I'm making blatantly poor decisions about how to use my talent.
I think it's just an excuse, frankly. To say DMC is stale now, is to say CAPCOM shoudn't have to try to fix the problem they have created with its apparent staleness. You don't have to completely redress and reinvent something in all but core ideas because you think something is stale. You simply have to take some calculated risks to deviate from your so-called stale formula and explore areas yet unexplored (and DMC has plenty of them). For people to say (and I have heard them say it) that there is nothing left of the old DMC to explore is to show a deficiency of imagination. Or that this is automatically the next step because everything before has been exhausted. That's balls. It hasn't. It has barely even been touched upon but somehow DMC is 'stale' because CAPCOM says it is and has handed it over to someone else to deal with and take the flak for, probably because a lot of their former talent with this franchise has moved on.
If any one of us had to sit in a room and come up with some premise or some area about Dante's or Sparda's or Vergil's or Eva's life for a new DMC game, even the least imaginative person here could probably manage to figure out that there are things about all of them yet unexplored or dealt with, and that if it was done right, it could make a good game (as good as this new one). There's no excuse for not coming up with something when you have a brain that can think and imagine things. There's no dead end here at all.
I knew there was a reason I liked you. ;D
EllDawn
Well-known Member
Sometimes the way to fix something is to start over. I don't really think Capcom is that willing to try continuing the original series. Sure there's more than can be done, but it doesn't mean anything if those making the game are going to keep using the same formula over and over.
I write, paint ceramics, basically dabble in several forms of art. So I know that there are times where, if you've made so many mistakes, you have to start over in order to save what you're making. The only difference here is that they've released the games and it's obvious when they're trying to start over to make something better of what they originally put out. I'm sure you've noticed that the original series can barely fit together as one story. They've jumped around in the story so much that there are many continuity problems. DmC is a chance for the story to make sense as a whole, once they make sequels. That's how I see it.
V
Oldschool DMC fan
Quite, but that incongruity between various DMC games is entirely CAPCOM's fault, due to no DMC game having the exact same team working on it. I do feel that as a franchise DMC has never had a clear direction and development because of this fact, and it was avoidable, if the effort had been put in, when it clearly wasn't. DMC2 for example— I don't think anyone can really argue (even the people that like it) that it was a sub-par effort, because it was on practically all fronts— detail, characters, plot, environments, gameplay. All falling short of the expectation from the previous title, and that was avoidable. If anything, I'd call it laziness on the part of the new team, not some inherent flaw with the ideas and characters within it. It was how they were used.
And because we know they can do better, we can spot exactly where that laziness appears within the series. True, it perhaps isn't as easy to pick up with a new team where an old one left off, but it's not impossible. If Ninja Theory can do it with their apparent need for outside help, why on Earth couldn't CAPCOM get their asses in gear before when they had all the resources? The answer is that they could have, they just didn't.
I don't think the series had 'mistakes' in it that needed rectifying with a complete slate wipe at all— if anything the slate is being wiped for money, to attract a larger audience, not because there was anything inherently 'wrong' with DMC. They're calling it 'one of the biggest games to be out next year' and 'a major franchise'. That means it was already actually popular, had fans, and was making money or it wouldn't have made it to four games at all— it was not a chronic failure, dying of consumptive staleness. This is IMO language being used to manipulate opinion, to incite the idea that DMC was failing horribly when it wasn't. 4 actually made the most money out of all of the DMC games, and that was the last one, not the first, as if there had been a steady drop in sales from the first DMC game. The sales order from poor to best goes: DMC3, DMC2, DMC1 DMC4, and there are various reasons for this— one of which CAPCOM's own fault for producing DMC2 and making people wary that 3 would suck as badly, because 3 had a much better marketing campaign but the worst sales figures despite being arguably on par with 1. The figures do not do the games themselves justice, but since $$$ figures are what CAPCOM cares about, and the last game was doing better than all of them being multi-platform, they are basically making it up when they claim that DMC was somehow suffering in the context of 'staleness', because the numbers say the opposite. What they really mean is they covet those Western $$$ and that's the most plausible reason for the slate-wipe. I am not beating about the bush here— these are businessmen interested in money, artistic integrity comes second now. It wasn't 'stale', it wasn't 'dead', it was a desire to shift 5 million copies, and to do that they need to woo Western audiences with an all-singing all-dancing Western Style Dante. And not apparently having the desire to have made the right changes in 4 to have prevented that 'staleness' that actually earned them more than any of the previous titles had.
I suppose if I were CEO and wanted to pass the buck and not have to outdo myself and my bad decisions and boo-boos with 4, then I'd give it to some little cheap Western studio to develop as well. It's exactly what I'd do, given the state of the game industry at present and the general current CAPCOM method: recycle or farm out. Who cares if the old fans are ****ed? Who cares about Japan's fussy fans? There are millions of potential more waiting in America and Europe to buy anything if I can convince them it will appeal to them.
In short/tldr;— no, if DMC was truly stale and uncool and failing so abysmally as they claim, there wouldn't have been remotely the amount of furore among gamers over this decision to slate-wipe, because nobody out there would give half a crap. Nor would the last game have made the best sales. There was plenty they could have done with it, other than completely reinvent it— this is being touted as chiefly an artistic decision, when it is not. It is a business decision. For profit.
And because we know they can do better, we can spot exactly where that laziness appears within the series. True, it perhaps isn't as easy to pick up with a new team where an old one left off, but it's not impossible. If Ninja Theory can do it with their apparent need for outside help, why on Earth couldn't CAPCOM get their asses in gear before when they had all the resources? The answer is that they could have, they just didn't.
I don't think the series had 'mistakes' in it that needed rectifying with a complete slate wipe at all— if anything the slate is being wiped for money, to attract a larger audience, not because there was anything inherently 'wrong' with DMC. They're calling it 'one of the biggest games to be out next year' and 'a major franchise'. That means it was already actually popular, had fans, and was making money or it wouldn't have made it to four games at all— it was not a chronic failure, dying of consumptive staleness. This is IMO language being used to manipulate opinion, to incite the idea that DMC was failing horribly when it wasn't. 4 actually made the most money out of all of the DMC games, and that was the last one, not the first, as if there had been a steady drop in sales from the first DMC game. The sales order from poor to best goes: DMC3, DMC2, DMC1 DMC4, and there are various reasons for this— one of which CAPCOM's own fault for producing DMC2 and making people wary that 3 would suck as badly, because 3 had a much better marketing campaign but the worst sales figures despite being arguably on par with 1. The figures do not do the games themselves justice, but since $$$ figures are what CAPCOM cares about, and the last game was doing better than all of them being multi-platform, they are basically making it up when they claim that DMC was somehow suffering in the context of 'staleness', because the numbers say the opposite. What they really mean is they covet those Western $$$ and that's the most plausible reason for the slate-wipe. I am not beating about the bush here— these are businessmen interested in money, artistic integrity comes second now. It wasn't 'stale', it wasn't 'dead', it was a desire to shift 5 million copies, and to do that they need to woo Western audiences with an all-singing all-dancing Western Style Dante. And not apparently having the desire to have made the right changes in 4 to have prevented that 'staleness' that actually earned them more than any of the previous titles had.
I suppose if I were CEO and wanted to pass the buck and not have to outdo myself and my bad decisions and boo-boos with 4, then I'd give it to some little cheap Western studio to develop as well. It's exactly what I'd do, given the state of the game industry at present and the general current CAPCOM method: recycle or farm out. Who cares if the old fans are ****ed? Who cares about Japan's fussy fans? There are millions of potential more waiting in America and Europe to buy anything if I can convince them it will appeal to them.
In short/tldr;— no, if DMC was truly stale and uncool and failing so abysmally as they claim, there wouldn't have been remotely the amount of furore among gamers over this decision to slate-wipe, because nobody out there would give half a crap. Nor would the last game have made the best sales. There was plenty they could have done with it, other than completely reinvent it— this is being touted as chiefly an artistic decision, when it is not. It is a business decision. For profit.
berto
I Saw the Devil
The formula Capcom keeps using is 'how do we appeal to a wider audience?' It's not been about what they can improve the formula but how they can put a different look on it and get people to buy it based on the look over the gameplay. DMC4 and DmC are not leaps and bounds from DMC3 and the only real diference is the cosmetic one.
If RE wasn't making the money it is they would provably reboot that one, too, under you criteria.
That's not quite true. DMC3 and DMC3:SE sold about the same, with the SE been the better selling of the two, DMC3, if you compile both versions is still a better seller than DMC2.
darkslayer13
Enma Katana no Kami
4 million people assuming no one bought both versions of the game. The actual number of people is a lot lower. However 4 million copies sold is just as good no matter how many people bought them.
V
Oldschool DMC fan
I forgot to take into account the extra editions, such as SE and the HD, but that only adds to what I'm saying. They will still have sold. They did sell. Hell, by CAPCOM's reasoning and excuses, I've probably kept them in business alone with my 4 copies and 6 buys. They're doing that bad.
EllDawn
Well-known Member
I meant story, but I should have included it. As far as them trying to appeal to as wide a group as possible, that can be a problem too. You try making something that everyone will like, and it's more likely to be rejected. You can't please everyone. This is where I agree with Tameem's idea of making a game that they enjoy, rather than focusing on what everyone else wants. How many authors do you know of that try catering to their fans rather than writing what they want? Then again I'm mostly a Stephen King fan because he doesn't try pleasing anyone.
V
Oldschool DMC fan
So you're saying there was some mistake/something wrong/stale with the DMC story? Essentially it doesn't appear NT have deviated too much from the basic elements of that story anyway. They have just re-dressed the game world and stuck in a bunch of Anonymous-vs-the-Establishment parallels and made out that the demons are our politicians and bankers. The story elements look like they will be much the same. Dante is supernatural orphan, dead mother and screwed up brother, who fights demons and the king of demons. Only possible difference so far seeming to be the trajectory of Vergil and whatever role Sparda is given, but essentially still the same figures in the family, and still very much the same story.
EllDawn
Well-known Member
In my opinion RE has the same problem. They keep using too much of the same story. 4 was really the only one I could stand to get through because of it being different.
As far as I can tell, NT has given more detail, tried answering questions of what the brothers are like, what happened to their parents. The original series only had simple explanations, and the fans filled in the rest. And then there's the problem with the story of each game not really fitting with the previous game. There are movies that have done the same thing, they'll establish something in the first, only to change it in a sequel. Unfortunately I can't think of any titles right now.
DMC is a fun series, I admit that. I probably wouldn't be here talking about DmC if I hadn't gotten into the original series first. But I am willing to admit there were plenty of problems with the story.
Another thing NT has done is given it a different setting. They're trying to make it more serious, while keeping recognizable elements. If Capcom was making the reboot, they'd do the same thing. Hasn't Capcom basically said they wanted to see what the Western take would be?
I had also said that there had to be the will to try repairing the series, which Capcom doesn't have, apparently. They might see it as more work than they'd be willing to put into a series that doesn't bring them anywhere near as much money as RE.
V
Oldschool DMC fan
Perhaps, I acknowledge your point; though I also stress that they have seemingly kept much of that former story material without really altering the bones of it. To do something truly 'fresh' but retain the pure DMC universe one could easily have gone with telling the story of Sparda from his POV, for example, and done it in the manner of the older games. I'm guessing most fans would be happy to have his story explored and be the badass that is Sparda, even if it meant not being Dante for once. There's one viable possibility never even bothered with or apparently considered.
What might these problems be, in your opinion? Aside from the lack of information given, which you have mentioned already.
Yes, I would say that all of their design choices, changes to setting and the 'grittiness', to the inclusion of angels all fall in line exactly with trying to appeal to the current Western target audience and their pop culture understanding of 'demons' or devils (right up to the sex scene that's supposedly in there, Western media containing stuff about demons frequently infers the sexual connotations of devils in Western thought). Again, I think these are primarily changes made in order to appeal more easily and make money, rather than artistic exploration, but we don't appear to be disagreeing on that.
EllDawn
Well-known Member
Who knows? Maybe they'll do a game about Sparda later. They'd probably have to call it a spin-off because of so many seeing Dante as the rep for DMC. At least that way they'd be answering some questions fans have about Sparda. I'd be willing to bet a lot of fans have written to Capcom about that idea.
As for the problems the original series has, for one, the fact they keep creating more questions without answering them. There's even confusion about whether or not Sparda is still alive. They stated he was dead in the first, but then every game after that tended to give the idea that he was still alive, but maybe in hiding. Character progression was a little confusing. I can understand how Dante acts in 3, but if 4 is supposed to be after the first in the story, then Dante kind of slid back and suddenly, somehow, became who he was in 2. There are a few small things, that don't really affect the story, but I don't really care about those. It's mostly the confusion they created with some major inconsistencies. With the introduction of Nero, and the explanation in the novel, they changed Vergil and kind of made the timeline more confusing. Unless Dante and Vergil are 1,900 years old like I've heard Reuben say, it's hard to believe that Vergil is Nero's father. There's also the fact that Vergil doesn't seem to have any interest in women. You get more of the idea that he rejects humanity, even though he doesn't really try to kill Lady. These are things that do affect the story, and made the story hard to follow and make any sense of. In other words it's also the odd changes they made.
MegaMad9
The Mad Man
I'm not saying that the only type of hate is from difference, but a lot of it really is if you get down to it ie racism
I watched the show... and I didn't like it. I told a brony this, and he told me that I was wrong.
Think about that.
(No, it wasn't randommlulz who said that... and to be fair, I don't think he would)
Edit: Off Topic
It's still about the hair for those few stragglers out there. But you're right about the determination. Most people just refuse to look at things objectively. Denial can be an ugly thing.
No Consistency + No Explanation + Too Many Fan Theories = Disaster
The major screw up was with DMC4, to be sure. However, a lot of damage could have been avoided if they had made Nero secretly evil.
Observe.
Adachi makes Old Vergil look like a boyscout. It's obvious he had used the bumbling "Nero Character" as inspiration for the role, but only to mask the unbridled corruption inside of him.
To those who don't think Nero is a complete klutz, allow me to present this vid.
Adachi would have fallen all over himself only make Dante lower his guard and win the battle in the end.
You know what? I'll go as far as to say that Adachi and Old Dante are evenly matched, whereas Nero couldn't even win with Vergil as his Persona.
8BitHero
Scrub
I made the EXACT same point in a YouTube video.
No bull-. The reason "you"(not this forum) do not like DmC is because of the hair. You don't admit it (YouTube comments) but that's the reason. The game is great and now we have the fun/obstacle of learning how the game works.
I made a point about what a "REBOOT" is. Look at Tomb Raider (Which looks like a female Uncharted (which isn't a bad thing)) or the recent Amazing Spiderman in which he had a NEW SUIT(!) but the those went well with everyone, so why is DmC getting "Mundus dumped" on?
This is....pathetic mentality is what we are now as gamers(well those). I understand if you don't like the direction of RE6 or DmC but they aren't bad games. I saw to my friend that I find Forza to be extremely dull and boring, BUT, because I don't like it, it doesn't mean it's bad. There's such a thing as not liking a game/film/whatever but still acknowledging it's well made and caters to the genre. For me to even say Forza is a bad game would be lying and biased. But now we're in the time were, if you don't like it, you must HATE it.
I'm new here but this forum has great rational attitude.
No bull-. The reason "you"(not this forum) do not like DmC is because of the hair. You don't admit it (YouTube comments) but that's the reason. The game is great and now we have the fun/obstacle of learning how the game works.
I made a point about what a "REBOOT" is. Look at Tomb Raider (Which looks like a female Uncharted (which isn't a bad thing)) or the recent Amazing Spiderman in which he had a NEW SUIT(!) but the those went well with everyone, so why is DmC getting "Mundus dumped" on?
This is....pathetic mentality is what we are now as gamers(well those). I understand if you don't like the direction of RE6 or DmC but they aren't bad games. I saw to my friend that I find Forza to be extremely dull and boring, BUT, because I don't like it, it doesn't mean it's bad. There's such a thing as not liking a game/film/whatever but still acknowledging it's well made and caters to the genre. For me to even say Forza is a bad game would be lying and biased. But now we're in the time were, if you don't like it, you must HATE it.
I'm new here but this forum has great rational attitude.