• 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

Game series that just needs to go on a hiatus

Pale Rider said:
Every game has glitches, annual or not, and that's what I was saying.
Click to expand...
you are correct but that has nothing to do with this argument lol

>Preference, bro. Preference. I prefer GTA over Sleeping Dogs and others, and so I'd want to play that. I hope this time I'm clear.
Wait.. i'm just saying that you can play any game of your choice until GTA 5 releases.. it only has to do with your preference of games.
>Seriously, dude, if you don't like them doesn't mean nobody does.
Its not about liking or hating its simply about having a dislike for exploitation of games... anyone who hasn't played AC 1 or 2 would find brotherhood or revelations a pretty great game.
>if only they were third person.
its not really a big problem you'll get used to it(unless you get nausea by playing FPS)
>What's the point? DmC still isn't a proper sequel
A sequel to what ? DmC is a standalone game.
>Weren't you speaking of "PROPER SEQUEL being announced"?
let me re-state that i was talking in relation to the rapid game development cycle and annual releases.. unlike GTA 5 which was in developed for more than 5 years even delayed for making improvements NOW that is what i call a "proper sequel"
>Wait... A sequel isn't something that moves forward the story of a previous game?
Yes but that's the not only thing which is important the gameplay quality also has to improve.
 
ROCKMAN X said:
you are correct but that has nothing to do with this argument lol
Click to expand...

You yourself said that annual releases result in degradation of quality -- quality as in bugs and glitches-- and I gave you a few examples of games having glitches despite not being annual. How's that has nothing to do with this argument?

Wait.. i'm just saying that you can play any game of your choice until GTA 5 releases.. it only has to do with your preference of games.
Click to expand...
Yes, right you are!

Its not about liking or hating its simply about having a dislike for exploitation of games... anyone who hasn't played AC 1 or 2 would find brotherhood or revelations a pretty great game.
Click to expand...
See? That's what. Of course, that still doesn't mean all people who played AC and AC2 will dislike them. It differs from person to person.

its not really a big problem you'll get used to it(unless you get nausea by playing FPS)
Click to expand...

I did try getting used to it. I've finished Delta Force upto Black Hawk Down (I know old but it's first person), tried completing Sniper: Ghost Warrior, and recently tried Far Cry 3. All of'em yielded the same result - First person games aren't meant for me. I don't enjoy how it feels. I never got nauseous, though.

let me re-state that i was talking in relation to the rapid game development cycle and annual releases.. unlike GTA 5 which was in developed for more than 5 years even delayed for making improvements NOW that is what i call a "proper sequel"
Click to expand...
Ok.. I myself thought I was getting you wrong.


Yes but that's the not only thing which is important the gameplay quality also has to improve.
Click to expand...
This is where we differ. I firmly believe a sequel is what takes the game forward, storywise; gameplay can be the same, or similar, or just "protecting" the core of a given franchise.
 
i think that metal gear deserves a hiatus. the story is over anyway with phantom pain
 
Pale Rider said:
You yourself said that annual releases result in degradation of quality -- quality as in bugs and glitches
Click to expand...
Eh.. no not bugs&glitches quality denotes to the innovative&evolutionary status of a game.

>that still doesn't mean all people who played AC and AC2 will dislike them.
Oh man why don't you get it ?? its not about being a good game its about compensation of the quality.

Technically speaking AC:brotherhood&revelations are NOTHING but AC 2 expansion packs like vergil's downfall and GTA DLC's but they are sold at full price of a game and that's just unnecessary.
>I don't enjoy how it feels. I never got nauseous, though.
Have you tried portal ?? its not primarily about shooting so you can try that.
>gameplay can be the same, or similar, or just "protecting" the core of a given franchise.
That's funny would you like to play DMC 3 with DMC 1's control scheme ? or would you like to play GTA 5 with top-down perspective.

Every game series needs to evolve,improve&expand on its universe at least that's how "Good" games work.
 
ROCKMAN X said:
Eh.. no not bugs&glitches quality denotes to the innovative&evolutionary status of a game.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but what? Your first post on this page said otherwise, and now it's "innovative and evolutionary" status of a game?

Oh man why don't you get it ?? its not about being a good game its about compensation of the quality.
Click to expand...
I don't get it?! You're the one changing definitions and I'm not getting it. Makes sense.

Technically speaking AC:brotherhood&revelations are NOTHING but AC 2 expansion packs like vergil's downfall and GTA DLC's but they are sold at full price of a game and that's just unnecessary.
Click to expand...
Somewhat I can agree with this.

Have you tried portal ?? its not primarily about shooting so you can try that.
Click to expand...
Let's end this little discussion on my mind's aversion to first person games.

That's funny would you like to play DMC 3 with DMC 1's control scheme ? or would you like to play GTA 5 with top-down perspective. Every game series needs to evolve,improve&expand on its universe at least that's how "Good" games work.
Click to expand...

I did say gameplay can be "protecting the core of a franchise". Evolution is a secondary thing. Would it be called GTA if instead of people with guns, there were mages throwing fireballs? Would it be The Elder Scrolls if people with Uzi were running and gunning holds of Skyrim? Apart from it, DmC is de-evolution of DMC 4's gameplay. It must be a "bad" game. You seem to not consider that "evolution" of a game can be in different ways.

And once again, good games and bad games are a matter of perspective. Ok?
 
Pale Rider said:
I don't get it?! You're the one changing definitions and I'm not getting it. Makes sense.
Click to expand...
Uh.. you know what ? just give me the keys:shifty:

>I did say gameplay can be "protecting the core of a franchise". Evolution is a secondary thing.
Well DMC 3 DID protect the core of the franchise and revamp the gameplay completely.
>Would it be called GTA if instead of people with guns, there were mages throwing fireballs?
So you're assuming that Evolution of gameplay&story = people shooting fireballs or something radical like that ? if that was true that GTA 3 should have been about people throwing fireballs.

>DmC is de-evolution of DMC 4's gameplay.
That's B.S for it to be a "Devolution" it has to degrade in terms of gameplay&story from DMC 4 which it doesn't some things are changed or tweaked.. devolution in a sense would be going back to DMC 1's control scheme and bad graphics.

NOT to mention DmC IS A REBOOT so it doesn't even come into a series.
>You seem to not consider that "evolution" of a game can be in different ways.
No i consider it to be a gradual process in which a game series evolves.. if given time it can be exceptional,if exploited for money we get glorified expansion packs and annual releases like call of duty.
>And once again, good games and bad games are a matter of perspective. Ok?
More specifically its a matter of opinion and in my opinion annual releases are not healthy for a game series and DmC is a great game which brings back many new fresh elements which DMC series needed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom