Last Chance Leaving...

[IncarnatedDemon]

I'm pretty sure it cost them a lot of nerves and mental strenght to put up with everything the 'fans' had been throwing at them :/ Never underestimate psychological pressure. That's nothing money can make up for.
About Tameem not caring how much it sells I'd say that's just his general attitude towards the games he and his team make, because he cares more for making a game he himself would enjoy playing, rather than constructing a game that tries to appeal to as many people as possible just to bring in big sales. But this just in.
I really think you could say Capcom's DmC just as much as you could say NT's DmC - or better yet, Capcom's AND NT's DmC-, I mean, just as Chancey already pointed out, you'd also talk about Nolan's Batman in regards to the The Dark Knight triology, even though Nolan didn't invent Batman.

dmc is not a movie. That analogy of using Batman serie is flawed because it takes into account only story. It is capcom's reboot because:

1. They made the gameplay, and standarized it. And it cost them money from dmc1-4.
2. They paid for reboot's cost for NT
3. They superviced, taught and assisted NT with the gameplay

So IT IS capcom's DmC. Because of the reasons i mentioned above. NT did not pay for the development of the reboot, they were paid. So all that "They made cutscenes, art, audio" are all part of their job. But the most important job of a game...gameplay, was not invented by them. Hell as i just said above they got help to produce the gameplay BY...capcom.
And it's ironic that you bring up that "I rather not cater to people", do you know that reboot is exactly that? Its goal was to cater to westerns and as result earn capcom alot of money. As for that bs idealistic talk, i assure you Tameem Antoniades cares about sales, it's just simple, he got paid for reboot independt of the sales. So being a big shot guy and showing the world what he is , he boasts about
"My ideals are so great that i dont care about games sales, even though i got paid. Did i say that? Yeah we got paid dude...even if game sells 1 unit we got paid.
WE GOT PAID !"
So spare me the empty bs talk from a douchebag who thinks his company will bring rennessance to videogames.

Mental strength is part of your obligation when you accept a assignment whether you like it or not. And considering this guy jokes about rebooting characters as if it's a joke to him, i'd say what he got is just what he deserved ( -Death threat from that one or two crazy people).
Perhaps capcom should have paid NT for mental strenght as well. Say $10 extra for keeping up their mental strength during development? Sounds good to me.
No wonder development costs of AAA games have gone up, mental strength of developers have gone down and we need to pay them to adress this issue.

 

[Chancey289]

So because the comparison was taking place between a video game franchise and a movie franchise suddenly the meaning and concept behind "reboot" is not the same.......

 

[Lionheart]

snip

''NT did not pay for the development of the reboot.''
And you know this... how? It doesn't seem logical to me that Capcom paid for literally everything, including Ninja Theory's staff for doing their jobs. That just doesn't make any sense. Since it's their brainchild as well as Capcom's, DmC is as much NT's game as it is Capcom's. I don't care if Capcom made most of the gameplay, because that doesn't make them the owners of the game. I remain unconvinced that DmC is only Capcom's game and not NT's as well as Capcom's.

I do agree with you, though, that DmC was made to cater to people, and that Tameem must care about sales and thus the amount of money they bring in. I mean, I'm pretty sure Tameem said he doesn't care about sales because he got upset, and people will say all kinds of things when they get upset. If he didn't get upset, then he somehow doesn't realize how running a business works, or he's gone insane. Or something else (I don't know what).

 

[Lionheart]

So because the comparison was taking place between a video game franchise and a movie franchise suddenly the meaning and concept behind "reboot" is not the same.......

+1 for the Dean Winchester gif

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

Ninja theory has a staff yes, that they must pay for. But this money comes from the publisher capcom. Where do you get the idea that NT has forked out money to develop the reboot? If this quote does not prove to you that they were merely workers for capcom, then i dont know what will. Because nowhere does it say or give any sign that NT was using their own money to develop reboot:

Enslaved should have done better," he told Edge. "Right now we should have been doing a sequel and perfecting that sequel and doing what franchises do, which is get better over time.

"[But] because that didn't happen we've not expanded to two teams like we intended to. So we've remained a smaller shop. But now we get another chance with DMC."

cvg

 

[Sunaka Marién]

snip

No, the Batman analogy is not flawed, because the most important part of a BATMAN movie is BATMAN, whom Nolan did not invent, therfore, in our example Batman=gameplay, not story=gameplay, because, y'know people go to watch a Batman movie to, well, see Batman, just as people play a video game in order to play it. And Nolan most likely also did get paid by DC for making those Batman movies, yet we'd still be talking about Nolan's Batman.

But since you seemingly don't want to understand that example here's another one:
Video games themselves. Capcom did not invent video games. Yet, we're talking about their video games. According to your logic, every video game ever would actually be the game of those two incredebly bored military guys who misused some kinda military device to play with it in a similar fashion to playing Pong a few years later.

It does not matter who invented the gameplay, because even though Capcom thought NT the basics of DMC gameplay and assisted them, it is still NT's take on the gameplay, because they recorded all the moves needed, they decided to separate said moves int Angel- and Demon-Mode, they decided on which weapons Dante was going to use, they streamlined all the moves so that there'd be no need for the styles anymore, and ultimately, they programmed all of that.
NT also didn't invent the concept of cutscenes and audio. Yet, they're their cutscenes and audio.

It was Capcom's goal to cater to a westen audience, not NT's. And I never said that Tameem doesn't care for sales AT ALL, because that'd be silly, the man's gotta earn his bread aswell, 'aight? All I said was that he would rather make a game he'd like to play himself and might not get them Call of Duty sales, than make a game that gets him the Call of Duty sales, but does not appeal to him at all, which would also mean that making said game was absolutely no fun for him whatsoever.

Of course you need mental strenght in whateve project you work on, but I'm pretty sure they didn't sign up for that MASSIVE amount of hatred coming toward them, from their own kind, nevertheles, 'cuz believe it or not, Tameem and other members of his team are actually fans of the Devil May Cry series, shocking, right?
And "considering this guy jokes about rebooting characters as if it's a joke to him"? What are you even talking about? Because he said that people would laugh out Dante if he'd enter a bar in a burning red flamboyant leather coat? Because of that little mention it's all a joke to him?

 

[berto]

I'm not sure I understand. If NT was not financing DmC and Capcom is the one picking up the bill how is that a bad thing? Companies finance games all the time from third person developers.

No, the Batman analogy is not flawed, because the most important part of a BATMAN movie is BATMAN, whom Nolan did not invent, therfore, in our example Batman=gameplay, not story=gameplay, because, y'know people go to watch a Batman movie to, well, see Batman, just as people play a video game in order to play it. And Nolan most likely also did get paid by DC for making those Batman movies, yet we'd still be talking about Nolan's Batman.

I'm sorry I can't read the rest of the long comments, I can't get into them. I just wanted to comment on the whole Batman thing. Nolan's Batman isn't the first retake on the Batman series, just the first on film. The reason I don't see the Dark Knight as a viable comparison is because DmC was a far more dramatic alteration than the Dark Knight ever was, or any other reboot, for that matter. Who invented what doesn't really seem to me like a crucial prospect to me as much as how they handle it.

 

[Lionheart]

Ninja theory has a staff yes, that they must pay for. But this money comes from the publisher capcom. Where do you get the idea that NT has forked out money to develop the reboot? If this quote does not prove to you that they were merely workers for capcom, then i dont know what will. Because nowhere does it say or give any sign that NT was using their own money to develop reboot:


cvg

Alright then, I'll give you that; publishers do pay developers, so I suppose Capcom paid Ninja Theory. But what about the fact that Ninja Theory has created the plot? They invented the plot, not Capcom, so that means DmC is Ninja Theory's 'brainchild'. Sure, the gameplay is not theirs, but the plot and script supposedly are. Even the characters were co-developed by NT, as far as I know. So... how can DmC be only Capcom's game, and not both Capcom's and NT's? Or did I misinterpret your post? Because in my mind, just throwing some money at something doesn't make you its inventor, it just makes you its financier.

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

Alright then, I'll give you that; publishers do pay developers, so I suppose Capcom paid Ninja Theory. But what about the fact that Ninja Theory has created the plot? They invented the plot, not Capcom, so that means DmC is Ninja Theory's 'brainchild'. Sure, the gameplay is not theirs, but the plot and script supposedly are. Even the characters were co-developed by NT, as far as I know. So... how can DmC be only Capcom's game, and not both Capcom's and NT's? Or did I misinterpret your post? Because in my mind, just throwing some money at something doesn't make you its inventor, it just makes you its financier.

Everything NT developed in sense that they had to think about it hard...being creative is NTs. For example Dante and gameplay are two things NT did not come up with. In contrast Bob Bargas and Kat are NT's creations.
When you weigh that capcom had made dmc gameplay way before NT made this reboot, they paid, and taught and assisted NT on gameplay...then it's more appropriate to call it capcom's Dmc than NT.
And when i say capcom i mean:
Hideki Itsuno, Hideki Kamiya, Team Little Devils, and other key important developers.

As for characters, most of NT's job was tweaking. Take NTDante for example, this is part of his character:
a coat
being funny
have a sword named rebellion
have two guns named E&I
Has demonic herritage
Has a father named Sparda whos a demon
Likes pizza

In reboot project capcom was not just throwing money.
Speaking both for himself and for series producer Motohide Eshiro, Capcom Japan’s David Chrissop said that DmC is “not a collaboration in name only”.

 

[Chancey289]

Overall, DmC for the most part is Ninja Theory's product and they were just following Capcom's instructions because Capcom's the boss. It's Capcom's franchise still. And reinventing a lot of signature moves and Devil May Cry stuff doesn't mean there was somehow less work. That was all so it can pay more tribute to its predecessors being a reboot and all.

Which is what I don't understand now. People like Demon here complain about DmC the most for being just too different (despite still never playing it) and suddenly making it more familiar is the bad thing?

k den.

 

[V's patron]

I do agree with Berto tho because with marvel or dc you wont have as much freedom writing them as they are all about the status quo so using them aren't apt comparisons.


.

 

[Lionheart]

Everything NT developed in sense that they had to think about it hard...being creative is NTs.

I don't understand (the grammar of) this sentence. No offense intended.

When you weigh that capcom had made dmc gameplay way before NT made this reboot, they paid, and taught and assisted NT on gameplay...then it's more appropriate to call it capcom's Dmc than NT.

It's more appropriate to say that Capcom had a hand in creating it, but Ninja Theory mainly created it.

As for characters, most of NT's job was tweaking. Take NTDante for example, this is part of his character:
a coat
being funny
have a sword named rebellion
have two guns named E&I
Has demonic herritage
Has a father named Sparda whos a demon
Likes pizza

Yes, but that's sort of my point; NT did not keep their hands off of it, they helped change it up, therefore DmC is partly their product as well. If they had nothing to do with the characters, then the characters would be attributable to Capcom only.

In reboot project capcom was not just throwing money.
Speaking both for himself and for series producer Motohide Eshiro, Capcom Japan’s David Chrissop said that DmC is “not a collaboration in name only”.

Yes, that's also part of my point; Capcom helped out with DmC. That makes it partly their product. However, Ninja Theory also worked on it and created things that Capcom did not specifically ask them to create. Ninja Theory was given quite a bit of freedom on making the plot and tweaking the characters. Ninja Theory came up with the plot and Capcom (as far as I know) didn't tell them to ''make the plot as per these instructions''. NT are the creators, and therefore, DmC is partly their game (for an important part).

 

[Demi-fiend]

Overall, DmC for the most part is Ninja Theory's product and they were just following Capcom's instructions because Capcom's the boss.

Ha-yup. Capcom (namely Itsuno) were the ones who wanted to remove lock-on, so that bit was entirely their fault.

 

[Lionheart]

And reinventing a lot of signature moves and Devil May Cry stuff doesn't mean there was somehow less work. That was all so it can pay more tribute to its predecessors being a reboot and all.

Which is what I don't understand now. People like Demon here complain about DmC the most for being just too different (despite still never playing it) and suddenly making it more familiar is the bad thing?

k den.

I don't think he meant that he thinks it's a bad thing. At least, I haven't seen any truly negative comments about how DmC's like the old DMCs in some ways. We're just discussing here if DmC is Capcom's product or both NT's and Capcom's. He simply came up with the argument that some important aspects of DMC still exist in DmC, like some of Dante's personality, him being funny, still liking pizza, etc - which somehow makes DmC 'Capcom's game'. I don't understand how that works.

 

[Demi-fiend]

I'm pretty sure it cost them a lot of nerves and mental strenght to put up with everything the 'fans' had been throwing at them :/ Never underestimate psychological pressure. That's nothing money can make up for.

Well, that's the last time a game company will ever experiment on their franchise... ever -- due to the fact that any change not approved by the fans will be met with torches and pitchforks.

See, this is why the creator of the latest Hitman game said "we will not be dictated to by the fans". And not surprisingly, the fans had a problem with that -- *sigh*

http://www.hitmanforum.com/index.ph...olution-team-wont-be-dictated-to-by-the-fans/

The fans seem to forget that it's the company's franchise to experiment with, and not theirs...

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

Numbered according to your post Lion:
1. I mean the things that were new and introduced by NT was invented by them. Therefor they deserve credit for those parts. Such as Malice concept in the gameplay or Kat in character side.

2. Yes, that is appropriate. But NT produced the gameplay with a little bit of inventing on the side. Majority of the gameplay in reboot had already been invented/developed by capcom, and all that NT needed to do was reproduce this gameplay.

3. Well yes, but producing same characters with minor tweak and making them for first time are two different things. The idea of a guy named Dante who jokes around and taunts demons, with a arsenal of a sword, named rebellion, and guns named Ebony and Ivory...thats not a concept invented/developed by NT but capcom so for most part when it comes to character Dante, it is capcom that deserves most of the credit not NT.

4. Yes, i don't deny that reboot is partially NT's game in sense that they contributed to it's creations.

In my opinion, considering what capcom has done in past and what they have done with reboot with supervicing it, teaching NT tricks and assisting them with gameplay. It's far more appropriate to say capcom's DmC than NT's. As capcom has done far more that has led to what the reboot is from a gameplay, but also from a character perspective.
And had capcom not had done all of this, NT would have far less time on their hand on cinematics, story, audio and other stuff.

It is far more easier to develop a game basing it on gameplay that has existed before than nothing at all. Because there have been done trial and error with gameplay, and it's been documented what works and what doesn't, and what should be there.
And in return for this you get more time on your hand than you would if you were to make a gameplay starting from scratch with no other gameplay as basis. And i posted the "Kojima Talks" video where Kojima's team got issues with gameplay.

 

[Lionheart]

Well, that's the last time a game company will ever experiment on their franchise... ever -- due to the fact that any change not approved by the fans will be met with torches and pitchforks.

See, this is why the creator of the latest Hitman game said "we will not be dictated to by the fans". And not surprisingly, the fans had a problem with that -- *sigh*

http://www.hitmanforum.com/index.ph...olution-team-wont-be-dictated-to-by-the-fans/

The fans seem to forget that it's the company's franchise to experiment with, and not theirs...

I can't say I agree it's only up to the company to decide what to do with the franchise. They've got consumers - customers - and if they make a bad decision (that is, one that the fans really despise), they should be called out on it. If not, they can die with all the other companies that brought out failed products. They don't have a customer relations department and such for the fun of it. When they started the franchise, they knew they would have people to keep happy, like with any other job. As an analogy, for example: saying 'screw you' to your boss or any of your superiors generally isn't a good idea.

In my mind, experimentation shouldn't be done on a franchise when it's already eleven years old or so, not to mention when it's unfinished. They should finish the old franchise first - then we'll see about experimentation.

 

[Lionheart]

Yes, i don't deny that reboot is partially NT's game in sense that they contributed to it's creations.

So you agree it's also Ninja Theory's game, not just Capcom's game? Because that was the whole issue. There's still huge parts of DmC that Capcom had nothing or very little to do with, so that makes it NT's game too.

In my opinion, considering what capcom has done in past and what they have done with reboot with supervicing it, teaching NT tricks and assisting them with gameplay. It's far more appropriate to say capcom's DmC than NT's. As capcom has done far more that has led to what the reboot is from a gameplay, but also from a character perspective.
And had capcom not had done all of this, NT would have far less time on their hand on cinematics, story, audio and other stuff.

That I can definitely agree with, though it doesn't make DmC only Capcom's game, in my mind. Maybe we should just agree to disagree on that, then.

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

Yes, i agree it's also NT's game. But much more capcom, and it doesnt have anything to do with fact that they paid for the project but that capcom made the gameplay of dmc that was implanted into the reboot. Plus all stuff they did during reboot's development.
I guess what i am saying is...if your going to give most of credit to a company for the reboot, it is capcom. And so if your going to say "Whos game it is", then its capcom and again...its not because they are the publishers.

 

[Lionheart]

Yes, i agree it's also NT's game. But much more capcom, and it doesnt have anything to do with fact that they paid for the project but that capcom made the gameplay of dmc that was implanted into the reboot. Plus all stuff they did during reboot's development.
I guess what i am saying is...if your going to give most of credit to a company for the reboot, it is capcom. And so if your going to say "Whos game it is", then its capcom and again...its not because they are the publishers.

Yeah, true. I guess most websites and other media consider DmC to be mostly Ninja Theory's work because they made the plot, and plots are always considered very important in any form of literature or other media. Besides, it's the 'rebooted' parts that they're focusing mostly on, not the parts that already existed (like Dante having a sword called Rebellion, having a long coat, having a rebellious attitude, and so on). Aside from that, I don't really know exactly how much influence Capcom has had on the final product. For example, it could be that NT came up with the idea to have an angel form as well as a demon form, and that Capcom helped implement it. In that case, that would make it mostly NT's idea. If many of these things happen, I'd say DmC is mostly NT's game. But I just don't know.