I can't help it if KOH keeps pulling "facts" out of his ass. He does this in many of his posts. Don't get mad at me for pointing it out.DreadnoughtDT;264592 said:The SE had toned down difficulty to appeal to casual gamers.
And y'know, that was really really blunt and kind of assholeish to say.
And toning down difficulty doesn't automatically mean it appealed to casual gamers. I didn't see any attempts to market it towards them, and the addition of Vergil would have been totally incomprehensible since he has basically no story for his mode.
Just because I think you're wrong it must mean I think I'm always right? Don't overgeneralize.King of Hell;264596 said:@moseslmpg: do you really live in a world where everything you say is right & the others are wrong? stop being so self righteous, the special edition tuned down the difficulty & added an extra difficulty "Very Hard" to appeal to both casual & us, we love it harder while casuals like to breeze through. & yes critical success matters, DMC3 was more critically successful than DMC2, yet DMC2 sold half a million more copies than 3. so where's the DMC2 wannabe game? DMC4 used the style system if I remember, not the amulet. its true that the priority is the financial success, but without critical success, the next game would flop.
Hardcore gamers are not defined essentially by what difficulty they choose, it is by their level of interest and devotion to a series. I have never enjoyed the so-called "challenge" of playing on harder difficulties, but I am certainly not a casual DMC gamer.
And no, critical success has no value in itself for game companies. They don't get paid more if their game is a critical success, they get paid more if more people buy it. If a company can make a game that is a critical flop but a financial winner, they aren't going to cry about how no one likes the game. The designers might, but the companies measure value in money not words written by reviewers. This is why you have sleeper hits that have great reviews but no one buys them for whatever reason. (And IIRC, the only thing DMC4 had from DMC3 was Yamato and styles and moves for Dante, everything else was more similar to DMC2 than 3).
Back on topic: I think that even if Capcom does hand the series over to another company, they will have to have some oversight in terms of the general idea of the game, and probably details like Nero. But I just believe that Nero cannot be explained away without some ridiculous backtracking and non sequitur explanations. That said, I would feel more comfortable with a Western company doing it as Western games tend to have more intelligible stories than purely Japanese ones *cough*Bayonetta*cough*
I would actually be more worried about gameplay than anything else. There is no Western game on the market that has been able to match DMC's type of action. GOW doesn't even come close.