Shouldn't we DMC fans be grateful about DmC instead of acting like it was something unwanted?

[IncarnatedDemon]

I know.

And thing is, it plays great. They created a new BASIS for the gameplay, like DMC1 did, they just need to evolve it little by little till it reaches it's peak

 

[Fran0823]

Cute, this again

Please tell me, how that invalidates my claim?
1st) console vs PC with turbo mod...totally fair

2nd)"Oh look, these developers created a new system for this game that is not as good as the 4th try of these other developers! SUCKS!! "

If DmC was made by the very same team that made DMC4, that video you like so much would actually hold up.But no, this was NT's attempt to create a DMC gameplay, and it's pretty fun for a first try.A good basis for better things to come.

This is just like people complaining about HALO4 and putting that goddmaned HALO3 vs HALO4 gameplay video over and over and over...HALO 5 will probably be closer to Bungie´s orginals, or it will evolve into something even better, thanks to HALO 4 and imput from the fans.

Also there is this:

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

Actually my point was: DmC did not create a basis for DMC gameplay in same way DMC 1 did. And that video was best i could find that illustrates my point.

 

[Fran0823]

Actually my point was: DmC did not create a basis for DMC gameplay in same way DMC 1 did. And that video was best i could find that illustrates my point.

That's obvious, DMC1 pretty much established the genre.
When I said "Just like DMC1" I meant it from an evolution perspective, DMC1 was A LOT simpler than 3 or 4

Allow to illustrate my point WITH POKEMANS!!

In my perspective DMC1>DMC2>DMC3=

and finally DMC4:

While DmC is still a "Charmander" it will certainly evolve into something similar but with some differences :

Get it? because MegaCharizard X is more edgy and has a different typying!! HAR HAR!

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

So what can this evolved Charmander do that Charizard can´t?

 

[Fran0823]

W

So what can this evolved Charmander do that Charizard can´t?

Well...he is actually a Fire/Dragon instead of Fire/Flying

Off-Topic:...That pretty much sold Pokemon X to me

 

[Jak]

DmC is like the superman returns of the franchise and i mean that in a good way. like superman returns, DmC is a ballsy move. DmC took everythign we know about the character, twisted it, and gave us a version in which we had never seen before or never thought to see (for some of us at least). DmC takes risks. it shows developers what can and can't be done or what should or shouldn't be done to a character based on fan reaction. this, however can be a double edged coin. i feel like the next installment in the franchise is going to be that MAN OF STEEL game that everyone asked for, but the end result and reaction will be split but leaning more on the positive side. so in a way, i AM grateful we got DmC but not for the same reasons that you are, RX

 

[Fran0823]

DmC is like the superman returns of the franchise and i mean that in a good way. like superman returns, DmC is a ballsy move. DmC took everythign we know about the character, twisted it, and gave us a version in which we had never seen before or never thought to see (for some of us at least). DmC takes risks. it shows developers what can and can't be done or what should or shouldn't be done to a character based on fan reaction. this, however can be a double edged coin. i feel like the next installment in the franchise is going to be that MAN OF STEEL game that everyone asked for, but the end result and reaction will be split but leaning more on the positive side. so in a way, i AM grateful we got DmC but not for the same reasons that you are, RX

Not as cool as my Pokemon example, but yeah.

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

DmC is like the superman returns of the franchise and i mean that in a good way. like superman returns, DmC is a ballsy move. DmC took everythign we know about the character, twisted it, and gave us a version in which we had never seen before or never thought to see (for some of us at least). DmC takes risks. it shows developers what can and can't be done or what should or shouldn't be done to a character based on fan reaction. this, however can be a double edged coin. i feel like the next installment in the franchise is going to be that MAN OF STEEL game that everyone asked for, but the end result and reaction will be split but leaning more on the positive side. so in a way, i AM grateful we got DmC but not for the same reasons that you are, RX

I swear, if i asked with a honest and sincere tone how DmC took risks, and you and i started debating it.
It would only lead to arguments.

So i will just say:
I fail to see the logic here.

 

[Fran0823]

I swear, if i asked with a honest and sincere tone how DmC took risks, and you and i started debating it.
It would only lead to arguments.

So i will just say:
I fail to see the logic here.

A reboot is risky by definition
Other than that, the story is pretty standard but full of potential
Like the Megaman EXE situation

 

[Jak]

I swear, if i asked with a honest and sincere tone how DmC took risks, and you and i started debating it.
It would only lead to arguments.

So i will just say:
I fail to see the logic here.

it dared to do something different with the characters and setting. and not just in a minor tweak hear and there like the classic series did. this REALLY changed stuff around. it changed everything. and i think that doing that to a franchise as beloved as DMC takes a lot of balls.

 

[Demi-fiend]

it changed everything.

I'm not familiar with Superman lore. Would you mind telling me how it changed everything?

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

A reboot is risky by definition
Other than that, the story is pretty standard but full of potential
Like the Megaman EXE situation

A reboot is risky by definition? Are you trying to make me laugh...?
Rebooting is primarily done by companies because it gurantees a decent sum of money than creating a new ip.
There is less risk with a reboot than a new game, even if you **** off 60% of the fanbase.

it dared to do something different with the characters and setting. and not just in a minor tweak hear and there like the classic series did. this REALLY changed stuff around. it changed everything. and i think that doing that to a franchise as beloved as DMC takes a lot of balls.

Rebooting a serie takes maybe half a ball. But even then rebooting is done because it´s a safe bet.
But you know what takes two balls to do? Creating a new IP.

But let´s pretend rebooting is innovation itself and that rebooting is very, very risk. It´s not like your changing a game but keeping things to ensure people will still buy the game.
Yes reboots are very risky.
Btw, when did NTDante stop smoking? Was it when Capcom said "Let´s not do that"?

Or did smoking not go well with the narrative?

 

[Jak]

I'm not familiar with Superman lore. Would you mind telling me how it changed everything?

superman returns was a movie that most superman fans hated because it took the character from a "truth, justice and the american way mother ****er, this is my planet and i'm superman, **** yeah..." tone to a more "i'm just some guy. both my fathers saw me as a god though. and i have a duty but i'm not sure how to..." type of tone. this takes everything we know of superman, and twists it, so that what we thought we knew, we really didn't know, and we are now questioning what it means to be superman. what it means to be the last son of a world long gone. and then the point of superman's son of "krypton lives, because of him" and then the exact perversion of that through luthor's version of krypton with that island, where in lex's mind krypton would live again, but only to spite superman. and at the time this movie came out, superman in comics was a very black and white character, where as superman returns introduces those gray areas.

 

[Demi-fiend]

A reboot is risky by definition? Are you trying to make me laugh...?

Why do you have to talk to people that way, ID?

 

[Fran0823]

A reboot is risky by definition? Are you trying to make me laugh...?
Rebooting is primarily done by companies because it gurantees a decent sum of money than creating a new ip.
There is less risk with a reboot than a new game, even if you **** off 60% of the fanbase.


Rebooting a serie takes maybe half a ball. But even then rebooting is done because it´s a safe bet.
But you know what takes two balls to do? Creating a new IP.

But let´s pretend rebooting is innovation itself and that rebooting is very, very risk. It´s not like your changing a game but keeping things to ensure people will still buy the game.
Yes reboots are very risky.
Btw, when did NTDante stop smoking? Was it when Capcom said "Let´s not do that"?

Or did smoking not go well with the narrative?

Also this, because I can and kinda counts

I can go on with lots of crappy reboots that are hated 1000000XDmC and didn't sell a thing

 

[Jak]

Rebooting a serie takes maybe half a ball. But even then rebooting is done because it´s a safe bet.
But you know what takes two balls to do? Creating a new IP.

But let´s pretend rebooting is innovation itself and that rebooting is very, very risk. It´s not like your changing a game but keeping things to ensure people will still buy the game.
Yes reboots are very risky.
Btw, when did NTDante stop smoking? Was it when Capcom said "Let´s not do that"?

Or did smoking not go well with the narrative?

i'm not just talking about the rebooting or the money or politics or any of that. i'm talking about changing the essence of devil may cry and how the fans weren't ready for it yet.

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

i'm not just talking about the rebooting or the money or politics or any of that. i'm talking about changing the essence of devil may cry and how the fans weren't ready for it yet.

Well, if your going to talk about DmC as a risky move by Capcom you have to talk about Capcom. And you also have to talk about rebooting within gaming industry.
And what´s more risky and ballsy move than making a new IP?

Come on Jak, dont you think your being conceited in context to DmC? Capcom has expressed they rebooted to cater to westerns and gain more money. There was no higher motive of providing a new profound perspective to the character Dante.

Also this, because I can and kinda counts

I can go on with lots of crappy reboots that are hated 1000000XDmC and didn't sell a thing

So what if a reboot didn´t sell? It just either means the game sucked balls , fanbase was small or other signficiant factor.
Just because some reboots fail, it doesn´t mean rebooting in general is a risky approach.

 

[berto]

I felt DMC only needed a reboot since Capcom seemed unwilling to actually sit down and clean up the messy continuity they created. Its messy sure but its not unfixable.

I don't fully agree with this. I think they did it because of the constant complains they get for the story. That and Inafune's boner for western gaming that seemed to linger after he pushed for this project to be westernized to the MAX even after he was gone.

 

[Jak]

Well, if your going to talk about DmC as a risky move by Capcom you have to talk about Capcom. And you also have to talk about rebooting within gaming industry.
And what´s more risky and ballsy move than making a new IP?

Come on Jak, dont you think your being conceited in context to DmC? Capcom has expressed they rebooted to cater to westerns and gain more money. There was no higher motive of providing a new profound perspective to the character Dante.

well if you believe that in the context of DmC i'm being conceited, then damn-it, i am. DmC is that bastard kid who didn't ask to be made but was put here anyway and keeps getting flack for just existing. its here. we just gotta get over the why and how and accept it. plus, DmC presents opportunity for devil may cry, not just story wise, but in terms of gameplay as well.