Devil May Cry series discussion/DmC anticipation (your mileage may vary)

[Dracarys]

Come on, what was every accusation Uncharted had when it was first released?

Unfounded, because Uncharted played nothing like TR. While the new TR has abandoned the series own mechanics and instead cloned Uncharteds mechanics, as well as several other things.

The only comparison between Uncharted and any other TR should be the main character is a treasure hunter, there is shooting involved and platforming involved. Have the be really general with the latter two, because if try and be descriptive of the shooting or platforming the similarity ubruptly ends.

[Gradon]

Unfounded, because Uncharted played nothing like TR. While the new TR has abandoned the series own mechanics and instead cloned Uncharteds mechanics, as well as several other things.

The only comparison between Uncharted and any other TR should be the main character is a treasure hunter, there is shooting involved and platforming involved. Have the be really general with the latter two, because if try and be descriptive of the shooting or platforming the similarity ubruptly ends.

Fair enough. Tomb Raider needed fixed up again though. Underworld was drivel. Besides, this is a DmC thread; I wanna have a go at the game tbh, I loved the demo but the only thing that bothered me was the 30fps.

[Member_of_STARS]

"Media" for some reason decided to blow the whole rape thing out of proportions, as if the fact that a video game narrative contains rape in it somehow means that it's a scene where you sit down with your whole family on a saturday evening, roll die, and take turn 'aving laughs and raping little girls for entertainment.

You're doing it a bit yourself here, blowing things out of proportion. From what I saw, in this particular instance, it had nothing to do with media portraying devs as someone who were using rape as a shock tool. The gamers' reaction was summarily "this is stupid", and not "oh my god, how dare they portray a woman being raped!". Use of sensitive topic to add substance to character which didn't need it (at least not in this way). People know Lara Croft as an adventurer, not someone with a broken mentality after being abused by a bad man. It's kind of like remaking Bruce Wayne as a homosexual kid who got bullied in school for it.

Regarding "Looks", I mean that people are very quick at judging books by their cover (or the 3D model of the main characters, in gaming cases). Oddly enough, while not without its fair share of controversies and Internet drama, the average movie fan does seem more down to earth when it comes to his/her taking issues with a different spin/interpretation of a character in a remake/reboot/whatever of something.

You don't give gamers enough credit. Just as with the moviegoers, gamers build a pretty accurate sense of prediction when it comes to just a few trailers/gameplay vids, concept art, screenshots and interviews. During the past 5 years, I don't remember a single game I was wrong about pre-release. Positively surprised (past already expected goodness), but not flat out wrong.

(Also, I don't recall ever having the graphics of Halo Wars jotted down as something that made me enjoy playing it more than an add infinity match of Starcraft. Halo Wars could've looked visually looked like Building of a Dynasty, for all I care, as long as it pulled off the same gameplay concepts)

The fact of the matter is that defending a game which has less gameplay depth as superior to one which obviously, by any standard, contradicts your opinion, still makes me question your objectivity when you claim that too many players appreciate looks more than depth.

Also, a reboot isn't something you do to "leech off the old fanbase". In general, that's the last thing you wanna do.[insert a whole lot of reasons which are not reflected by history]

Yet so far, a reboot has been made precisely to cash in on the loyalty of the old fanbase while creating a new one. If your argument was solid, we wouldn't have had asinine plot rewrites or complete abandonment of the old lines.

Evolution beats revolution, this is simple common sense. Remakes work, reboots split the fanbase and if they end the old story/characters, why not just ditch the franchise and make a new one. The reason is quite clear, don't you think?

[Carnivol]

You're doing it a bit yourself here, blowing things out of proportion. From what I saw, in this particular instance, it had nothing to do with media portraying devs as someone who were using rape as a shock tool. The gamers' reaction was summarily "this is stupid", and not "oh my god, how dare they portray a woman being raped!". Use of sensitive topic to add substance to character which didn't need it (at least not in this way). People know Lara Croft as an adventurer, not someone with a broken mentality after being abused by a bad man. It's kind of like remaking Bruce Wayne as a homosexual kid who got bullied in school for it.

I always talk black/white. As for "weak" Lara; they're basically doing a typical movie approach to the reboot. They've said a billion times this is basically a "Lara's first adventure"-ish approach to the character. Full reboot, yes. But a person usually isn't straight up a "badass". Hardened people are usually weak-sauce "everyday" people who get put into situations where they basically get pushed too far -- and instead of caving in, they suddenly bite back ... and these types of experiences tend to stick with them, and they're likely to more or less start seeking out these types of situations again too. It's not comic book or movie nonsense. It's actually something that happens quite often.

You don't give gamers enough credit. Just as with the moviegoers, gamers build a pretty accurate sense of prediction when it comes to just a few trailers/gameplay vids, concept art, screenshots and interviews. During the past 5 years, I don't remember a single game I was wrong about pre-release. Positively surprised (past already expected goodness), but not flat out wrong.

Did you read what I wrote? In cases like DmC, people more or less ignored the entire trailer set for the game and just got hung up on one thing; Dante not being "Dante." Just like the Jill fanatics on these boards moan about Jill's nose or hip to shoulder ratio not beingcorrect. "Gamers" are generally the worst.

The fact of the matter is that defending a game which has less gameplay depth as superior to one which obviously, by any standard, contradicts your opinion, still makes me question your objectivity when you claim that too many players appreciate looks more than depth.

I defend a AAA release that had the balls do attempt to do something different in a genre that's mostly been polluted by countless attempts at just doing the exact same thing as Starcraft did. If I wanna play an RTS that's not Starcraft, I don't fire up one that tries to be Starcraft (regardless of what type of skin it goes under), I fire up something made by Relic Entertainment or ... Halo: Wars (Still amazed by how well that game and C&C3 played with gamepad controlls too.)

Yet so far, a reboot has been made precisely to cash in on the loyalty of the old fanbase while creating a new one. If your argument was solid, we wouldn't have had asinine plot rewrites or complete abandonment of the old lines.

Evolution beats revolution, this is simple common sense. Remakes work, reboots split the fanbase and if they end the old story/characters, why not just ditch the franchise and make a new one. The reason is quite clear, don't you think?

Sometimes I just wonder if you actually don't know how to read English and somehow babelfish stuff. Like. Seriously. Also, I listed perfectly good reasons as for why Devil May Cry was in need of a new start. What'd you expect anyway? A full remake of the original? Exposing a new and more expectations laden audience to the atrocious foundation of the franchise? Anyway, regarding why not "ditch" a franchise and make a new one; It's hard to break through with new console IPs in the middle of a "console generation" and while they didn't exactly make a new name, do take note of how the game uses DmC as its main branding instead of the full name Devil May Cry.


Guess the bottom line is; some people just don't want change. Which can be fine and cool, but it sucks big time if that's supposed to hold the rest of the world back from trying something new every once in a while.

[Member_of_STARS]

I always talk black/white. As for "weak" Lara; they're basically doing a typical movie approach to the reboot. They've said a billion times this is basically a "Lara's first adventure"-ish approach to the character. Full reboot, yes. But a person usually isn't straight up a "badass". Hardened people are usually weak-sauce "everyday" people who get put into situations where they basically get pushed too far -- and instead of caving in, they suddenly bite back ... and these types of experiences tend to stick with them, and they're likely to more or less start seeking out these types of situations again too. It's not comic book or movie nonsense. It's actually something that happens quite often.

It doesn't happen often at all, media being the perfect proof. Most people break apart, you have a handful of individuals who can overcome severe abuse/odds stacked against them, and even then it's purely situational. School bullying, mass shootings, work abuse, everyday life disagrees with you. That's not the point, realistic character development via potentially sensitive topics is stupid when the gameplay videos have shown her shooting and tearing shit up. To put this into perspective, if she's killing baddies for most of the game yet the game portrays her first one as a horrid experience, then all this BS is just for shock value. "but but but MoS, everyday people can be heroes too" is a stupid argument.

Did you read what I wrote? In cases like DmC, people more or less ignored the entire trailer set for the game and just got hung up on one thing; Dante not being "Dante." Just like the Jill fanatics on these boards moan about Jill's nose or hip to shoulder ratio not beingcorrect. "Gamers" are generally the worst.

No wonder you're so pissed, it looks like you're even more detatched from the market than I thought. The entire trailer has absolutely no meaning when the image of a character liked by so many receives a total do-over. I see where you're coming from, you probably think gameplay is the only thing which matters and everything else is icing on the cake, secondary, ignorable if it is too bad. (which is funny as that Halo RTS thing nobody remembers is about as deep as the kiddie side of a public pool)
This may have been true back in the nineties, where a space marine whos name wasn't important was killing mutants who came from a place which wasn't important and had to collect 3 coloured keycards which function in the game universe wasn't important.

You're also comparing a complete remake of a character both visually and in emotional sense, to a rather small number of complaints about a nose many thought to be funny. This is a RE forum, incase you haven't noticed, most topics with substance have been discussed through and through 10 years ago. Jills nose was a blip by some Jill hentai fans, in the same ballpark as Chris' difference between REmake and CVX. There's also the change in substance, DMC 1, 3 and 4 had the character portrayed more or less in a way which made him recognizable.

I defend a AAA release that had the balls do attempt to do something different in a genre that's mostly been polluted by countless attempts at just doing the exact same thing as Starcraft did. If I wanna play an RTS that's not Starcraft, I don't fire up one that tries to be Starcraft (regardless of what type of skin it goes under), I fire up something made by Relic Entertainment or ... Halo: Wars (Still amazed by how well that game and C&C3 played with gamepad controlls too.)

No. You defend an AAA release which was on a platform you could play, and which was disliked by many enough so you could feel righteous in your hipster crusade. Nobody really copies SC, most prefer to copy the CnC series as it's a bit more straightforward, predictable and simplistic in nature.

Sometimes I just wonder if you actually don't know how to read English and somehow babelfish stuff. Like. Seriously. Also, I listed perfectly good reasons as for why Devil May Cry was in need of a new start. What'd you expect anyway?

"Seriously", none of those reasons make any sense. What you did was coming up with utter nonsense in a situation where vast majority of people with common sense would state the reason for reboots being "money". If you're pissed about it, fine.

It's hard to break through with new console IPs in the middle of a "console generation" and while they didn't exactly make a new name, do take note of how the game uses DmC as its main branding instead of the full name Devil May Cry.

Also known as "for the cash, dawg!". You serious?

Guess the bottom line is; some people just don't want change. Which can be fine and cool, but it sucks big time if that's supposed to hold the rest of the world back from trying something new every once in a while.

It's not about change. I've been talking about the whole "evo vs revo" thing for years. You can keep up with modern times and still deliver what your fanbase expects you to. A good AAA example would be MGS series. Nobody is stopping anyone from trying "something new", but if people have been expecting Splinter Cell to be a "hardcore" stealth game with some serious Tom Clancy-esque plot development, then getting THIS shit-

instead is a little disappointing. So if you prefer, say GTA, and I like Ghost Recon, don't demand GR to be turned into GTA just so you would enjoy it. And don't support the change just because you, in your infinite elitism, believe everyone else who plays videogames is a spoiled, media-controlled zombiedrone and you would feel more special by standing up for the guy who gets publicly smacked around. Sometimes, as actually does happen in real life, that guy deserves it.

[Pikminister]

I think we can safely say that DmC is the RE4 of the DMC series.

I remember there being similar reactions to RE4. "It's a good game but its not a good RE game!" or "It's RE for casuals" and stuff like that.

Now... for it to be exactly like RE4, it has to get similar sales numbers. That's the hard part.

[Rombie]

^ You mean than the GC version when it first came out? Won't be that hard. Lol

I like the analogy though. It's very apt.

[Carnivol]

Now... for it to be exactly like RE4, it has to get similar sales numbers. That's the hard part.

And get ported to EVERYTHING.

[News Bot]

A good AAA example would be MGS series.

MGS4 is pretty much a bit-by-bit walkthrough of what a video game should not do.

[Pikminister]

^ You mean than the GC version when it first came out? Won't be that hard. Lol

I like the analogy though. It's very apt.

Are you talking about comparing the Cube sales with the combined sales numbers DmC gets on both the PS3 and 360? That's a bit unfair, no?

Here's how the Cube version of RE4 sold within its first year (these numbers came from Capcom at the time):

* Sold 500,000 units in North America in 6 months (Capcom had shipped 660,000 for NA)

* Sold 200,000 units in Europe in 1 month ( 360,000 shipped).

* Sold 220,799 units in Japan (by early 2006)

Total sales of RE4 on the Gamecube after its first year = 1,200,000 units

the Gamecube version ended up selling 1,600,000 units overall

The game did better on the PS2:

Total sales of RE4 on PS2 = 2,300,000 units

So, we can add up the sales numbers of RE4 on the PS2 & GCN and see if DmC can sell the same/more/less on both the PS3 and 360 in a similar period of time.

So far, DmC's unofficial combined world wide sales numbers sits at: 360,000 units after its first week on sale.

[Rombie]

Are you talking about comparing the Cube sales with the combined sales numbers DmC gets on both the PS3 and 360? That's a bit unfair, no?

Yes, but that was the joke. You dont need to spell out the sales for me Pik, I was just being facetious on that very fact, that the far inferior PS2 version sold better than the GC one at the time of launch. For the fact that for a game, the GC version, which won so many game of the year awards, also had to drag itself slightly past the 1 million units at the time was criminal. It deserved to sell far better than it did and the PS2 version was a criminally bad port that more people played. I was just jokingly comparing the first launch of RE4 that's all.

Given the reviews and the multi format if be surprised if DmC undersold like the GC version if RE4, but anything is possible. Sometimes sales do buck the critical trend unlike what most people try to say always goes hand in hand.

[Pikminister]

Yes, but that was the joke. You dont need to spell out the sales for me Pik, I was just being facetious on that very fact, that the far inferior PS2 version sold better than the GC one at the time of launch. For the fact that for a game, the GC version, which won so many game of the year awards, also had to drag itself slightly past the 1 million units at the time was criminal. It deserved to sell far better than it did and the PS2 version was a criminally bad port that more people played. I was just jokingly comparing the first launch of RE4 that's all.

Given the reviews and the multi format if be surprised if DmC undersold like the GC version if RE4, but anything is possible. Sometimes sales do buck the critical trend unlike what most people try to say always goes hand in hand.

Psst! I was merely using your comment as an EXCUSE to make a comparison between RE4 sales on the Cube and DmC on both the PS3 and 360.

The fact that DmC has yet to top the sales of RE4 on the Cube (individually on either PS3 or 360) is something to think about. Don't you think? I thought so, that's why I went along and made the comparison.

And in regards to your little rant about how low RE4 sold on the Cube compared to the PS2 version... did even you consider their respective user bases? specifically, their size at the time? - 6/7 million on the gamecube compared to 22 million on the PS2 aprox.

And when we take their user base into account, it turns out RE4 sold quite well on the cube. Since more people on that console bought RE4 (1.6 million out of 7 million) than on the PS2 (2.3 million out of 22 million users).

But that's another issue for some other time.

Right now, DmC needs to prove that reboots of this kind DO work in terms of sales. It worked with critics. How will fans and gamers respond to it? That's what I want to find out.

[MiLØ]

MGS4 is pretty much a bit-by-bit walkthrough of what a video game should not do.

Haha wow, please tell me what game do you like and I'll be happy to trash it.

[Pikminister]

Update on DmC's sales in the UK:

UK all formats charts – 26 January

1 (3) Call Of Duty: Black Ops II (360/PS3/Wii U/PC)
2 (2) FIFA 13 (PS2/Wii/360/PS3/Wii U/PC/PSP/3DS/PSV)
3 (4) Far Cry 3 (360/PS3/PC)
4 (1) DmC Devil May Cry (360/PS3)
5 (10)Assassin’s Creed (360/PS3/Wii U/PC)
6 (5) Need For Speed: Most Wanted (360/PS3/PC/PSV)
7 (6) Just Dance 4 (Wii/Kinect/Move/Wii U)
8 (7) Football Manager 2013 (PC/PSP)
9 (9) The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (360/PS3/PC)
10(8) Hitman: Absolution (360/PS3/PC)


UK individual formats chart – 26 January

1 (4) Call Of Duty: Black Ops II (360)
2 (3) FIFA 13 (360)
3 (8) Call Of Duty: Black Ops II (PS3)
4 (6) FIFA 13 (PS3)
5 (5) Far Cry 3 (360)
6 (10)Football Manager 2013 (PC)
7 (7) Just Dance 4 (Wii)
8 (11)The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (360)
9 (1) DmC Devil May Cry (360)
10(17)Assassin’s Creed III (360)

The PS3 version ranked at #13 and the PC version is not in the top 40.

[Rombie]

And in regards to your little rant about how low RE4 sold on the Cube compared to the PS2 version... did even you consider their respective user bases? specifically, their size at the time? - 6/7 million on the gamecube compared to 22 million on the PS2 aprox.

And when we take their user base into account, it turns out RE4 sold quite well on the cube. Since more people on that console bought RE4 (1.6 million out of 7 million) than on the PS2 (2.3 million out of 22 million users).

But that's another issue for some other time.

I'll bite

Subjectively you're correct about the userbases and normally I think thats a fair comparison for any game, but to me also a game which walks away with that many GOTY awards from almost everyone in the industry should also be pushing the numbers up on both units sold as well as new console users significantly at the same time. I still say, and I figure from the point of comparison to the low sales of DmC you mentioned you kinda agree too, that the game still undersold on seemingly it's critical potential when you're talking just about the GC edition.

RE4 was a strange beast though I guess, expectations were always of a PlayStation 2 edition when a) first announced for it and b) still after supposed GameCube "exclusivity" - the number of people who said I'm not getting a Gamecube and waiting were plentiful in 2004. But still, those who waited just for the PS2 version didn't exactly walk away with a top class edition at the time. Their loss though :p

But yeah, then I make those comments full well knowing as to why the GC version may not have had the chance to ever sell as much as the PS2.... user base, expectations of ports, franchise history with Sony etc. etc.

The fact that DmC has yet to top the sales of RE4 on the Cube (individually on either PS3 or 360) is something to think about. Don't you think? I thought so, that's why I went along and made the comparison.

Oh yeah, as I said - I found the idea of comparison apt enough, both on response from a sales and critical level I guess. I mean it's a bit different coming out on two platforms at once and on formats again with bigger user bases and expectations, but I get why your comparison is there.

I really think the negative concept of this "version of Dante" and a "Western studio" has been a bigger barrier to success than Capcom (and Ninja Theory) expected. The game got great reviews, and even if they'd even made a perfect 10/10 game across the board, I think it just would have an uphill battle still. DmC has somehow proven that occassionally, unlike what Capcom has found in the past, fan support on agreeing about the content of a project sometimes does make a difference to if people will fork out the cash.

While Capcom also has traditionally been a developer who bucks the trends and releases games in Jan quite frequently, I think you can also add into the fact they released into the start of an unexpected glut of big releases for the first three months of the year, where also many were pushed back that people are waiting to spend their money on.

I personally didn't pick up DmC as a purchase because I spent money on Aliens CM for example... ACM might turn out to be a huge sack of monkey crap, but I'm more interested in Aliens than DmC. I could believe that is the same for people with interests in Dead Space, Bioshock Infinite, Tomb Raider, Metal Gear Rising, or anything else arriving soon. I'm not saying there isn't people out there who did perhaps want to pick up DmC (I've seen plenty around and the chart placement says there was enough in the first week for top billing in the UK etc.) but perhaps due to the above issues about the content etc. not nearly as much as some of these other games.

Of course that's all prediction until I see how some of those titles later sell. For all I know the impact could be across the board and they all walk away with below average sales because people were so unsure and spread out about their purchases between Jan, Feb, and March. :p