GinxTV: DmC: Devil May Cry Preview

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Ah fuck it, I'm buying the game. I got money to burn, and if it turns out shit, I'll just use it for target practice.

I'm just gonna go in expecting nothing.

I thought the entire idea behind dante as a character was always to "hate him" while at the same time find him entertaining and funny, these aren't mutually exclusive. That's how I always felt about old dante and I still feel the same way about new dante so... seems like they did things right to me. Like Kratos you aren't suppose to love him for his personality but that he's an asshole who does amazing things and for other reasons find him compelling.

As for the combat everything I've seen of it seems far better than the old games, but then I was always terrible at the old games and felt they were needlessly overcomplicated with a control system and interface that was needlessly vague and hard to process. Sure playing on the lowest difficulty allowed you to just button mash through them but that's never really satisfying or fun.

Lectori Salutem:

Funny he got all of that without actually, you know... playing it.

OT: Called it.

My opinion of this has stayed the same since day one.

Ninja Theory are good, they're very good. I trust them and what I've seen of it looks really good.

This is so depressing that I could almost cry, but it looks like another of my series staples just fell out of my 'Must Always Buy' listing. I could forgive some things, but this... this just looks terrible in every aspect of the series. I liked the old look, I liked the old music, and I liked the old story. Sure, all of them could've used plenty of padding and improvements, but a complete overhaul like this is just going too far.

Abandon4093:

Lectori Salutem:

Funny he got all of that without actually, you know... playing it.

OT: Called it.

My opinion of this has stayed the same since day one.

Ninja Theory are good, they're very good. I trust them and what I've seen of it looks really good.

I know, right? It's like he's basing huge assumptions on minor changes in details in trailers that are meant to highlight certain aspects of characters and keep hidden other aspects of characters, like trailers and such should.

Look, I don't mind that people are complaining about the new DMC game, that's find. Consumers have every right to complain about a product they don't like, however there has been way too much criticism before the game has even released. There is a difference between expressing worry over the direction that the game is going, and absolutely frothing at the mouth and sending death threats and insults to the creators. Quite frankly, I'm impressed that the developers (supposedly) took a stand against their fans and stuck to their guns.

If the game is bad, it's bad on its own merits, but I bet that even if the game was gold plated gold in a gold case people would still hate on it because it's not exactly the exact thing they want. It's a fine line between sticking to the original vision of anything (be it movies or books or whatever) and simultaneously improving upon it is even harder.

Hope for the best, expect the worst I guess. Frankly, I'm pretty interested in this new DMC. People toss out the word "emo" so much that it has since lost all meaning and only proves to me that most people don't know jack shit about character development or characterization. I cannot see how people can call this cocky, self-assured, wacko a "emo" or "whiner", it's just blind insults being hurtled for no reason and provides no constructive feedback.

I love all the hate on the characterization of a character in a game that NOBODY has had the chance to play all the way through. All these criticisms on Dante's characterization are bunk, because they are going off of trailers, not the finished product. If the game doesn't look like it appeals to you, then don't buy it. However, don't go around posting 10 minute videos like you're conducting a scientific thesis on something you haven't even fully observed yet.

I also find all the hate extremely interesting because, to me, Dante has ALWAYS been a smug asshole. The new Dante may just be even better at being an asshole. It's like the dev team cobbled together the worst aspects of punk-rock posers and rolled them into the new Dante. They even gave him a Union Jack patch (despite him being clearly American):

People often say that the old Dante is good because of the campiness of it. While I don't disagree, it's very possible that the new Dante is just camp through different eyes. I find the new Dante just as hysterically terrible as the old Dante.

The true call on whether or not to cry foul on the writing can only be determined once you view the whole product (including character arcs).

Oh look, more people criticizing a game that hasn't been released yet. How did you guys get to play it before all of us?

To be honest, I always thought Dante was an ass to some degree so, this Dante doesn't really feel very different in that regard.

While I find the "corperates are evil" cliched, that doesnt make it can't be a good story.

Also, I have to admit a red flag went up when he kept bring up people hating this Dante because of the hair. While that was a complain used quite some time ago, that isnt much the case now if at all.

Jumplion:

I know, right? It's like he's basing huge assumptions on minor changes in details in trailers that are meant to highlight certain aspects of characters and keep hidden other aspects of characters, like trailers and such should.

Look, I don't mind that people are complaining about the new DMC game, that's find. Consumers have every right to complain about a product they don't like, however there has been way too much criticism before the game has even released. There is a difference between expressing worry over the direction that the game is going, and absolutely frothing at the mouth and sending death threats and insults to the creators. Quite frankly, I'm impressed that the developers (supposedly) took a stand against their fans and stuck to their guns.

If the game is bad, it's bad on its own merits, but I bet that even if the game was gold plated gold in a gold case people would still hate on it because it's not exactly the exact thing they want. It's a fine line between sticking to the original vision of anything (be it movies or books or whatever) and simultaneously improving upon it is even harder.

Hope for the best, expect the worst I guess. Frankly, I'm pretty interested in this new DMC. People toss out the word "emo" so much that it has since lost all meaning and only proves to me that most people don't know jack shit about character development or characterization. I cannot see how people can call this cocky, self-assured, wacko a "emo" or "whiner", it's just blind insults being hurtled for no reason and provides no constructive feedback.

Trailers also have the job of putting forth the best of what it's advertising has to offer. What these are doing is making most people think "Damn. I got to spend the game playing as this douch?" Which is putting people off.

I agree that a game should be good or bad on it's own merits, but really, it's the same issue people are having with Resident Evil 6. Once you throw a name onto a game that has little resemblance to what it's suppose to be, oh course people are going to be upset. Though complaining at this stage is meaningless as Ninja Theory has given Zero fucks on the matter.

(Disclaimer: I have never played a Devil May Cry game.)

Most Ginx videos make me want to grab a crowbar and pry their lips off of the butt of the developer of whichever game they're profiling (admittedly, they pointed out some major problems that they had with Dust 514), and this one was certainly no exception to that.

That being said...

I'd advise against writing this game off entirely before it's released. This reinterpretation of Dante as an annoying, pretentious, obnoxious, emo jackass has potential IF they give him a good character arc and allow him to develop, grow and mature as the game proceeds. It's quite possible that we're SUPPOSED to find him insufferable early on, as he tries cover up his own insecurities and fears (and downplaying how intimidated he is by the daunting responsibilities facing him) by acting in the way he THINKS that Tough Guys should act. Dante might have a few hard lessons to learn during the course of the game about what it means to be tough, what it means to be a man, and what it means to be a hero.

The game, even if it's incredibly short, will take hours to complete, and we've only heard minutes worth of footage so far. There could be a LOT going on that the developers don't want to spoil before release day.

So, while I can't blame fans of the earlier games if they're not going to pre-order this one, I'd still urge people to keep an open mind. You can always vote with your wallet if the game DOES turn out to actually suck (or even if it's just not the game you wanted).

THAT being said...

I REALLY hope that the voice-acting that we heard in that video isn't what we'll be hearing in the game when its released.

Shadowstar38:

Jumplion:

I know, right? It's like he's basing huge assumptions on minor changes in details in trailers that are meant to highlight certain aspects of characters and keep hidden other aspects of characters, like trailers and such should.

Look, I don't mind that people are complaining about the new DMC game, that's find. Consumers have every right to complain about a product they don't like, however there has been way too much criticism before the game has even released. There is a difference between expressing worry over the direction that the game is going, and absolutely frothing at the mouth and sending death threats and insults to the creators. Quite frankly, I'm impressed that the developers (supposedly) took a stand against their fans and stuck to their guns.

If the game is bad, it's bad on its own merits, but I bet that even if the game was gold plated gold in a gold case people would still hate on it because it's not exactly the exact thing they want. It's a fine line between sticking to the original vision of anything (be it movies or books or whatever) and simultaneously improving upon it is even harder.

Hope for the best, expect the worst I guess. Frankly, I'm pretty interested in this new DMC. People toss out the word "emo" so much that it has since lost all meaning and only proves to me that most people don't know jack shit about character development or characterization. I cannot see how people can call this cocky, self-assured, wacko a "emo" or "whiner", it's just blind insults being hurtled for no reason and provides no constructive feedback.

Trailers also have the job of putting forth the best of what it's advertising has to offer. What these are doing is making most people think "Damn. I got to spend the game playing as this douch?" Which is putting people off.

This is where the detractors forget to distinguish between their own, personal, subjective opinion of a yet unreleased game and confusing it with how everyone else is feeling.

Looking at this thread alone, the reaction to the new DMC and Dante seem to be split about 50/50. Personally, I like this interpretation of the character, and honestly don't see that much of a difference between the two. He looks and acts like the ass-kicking asshole you want to be, at least to me.

SouthpawFencer:
I'd advise against writing this game off entirely before it's released. This reinterpretation of Dante as an annoying, pretentious, obnoxious, emo jackass has potential IF they give him a good character arc and allow him to develop, grow and mature as the game proceeds.

Seriously, I do not understand why people are calling him "emo" of all things. Obnoxious, fine, considering Dante has always had some semblance of annoying/obnoxious qualities. It seems that any semblance of emotion or slight sadness or melancholy is branded instantly as "emo". I'm beginning to think that people don't really understand what the term is supposed to mean.

So this is what it looks like when a publisher just emailed their press release for "critics" to read in their previews.

Honestly, my main criticism for the game is its core game mechanics. In DMC3 (my favorite DMC), the core mechanics surrounds certain styles, and when you are committed to a style that has consequences. Certain styles have their restrictions and combat philosophies, resulting in wildly different play-style and challenges. Mastering these styles require knowledge of the mechanics and excellent execution, not to mention an intuitive sense of context with who you're fighting against and in what environment.

All of that matters, resulting in a tightly and smartly chain of great looking combos from some of the masters of the game.

But Ninja Theory's core mechanics just threw that out the window. It's essentially God of War but faster, immediately turning what was a twitch intuitive reflex of skill to just button mashing. The game just doesn't get what DMC's combat is about.

The core mechanics reflects that the combat is about style. Combo-centric style. That's Nero. With Nero, it's just about how long you can chain a combo. You get the grappling, the dashing, and a ton of multihit combos. It was there for people who were complaining about DMC3's difficult to master set of combat styles.

The core combat seems to be all flash and no substance. It's style without the mastery. It's empowering without also being challenging.

At least, that's my main criticism of the game.

Abandon4093:

Funny he got all of that without actually, you know... playing it.

OT: Called it.

My opinion of this has stayed the same since day one.

Ninja Theory are good, they're very good. I trust them and what I've seen of it looks really good.

That's the largest flaw of the video, it's all based on the material released so far. But that same material is supposed to give an impression what the game is like.

I'm not saying the video is 100% correct (far from it), but it does illustrate why I'm afraid I'm not going to like the changes that Ninja Theory seems to have made to the character.

ThisNewGuy:
So this is what it looks like when a publisher just emailed their press release for "critics" to read in their previews.

Honestly, my main criticism for the game is its core game mechanics. In DMC3 (my favorite DMC), the core mechanics surrounds certain styles, and when you are committed to a style that has consequences. Certain styles have their restrictions and combat philosophies, resulting in wildly different play-style and challenges. Mastering these styles require knowledge of the mechanics and excellent execution, not to mention an intuitive sense of context with who you're fighting against and in what environment.

All of that matters, resulting in a tightly and smartly chain of great looking combos from some of the masters of the game.

But Ninja Theory's core mechanics just threw that out the window. It's essentially God of War but faster, immediately turning what was a twitch intuitive reflex of skill to just button mashing. The game just doesn't get what DMC's combat is about.

The core mechanics reflects that the combat is about style. Combo-centric style. That's Nero. With Nero, it's just about how long you can chain a combo. You get the grappling, the dashing, and a ton of multihit combos. It was there for people who were complaining about DMC3's difficult to master set of combat styles.

The core combat seems to be all flash and no substance. It's style without the mastery. It's empowering without also being challenging.

At least, that's my main criticism of the game.

I hate to be that guy, but what criticism of what game, DMC 4?
I can't wrap my head around these comments, ever. I understand some gameplay videos do hint at the overall game, but seriously, what have we seen so far? Dante fight the generic enemy #5 in numbers of... 4-5? And what seems to be the first boss of the game, with said game set on easy.
You know what was easy? Easy mode was easy. The first enemies you faced were easy.

I mean, give at least the gameplay which you can't play some slack before you start calling things :P

Ferisar:

ThisNewGuy:
So this is what it looks like when a publisher just emailed their press release for "critics" to read in their previews.

Honestly, my main criticism for the game is its core game mechanics. In DMC3 (my favorite DMC), the core mechanics surrounds certain styles, and when you are committed to a style that has consequences. Certain styles have their restrictions and combat philosophies, resulting in wildly different play-style and challenges. Mastering these styles require knowledge of the mechanics and excellent execution, not to mention an intuitive sense of context with who you're fighting against and in what environment.

All of that matters, resulting in a tightly and smartly chain of great looking combos from some of the masters of the game.

But Ninja Theory's core mechanics just threw that out the window. It's essentially God of War but faster, immediately turning what was a twitch intuitive reflex of skill to just button mashing. The game just doesn't get what DMC's combat is about.

The core mechanics reflects that the combat is about style. Combo-centric style. That's Nero. With Nero, it's just about how long you can chain a combo. You get the grappling, the dashing, and a ton of multihit combos. It was there for people who were complaining about DMC3's difficult to master set of combat styles.

The core combat seems to be all flash and no substance. It's style without the mastery. It's empowering without also being challenging.

At least, that's my main criticism of the game.

I hate to be that guy, but what criticism of what game, DMC 4?
I can't wrap my head around these comments, ever. I understand some gameplay videos do hint at the overall game, but seriously, what have we seen so far? Dante fight the generic enemy #5 in numbers of... 4-5? And what seems to be the first boss of the game, with said game set on easy.
You know what was easy? Easy mode was easy. The first enemies you faced were easy.

I mean, give at least the gameplay which you can't play some slack before you start calling things :P

I always see this argument of "don't judge until you try." And my response is that if the audience cannot make up their mind on their purchase based on what is shown so far, then what's the point of showing these videos in the first place? Are they not to introduce the game and encourage players to purchase it?

Well by that logic, we also can't say anything good about the game without playing it just like we cannot criticize the game without playing it. Therefore, you should also criticize every preview of every game because they are either praising or criticizing a game without playing it.

I don't feel the same way. I feel like if a publisher decide to show its audience certain aspects of the game (via video or anything else), then whatever is shown is fair game for criticism.

At the end of the day, it's easy to simply dismiss criticism like you have. All you really have to do is question the credentials of the critic then you can choose to ignore the substance.

Doesn't look that different to me. I think the game looks awesome. I guess that makes me a bad fan of the series or whatever.

The picture on the Escapist's main page banner for this looks like it was taken from an Axe commercial...

Can you all tell me where you became to clairvoyant? I mean, no one has played this or finished it but you all seem to know loads about it.

Is it time travel? OOOH! COOL I WANNA GO PLAY METAL GEAR RISING!

Some of the visual flair looks nice. Mostly the level/world design. Vibrant colors and the shifting, hostile environment are nice. But alas, that's all this game can offer me. Still trying to be a grimdark gritty story, the whole 30 FPS debacle, atrocious acting...

And Dante. Who could forget good ol' Dante, that Tameem Antoniades looking, cigarrette smoking, Sex shitty fucking Pistols listening punk wannabe.

You got it right man. And this the fact (as mentioned by others before me) that both the team and various garme jurnalistz are trying to force feed the notion that I'm just pissed off about the hair color is fucking hilarious.

I got that DMC: HD Collection. I think I'm sticking to that, fuck you very much.

Jumplion:
He looks and acts like the ass-kicking asshole you want to be, at least to me.

I think he looks and acts like an obnoxious douche who's overcompensating for his small penis and massive insecurities. I certainly don't judge people who identify with that, but I do hope they seek help.

Danial:
Can you all tell me where you became to clairvoyant? I mean, no one has played this or finished it but you all seem to know loads about it.

Is it time travel? OOOH! COOL I WANNA GO PLAY METAL GEAR RISING!

If I see a turd on a plate, I don't need to take a bite to know its gonna taste like shit.

Jumplion:

Abandon4093:

Lectori Salutem:

Funny he got all of that without actually, you know... playing it.

OT: Called it.

My opinion of this has stayed the same since day one.

Ninja Theory are good, they're very good. I trust them and what I've seen of it looks really good.

I know, right? It's like he's basing huge assumptions on minor changes in details in trailers that are meant to highlight certain aspects of characters and keep hidden other aspects of characters, like trailers and such should.

I think its hilarious that 1. People think Ninja Theory has ever done good work when their entire library has been attempts to rip off DMC and GoW and failing both critically and commercially and 2. People think that this Dante is going to have some secret character depth that we're just not privy to. He's Dante for the CoD kids and and those games are loaded with memorable characters, right?

Sylveria:

Jumplion:
He looks and acts like the ass-kicking asshole you want to be, at least to me.

I think he looks and acts like an obnoxious douche who's overcompensating for his small penis and massive insecurities. I certainly don't judge people who identify with that, but I do hope they seek help.

And I hope that people who belittle others in an effort to come off as artificially superior will acknowledge their condescending attitudes and work to improves themselves.

Sylveria:
If I see a turd on a plate, I don't need to take a bite to know its gonna taste like shit.

We haven't seen the actual dish, just previews that may or may not seem appetizing to some people. A dish that looks like a turd could easily be delicious on the inside, just have to give it a shot.

Sylveria:
I think its hilarious that 1. People think Ninja Theory has ever done good work when their entire library has been attempts to rip off DMC and GoW and failing both critically and commercially and 2. People think that this Dante is going to have some secret character depth that we're just not privy to. He's Dante for the CoD kids and and those games are loaded with memorable characters, right?

Failing critically? Don't know about that, Ninja Theory seem to be pretty well respected. Commercially, sure, I guess, though none of their games have been entire flops.

People aren't saying that this Dante is going to have an amazing amount of character depth. People are saying that it is way too early to claim that he doesn't. Major difference, I suggest you realize this.

ThisNewGuy:
I always see this argument of "don't judge until you try." And my response is that if the audience cannot make up their mind on their purchase based on what is shown so far, then what's the point of showing these videos in the first place? Are they not to introduce the game and encourage players to purchase it?

Well by that logic, we also can't say anything good about the game without playing it just like we cannot criticize the game without playing it. Therefore, you should also criticize every preview of every game because they are either praising or criticizing a game without playing it.

I don't feel the same way. I feel like if a publisher decide to show its audience certain aspects of the game (via video or anything else), then whatever is shown is fair game for criticism.

At the end of the day, it's easy to simply dismiss criticism like you have. All you really have to do is question the credentials of the critic then you can choose to ignore the substance.

Criticizing the visuals and animations, etc..., is easy because those are immediately apparent. Those things don't usually change throughout the course of the game, so that is free game.

Criticizing gameplay is a bit trickier in that it requires the input of the actual player. What may not look all that fun to play may be really fun to actually play it, and there are many nuances and tricks that developers implement that cannot be fully realized by simply observing it.

Criticizing story elements (characters, the overall story, etc...) is not really legitimate as story telling, especially one centered on interaction, can change dramatically over the course of the medium. What may start out as a cocky, self-assured jackass could develop into someone who fights for justice and virtue, or he remains a jackass but with a heart of gold. Of course, he could remain the same, we don't know, unless they want to spoil the entire story by giving us a summary, we can't really say much about it. And character development does not just happen at the story level, little quips in combat, how the character moves in the world, all these little things build the character that we can't properly judge based on some short, 1 minute trailer meant to showcase the more bombastic parts of the game.

Note that people did not criticize "Metroid: Other M" about its portrayal of Samus or its overarching story until after it was created. People did not bring out the pitchforks against Team Ninja (different from Ninja Theory) and immediately claimed they were ruining the franchise (okay, maybe we all were a bit concerned over their previous portrayals of women, but we mostly gave them the benefit of the doubt), at least not to the extent that this whole DMC debacle has done.

EDIT: Hell, just look at Resident Evil 6! People didn't outright bitch and moan about the series being a "betrayal" until after it was released and they could truly get their hands on it to criticize it. Can't people extend the same courtesy to the new DMC game?

Please note, nobody is saying that you cannot criticize a product before it is released, it is, after all, a risk that all consumers must go through so they do have to have some preconceived notion of what they are about to get. What people are saying is that it is unreasonable to outright attack, spew death threats, and complain with such vitriol while completely brushing the game off and claiming it has already ruined the franchise when it could very well be a worthy successor to the previous DMC games. If you don't quite like the direction it's going and decide not to buy it, by all means do what you will with your money. Nobody is asking anybody to instantly love this game. But please, just back off a bit and just see what happens. If it's a bad game it will be bad based on its own merits, but it feels that even if the game was pure gold in a gold case people would still want to shit all over it because it isn't exactly what they want it to be.

Just, you know, keep an open mind and criticize it fully when you have the full context. This doesn't mean you have to buy the game, Let's Plays are fine, and general articles from people who have played the game should be sufficient enough to create discussion.

Jumplion:

Criticizing the visuals and animations, etc..., is easy because those are immediately apparent. Those things don't usually change throughout the course of the game, so that is free game.

Criticizing gameplay is a bit trickier in that it requires the input of the actual player. What may not look all that fun to play may be really fun to actually play it, and there are many nuances and tricks that developers implement that cannot be fully realized by simply observing it.

Criticizing story elements (characters, the overall story, etc...) is not really legitimate as story telling, especially one centered on interaction, can change dramatically over the course of the medium. What may start out as a cocky, self-assured jackass could develop into someone who fights for justice and virtue, or he remains a jackass but with a heart of gold. Of course, he could remain the same, we don't know, unless they want to spoil the entire story by giving us a summary, we can't really say much about it. And character development does not just happen at the story level, little quips in combat, how the character moves in the world, all these little things build the character that we can't properly judge based on some short, 1 minute trailer meant to showcase the more bombastic parts of the game.

Note that people did not criticize "Metroid: Other M" about its portrayal of Samus or its overarching story until after it was created. People did not bring out the pitchforks against Team Ninja (different from Ninja Theory) and immediately claimed they were ruining the franchise (okay, maybe we all were a bit concerned over their previous portrayals of women, but we mostly gave them the benefit of the doubt), at least not to the extent that this whole DMC debacle has done.

EDIT: Hell, just look at Resident Evil 6! People didn't outright bitch and moan about the series being a "betrayal" until after it was released and they could truly get their hands on it to criticize it. Can't people extend the same courtesy to the new DMC game?

Please note, nobody is saying that you cannot criticize a product before it is released, it is, after all, a risk that all consumers must go through so they do have to have some preconceived notion of what they are about to get. What people are saying is that it is unreasonable to outright attack, spew death threats, and complain with such vitriol while completely brushing the game off and claiming it has already ruined the franchise when it could very well be a worthy successor to the previous DMC games. If you don't quite like the direction it's going and decide not to buy it, by all means do what you will with your money. Nobody is asking anybody to instantly love this game. But please, just back off a bit and just see what happens. If it's a bad game it will be bad based on its own merits, but it feels that even if the game was pure gold in a gold case people would still want to shit all over it because it isn't exactly what they want it to be.

Just, you know, keep an open mind and criticize it fully when you have the full context. This doesn't mean you have to buy the game, Let's Plays are fine, and general articles from people who have played the game should be sufficient enough to create discussion.

I'm not sure about your standard for which parts of a game someone can criticize at what time of development. That's a pretty slippery slope there.

Personally, I generally don't care for visuals, so I pretty much never criticize a game for its visuals. If it looks great, that's awesome bonus, but if it looks like ascii, but plays awesome, I'll still think the game is awesome. But if visuals is something that is a deal-breaker for some people, go ahead and talk about it.

Criticizing game mechanics is the whole point of previews and trailers. They're there to introduce how the game might play. So if a critic or a trailer or a teaser cannot indicate thus justifying criticism on how a game plays, then there's nothing to discuss.

At the end of the day, all criticism on any part of what is shown is totally legitimate. If you, as a publisher or a developer, is unreceptive to criticism, then don't show the game. Whatever is shown is fair game. Whatever is played is fair game. Every event, every publicity, every dev interview, every tweet is fair game for criticism.

Edit:
I really wasn't spewing hate on the game. I just criticized the mechanics that were shown. And I'm definitely open minded about this game. I would love for this game to succeed. DMC is one of my favorite franchises of all time. But I think what is best for a development team aren't people patting their backs and tell them how awesome they are, but have people actually give criticism on their game so they can evaluate their designs to improve if they feel the need for it. Having your designs get challenged is extremely helpful. That's pretty much why they have focus tests and QA teams, because most preview don't actually reflect criticism. Previews are just PR.

If someone can write a preview that says good things about a game based on what is shown and without the full context of the game, then someone can also write a criticism of the game without the full context of the game.

ThisNewGuy:
Personally, I generally don't care for visuals, so I pretty much never criticize a game for its visuals. If it looks great, that's awesome bonus, but if it looks like ascii, but plays awesome, I'll still think the game is awesome. But if visuals is something that is a deal-breaker for some people, go ahead and talk about it.

I'm not saying visuals as in graphics. If the game is stylized in ascii, like Dwarf Fortress, that's cool. You can critique the style, absolutely, because the visual style will usually stay consistent throughout the game. People critique how a bunch of FPSs look like dogshit and gunmetal gray, those are easier critiques to levy because those visual styles will most likely stay consistent throughout most of the game. I'm simply stating what is the easiest benchmark to criticize a game through simple viewing of a trailer.

Criticizing game mechanics is the whole point of previews and trailers. They're there to introduce how the game might play. So if a critic or a trailer or a teaser cannot indicate thus justifying criticism on how a game plays, then there's nothing to discuss.

I don't believe that is the point of previews/trailers at all, as you say later it's more for PR/advertising. Showcasing what they believe to be the most essential parts of the game. Gameplay, by its nature, is interactive and thus really needs to be played to truly get the context that it brings to the game. Heavy Rain didn't look engaging to play for many people, but for an equal number of people who did play the game felt the gameplay/mechanics were handled very well within the context of what it was trying to do.

At the end of the day, all criticism on any part of what is shown is totally legitimate. If you, as a publisher or a developer, is unreceptive to criticism, then don't show the game. Whatever is shown is fair game. Whatever is played is fair game. Every event, every publicity, every dev interview, every tweet is fair game for criticism.

But that was my point, not everything can be shown in a simple trailer or gameplay demo. I recall the demo for Mirror's Edge came out, everyone was absolutely blown away, and for good reason. That short demo really encapsulated what the developers were trying to do. The world and visuals they showed were interesting, and the story came off as fairly intruiging as well. Everyone went nuts for it. Unfortunately, they couldn't keep the momentum up for the rest of the game and we all found out that it really started slagging after that initial demo and the story was just a mess.

This is why I am saying that it's not quite valid to critique the story as if you know it's entirety because you don't, and you never will until it is fully released. You don't even have to actually play it, Let's plays and several other people playing the game should be sufficient to gain a grasp over what the game is.

Edit:
I really wasn't spewing hate on the game. I just criticized the mechanics that were shown. And I'm definitely open minded about this game. I would love for this game to succeed. DMC is one of my favorite franchises of all time. But I think what is best for a development team aren't people patting their backs and tell them how awesome they are, but have people actually give criticism on their game so they can evaluate their designs to improve if they feel the need for it. Having your designs get challenged is extremely helpful. That's pretty much why they have focus tests and QA teams, because most preview don't actually reflect criticism. Previews are just PR.

Exactly. So why would someone criticize what is essentially a commercial as if it were the full game?

If someone can write a preview that says good things about a game based on what is shown and without the full context of the game, then someone can also write a criticism of the game without the full context of the game.

For that particular part of the game, sure. This is why the criticisms of the Hitman: Absolution sexy nuns trailer is legitimate as it is concerning something bigger than just the game itself that is immediately apparent. People weren't deriding the game itself as horribly misogynistic, just the particular trailer and what it says about the industry as a whole. All I'm saying is to extend the same gratitude to DMC, for better or for worse.

ThisNewGuy:
snip

okay, honestly don't get how you can attack gameplay based upon trailers that as of yet haven't talked about the actual mechanics of the game. This is one the first reviews I've seen for the game that has mentioned any actual mechanics (the heaven/hell switch between moves), so unless you are going to attack THAT specific idea, you have nothing present to actually attack.

How do you know it's just going to be button mashing and not based around careful combos, positioning, what have you? You haven't been able to actually press any buttons and see what effect they have in the game.

GinxTV:
Ninja Theory is a good developer...

What? Well, they aren't bad... Enslaved and Heavenly Sword were certainly good to look at, but I though the gameplay in the former was severely lacking while the later was just an above-average God of War clone.

GinxTV:
... dubstep...

And just when I though all possible goodwill I had for this game had already evaporated.

Look, I know game sites are required to churn out these puff pieces during preview cycles if they want to continue getting access to future releases, so I'll cut you some slack. The environments look amazing, and the combat is mostly authentic... and that's it.

But Donte just comes off as a total, unapologetic prick. He's 'edgy' in the most focus-tested, committee-designed meaning of the word. His dialog is just terrible. I find him extremely unlikable, and is the reason why my gaming dollars will going elsewhere next year...

Sorry Capcom, but all the DMC fans jumped ship to Bayonetta. I hope you makes lots of money from the dumbed-down DMC and Resident Evil.

So, Tameem's idea of "cool story" is pitting Anonymous and Fox News against each other. With Bill O'Reilly as the main villain (until the obvious "epic reveal" that Vergil was behind everything all along).

And that the quality of dialogue is directly propotional to the amount of swearing.



Wow. I'm a bit confused. They market and sell the game as an "M for Mature" title, yet the dialogue sounds something out of middle schoolers' playground.

Not to even mention the developers' track record isn't very good and that the writing was always outsourced before (f.ex. Heavenly Sword was completely rewritten because it was so shitty).

Thanks, but I'll pass.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here