• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

DmC |OT| No, F*ck You!

Dahbomb

Member
Actually I'm really not sure I agree with the premise that a disappointing sequel can negate the quality of what came before. Even with the most egregious example of a drop in quality, Star Wars, I don't find myself enjoying the first films any less. It seems a really odd thing to argue.
I sort of see his point though. Spider Man 3 was so bad that it retroactively made Spider Man 1 and 2 bad for me. Now I can't unsee the ridiculous amount of cheese in the Raimi movies. I also liked the first few Donner Superman movies but after watching Superman Returns I couldn't stand the Donner universe either (I can't wait for the Superman reboot by the way).

A lot of people feel this way about the Mass Effect trilogy.
 

Risette

A Good Citizen
Actually I'm really not sure I agree with the premise that a disappointing sequel can negate the quality of what came before. Even with the most egregious example of a drop in quality, Star Wars, I don't find myself enjoying the first films any less. It seems a really odd thing to argue.
midichlorians??
 

ezekial45

Banned
Actually I'm really not sure I agree with the premise that a disappointing sequel can negate the quality of what came before. Even with the most egregious example of a drop in quality, Star Wars, I don't find myself enjoying the first films any less. It seems a really odd thing to argue.

Yeah, I disagree about that too. The Matrix sequels aren't that great, but the first movie is still pretty awesome.

DmC can't ruin the other games because they're intended to be a reboot and not tied to the other games directly. It's a separate thing.
 

V_Arnold

Member
Actually I'm really not sure I agree with the premise that a disappointing sequel can negate the quality of what came before. Even with the most egregious example of a drop in quality, Star Wars, I don't find myself enjoying the first films any less. It seems a really odd thing to argue.

I do not agree with that point either, but I understand if that is how some people work. It is a bad association to make (as it does not really help you in any way, just makes your life more frustrating, really), but I guess it is a hard habit to break.

Matrix 3 being meh did not make Matrix and Reloaded less amazing for me.
 

GuardianE

Santa May Claus
Yeah, I disagree about that too. The Matrix sequels aren't that great, but the first movie is still pretty awesome.

DmC can't ruin the other games because they're intended to be a reboot and not tied to the other games directly. It's a separate thing.

The Matrix sequels weren't reboots. The comparison doesn't work. Reboots serve as a separate function from sequels.

And no, poor sequels don't destroy what came before. If nothing else, they elevate their predecessors. That doesn't change the fact that sequels set the stage for the future of a series. That does not change
 
I sort of see his point though. Spider Man 3 was so bad that it retroactively made Spider Man 1 and 2 bad for me. Now I can't unsee the ridiculous amount of cheese in the Raimi movies. I also liked the first few Donner Superman movies but after watching Superman Returns I couldn't stand the Donner universe either (I can't wait for the Superman reboot by the way).

A lot of people feel this way about the Mass Effect trilogy.
Well that's different, you have had your eyes opened to something you didn't see before.
midichlorians??
That isn't in the first films, it doesn't matter.

My enjoyment of a film or game is my own, the creators aren't in control any more.
 
I sort of see his point though. Spider Man 3 was so bad that it retroactively made Spider Man 1 and 2 bad for me. Now I can't unsee the ridiculous amount of cheese in the Raimi movies. I also liked the first few Donner Superman movies but after watching Superman Returns I couldn't stand the Donner universe either (I can't wait for the Superman reboot by the way).

A lot of people feel this way about the Mass Effect trilogy.

But it was always there.
 
The Matrix sequels weren't reboots. The comparison doesn't work. Reboots serve as a separate function from sequels.

And no, poor sequels don't destroy what came before. If nothing else, they elevate their predecessors. That doesn't change the fact that sequels set the stage for the future of a series. That does not change
Absolutely, and disappointment is a perfectly valid reaction to have to a follow-up not being what you would have wanted. But I'm not sure anger is. And the idea that anyone doing anything creative has a responsibility to do things a certain way makes me very uneasy.
 
How does a poor sequel not affect your enjoyment of the prequel? Imagine if The Return of the King was just Gandalf taking a long-ass dump. Read or watch the prequels after that and try not thinking about it.
 

Dahbomb

Member
But it was always there.
I know it was always there but I never really paid too much attention to it, I always chalked it up to comic book super hero movies. I guess it didn't help that Batman Begins came and after that I never saw any other comic book super hero movie the same again.
 
How does a poor sequel not affect your enjoyment of the prequel? Imagine if The Return of the King was just Gandalf taking a long-ass dump. Read or watch the prequels after that and try not thinking about it.
I would still enjoy them the same for what they are, why not? I'm not saying I'd be happy about the direction but it couldn't ruin the earlier films.

Put it this way. The creation belongs to the creator, you don't have a right to any control over what they do next.

The experience you have with it belongs to you, nothing the creator does next can take that away from you.
 
How does a poor sequel not affect your enjoyment of the prequel? Imagine if The Return of the King was just Gandalf taking a long-ass dump. Read or watch the prequels after that and try not thinking about it.

Some of my favorite movies/games/books have terrible sequels and/or reboots. The Matrix is still one of my favorite movies, despite having disappointing follow-ups. The first season of Twin Peaks is still the best piece of television ever created, despite a poor second season and a terrible film. I don't retroactively hate Ghost in the Shell because I didn't like Stand Alone Complex as much.

That being said, it personally doesn't apply to my feelings about DmC, since I enjoy it and classic DMC (1 and 3, at least).
 

SoulPlaya

more money than God
I think this game serves as a reminder to people to not get so emotionally invested in a game, movie, etc.

Yes, you may "love" the series, but you don't own it. In the end, these are just IPs owned by companies who use them to make money. When you just take a step back, relax a bit, and think about it, these are just games meant to be enjoyed for fun, and that's what this game is. I'm not saying not to care, I'm just saying that you've got to maintain some logical clarity about this.

Furthermore, it's not as if the DMC development team had this game snatched from them. They chose to make DD instead, and are continuing to work on it. NT was given a chance to make a good game, and I think they more than delivered. When fans start using words like "betrayed", it makes you wonder whether or not they realize how seriously they're turning this into.

EDIT: On another note, I really hope the experience with this game doesn't deter other publishers from experimenting with their established franchises.
 

ezekial45

Banned
The Matrix sequels weren't reboots. The comparison doesn't work. Reboots serve as a separate function from sequels.

And no, poor sequels don't destroy what came before. If nothing else, they elevate their predecessors. That doesn't change the fact that sequels set the stage for the future of a series. That does not change

He brought up the Star Wars prequels, I brought up the Matrix films. That's where I was making the parallels. They're all connected together. DmC is a reboot, and it doesn't ruin or tarnish the plot of its predecessors because it's not related.

And yes, poor sequels CAN ruin the predecessors. The Spider Man 3 ruined the first 2 movies by introducing new elements that directly contradicted the plot of the earlier movies (Uncle Ben's death and weird Butler), and ruined some of the defining scenes in those movies. So watching the first two movies while knowing what happened in the third movie pretty much makes sour grapes of the most important scenes in the movies.
 
And yes, poor sequels CAN ruin the predecessors. The Spider Man 3 ruined the first 2 movies by introducing new elements that directly contradicted the plot of the earlier movies (Uncle Ben's death and weird Butler), and ruined some of the defining scenes in those movies. So watching the first two movies while knowing what happened in the third movie pretty much makes sour grapes of the most important scenes in the movies.
Just ignore that stuff if you don't like it. You don't have to accept it.
 

GuardianE

Santa May Claus
Absolutely, and disappointment is a perfectly valid reaction to have to a follow-up not being what you would have wanted. But I'm not sure anger is. And the idea that anyone doing anything creative has a responsibility to do things a certain way makes me very uneasy.

Why? Why can't I be angry? Why isn't that a valid reaction? Because it's negative? Some of the best things in gaming have sprouted from negativity. Being apathetic, or worse yet, being unapologetically positive about everything only leads to complacency and stagnation.

Creative freedom is always limited by context. And there are varying degrees that this context can be limiting. The context we're working with is an established set of characters, lore, and gameplay. There is a responsbility here. You will not be judged in a vacuum, nor should you be. If you're making a new IP, you have a different context. You have much more freedom, but you're still limited by context... by publishers, for example.


He brought up the Star Wars prequels, I brought up the Matrix films. That's where I was making the parallels. They're all connected together. DmC is a reboot, and it doesn't ruin or tarnish the plot of its predecessors because it's not related.

And yes, poor sequels CAN ruin the predecessors. The Spider Man 3 ruined the first 2 movies by introducing new elements that directly contradicted the plot of the earlier movies (Uncle Ben's death and weird Butler), and ruined some of the defining scenes in those movies. So watching the first two movies while knowing what happened in the third movie pretty much makes sour grapes of the most important scenes in the movies.

The Star Wars prequels are more like reboots than the actual series, really. DmC doesn't tarnish the plot or characters of its predecessors. It castrates them.
 
I would still enjoy them the same for what they are, why not? I'm not saying I'd be happy about the direction but it couldn't ruin the earlier films.

Put it this way. The creation belongs to the creator, you don't have a right to any control over what they do next.

The experience you have with it belongs to you, nothing the creator does next can take that away from you.

Some of my favorite movies/games/books have terrible sequels and/or reboots. The Matrix is still one of my favorite movies, despite having disappointing follow-ups. The first season of Twin Peaks is still the best piece of television ever created, despite a poor second season and a terrible film. I don't retroactively hate Ghost in the Shell because I didn't like Stand Alone Complex as much.

That being said, it personally doesn't apply to my feelings about DmC, since I enjoy it and classic DMC (1 and 3, at least).

Well, I'm glad you guys can because some people can't and it shouldn't be asked of them to just ignore sequels. Sequels and prequels and spinoffs and whatever there is puts any entry into a new context. If I know that the endgame of Frodo carrying the ring into Mordor is just seeing Gandalf take a shit it loses all meaning.
 
Why? Why can't I be angry? Why isn't that a valid reaction? Because it's negative? Some of the best things in gaming have sprouted from negativity. Being apathetic, or worse yet, being unapologetically positive about everything only leads to complacency and stagnation.

Creative freedom is always limited by context. And there are varying degrees that this context can be limiting. The context we're working with is an established set of characters, lore, and gameplay. There is a responsbility here. You will not be judged in a vacuum, nor should you be. If you're making a new IP, you have a different context. You have much more freedom, but you're still limited by context... by publishers, for example.
Not because it's negative, I said disappointment is valid. Anger seems strange to me because it implies some sort of blame. A creator can do whatever the hell they like with their creation. Should they be judged in a vacuum? Absolutely not, context does indeed matter, and feel free to judge DmC or whatever however you want. But you can't be angry just because you don't like it.
 

ezekial45

Banned
The Star Wars prequels are more like reboots than the actual series, really. DmC doesn't tarnish the plot or characters of its predecessors. It castrates them.

lol


Also, the star wars prequels are not reboots, because they're about the birth of Darth Vader, an already established character.
 
The Star Wars prequels are more like reboots than the actual series, really. DmC doesn't tarnish the plot or characters of its predecessors. It castrates them.

Wut. The prequel trilogy retroactively makes Darth Vader a whiny dingdong and turns the once-mysterious "clone wars" into a really silly spectacle. I'm not saying direct sequels or prequels can't tarnish how we view a series as a whole, but I believe it's important to separate out individual works from the series at large. I'm an Evangelion fan, for example, but not every episode of Evangelion is my favorite.

DmC doesn't "castrate" established characters because it does not take place in the same canon that those characters exist. If DmC was literally Devil May Cry 5 and everyone had inexplicably received makeovers and personality swaps, that'd be different. As it stands, DmC is an entry in the series made by different people with a different vision. Aside from the fact that it isn't a proper DMC5, it doesn't erase or change anything. I understand how that can be disappointing to people who are incredibly invested in the way the series used to be, but until we have absolute confirmation from Capcom that DmC is intended as a replacement for DMC... I think anger is a bit of a strong reaction.

I think the current Dark Souls -> Dark Souls 2 worry is far more pertinent. That's a series that, as far as we know, might be facing a core change for the worse in a direct sequel rather than a reboot/spinoff.
 
I dunno about castrates but the addition of angels and nephilim is incredibly arbitrary.

The lore centres co-existence of humans and demons and Dante's consolidation of the two within himself (using the strength of a demon to be a good human). Why aren't the angels fighting the demons if they exist? Why aren't the helping Dante? Come on, son
 

GuardianE

Santa May Claus
Not because it's negative, I said disappointment is valid. Anger seems strange to me because it implies some sort of fault. A creator can do whatever the hell they like with their creation. Should they be judged in a vacuum? Absolutely not, context does indeed matter. But you can't be angry just because you don't like it.

Something important is being taken away from me. I'm angry. It's pretty simple, no? People get angry for all kinds of things. I don't see why it's not a valid response.


Good lord, lol. Come on, now.

It castrates them in the sense that they will no longer be able to bear fruit... produce classic games. I think it's a fitting description.
 

Calcaneus

Member
I never had that problem with series that aren't completely linear. Just going with the Spider Man example, yeah 3 sucked, but I can still enjoy the first two because they do kinda stand alone. If they never made a spiderman 3, I wouldn't really be missing anything or feel like the story is incomplete.

I feel the same way about the DMC, bad entries may hurt my interest in the future of the series, but it can't hurt my love of the previous games.
 

V_Arnold

Member
It castrates them in the sense that they will no longer be able to bear fruit... produce classic games. I think it's a fitting description.

Will you be happy once again if old Dante and old Vergil pops back up? Will you be able to forgive them for they have sinned? :D
 

NIN90

Member
What baffles me is how everyone expects that DMC5 made by Capcom (with their absolutely awful output for the better half of this gen) would be an improvement.
 

GuardianE

Santa May Claus
Nothing has been taken away from you. I'm not saying you aren't angry. You clearly are. I'm saying being angry is totally unreasonable.

You're saying I "can't" be angry, which makes no sense. Being angry is ultimately just proactive disappointment anyway.


Did you post this with a straight face?

Absolutely. I'd say it to someone's face.


Will you be happy once again if old Dante and old Vergil pops back up? Will you be able to forgive them for they have sinned? :D

Despite your jab, I'll answer your real question. Will I be able to forgive Capcom? Not really. They have a long ass way to redeem themselves, and not just with DmC.
 
Something important is being taken away from me. I'm angry. It's pretty simple, no? People get angry for all kinds of things. I don't see why it's not a valid response.

But how is it being taken away from you, I think is what people want to know. What exactly about starting a new DmC series takes away the old ones from you? I'm pretty sure the team that made the old Devil May Cry games is currently devoted to Dragon's Dogma. If we knew that DmC was a stand-in/replacement for a DMC5 by them I'd understand completely, but we don't know that. We honestly can't even begin to extrapolate to that point. I suppose we could rewind and be mad at Capcom for putting them on Dragon's Dogma/Dragon's Dogma 2 or whatever it's going to be called. As it stands I don't really see how a different game counts as "taking away" from you.

What of people who do enjoy this new version, by the way? Are they implicit in this theft?
 

SoulPlaya

more money than God
Something important is being taken away from me. I'm angry. It's pretty simple, no? People get angry for all kinds of things. I don't see why it's not a valid response.
I think the pervading message should be that this really shouldn't be all that important to you. I know it's something that you've become invested in, but think of it this way. I know as a fan you feel that you've invested a lot of time and money into the series. However, Capcom has invested more money and even more time into the series, and you have to ask yourself, does your smaller investment mean that Capcom can't do what they want with their creation?

It's this attitude that I feel is holding some developers back from truly innovating.
 
You're saying I "can't" be angry, which makes no sense. Being angry is ultimately just proactive disappointment anyway.
No...I said it's unreasonable. Anger is qualitatively different from disappointment. It's reasonable to be disappointed if you don't win the lottery, it is unreasonable to be angry if you don't win the lottery. You have to be wronged for anger to be reasonable.
 

ezekial45

Banned
What baffles me is how everyone expects that DMC5 made by Capcom (with their absolutely awful output for the better half of this gen) would be an improvement.

Exactly. I said it before and I'll say it again; the DMC5 fans dream of won't be the DMC5 Capcom will make. Especially given their increasingly business oriented actions.

Expectations =/= Reality

And of course, DMC5 is still hypothetical at this point.
 

Korigama

Member
Exactly. I said it before and I'll say it again; the DMC5 fans dream of won't be the DMC5 Capcom will make. Especially given their increasingly business oriented actions.

Expectations =/= Reality

And of course, DMC5 is still hypothetical at this point.
Out of curiosity, what would you believe this "DMC5 that fans dream of" to be? In respect to what it might feature specifically? I ask because I've seen plenty of varying expectations as to what people might look for in such a game.
 

GuardianE

Santa May Claus
But how is it being taken away from you, I think is what people want to know. What exactly about starting a new DmC series takes away the old ones from you? I'm pretty sure the team that made the old Devil May Cry games is currently devoted to Dragon's Dogma. If we knew that DmC was a stand-in/replacement for a DMC5 by them I'd understand completely, but we don't know that. We honestly can't even begin to extrapolate to that point. I suppose we could rewind and be mad at Capcom for putting them on Dragon's Dogma/Dragon's Dogma 2 or whatever it's going to be called. As it stands I don't really see how a different game counts as "taking away" from you.

What of people who do enjoy this new version, by the way? Are they implicit in this theft?

I understand that we haven't seen confirmation of DmC replacing DMC yet. I honestly do. But all signs to that being the end goal.

Here's the thing. If I lay back and just accept DmC for what it is, and this really is the Capcom market test that I assume it is, then it'll just happen. At that point, it's too late to do anything. DMC is a long forgotten history of DmC. You could argue that it's already too late, but as you've said, they haven't announced DmC2 yet.

I don't see what's wrong then with being proactive and trying to encourage support for the old series while DMC5 is still faintly possible.

As for people who enjoy this game, there's nothing to say, really. They enjoy this game and they have every right to. And if they want to defend this game, then they can and should in as many ways possible.


I think the pervading message should be that this really shouldn't be all that important to you. I know it's something that you've become invested in, but think of it this way. I know as a fan you feel that you've invested a lot of time and money into the series. However, Capcom has invested more money and even more time into the series, and you have to ask yourself, does your smaller investment mean that Capcom can't do what they want with their creation?

It's this attitude that I feel is holding some developers back from truly innovating.

You're absolutely right. It shouldn't be that important to me. But it is. I can't help it.

And my small investment of time and money? Nah. I don't think Capcom owes me anything as an individual. The entire community of people who invested their time and money? I think that's a bit more compelling. And I recognize that it's not clear what % of the fanbase actually cares. That will be revealed with sales data.



No...I said it's unreasonable. Anger is qualitatively different from disappointment. It's reasonable to be disappointed if you don't win the lottery, it is unreasonable to be angry if you don't win the lottery. You have to be wronged for anger to be reasonable.

Not because it's negative, I said disappointment is valid. Anger seems strange to me because it implies some sort of blame. A creator can do whatever the hell they like with their creation. Should they be judged in a vacuum? Absolutely not, context does indeed matter, and feel free to judge DmC or whatever however you want. But you can't be angry just because you don't like it.
 

V_Arnold

Member
Despite your jab, I'll answer your real question. Will I be able to forgive Capcom? Not really. They have a long ass way to redeem themselves, and not just with DmC.

I really did not intend to attack you with it, just was funny to go for that bible quote,yo! :D

Regardless, I would really respect Capcom if they did not abandon old Dante and old Vergil. Especially since classic Vergil is the best Vergil. I really am an optimist, cause I want to see the situation as Ultimate Spider-Man and Amazing Spider-Man coexisting.
 

ezekial45

Banned
Out of curiosity, what would you believe this "DMC5 that fans dream of" to be? In respect to what it might feature specifically? I ask because I've seen plenty of varying expectations as to what people might look for in such a game.

I mostly go by Dahbomb's wishlist and proposals for DMC5, since many people in the DMC threads love it. I don't have a link to at moment. It sounds like a solid game with expanded multiple characters, devil hunting sub-game, refinement and tweaks to content, etc.
 
As a DMC fan, I just feel like the internet and the gaming press have been telling me that I'm not allowed to hate my new stepdad just because he isn't as cool as my real dad, and I'm an entitled cunt because there are homeless orphans in Africa.

Like, I get it, but my dad was still way cooler.
 

Dahbomb

Member
I mostly go by Dahbomb's wishlist and proposals for DMC5, since many people in the DMC threads love it. I don't have a link to at moment. It sounds like a solid game with expanded multiple characters, devil hunting sub-game, refinement and tweaks to content, etc.
Yeah I honestly don't ever expect Capcom to make a DMC5 game like that. I sincerely doubt that Capcom even thinks that the level design of DMC needs changing. And even if they do go that route of devil mission hunting design, there is no guarantee they won't fuck it up and end with something worse than the formula they have now. Then the fans would crucify me for ever bringing up that idea to begin with!
 

jett

D-Member
I found some short combo clips nothing too outrageous just few combos in training mode:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jb7eacRlDqc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNN9d_jEBEw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us6Q1fcLI7U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehyjyqE8III

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a31ayE9mpM


That last combo looks hilarious as fuck. It's called the "UFO".

Haha the last combo was pretty funny. Here's a small DMD video from a "high level" DMC4 player:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZODJ67SmNs
 

Risette

A Good Citizen
Yeah I honestly don't ever expect Capcom to make a DMC5 game like that. I sincerely doubt that Capcom even thinks that the level design of DMC needs changing. And even if they do go that route of devil mission hunting design, there is no guarantee they won't fuck it up and end with something worse than the formula they have now. Then the fans would crucify me for ever bringing up that idea to begin with!
I'm almost 300% sure Capcom would turn a devil hunting mission structure into a grinding shitfest.

Suddenly, I'm having PTSD flashbacks from Peace Walker. (this is not a Capcom/Konami joke just another franchise that took on a piecemeal mission structure that I did not quite like)
 

SoulPlaya

more money than God
I think your interpretation and qualifications of anger are severely limiting and incredibly unrealistic.
I know I'm just some random guy on the internet that you don't know, and you're more than entitled to be angry at whatever you want.

However, just some advice from a friendly source. If this game's existence is seriously making you angry and you feel that this game is that important to you, I think you may want to take a step back from gaming, man. These are just games. They're meant for fun and that's it. Just my opinion, but they shouldn't mean that much to you in the grand scheme of your life.

Just random advice that's probably meaningless, but yeah.
 
Top Bottom