@The_Laughing_Man said:

The last two nights I went and watched all the cutscenes from DmC 3 And 4. I never got far in the third game but to me the games are about the combat and the over the top main character and crazy supporting roles. Does this one still have that or do they try a more calm and normal approach to the game and story?

The combat in this game is very good. Not on a DMC3/Bayonetta level, but head and shoulders above everything else in the genre. It strikes a very good balance between complexity and accessibility.

As far as cutscenes/storytelling are concerned, there's still plenty of balls-to-the-walls crazy minus the goofy caricature on DMC. The tongue-in-cheek feel is gone, replaced by a lot of earnestness and heart. In DMC, Dante is brash and cocky because he's brash and cocky. In DmC, Dante is a lot more like Spider-Man.

@Sanious: They could have easily distracted Mundus in a different way or just staright out attacked him. And the reason to be civil is because it would be the right thing to do. You just killed his kid. Plus it is an opportunity for character development.

And it doesn't mater that he didn't kill it but he still has links to the act and it was wrong anyway

You guys are just applying real life moral issues to a video game

In a reboot which whole purpose was to add a serious story to the DmC franchise. And there are other bad moments in the game this one just really sticks out as bad

@Quarters: Fair enough. neither of you seem to be willing to see it this way either

@StarvingGamer: As I said that is just as much related to him being surprised at the moment. And even if that is the one moment where he shows remorse it is empty, he does nothing about and just carrys on never questioning Virgil until he out right says he is going to take over the world. Plus the story could have easily been written that he didn't need Virgil, in fact Virgil hasn't been shown to be any use in a fight up to this point

And it doesn't mater that it was his plan. There was no need for the line, even if you go with the plan which they didn't have to say that to annoy him. I've said this before and I shouldn't have to again. Also I wrote myself into a whole and must go with it isn't a good excuse

Also the baby fight was also tasteless.

@Blimble said:

@StarvingGamer: As I said that is just as much related to him being surprised at the moment. And even if that is the one moment where he shows remorse it is empty, he does nothing about and just carrys on never questioning Virgil until he out right says he is going to take over the world. Plus the story could have easily been written that he didn't need Virgil, in fact Virgil hasn't been shown to be any use in a fight up to this point

And it doesn't mater that it was his plan. There was no need for the line, even if you go with the plan which they didn't have to say that to annoy him. I've said this before and I shouldn't have to again. Also I wrote myself into a whole and must go with it isn't a good excuse

Also the baby fight was also tasteless.

Ok, I think I get what's going on here now. You didn't like the story, which is completely fine. Taste is subjective after all. Unfortunately, you are trying to invent objective reasons in order to convince us that we are wrong for liking the story. Yes, they could have written Virgil out of the ending. They also could have written it so that Dante kills Mundus with a kiss, turning him into an explosion of rainbow candies. That's not the story that NT wanted to tell. In the story, as written, Dante needed Virgil's help to reach Mundus's lair and ultimately close the hellmouth(? is that what it was? I've been watching Buffy so now I'm getting my mythologies mixed up).

And yes, they could have written it so that Dante distracted Mundus by singing Oh Danny Boy instead, but that's not the story they wanted to tell. Hate the story all you want, but there is no indication that NT wrote themselves into a corner at any point. DmC was a reboot in tone as much as anything else. This isn't "Hell yeah I'm a badass hero guy" Dante from the old DMC games. This is a new Dante full of naivete and idealism and a little bit of darkness. There's actual emotional depth there, whether or not you're willing to dig deep enough to find it.

But hey, there's no accounting for taste.

@StarvingGamer: This is meant to be a civil discussion. Please don't ruin that by acting how you have in that post.

Where did I say I was objectively right? I'm just stating my opinion. That is how a discussion works. I am just saying I don't thing that part and the game is general was written badly. Just because you and others also stated your opinion a couple of times doesn't mean I think that you are acting like your opinion is an objective fact. I am happy that people found a game they like with a story they like, I just happen to disagree on the quality.

And I agree Dante is full of naivete and idealism but nothing is every really done with it, he just keeps acting that way. A moment like this would have been a good place to explore that futher outside of simply stating what Dante thinks and his dark past. They never really do more with him than that

@Blimble said:

@Sanious: They could have easily distracted Mundus in a different way or just staright out attacked him. And the reason to be civil is because it would be the right thing to do. You just killed his kid. Plus it is an opportunity for character development.

And it doesn't mater that he didn't kill it but he still has links to the act and it was wrong anyway

You guys are just applying real life moral issues to a video game

In a reboot which whole purpose was to add a serious story to the DmC franchise. And there are other bad moments in the game this one just really sticks out as bad

"The right thing to do" isn't always what you think the right thing to do, that a pretty subjective thing. What Dante and Vergil did was the "right thing to do" for them. So even trying to argue that is pointless.

It being a reboot and having a more serious story has nothing to do with the problem that is trying to impose your real life morals to a video game, let alone a different person anyway. Dante and Vergil don't have the same morals as you, me or even each other. So again that is objective and pointless to even argue.

@Sanious: If we are going to go that deep it pretty much becomes impossible for either of us to argue any point. I simply don't think that action was just especially when the same effect an be achieved through other means. Even if you don't agree morally the scene could have been used to actually develop the characters which is very important in stories.

And I don't get what you are getting at with "real life morals" they are what they are, subjective ideas. Just because those characters hold different ones doesn't mean someone like me who disagrees is fine with it, I still think what they did was wrong. This isn't me saying my morals are objectively right just my opinion which I am trying to argue. just because they belong in a fictional story doesn't change that

@Blimble: Kind of sounds like you are when you're suggesting that they should have done things differently.

@Sanious: That's just because I'm not going to start every sentence with in my opinion. I could say that you thought all your posts were objective facts cause you didn't say they weren't. But i didn't as it just gets in the way of discussion even if you did think that, I'd rather talk about points but people here always seem to get hung up on stuff like that for no reason

@Blimble said:

@StarvingGamer: This is meant to be a civil discussion. Please don't ruin that by acting how you have in that post.

What? I've reread my post like 5 times and have yet to see where I wasn't being civil.

Look, this is what I'm saying here. You don't like the story, which as I already said, is totally fine. That's your right, everyone has different tastes. My problem is that you keep bringing up all these points about things not making sense as if the writing was somehow inconsistent either within its own logic or with what fans of the game seem to have taken away from it.

Think of it like this. At the end of A New Hope, Luke blows up the Death Star. Now, this thing is essentially a giant floating city which means it is sure to be full of non combatants. There are going to be doctors and engineers and cooks and all sorts of people. But Luke goes with the plan unquestioningly, because he has been told by people smarter than him that this is the only way. He is committing a war crime (at least by our current moral standards) on a humongous scale. So I ask you, do you have as much disdain for Star Wars Episode IV as you have for DmC? Do you feel like Lucas messed up and should have written it differently? If yes, then we can end the conversation here.

@StarvingGamer: Because you because you brought up stupid examples to mock me in an attempt to be funny

Dante distracted Mundus by singing Oh Danny Boy instead,

And you seem to be the one can't accept your opinion isn't fact. I dislike the scene and the way the character is portrayed. Get over it. I'm happy that you have found a game you enjoy but I think it is utter shit and have stated why. And I was beginning to think we could have decent discussions about this game

@StarvingGamer said:

@Blimble said:

@StarvingGamer: This is meant to be a civil discussion. Please don't ruin that by acting how you have in that post.

What? I've reread my post like 5 times and have yet to see where I wasn't being civil.

Look, this is what I'm saying here. You don't like the story, which as I already said, is totally fine. That's your right, everyone has different tastes. My problem is that you keep bringing up all these points about things not making sense as if the writing was somehow inconsistent either within its own logic or with what fans of the game seem to have taken away from it.

Think of it like this. At the end of A New Hope, Luke blows up the Death Star. Now, this thing is essentially a giant floating city which means it is sure to be full of non combatants. There are going to be doctors and engineers and cooks and all sorts of people. But Luke goes with the plan unquestioningly, because he has been told by people smarter than him that this is the only way. He is committing a war crime (at least by our current moral standards) on a humongous scale. So I ask you, do you have as much disdain for Star Wars Episode IV as you have for DmC? Do you feel like Lucas messed up and should have written it differently? If yes, then we can end the conversation here.

That is not the same thing at all. Yes there might be non-combatants there, but they are not the target. The Death Star is blow op because it is a military target. It is not the same as cold blooded murder. It would be if Luke had taken over the death star and blown up Curacant because the emperor was on it. THAT is more the situation we have here.

Dante is supposed to be the hero, but how can he be the hero when he is okay with doing horrible things. If they had shown him have deep remorse and grown him as a character that showed that he had huge issues with the actions of Virgil it would be something else, but that is not what happens. He disproves for about 4 seconds and then HAHA DEAD BABY YOU MAD!.

@Blimble: I was using extreme examples to prove a point, that arguments about what they could have written are ultimately useless because they literally could have written anything, even things as bizarre as the suggestions that I made. The only way to have a meaningful discussion about the story is to approach it on its own merits.

Which brings me to the crux of it. The problems you have with the way Dante is portrayed seem to be flying in the face of the game that I experienced. You say that Dante is a bad person, but he doesn't do anything bad.

And I notice you completely ignored my analogy. If you could answer me, I really believe that would be the quickest way to reach an accord.

@Blimble said:

@Sanious: They could have easily distracted Mundus in a different way or just staright out attacked him. And the reason to be civil is because it would be the right thing to do. You just killed his kid. Plus it is an opportunity for character development.

And it doesn't mater that he didn't kill it but he still has links to the act and it was wrong anyway

You guys are just applying real life moral issues to a video game

In a reboot which whole purpose was to add a serious story to the DmC franchise. And there are other bad moments in the game this one just really sticks out as bad

@Quarters: Fair enough. neither of you seem to be willing to see it this way either

@StarvingGamer: As I said that is just as much related to him being surprised at the moment. And even if that is the one moment where he shows remorse it is empty, he does nothing about and just carrys on never questioning Virgil until he out right says he is going to take over the world. Plus the story could have easily been written that he didn't need Virgil, in fact Virgil hasn't been shown to be any use in a fight up to this point

And it doesn't mater that it was his plan. There was no need for the line, even if you go with the plan which they didn't have to say that to annoy him. I've said this before and I shouldn't have to again. Also I wrote myself into a whole and must go with it isn't a good excuse

Also the baby fight was also tasteless.

I'm utterly befuddled that people are seemingly up in arms about the demon baby thing. I dunno sorry if I'm not exactly sympathetic to the demon spawn of the king of demons. That thing is hardly a innocent child. Its a goddamned monstrosity and a demon.

@MurderBunny said:

@StarvingGamer said:

@Blimble said:

@StarvingGamer: This is meant to be a civil discussion. Please don't ruin that by acting how you have in that post.

What? I've reread my post like 5 times and have yet to see where I wasn't being civil.

Look, this is what I'm saying here. You don't like the story, which as I already said, is totally fine. That's your right, everyone has different tastes. My problem is that you keep bringing up all these points about things not making sense as if the writing was somehow inconsistent either within its own logic or with what fans of the game seem to have taken away from it.

Think of it like this. At the end of A New Hope, Luke blows up the Death Star. Now, this thing is essentially a giant floating city which means it is sure to be full of non combatants. There are going to be doctors and engineers and cooks and all sorts of people. But Luke goes with the plan unquestioningly, because he has been told by people smarter than him that this is the only way. He is committing a war crime (at least by our current moral standards) on a humongous scale. So I ask you, do you have as much disdain for Star Wars Episode IV as you have for DmC? Do you feel like Lucas messed up and should have written it differently? If yes, then we can end the conversation here.

That is not the same thing at all. Yes there might be non-combatants there, but they are not the target. The Death Star is blow op because it is a military target. It is not the same as cold blooded murder. It would be if Luke had taken over the death star and blown up Curacant because the emperor was on it. THAT is more the situation we have here.

Dante is supposed to be the hero, but how can he be the hero when he is okay with doing horrible things. If they had shown him have deep remorse and grown him as a character that showed that he had huge issues with the actions of Virgil it would be something else, but that is not what happens. He disproves for about 4 seconds and then HAHA DEAD BABY YOU MAD!.

But Dante didn't shoot Lilith. He literally did not have time to have issues about Virgil's actions. Everything started exploding, and the freedom of the entire world was in jeopardy. This was his one and only chance to defeat the bad guy. What was he going to do, spend that time arguing with the one person whose help he needed? Was he going to act sad and remorseful despite knowing that pretending to revel in the death of Mundus's child was likely the only path to victory? Is that what you would do if the fate of everything and everyone was in the balance?

@StarvingGamer: By using extreme examples you completely lose the meaning of what I was saying and come off as just wanting to make fun of those who disagree with you rather than engage in valid discussion i was pointing out how in my opinion (just so you don't go on another one about me thinking everything I say is fact) the scene makes Dante look bad and gave an example of how they could make him look better and develop the character, I'm sure an actual writer could figure something better out. Your bizarre points have no meaning as they don't make sense in the context of the game, mine did.

And you really don't seem to be able to grasp the idea that not everyone has the same opinion as you. We saw the same thing but have different out looks on it. get over yourself. i see mocking a person no mater what they have done before because there child has just been killed as completely horrendous, you don't. I'm fine with that but you don't seem to be able to accept this.

And your analogy was just as stupid as the ones before as the situation were nothing a like, neither are how realistic are the world being portrayed 9DmC very serious Star Wars like old simple adventure shows where morality is balck and white) and the morality of the situation. You really don't seem to be able to realise your opinion isn't fact

If the game is fun and has great mechanics, I couldn't care any less about the story or characters.

Story/characters are window dressing in video games imo. If you have great writing, and shitty game design I don't want to play it.

Even something like "The Walking Dead" isn't going to continue to cut it with its writing. If they don't fix/improve game mechanics, I'm not going to play it anymore.

@Demoskinos: I've been round in circles for this for a while so I can't really be bothered getting into that one again sorry. my basic view is that the child isn't inherently evil as demons in that world can make choices. By not giving it a chance to decide what is right or wrong and killing it because it could be evil one day I view Virgil and Dante by extension of not bringing this up as wrong or showing a decent amount of remorse as evil. And I don't see why killing it was the only path to victory and it still wouldn't make it right

edit:clicked wrong person reply button

@Blimble: Insults aside, how are they nothing alike? In both situations they have to perform actions that may seem distasteful or morally wrong to some, because in the high-stakes world they live in they believe these actions are their only chances for success.

But are you honestly saying that if the fate of the entire planet was in your hands, and the deciding factor was based on your willingness to throw the death of your enemy's child in their face, you would doom everyone to eternal slavery because that level of taunting is too distasteful?

@StarvingGamer: One is about the killing on an innocent child. Yes it was a demon but it hadn't developed the ability to choose right or wrong and is a civilian, they killed it because they believed it could be evil but it didn't have to be. Plus it is a fucking baby man. That world works on a more realistic world (magic and shit aside) so morality works the same way

the death star is full of people who have made the choice to work for the empire which is known to be morally corrupt. They made that choice themselves and have willingly taken part in a war. Star wars also works on the old tv adventure show rules where bad guys are bad, if you are a faceless henchman you were always bad

completely different

@Blimble: Forget the analogy, what about my other question?

"Are you honestly saying that if the fate of the entire planet was in your hands, and the deciding factor was based on your willingness to throw the death of your enemy's child in their face, you would doom everyone to eternal slavery because that level of taunting is too distasteful?"

@Blimble said:

@Demoskinos: I've been round in circles for this for a while so I can't really be bothered getting into that one again sorry. my basic view is that the child isn't inherently evil as demons in that world can make choices. By not giving it a chance to decide what is right or wrong and killing it because it could be evil one day I view Virgil and Dante by extension of not bringing this up as wrong or showing a decent amount of remorse as evil. And I don't see why killing it was the only path to victory and it still wouldn't make it right

edit:clicked wrong person reply button

Also, since I got this message anyways... Mundus, when next to his portal of power, is invincible. He cannot be touched. The only way to kill him is to pull him away from his portal long enough to close it, which needs both Virgil and Dante. However, Mundus is also very smart and crafty. He isn't going to leave his portal willingly, so what can Dante do? He isn't strong enough to move Mundus by force, so he has to get Mundus angry enough to chase him. Of course that's not an easy thing to do when you're dealing with an uncaring/unfeeling demon. So they found the one thing that Mundus did care about, his unborn child, and capitalized on it.

And remember, Dante didn't even want to use Lilith and the baby to get Mundus at first, even though he knew that it was likely his only shot. He was willing to trade her for Kat instead, hoping they could find another way. Of course Virgil knows this isn't possible and, true to his "end by any means" personality, takes the shot when he has the chance. At that point the world starts exploding so it becomes do or die time. It's go go go time so Dante follows Virgil's plan, as distasteful as it may be. And even then he still tries to do it his way by talking about freedom for humanity, but it's clear that Mundus isn't biting. So he puts on his facade once more and goads him into losing his tempter the only way he knows how.

EDIT: Ok and back to the analogy really quickly because I do have an answer. If the Empire is this big bad place, how do you know these non combats weren't conscripted against their will? Sure the Empire would want the best engineers/doctors/whatever working on their crown jewel so it stands to reason that they'd pull in the best-of-the-best regardless of how willing or unwilling they were.

@StarvingGamer: So are you admitting the analogy doesn't work?

And i don't see how your next question applies at all. they did not need to kill the child to win. Virgil just did it as an extra precaution

And yes they could have easily mocked him in other ways like how they destroyed his entire empire in little time, some teenage lay about who wasn't even trying hard, how he isn't even really powerful and just generally brag. Or some completely different plan like causing more mayhem and taking over everything so leaving Mundus the only one that can come and stop them. Plus the writer could have easily avoided a problem like this

And it doesn't mater that he didn't plan it straight away, you should also notice there you admit the plan doesn't require killing the baby, he is willing to accept it. the story could easily have Dante go with his own plan at the moment, why does he have to follow Virgil's plan so rigidly? he could by himself get Mundus away from the portal and defeat him if the writer wants him to. It wouldn't even be a weird leap in logic

@Blimble said:

@StarvingGamer: So are you admitting the analogy doesn't work?

And i don't see how your next question applies at all. they did not need to kill the child to win. Virgil just did it as an extra precaution

And yes they could have easily mocked him in other ways like how they destroyed his entire empire in little time, some teenage lay about who wasn't even trying hard, how he isn't even really powerful and just generally brag. Or some completely different plan like causing more mayhem and taking over everything so leaving Mundus the only one that can come and stop them. Plus the writer could have easily avoided a problem like this

And it doesn't mater that he didn't plan it straight away, you should also notice there you admit the plan doesn't require killing the baby, he is willing to accept it. the story could easily have Dante go with his own plan at the moment, why does he have to follow Virgil's plan so rigidly? he could by himself get Mundus away from the portal and defeat him if the writer wants him to. It wouldn't even be a weird leap in logic

I never admitted the plan didn't require killing the baby. What? I admitted that Dante didn't want to kill the baby to get at Mundus.

And it would be a HUGE leap in logic if suddenly any minor taunt was enough to get this crafty king of demons to leave his place of safety just because. It is built up and reiterated time and time again that the only way to get Mundus away from his portal is to make him really mad, and the only way to make him really mad is to put his unborn child in jeopardy. This is reinforced not only by numerous characters but by Mundus's own actions. Again, they could have written it differently, but within the logic of the universe of DmC it makes sense. And because it makes sense, Dante's actions also make sense not as an evil baby-killer but as a hero willing to get his hands dirty (at least by association) if that's what it takes to save the world.

Also, I still like the analogy, not as a direct comparison of genres and styles but as a thought experiment.

@Blimble said:

@Sanious: That's just because I'm not going to start every sentence with in my opinion. I could say that you thought all your posts were objective facts cause you didn't say they weren't. But i didn't as it just gets in the way of discussion even if you did think that, I'd rather talk about points but people here always seem to get hung up on stuff like that for no reason

My problem is that you found things wrong with the story to only suggest things that would have made the story more inconsistent and Dante more dis-jointed. And the fact that you pretty much ignored points that have already been made to only keep making your own points. You don't like how they pissed off Mundus and think they could have done it other ways, but the fact of the matter is there is no better way unless they completely re-written a lot of things because of the way the game built it up to that point.

And if you don't like the way they did it because of the killing of an unborn child, that is more your problem than the games.

I just want to say that I think the story could of benefited by exploring Dante's skepticism about his brother. Even one scene where he drills Vergil about what he did would of sufficed. After that one scene and the end you don't really get the impression that Dante was all that bother by as his attitude towards vergil never changed. As evident by their banter before reaching Mundus. Maybe they could of had Dante being distant from Vergil at that point, giving him a bit of a cold shoulder while still going along with the ultimate goal. Showing his confliction. The acting could of portrayed, no need for a dramatic argument even.

@StarvingGamer: Dante's whole trade off plan doesn't involve any killing. they were just going to give her back. No one was originally meant to die. You said he didn't want to do that and was trying another way. Please explain why the plan couldnt have gone ahead with an alive Lilith and baby

I don't see why teasing the guy who has spent years (I think hundreds was implied or said) wouldn't go mad at having some bastard kid of his old right hand man destroy his empire. You may still see him as a hero but i still see him as doing something unforgiving wrong. Even if the writer needed this scene a more interesting one could have been written that lol your baby is dead and the writer could have just made up a different plan for Virgil and Dante

And you analogy isn't a thought experiment at all, it is easily debunked and serves no purpose. Plus that edit you made on your last post still doesn't help. there was no evidence of forced conscription and again star wars is a simple black and white morality. On people who are bad are on the death star cause they are bad, it is a throw back to a simpler time

@Sanious: I don't see how Dante not finding the kid being killed being weird for his character, in fact I'm pretty sure most here argued he did including you. I'm sorry if I have ignore some of your points and if you say what they are I'll try to address them. I've already given some quick ideas and I'm sure a real writer could do better, and if they had to change more stuff to avoid the scene yes I do think the game would be better.

And if you don't like the way they did it because of the killing of an unborn child, that is more your problem than the games.

I have no idea what your point is here. It is a issue with my views vs the games views.

@Blimble said:

@StarvingGamer: Dante's whole trade off plan doesn't involve any killing. they were just going to give her back. No one was originally meant to die. You said he didn't want to do that and was trying another way. Please explain why the plan couldnt have gone ahead with an alive Lilith and baby

I don't have an issue with this scene. It showed the true side of Vergil. The player was meant to see him as wrong in this case, as foreshadow towards the conclusion. My issue with this whole things comes from Dante not showing that he was affected by this past the moment it happened. Seems weird that he would shrug it off or be oblivious to the way his brother was acting after what he did to Lilith and how he was okay with ditching Kat.

@ImmortalSaiyan: I was just pointing out that the plan doesn't need the baby to die, it could have been done differently. I also think a more subtle approach with Virgil would have been better but anyone who knows anything about the series new he would turn at one point or another. Having him not turn would actually have been an interesting move, maybe some foreshadowing that he would in a later game but not necessarily. i also agree with your earlier post about when Dante and Virgil meet up again

@Blimble: Yes, it could of been done different. That was Dante's intent. Vergil messed that up. This was the one scene that actually got an emotional response from me. I was not of Vergil's side after that. Just because something is difficult to watch or a serious subject does not mean writers should shy away from including it. Granted they handle it was. Which I think the scene itself was but they failed to do much with it after.

I'm with you that Dante kinda comes off as a jerk in this game. He is painted to be a good guy and sympathetic but has a nasty attitude towards everyone but Kat and Vergil. He spouts bad one liners and the actor speaks all his lines with a self satisyed slur that annoys me. I think this Dante is poorly written. The attempted to make him more rounded but did a poor job. Only at the end of the game did I warm up to him.

I did not see it as a foregone conclusion that Vergil in this game would be evil considering all the changes Ninja Theory made to the series. So the twist worked on me. Overall I think the story has some okay elements and works as a origin story but fails in providing substance with the themes it brings up.

Good thread. This is definately worth a read:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2013/01/22/upset-dmc-fans-are-entitled-because-thats-what-we-call-people-who-complain-about-video-games/

@Blimble said:

@StarvingGamer: I don't see why teasing the guy who has spent years (I think hundreds was implied or said) wouldn't go mad at having some bastard kid of his old right hand man destroy his empire.

Because Dante did those things and none of them made Mundus freak out and start blowing up the world. Killing his unborn child did.

@ImmortalSaiyan: I don't think games should shy away from difficult concepts as well but this handling was very badly done. The whole incident is very big at the moment but then almost shrugged off. And it is a shame as it would be the perfect moment to develop the character who although I dislike think there is something interesting in there. Wasted potential really. Virgil turn was pretty obvious to me, reboots generally don't change characters roles that much. The whole story just seems like a base set of decent ideas strung together by someone who didn't know or really care what was happening. moments like Kat's past just kind of get talked about and then that is it. Characters are who they are and that is it. This is partly why I was and am annoyed about the reboot. If it really did have a good story i would forgive them dumbing down the combat, that is the reason we were told for the new devs. Instead it is a dumbed down game with a story that goes from okay to really bad.

@Brighty: That's a good article. There really is something odd in the gaming media with the whole entitled argument

edit:@StarvingGamer: Then write him to freak out at that. Make it dear to the character. It isn't the only way the scene could go, it could go many different way that avoid making Dante have to do something terrible to get what he wants. Now if character development came with him doing something terrible then him bringing up the baby could be interesting but as it is the game doesn't show any type of development from the scene. The line is taken as just as okay as his other one liners

@Blimble: I see where you are coming from and largely agree. There is a good premise here with potential but not much is done with it. Nothing is given time to be developed like with Kat's past, Dante's feeling towards Vergil or even broader things like the demon enslaved world. A neat idea that is shrugged off. Ninja Theory proved they can do better, with Enslaved. I am hoping a possible sequel will handle things better. Were the story good I could get behind Brad's 5 star glowing review. As it stands I think the game is still solid.

@ImmortalSaiyan: i pretty much agree. the game is mostly solid (a lot of it I really don't like though) but I'm also never going to be able to detach it from the old serious, I'm never not going to feel cheated out of a DMC5 (which really could of happened, 4 was very popular for the genre) on the promise of a game with better story that failed badly. Also Enslaved was written by an outsourced writer, I just hope they get him in again if DmC 2 happens (which part of me hopes happens, we came back from DMC2 and can do it again), and it is made by platinum. A guy can dream

@Blimble said:

@Brighty: That's a good article. There really is something odd in the gaming media with the whole entitled argument

There is truth to people feeling entitled about certain games, but of course there are also going to be people that over use that to much against anyone who complains and it will just lose all its meaning. People tend to like to latch onto a specific word for their argument and it catches on to the point where the right context of it is gone and people don't use it properly.

@Sanious: True. The problem is on the internet people always take things to far on both sides no mater what the issue, though I always find the anti-haters side take it the furthest but that might just be because I find that sort of mentality so weird. I just find it so odd when the press start acting like it, I think i just expect more of journalist when I shouldn't always

@Brighty:

That's a really good article, and in every way conveys some of the feelings that I wasn't able to. A major frustration of wanting to critique something like DmC or anything else that's divisive, is that there will always be a louder voice appealing to its own authority. When I try to explain why the story of the new DmC fell so flat with me, I'm almost always me with comments to the tune of "Well the reviewers seem to have liked it." And that's true, most seem to. But that shouldn't invalidate someone else's opinion just because one voice is recognized as "games journalism" and the other as a fan. And again, it's those louder voices that are unfairly dismissive of any sort of dissenting opinion because they can never be called to a discussion. With many game publications, the discussion they have is one sided. My distaste towards DmC has nothing to do with Dante's hair color, but I'm grouped into that irrational camp anyway. And I'm also convinced that the amount of people who actually care about Dante's hair color and that alone is equal to exactly zero. But it's a convenient way to quickly categorize and dismiss anyone who doesn't agree with you, and it's frustrating to be honest.