Quick Look: Devil May Cry

@Darklight said:

@Assirra said:

@Tikicobra said:

"Does this take place in a specific city?"

"They never name it."

Dude, seriously? It's called Limbo, isn't it? That's been talked about constantly. I played the demo and they mentioned it there.

Nope, Limbo is the twisted version of the world rather then the city name. It actually came from the phrase "stuck in limbo"

No idea what it is supposed to mean, usually get used when stuck where you are not supposed to be, like falling through the world in an mmo.

Limbo come from this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limbo

Yeah, I get that, I know what Limbo is. I was under the impression that Limbo as a place was represented in this game as a city.

As someone who's never played a DMC game (and probably never will), it's very hard to relate what I see on the screen and the discussion about it, to the five out of five score. Is this just Brad getting excited again, like with Diablo 3, a game he scored as a five and raved about during the first few weeks after release, but then didn't even include in his 10 entry GOTY list?

I bet you we won't find DmC on there either as the year wraps up. Nothing wrong with that per se, but.. I dunno... is this really a must-play game?

I think some of this "review hate" is from the fact that DmC appears to have ended up better than a Ninja Theory game had any right to based on the combat systems of their previous games. Before DmC, no one would have mentioned "tight" or "satisfying" when describing the controls/combat in Ninja Theory games. They were notorious for prioritizing animation over control, having VERY "loose" response to input, etc.

My issue since the beginning is that I had NO confidence in Ninja Theory's ability to make a good combat system and Capcom had entrusted them with one of the tightest controlling action franchises in history. It seemed like such a backward and short-sighted choice of developer on their part. Then (in what was likely major damage control) Capcom said some of their designers were providing "input" on the combat...and having watched the evolution of combat systems of DmC since they started showing it...it shows.

I like to think all this bitching and complaining raised the bar at Ninja Theory to do better than they ever had and to take advice from Capcom's design input...because they DID NOT want to justify the haters (including myself up to this point) with a bad playing Devil May Cry game.

@DeadPan: yes, it has been pointed out to me that I misread what was happening. And that I am a total jerk(personal opinion) for just blowing up on you.

First post, you guys sold me on this one. I just started playing Darksiders (I and II) and this speaks to me much more. Then again on only on the first level on both of those. Maybe its the art direction.

@1337gmr: The art direction in Darksiders is a mixed bag. A lot of stuff looks fine, but a lot of it is juvenile and dumb. War's design in particular. He looks like he has a tiny head and way, way too much armor. But Darksiders is a game that starts slow but gets better as you get further (you really need to like Zelda) while DmC seems more like a game that's immediately satisfying, not really interested in a slow build.

I played the demo a little while ago and it just didn't click with me, but it still seems like a really well made game.

@Carac: I played the demo of Heavenly Sword and didn't really like it because it felt like cheap God of War with an interesting idea thrown in here and there, and I bought Enslaved but just can't get into it because it's just kind of boring, but I'd call the combat in both "occasionally satisfying." That said, I don't think the haters influenced the design of the game. I think they've probably just learned from their last two games and were taking on a franchise that they loved and wanted to do right by that also demanded them to really work on their weaknesses while also allowing them more freedom to push harder on crazy combat (Dante's a fair cut above Nariko or Monkey in terms of violence, I'd say). A great creative challenge for them.

did someeone say.....Devil Trigger?

I can't wait to pump this out to 200 FPS on my PC. Looks great at 30.

This reminds me of Bulletstorm. Stupid beyond poinitng out, but does what it tries to do so well it really stands out.

DMC4 sold 2.6 million copies. It was hardly a niche franchise, Brad. But Capcom like almost every other game company nowadays just got greedy and decided they wanted to dumb it down to reach an even wider audience. We'll have to wait to see whether or not that pays off for them, but I don't see this game selling a ton more than DMC4 which must have cost much less to develop especially when you consider how much money Ninja Theory loves to drop on mocap.

@IcarusFoundYou: Funny you should say that, as I specifically wrote that to get a rise out of easy targets.

Why? Because I'm a sick sick bastard.

@EnduranceFun: The Devil May Cry series has been saying FUCK YOU to its fans ever since they blocked Kamiya from working on the second one.

HIDEKI KAMIYA HAS THE JAPANESE MAGIC INSIDE HIM. WHEN YOU DENY THIS YOU DENY YOURSELF.

I'm going to wait until the PC version. I doubt my wife will let me play this game in front of our kids with all the curse words blasted on the screen.

"Devil May Cry had become a niche series",,,with 4 selling over 2 and a half million copies?! Hell, if 4 had separate campaigns and more levels for each character it would have done far better.

But yeah, of Capcom's Resident big titles, this was the one that needed rebooted, obviously.

@Neckbear said:

DMC4 sold 2.6 million copies. It was hardly a niche franchise, Brad. But Capcom like almost every other game company nowadays just got greedy and decided they wanted to dumb it down to reach an even wider audience. We'll have to wait to see whether or not that pays off for them, but I don't see this game selling a ton more than DMC4 which must have cost much less to develop especially when you consider how much money Ninja Theory loves to drop on mocap.

DMC4 sold significantly less copies than previous entries. It doesn't make any sense to keep putting out sequel's to a series where the sales drop heavily. Why would you even consider calling it greed? They need to make money off games, not just earn back what they put in. No dev out there does that. Every heard of fiscal years? You may not care, I may not care, but it matters allot for the continuation of a company. If you think 2,5 million copies sold over 5 years is anything but niche then you're mistaken. Just to give you an example: everybody knows the unique experience Mirror's Edge was received pretty well by critics and it's generally considered 'too bad' that the series didn't sell well. It sold 3 million copies. In less than 5 years. They aimed at the same number: 3 million. But in the same fiscal year. So it 'flopped'. It's niche game to the core.

@Robo: I really think the only reason they felt the need to address it was the gross fervor that stemmed from all of the reviews. When people are bragging about unsubscribing due to a review score being better than they think it should be, and having others clap them on the back, it seems like a necessary move to have to come out and explain what's going on.

I think it's dumb that it has to happen, but, what can you do. Internet.

With regards to the soundtrack, I'm really weirdly into it. I've never been a massive fan or anything, but I missed the crazy stylish action with some guy sounding like he's doing a DevilDriver impression with chugging and wailing guitars and insane drums patterns. I dunno. I'm just pretty stoked about this game, though I am a little bummed over the decreased framerate, not having a PC that can actually run games.

@Blimble: So you are basing your opinion of a full product on a demo? A demo can give you a good idea of how a game generally works, but until you've played the full game you really can't judge. Just in this quick look there were a ton of elements that the demo did not show. You played one part of one level and honestly that isn't nearly enough to judge an entire game on. Brad played the entire game from start to finish. Sorry if I trust his opinion more than the opinion of someone whose played 20 minutes of the game.

@Raven10 said:

@Blimble: So you are basing your opinion of a full product on a demo?

Yeah. That's what a demo is for. And while I've haven't played the full games I have played all the other which is more than I can say for Brad. Unless the full game pulls out something truly amazing I don't think I need to waste my money. And from a lot of reviewer all the later stuff is actually worse for the combat as instead of mixing it up you mash one colour coded weapon till they die, they can't even hurt you when you have it selected

@whatisdelicious said:

@Carac: I played the demo of Heavenly Sword and didn't really like it because it felt like cheap God of War with an interesting idea thrown in here and there, and I bought Enslaved but just can't get into it because it's just kind of boring, but I'd call the combat in both "occasionally satisfying." That said, I don't think the haters influenced the design of the game. I think they've probably just learned from their last two games and were taking on a franchise that they loved and wanted to do right by that also demanded them to really work on their weaknesses while also allowing them more freedom to push harder on crazy combat (Dante's a fair cut above Nariko or Monkey in terms of violence, I'd say). A great creative challenge for them.

A franchise that "they" loved? Who's "they", exactly, the devs or the fans?

@Nettacki: Ninja Theory. I'd assume that the reason they'd want to take it on is because they were fans of the original franchise and wanted to give their own spin to it.

@Christoffer said:

Great Quick Look but, yeah, I will never play this game. Guess I don't like "intellectually dumb" stuff.

Which is funny because NT wanted it to be more intellectually not-dumb.

@Neckbear said:

DMC4 sold 2.6 million copies. It was hardly a niche franchise, Brad. But Capcom like almost every other game company nowadays just got greedy and decided they wanted to dumb it down to reach an even wider audience. We'll have to wait to see whether or not that pays off for them, but I don't see this game selling a ton more than DMC4 which must have cost much less to develop especially when you consider how much money Ninja Theory loves to drop on mocap.

@Zevvion said:

DMC4 sold significantly less copies than previous entries. It doesn't make any sense to keep putting out sequel's to a series where the sales drop heavily. Why would you even consider calling it greed? They need to make money off games, not just earn back what they put in. No dev out there does that. Every heard of fiscal years? You may not care, I may not care, but it matters allot for the continuation of a company. If you think 2,5 million copies sold over 5 years is anything but niche then you're mistaken. Just to give you an example: everybody knows the unique experience Mirror's Edge was received pretty well by critics and it's generally considered 'too bad' that the series didn't sell well. It sold 3 million copies. In less than 5 years. They aimed at the same number: 3 million. But in the same fiscal year. So it 'flopped'. It's niche game to the core.

Interesting couple of posts. I don't think this game will be that successful when it will lack the support of some of the hardcore fans plus I have to imagine it cost more to outsource compared to simply working on the groundwork made by DMC4. If the goal was to sell three million copies, this game is guaranteed to flop. What I want to know is where the second guy got sales data on DMC1 and 3? Wikipedia says they sold around 1-2mil copies and I always assumed DMC4 sold the best, having the best data available, suggesting it sold almost 3mil copies. That may not be Call of Duty levels of sales, but that is decent, just apparently not good enough for Capcom. Seems like a decision based purely on trying to reach a wider audience.

I mean, sure, they're free to do that, but that doesn't mean I support their decision.

this game looks boring

@whatisdelicious said:

@Nettacki: Ninja Theory. I'd assume that the reason they'd want to take it on is because they were fans of the original franchise and wanted to give their own spin to it.

Your assumption would be wrong, for there are various interviews with the lead writer Tameem and a few "jokes" in-game that shows that they never had any love for the series in the first place (stuff like how old Dante doesn't fit with his expectations of what's "cool" and claims this new Dante is cooler) and only wanted to make a reboot of a franchise because they were obligated to by Capcom.

Game looks alright (maybe more like a 3 or 4 to me but eh, i'm just going off this 40 min video) and pretty good quick look. I will say though that the idea that people should go out and buy Bayonetta 2, and thus WiiU, to show there support for those types of games is described in a much easier manner than it actually is. Hell, tons of people love them some Bayonetta but to just say "So go get it." kind of ignores all the other factors surrounding that situation.

I just can't bring myself to like this game. The simple fact that it exists means that one of my favorite franchises is dead as I know it and nothing will bring it back. No matte how good the final product is, it will alwasy remain an usurper in my mind. 
 
It's a shame because I love character action games (and we don't get enough of those) and this seems like an excellent one. It would have been so much better if they named it anything else.

@Nettacki: Do you have any links to those interviews? They'd probably be pretty fun reads. Regardless, even if they weren't fans, that doesn't mean the game is worse or any less legitimate. It's a reboot.

The Difficulty modes are more or less the same as before, except for "Hell and Hell", that one's new.

@whatisdelicious: In some ways, it does. If they don't like the original series of which this game is a reboot of, then they probably shouldn't have done it because a good reboot at least keeps the spirit and core of what made the games great while changing everything else about it. This game doesn't seem to respect its roots at all, as evidenced by an early easter egg involving Dante getting a white wig, looking at himself in a mirror, and saying "not in a million years."

@Nettacki: Yeah, but that's what a reboot is. If they just did the same thing, then what's the point? That's specifically what I loved about Casino Royale. The bartender asks Bond what kind of drink he wants and he doesn't say his classic "Martini. Shaken, not stirred." He says "I don't give a damn." Moneypenny wasn't named Moneypenny. She was named Vesper Lynd and was just an accountant and served as the new Moneypenny because she describes herself as, "I'm the money," to which Bond responds, "Every penny of it." Those are really smart nods to the old Bonds while also making their own thing. And that's what I didn't like about Skyfall. Moneypenny in Skyfall is just the last name of a woman who's been around the whole movie. It was corny and dumb.

Same with Christopher Nolan's Batman. A very serious reboot of a previously silly franchise. Smart nods while making his own thing. Plenty of people at the time thought it was too serious and "wasn't like Batman." Now it's hard to imagine Batman being anything but serious and dark and gritty.

If Dante looked the same and acted the same, then what's the point? Personally, I think this new Dante is cooler than the old Dante. I think the combat appeals to me way more, and I love how bold they get with the color palette and level design. They made a Devil May Cry fan out of somebody who only had a passing interest in Devil May Cry before. That's the point of a reboot.

@whatisdelicious said:

@Nettacki: Yeah, but that's what a reboot is. If they just did the same thing, then what's the point? That's specifically what I loved about Casino Royale. The bartender asks Bond what kind of drink he wants and he doesn't say his classic "Martini. Shaken, not stirred." He says "I don't give a damn." Moneypenny wasn't named Moneypenny. She was named Vesper Lynd and was just an accountant and served as the new Moneypenny because she describes herself as, "I'm the money," to which Bond responds, "Every penny of it." Those are really smart nods to the old Bonds while also making their own thing. And that's what I didn't like about Skyfall. Moneypenny in Skyfall is just the last name of a woman who's been around the whole movie. It was corny and dumb.

Same with Christopher Nolan's Batman. A very serious reboot of a previously silly franchise. Smart nods while making his own thing. Plenty of people at the time thought it was too serious and "wasn't like Batman." Now it's hard to imagine Batman being anything but serious and dark and gritty.

If Dante looked the same and acted the same, then what's the point? Personally, I think this new Dante is cooler than the old Dante. I think the combat appeals to me way more, and I love how bold they get with the color palette and level design. They made a Devil May Cry fan out of somebody who only had a passing interest in Devil May Cry before. That's the point of a reboot.

I never said that they were supposed to do the same thing. Even Nolan's Batman maintained the core principles of what makes Batman great while adjusting everything else to fit the perceptions of the modern audience.

And there weren't any really smart nods to the original series in this DmC reboot outside of that white wig scene that I mentioned (if that can even be considered smart).

Plus, let it be known that I have no problem with new Dante acting different from old Dante. I just wish they came up with a better direction for the guy than "swear-happy anarchist who thinks he's cooler than he actually is."

man there is some fucking drivel in these DMC threads

@Zevvion: They shipped 2 million units for DMC4 in the first month. Yes, shipped != sales, but it's still significant.

Also, this: http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090123043519/vgsales/images/3/34/Devil_May_Cry_sales_figures.png

@Nettacki: I guess I can understand where you're coming from. I typically don't like that kind of character, but I really like the actors they got. It's like what Brad said. On paper, it should be really dumb, but somehow, they managed to make it dumb in a really fun way. It feels like they hit the tone they wanted to hit and it's not going to appeal to everyone just like the old DMC didn't appeal to everyone. I can't remember who said it, either Brad or Ben Kuchera or somebody, but "you don't reboot something to sell it to the same people."

To me, this has the same core that the old DMC had, just in broad strokes. Flip a guy in the air and shoot him to make him float? Check. White hair, red jacket? Good enough. Arrogant Dante? Oh yeah.

Nolan's Batman was the same way. Batmobile? Sure, but it's way different now and arguably way stupider. Gadgets? Yep, but now they're all based in reality instead of being fantastical. Costume? Yeah, but now it's like black body armor and very practical instead of grey with black and yellow. There's no yellow anywhere on him, really.

This game looks pretty freaking great! Surprising, as i thought all the other DMC's were really, really bad. Like.. *really* bad. But i like the way the combat looks here and I know the new look is getting some hate, but I'm certainly a fan. Never was a fanboy of the "Sephiroth" anime hero type, i guess.

This just looks like a Devil May Cry game. The biggest difference is the aesthetic. Seems fine.

Finished it on DMD just now. I need to go back to the previous installments to compare more directly, but for now I'd say in terms of difficulty:

DMC3 >> DmC > DMC > DMC4 >>> DMC2

The difference between DMC3 and DmC is slightly bigger than I originally thought. Still very challenging game, that will make you die several times. Just more forgiving in certain places than DMC3 was. Although some enemy waves in DmC are just nuts.

I do believe it's the second most challenging game in the series. Based on my experience that is. Though if HOH is something to go by at what H&H will represent in terms of enemy waves, then I think DmC takes the first spot easy. Though, it may not be fair since DMC3 didn't have H&H to compare it by. Still... if you want a hard game, you'll definitely find it in here.

@Zevvion: How was DMC3 on normal vs DmC on normal? I think you'll get a somewhat more accurate metric on the game's difficulty if you just compare the relative difficulty levels of the different games.

@whatisdelicious said:

On paper, it should be really dumb, but somehow, they managed to make it dumb in a really fun way. It feels like they hit the tone they wanted to hit and it's not going to appeal to everyone just like the old DMC didn't appeal to everyone.

That's a weird thing to say, considering that NT was talking up its story like it's gonna be something like Shakespeare, which means they apparently wanted to get people to take it seriously and find it to be some gloriously deep, intellectually fulfilling experience, and if what you say is true (that it's just dumb, even if it's in a really fun way), then they failed at providing even that. I got a feeling that whatever dumb things are in this game weren't intentionally made to be dumb. It just came off that way because few people know of NT's intentions for the story.

@Nettacki: I like it because I think the acting is pretty great and that's something that so many games miss. I think parts of it are dumb in a fun way but that doesn't mean they failed. It's like they said in the Quick Look; it's hard to quantify what "dumb" means in that context. It's "dumb" when "Fuck You Dante" appears on a wall, but it's also really legitimately cool. Serious and "dumb," good acting and "dumb," etc. are not always exclusive.

But at that point, it feels like you're trying to find any way to say that this game is bad or failed, even when it succeeds, because they didn't succeed at the thing they wanted to succeed at in the exact way they wanted to succeed at it. It feels like you're reaching for anything to prove that the game is bad because you don't agree with the direction of the game. That's what bothers me about everybody raging over it. It feels like everybody wants this game to fail just because it's not exactly what they wanted it to be. Just because it's not what you wanted or expected doesn't mean it's bad.

@Nettacki said:

@Zevvion: How was DMC3 on normal vs DmC on normal? I think you'll get a somewhat more accurate metric on the game's difficulty if you just compare the relative difficulty levels of the different games.

Agreed. What I said before: DMC3 >> DmC > DMC > DMC4 >>> DMC2 is concerning DMD mode (or MD mode in 2). So on DMD, DMC3 the challengingest (word inspired by revengeance). But DmC is still definitely not going to be finished by most people on DMD. Not even mentioning H&H.

For normal mode I really wouldn't know. They are all easy on that I think. Also don't think anyone cares for anything but DMD and H&H. I haven't played H&H yet, I still have HOH to work through, so can't comment on that versus DMC4.

@whatisdelicious said:

But at that point, it feels like you're trying to find any way to say that this game is bad or failed, even when it succeeds, because they didn't succeed at the thing they wanted to succeed at in the exact way they wanted to succeed at it. It feels like you're reaching for anything to prove that the game is bad because you don't agree with the direction of the game. That's what bothers me about everybody raging over it. It feels like everybody wants this game to fail just because it's not exactly what they wanted it to be. Just because it's not what you wanted or expected doesn't mean it's bad.

I never said they failed at everything. Truth be told, the gameplay at least isn't horrible (not great either) and the graphics are fairly stunning on a technical level. But in the end, what was successful and what wasn't mean different things to different people, thus you're right that it's not necessarily bad, but it's not particularly good either. At least, not good enough to invest the full price required to get the game.

And if it came off like I'm grasping at straws for something bad about the game, I'm sorry for that. I'm just relaying the points made by various fans with legit concerns buried underneath the rage, especially for a game that seems more flawed than what's initially found.

@Nettacki said:

@whatisdelicious said:

On paper, it should be really dumb, but somehow, they managed to make it dumb in a really fun way. It feels like they hit the tone they wanted to hit and it's not going to appeal to everyone just like the old DMC didn't appeal to everyone.

That's a weird thing to say, considering that NT was talking up its story like it's gonna be something like Shakespeare, which means they apparently wanted to get people to take it seriously and find it to be some gloriously deep, intellectually fulfilling experience, and if what you say is true (that it's just dumb, even if it's in a really fun way), then they failed at providing even that. I got a feeling that whatever dumb things are in this game weren't intentionally made to be dumb. It just came off that way because few people know of NT's intentions for the story.

Well, the story won't win any awards, but I thought it was really well delivered. I didn't expect there was going to be a powerful moment in there that would grab me emotionally, but it was there for me. Kind of surprising. Better story than expected. I also liked the acknowledgment of the previous games. In particular how Vergil and Dante treat each other at certain points.

Nothing ground breaking, but from expecting not allot: actually pretty good.

@Nettacki: I think it has plenty of value for the price, but that's subjective as well. I really like the structure of the combat. The angel and devil triggers, the way it's easier to rack up huge combos, how aerial it is, etc. All subjective stuff, of course. And I guess it just gets tiring defending the game from people who are outraged by its very existence. If somebody's angry that it even exists in the first place, there's nothing the game could ever do to appeal to them. That's just frustrating sometimes, seeing people not even give it a chance because it's different (and worse) for X, Y, and Z reasons. So I apologize if I'm in defense mode here.

*coughs*

"I'm sorry the new DmC couldn't fill your dark soul with LIIIGGHHHTTTTTT!!!!!"

I'm just not interested in playing a game like this unless it's God of War or Ninja Gaiden.

I'm just not interested in playing a game like this unless it's God of War or Ninja Gaiden.