This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Even though I loved DmC, I can understand why fans were pissed off.

#31dillpickle69Posted 2/15/2014 11:39:23 PM
I'm going to sound a bit like a hypocrite for saying this, but as much as I disagree with the idea and execution of DmC as a reboot (Go see my posts/rants in this topic), I kind of had an alright time playing Lords of Shadow. Not an amazing time, but I didn't hate playing it, I kind of liked it. I spent a good time wondering why my opinion differed so much from DmC.

They both were nothing like the games they were supposed to be "rebooting", they were both outsourced, both made to cater to casuals, both made for Westernization purposes, and both were made when fans were clearly asking for a certain type of game from the original (1999 game for Castlevania and a game explaining DMCs plotholes). But why didn't I mind LoS as much? Then it hit me. Quantity. Castlevania's been around since the 80's I think, and I know they have well over 20 games, and all of them are pretty much standalone storywise. DMC on the other hand, wasn't even a decade old before the reboot was announced, only had 4 games (One of which was rushed and only released with 1/3 of the content), and the last game left us with a huge question mark.

Basically I'm saying that if they gave DMC a few more installments and ended it without a big plothole, there'd be less backlash.
---
"They don't love you, they won't pet sit your cats. As a matter of fact for fifty cents they'll beat you with a pool stick till your retinas detach."
#32The_Zora_KingPosted 2/18/2014 1:14:37 PM
Anyone else?
---
Si usted entiende esto, diga "Veo la luz!"
Enjoy writing? Contribute to Extend-a-Story! - http://www.sir-toby.com/extend-a-story/
#33nonexistingheroPosted 2/18/2014 1:19:04 PM
I agree with TC's points. Although I didn't like DmC. And I also feel the same way about Tomb Raider. I disliked how they pretty much turned it into an Uncharted clone that's slightly less on-rails.

It's the same for some other games, such as Resident Evil 6 (I could at least admit 5 was good, but I didn't consider it RE anymore) and FFXIII.
---
Read the mania: http://www.fanfiction.net/~nonexistinghero
In SA2, it's Super Sonic and Hyper Shadow.
#34DrLight66Posted 2/18/2014 2:38:16 PM
dillpickle69 posted...
I'm going to sound a bit like a hypocrite for saying this, but as much as I disagree with the idea and execution of DmC as a reboot (Go see my posts/rants in this topic), I kind of had an alright time playing Lords of Shadow. Not an amazing time, but I didn't hate playing it, I kind of liked it. I spent a good time wondering why my opinion differed so much from DmC.

They both were nothing like the games they were supposed to be "rebooting", they were both outsourced, both made to cater to casuals, both made for Westernization purposes, and both were made when fans were clearly asking for a certain type of game from the original (1999 game for Castlevania and a game explaining DMCs plotholes). But why didn't I mind LoS as much? Then it hit me. Quantity. Castlevania's been around since the 80's I think, and I know they have well over 20 games, and all of them are pretty much standalone storywise. DMC on the other hand, wasn't even a decade old before the reboot was announced, only had 4 games (One of which was rushed and only released with 1/3 of the content), and the last game left us with a huge question mark.

Basically I'm saying that if they gave DMC a few more installments and ended it without a big plothole, there'd be less backlash.


Lords of Shadow didn't cause an uproar because all previous 3D Castlevania games ranged from good (Legacy of Darkness, Lament of Innocence) to downright mediocre (Curse of Darkness, Castlevania 64). It was the 2D games in the series that made the franchise so popular and are widely considered to be the best in the series. I feel like I'm replying to a kid lol because anyone over the age of 15 would know this.
#35NeoFalconHavokPosted 2/18/2014 5:24:34 PM
Good for you.
---
"If this guy has a problem with GameFaqs users that like Nintendo games, he can kiss my ass."
LMFAO
#36dillpickle69Posted 2/18/2014 8:20:55 PM
DrLight66 posted...
dillpickle69 posted...
I'm going to sound a bit like a hypocrite for saying this, but as much as I disagree with the idea and execution of DmC as a reboot (Go see my posts/rants in this topic), I kind of had an alright time playing Lords of Shadow. Not an amazing time, but I didn't hate playing it, I kind of liked it. I spent a good time wondering why my opinion differed so much from DmC.

They both were nothing like the games they were supposed to be "rebooting", they were both outsourced, both made to cater to casuals, both made for Westernization purposes, and both were made when fans were clearly asking for a certain type of game from the original (1999 game for Castlevania and a game explaining DMCs plotholes). But why didn't I mind LoS as much? Then it hit me. Quantity. Castlevania's been around since the 80's I think, and I know they have well over 20 games, and all of them are pretty much standalone storywise. DMC on the other hand, wasn't even a decade old before the reboot was announced, only had 4 games (One of which was rushed and only released with 1/3 of the content), and the last game left us with a huge question mark.

Basically I'm saying that if they gave DMC a few more installments and ended it without a big plothole, there'd be less backlash.


Lords of Shadow didn't cause an uproar because all previous 3D Castlevania games ranged from good (Legacy of Darkness, Lament of Innocence) to downright mediocre (Curse of Darkness, Castlevania 64). It was the 2D games in the series that made the franchise so popular and are widely considered to be the best in the series. I feel like I'm replying to a kid lol because anyone over the age of 15 would know this.


The quality of the previous 3D games has nothing to do with how fans react when they reboot the WHOLE SERIES, that includes the 2D ones. And it did cause an uproar, just not nearly as much as DmC.

It's usually the younger ones that call people kids over the internet to establish that they're not.
---
"They don't love you, they won't pet sit your cats. As a matter of fact for fifty cents they'll beat you with a pool stick till your retinas detach."
#37The_Zora_KingPosted 2/20/2014 6:33:40 PM(edited)
It's amazing how they never made a fantastic 3D Castlevania game. The concept seems so simple.
---
Si usted entiende esto, diga "Veo la luz!"
Enjoy writing? Contribute to Extend-a-Story! - http://www.sir-toby.com/extend-a-story/
#38dillpickle69Posted 2/20/2014 8:57:36 PM
I heard that they were going to do a 3D Alucard game before they decided to go with LoS instead. Shame, I would've played the hell out of that.
---
"They don't love you, they won't pet sit your cats. As a matter of fact for fifty cents they'll beat you with a pool stick till your retinas detach."
#39Ziggurcat24Posted 2/23/2014 10:59:22 AM
Wholeheartedly agree with some points from TC and other users.

shawnmck posted...

They are simply unwilling or incapable of change. They would rather be stuck in the past and retread the same tired and stale tropes. Just like how the Resident Evil series would still contain tank-like controls if the hard-core fans had their way.



lol no.

Guys like you don't get it and never will. That quote right there is proof of that.
Your mindset is still fixed in "the hard-core fans with nostalgia goggles" BS without ignoring some of the good arguments people already made in this thread.

It isn't about control schemes or any of that stuff, obviously the games today can't exactly play like in the past. That isn't the problem, that isn't the argument, no one is discussing that.

It's about maintaining the identity and essence of those franchises through time.
RE is survival horror with a little of action (killing monsters), managing resources, solving puzzles, uncovering the things (plot points, details) associated with the virus, progressing through complex, non-linear areas and barely escaping all that madness. It's NOT about ONLY action (like basically today is) or about tank controls or pre-rendered environments.
When I'm playing RE, I don't want CoD.

TR is a lone-wolf (which lends to it's isolation aspect) adventure about a woman determined to uncover the secrets and artifacts of old or mythological civilizations. It's about primarily exploring the environment, make use of all acrobatic moves/animations of the protagonist and the brain to solve puzzles or overcome obstacles and make progress. The combat is secondary and basically lasted 30 seconds tops, time to time. It's NOT about cover shooting wave after wave of enemies, lame cutscenes, mashing buttons on QTEs or tank controls.
When I'm playing TR, I don't want Uncharted.

Not selling anymore (or at least to the amount of some of the predecessors) is NOT a good reason to reboot a franchise or change it to the point it becomes more and more like other franchises the mainstream wants or unrecognizable. That is only relevant to greedy CEOs and publishers who want the most money now and fast. That's why they tremendously inflate the budget with it's largest share going to graphics, VA, marketing, etc; lacking gameplay content and sell crap as DLC.

That's not relevant to me. That's not I, as a gamer, and fan of decades-long franchises want to see. That's why I vote with my wallet. If the original concept of those franchises isn't appealing anymore to the masses then so be it. Kill them or make a scaled down and less riskier budget that stays true to the fundamentals of the franchise and be happy with the profit you make from it, if you do. NOT every series has or needs to have the potential to sell huge amounts for so long. That's absurd.

The ones who think that are just p****s who want the success of their predecessors but lack the talent and vision to make something truly original and great like them, so they just stick to milking a brand name.
---
The highway of fear is the shortest route to defeat