@petes114 No, it is not just about the hair. It has NEVER been just about the hair. I don't care what aesthetic changes they make to Dante, the fact that they turned a badass, likeable rogue, into a mean-spirited punk who's trying way too hard to be cool is the real crime done to the series.
@Defy_The_Fallen The point is to get the word out that it's actually a shitty game, so people won't mistakenly buy it based on a review like GS's. Hopefully, it sells so poorly that any attempts to continue the reboot by Capcom or Ninja Theory get scrapped, and one day they learn their lesson. As players and consumers, our only real power is our wallets and our word-of-mouth, so if we want to let Capcom know that they fucked up, we need to be loud, and we need to make sure it flops.
No, it is not just about the hair. It has NEVER been just about the hair. I don't care what aesthetic changes they make to Dante, the fact that they turned a badass, likeable rogue, into a mean-spirited punk who's trying way too hard to be cool is the real crime done to the series.
Reboot, retool, rework whatever you want, but it offends me that almost no reviewers can see how blatantly uninspired, childish, and unlikable the new Dante's personality is. Even the story is crap, being ripped piecemeal from last years headlines, with unoriginal characters and obvious "twists". To see any reviewer praise the story leads me to believe they were either bribed, or simply have no taste, both of which make me lose trust and confidence in them as a reviewer.
Sure, you can say that old DMC's story wasn't any better, but at least it wasn't full of itself. Old DMC's story was stupid fun. New DmC is just stupid, and no professional reviewer is willing or intelligent enough to see it.
I dunno, I think of stealth gameplay like solving a puzzle. It's an organic puzzle that requires patience and insight and timing and a little bit of luck, and for me that's the whole appeal. When a game hybridizes itself though, it inherently loses some of the complexity that made pure stealth so interesting. At its worst, stealth either becomes trivially easy or insultingly difficult,.
No seriously it took balls to break the "four point scale", especially with a release of this magnitude. I haven't played the game, so I can't really say if your complaints are legitimate, but from all the gameplay and other reviews I've seen... yeah, Capcom f--ed up on this one. Which is a shame because I really felt RE6 had a lot of potential.
There was a moment, briefly, when they announced DA3, and I thought, "Okay Bioware, you've done some great things before. Time to redeem yourself. Show the world that you can make a great RPG again."And then this happened, and I laughed to myself because I know that all hope of DA3 being good is lost. Welcome to the world of Hamburger Hepler, everyone.
So what, Michelle is just the old Julia? I'll take that. I haven't played JayCee yet, but if she's too different from T6 Julia, I think Michelle might be a good alternative.
Isn't the most galling part of the War Game genre the fact that it exists at all? War ISN'T a game. War is, in fact, very boring, tiring, and stressful. It is long stretches of time wasted in the heat of the desert, carrying 70lbs of heavy equipment on your back from one checkpoint to another. The monotony is occasionally punctuated by someone stepping on an IED, or getting shot by a sniper. Perhaps you'll get to fire your gun, but almost every shot will be suppressing fire. Most of your work in the "kill dudes" department will be done by artillery, drones, or snipers. Your enemies are poorly defined and easily disguised. Most of the time you won't know where shots are coming from, and you'll hardly be able to see who you're shooting. You very well may kill more civilians than combatants, and as long as you can claim that you had somewhat reasonable cause, no one will care.
Any videogame that consistently features heroic, intense, close-range infantry action, cannot call itself "realistic". War is not fun, exciting, or fulfilling. It is a place only a sociopath could enjoy.
Yes, the original flashlight mechanics in Doom 3 were chosen specifically to achieve a certain atmosphere and style by the developers.
But it didn't work. Doom 3 was more frustrating than scary, because the "scares" pretty much involved the same situation every time: enter dark hallway, monsters appear behind you, ah! If they were better at developing an actually scary atmosphere, then the flashlight mechanics might have worked. As it happened, Doom 3 was a bad horror game and a good FPS, but the shooter elements kept getting bogged down by clumsy attempts to be scary.
Videogames can be art, but they are also interactive. The player is more personally invested and involved with a videogame than any other form of media we have, so if a developer releases a product that a significant number of players agree is flawed, then they have created bad art. Revisions like what id and Bioware are doing are helpful because they're admitting their mistakes, and trying to make something better.
Narok's comments