• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

danmaku

Member
Nov 5, 2017
3,233
RIght. DmC is full of boneheaded design choices that seasoned action game developers would never make, because they don't just think in surface-level terms. They're interested in giving players more to sink their teeth into besides "launching a lot of enemies at once" or "hitting enemies in the air a lot."

Color coding enemies only makes sense if you want to choke all the complexity out of your combat and reduce it to a binary "use this weapon here, and that weapon there." This perfectly illustrate's Ninja Theory's shallow approach to DmC's combat. This shit might be acceptable to people like Adamska who either can't understand or refuse to learn how good action games work (I.E. giving the player many options and all kinds of ways to use them--and providing lots of feedback and subtle combat cues that skilled players can read), but it's not acceptable to DMC veteran players who have had a taste of real quality.

DMC games, apart from DMC2, have always aimed for a much a higher standard than your average button masher. The devs assume players are intelligent and curious, and interested in improving their skills over time. So they design their combat like a tree with dozens of branches, and make sure that everything reinforces the freedom and improvisational nature of the gameplay, from broader categories like enemies' defensive abilities (which may include parries, armor, and invincible states), to the way the different elements of combat interlock like puzzle pieces, so that an attack is not just an attack, but a parry, a dodge, and an enemy positioning tool.

It's offensive to wave away the value of all of this as a simple matter of opinion. Anyone is welcome to enjoy substandard rubbish and the spoonfed rewards of a game that demands and expects so very little from the player, but that doesn't somehow erase the quality of the better fare that they're not interested in.

To be fair, some of the design decisions were mandated by Capcom, like the removal of lock on. Capcom also asked NT to tone down the script (the first draft was more serious and horror oriented), which explains the weird tonal shifts throughout the game. It's unfair to blame everything on NT when Capcom themselves wanted a simpler game. And we all know that Capcom isn't exactly new to incredibly boneheaded decisions.
 

Black_Stride

Avenger
Oct 28, 2017
7,390
A combination of things. But soley relying on reviews IMO isn't great because I like a lot of genre's ( Like character action games ) where the reviewers don't get it. There's a lot of stuff in the rest of your post, but I don't really care to answer all that. DMC5 exists so... no need to argue on my part.

Im not solely relying on reviews.
But quite clearly DmC was a good game.
Users liked it, reviewers liked it, it got a Definitive edition....I dont understand.

What makes DmC a bad game, most if not all the signs point to it being a good game.
 

Holundrian

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,166
If reviews mean nothing whats the best way to gauge a games quality outside of reviews.
Using your head and actual talking points instead of "look at this number". How is this a real question jesus the quality of opinion and argument is so fucking low on era these days.

Remind you Diablo 3 is one of the best reviewed games at launch and it was an undeniable fucking broken mess. A loot game where the loot didn't work properly with a design that failed to do the things they said they wanted to do as per interviews. They wanted to make champion packs a focus for hunting instead of boss rushes but because of their broken inferno balancing people actually farmed talking to NPCs that drop blue weapons on conversation for a while. Stats were so broken that high rolling the dmg number on a weapon > than any other stat. This is not even opinion as far as subjective evaluation goes. What happened here is every reviewer played until 60 or close to it and called it a day although if you were competent I feel you could see the brokeness of loot way before inferno.

Reviews are not a good qay to gauge quality at all because sometimes it seems group incompetence when it comes to critical assessment just happens to get the whole industry most notably for high hype profile titles.
 

dodo

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,997
Tomb Raider.

DmC, for as many things as it bungles for hardcore fans, feels like a novel spin on the series. They had fun with it. A lot of it was misguided--cue the insipid Brokeback Mountain pitch slide here--but it had some fun ideas. I think it's a better entry than 2, and while its combat system can't hold a candle to 4's from a technical perspective I think, given the choice, I'd rather play DmC purely because its story mode feels a bit more whole compared to 4's backtracking and recycling. Plus, at the end of the day, DmC is one game out of six. A new one is coming out next week. Nothing was replaced, nothing was supplanted. It's just a different take on the series.

Tomb Raider botches everything core to Tomb Raider as a series imo. It was pitched as a woke revision of a problematic series, but I find the new trilogy way more irritating and offensive than the originals. Old Tomb Raider is horny and campy; new Tomb Raider is DARK and SERIOUS. Lara Croft isn't a ridiculous genius athlete dominatrix anymore. Instead of being a funny cartoon character, she just ticks the female character trauma laundry list, and for some reason the games feature extremely detailed Resident Evil 4 style graphic deaths even though none of the rest of the game has a b movie horror tone. Don't even get me started on the weird vocal performance, just go watch the E3 2011 stage demo and feel uncomfortable all over again. Three mediocre shooters in they decide to gesture vaguely at the series' relationship with colonialism, for some reason. Shadow doesn't say anything, it just feels like they felt a cultural change on the wind and wanted to let you know they knew, but it's a total shrug in the end. They still made the same game, they just had Lara feel bad about it for a little bit. It's just as limp as every AAA shooter that has a cutscene where a character says "you enjoy the killing" to the camera.

Anyway, I can't help but feel like after Shadow they're putting the brand to bed, which bums me out. Tomb Raider used to be fun and goofy! It used to have cool puzzles! The series definitely needed an update, but I really did not like the reboots.
 

Rendering...

Member
Oct 30, 2017
19,089
To be fair, some of the design decisions were mandated by Capcom, like the removal of lock on. Capcom also asked NT to tone down the script (the first draft was more serious and horror oriented), which explains the weird tonal shifts throughout the game. It's unfair to blame everything on NT when Capcom themselves wanted a simpler game. And we all know that Capcom isn't exactly new to incredibly boneheaded decisions.
True enough. We know that Capcom's idea with DmC was to casualize/westernize the series to see if it could make a lot more money than the other technical but very niche DMC titles.

Probably not the best idea they ever had. I'm glad the series survived it. And DmC fans can be glad that Itsuno is a far more gracious man than Tameem Antoniades (at least prior to DmC's release). Instead of alienating players who enjoyed that game, he embraced them and worked some of DmC's presentational elements into his own title.
 

Dante_727

Banned
Nov 6, 2017
216
DmC was an okay game but it doesn't matter since its flopped so badly (not meeting the expectations sales-wise)
I am glad that we are over it by now. (flash back from game journalists who ridiculed us by saying that we only cared about hair color)
 

Wink784

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,208
The first game in the TR reboot series was pretty good. Fun to play and updated with more interesting design elements. Haven't played the sequels and don't really care where the story goes. I just remember being more entertained by TReboot than any of the previous games in the series.
 

StallionDan

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,705
Tomb Raider reboot is terrible. It took the game and main character name and delivered something completely different and unrecognisable.

Can't even call it a reboot, it not the same character, not even the same genre. It's a name theft.
 

dlauv

Prophet of Truth - One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,513
At the time I played it, I thought TR13 was the best TPS I'd played since RE4. I really liked the stun and execute mechanics - the invincibility frames while you execute enemies allowed Lara to to heal a little and stay up close and personal. I loved the rolling and the sand throwing. It was just action-packed and surprisingly brutal. Also, the cult leader reminded me of Saddler and Lara's friend getting kidnapped reminded me of Ashley. It just echoed RE4 a lot for me. It didn't have the goofy charm though, obviously. I liked the progression system, and I liked that it was a well-paced TPS with some opportunities to explore, puzzle, and platform if the player craved some variety. Also, I really liked the platforming: jump, jump, pick, jump, jump, etc. Naturally, they took out the invincibility frames and made platforming clunkier with animation priority in Rise, and I didn't enjoy that game's combat or movement nearly as much; it had other strengths though.

I've changed my opinion of TR13 because the game breaks considerably with the silenced pistol (which is a far better bow and arrow than the bow and arrow), not to mention Headshot City with a mouse and keyboard because of how encounters blended stealth elements (I usually play with controllers for big console releases); but, up close and in the dirt, shotgun in hand: still a very fun way to play it.

With DmC, I was having fun, but it seemed like a couple steps forward and several steps back. The improvements made outside of combat didn't really make up for the changes to combat, which seemed at best both horizontally improved and worsened. In other words, for a game with a lot of contentious preamble about changing the identity of the franchise, it didn't really do much differently. And that's without getting into the story contents. I think I would have had a worse opinion if I hadn't played it on PC.
 
Last edited:

SourKiwi

Alt Account
Banned
Apr 2, 2018
301
Per-series, probably the dmc reboot. Shadow of the tomb raider is the worst game overall though. Completepy uninspired mess