Jimquisition: A Game By Any Other Name

[MrBaskerville]

Personally i have a grudge against Castlevania: Lords of Shadows, my problem with the game is that it abandonds everything the Castlevania series stood for except for some superficial names related to the story. The problem is that Castlevania was never about the story, to me the appeal was the style, the worship of classic horror and mythologi, something that´s rare in games these days and something i really really love.

Lords of shadows doesn´t take it´s inspiration from classic horror, but modern horror. It´s dark and grim and filled with nasty demons that looks like something Eli Roth would approve of. To make it even worse, the game doesn´t even share any gameplay similarities with the old ones. To top it off they got rid of all the themes from the series (except for the music box version of vampire killer...), heck they even got rid of the bats, skeletons and medusa heads. What´s left other than the name: Castlevania and the name Belmont who incidentially carries af whip? Not much... I don´t mind that people like the game, it just mind that someone decided to make a Castlevania game and didn´t even take the effort to understand the actual core of the series. It´s only a problem because i would have loved to see a true Castlevania game with AAA graphics and a rocking score. Instead we got something unrelated, that apparently is here to replace the series...

I don´t really know anymore, is it a good game? some people think so... It´s a tough one, because they can do whatever they want with their game, it´s none of my business, but shouldn´t there be some resemblence to the core material? Some style or core mechanics that always carries over from game to game in a series? Just find it a bit odd that they always try to adapt the story, which is often the least important part of most games...

Sorry if i´m rambling, i´m probably rambling^^.

Oh and i´m only angry at the new DMC because i don´t enjoy other games from Ninja Theory, i don´t trust that they are capable of making a good game in that particular genre. I don´t really mind the silent hill game, as a game in the series it looks kind of silly, considering the overall tone and atmosphere of previous games, and gameplay. But that series lost all meaning a long time ago and atleast the new game sounds more promising than other recent titles in the series... soo...

 

[veloper]

Most of the anger stems not from spin-offs, but rather from companies changing their sequels to cater to a different audience.

There's often fans who supported with their money a series since the first title and hoping for another installment in that genre.
The same name but a different type of game means to them that the sequel they hoped for, is nolonger just one ice, but buried already.

 

[Faerillis]

Hard to disagree with what you said (though a little surprised Syndicate came up as EA's game-type switch that turned out crappy rather than Dragon Age 2), but I think most of the fan outcry about Devil May Cry isn't that the character doesn't look like Dante, but because the character design is shit.

A scrawny brown-haired guy that Ninja Theory admits is based of Edward Fucking Cullen is a shit re-imagining of a fairly iconic figure. They could have redesigned Dante, that would have been fine ? and we can clearly see his old design leaking through, but the design they chose was fucking stupid. Don't get me wrong, the game is actually looking pretty damn fun at this point, but between Mass Effect and Twilight I would say that anything designed around a sparkling teen is pretty fucking shitty.

(To clarify, most of Mass Effect is awesome, just not the ending)

 

[AJax_21]

This video reminded me why I loved DMC4's Dante. Such a hilarious twat.

I'm willing to give DmC the benefit of the doubt if the combat can reach the standard set by 3 and 4.

 

[Aeonknight]

I think what impresses me most about this video is that he made a rational comment about the new direction Dead Space 3 is going. Yea it's going to be different, but if it's still good, it's still good. And it's even an EA game to boot, where no more than 30 seconds earlier he pulled his classic "because fuck EA" card.

 

[TitanAura]

Jim, let me just say that I think your delivery has improved significantly over the past few months. Humor is a subjective beast, but if I were to pinpoint what it is you've actually refined to a cleaving edge, it would be your timing. To me, watching you become a better, more competent content producer gives me the same feeling I had back when MovieBob was nothing but a youtube hopeful aiming for the stars.

You had me in tears by the end of the Dante bit. Keep it up, mate.

 

[medv4380]

Sounds like an interesting take on a series I otherwise wouldn't be interested in. At least they're using the title correctly. I'm more irritated when two games share a common title and have nothing in common with them. Like every Final Fantasy title I expect the stories to be completely unrelated only because of their track record. To me Each one should have had its own unique title unless they were somehow related in their story. Game play and game style I can accept, but a title, to me, conveys the story or setting. So I like the fact that a Silent Hill game that takes place in the same story universe shares the title name a bit. I'd understand the hate if it was unrelated in story like Final Fantasy usually is.

 

[Lord_Gremlin]

I don't mind spin-offs. Nothing wrong with Silent Hill on Vita. Or even new Syndicate. I do have a problem when completely unrelated game is suddenly branded new installment (Far Cry 2 - really? Imagine Call of duty 1 was called Quake V). And on subject of DMC - they took established character and completely screwed everything about him - especially story.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

I wish Jim Sterling would stop showing himself on the screen. I'm sure he's a looker, but his delivery is absolutely excruciatingly bad and unfunny. I literally keep another tab open on my browser just in case he shows up on the screen. His voice is almost comically grating, but I guess he has to talk.

I also think wacky spin-offs are fine and inoffensive, but I disagree with pretty much everything else. Once you establish characters and a world and a tone and a style and a theme, the audience is going to expect you to handle those elements appropriately because getting the audience to care about them is the whole point. This does not mean you can't take a series in a new direction, but it does mean you need to craft it in a way that respects the audience's emotional investment in what they've experienced so far. You couldn't make a Lord of the Rings II where Gondor gets attacked by Nazi stormtroopers for the exact same reason you couldn't write that into Return of the King. Changing a series is fine, but it's not easy to do in a way that builds on what came before. It requires a level of craft that developers don't seem to possess.

I'm not saying Mr. Sterling is an emotionless robot who just sees stories and characters and styles as components of a product whose significance can be rated on a scale from one to ten, I just don't know who else is going to agree with him that what happens to stories and characters and styles and tones and themes shouldn't matter to the audience.

 

[Varis]

Uhm, a tad bit off-topic but... What game was the cutscene from that ran from 2:39 to 2:46? ^^

 

[orangeapples]

Calling the game Silent Hill did have an effect on the quality. It gave the game a larger budget. Big recognizable names sell, therefore they get better funding. That is pretty much why spin-offs exist. We all know that more $$$ doesn't mean better game, but it does open up potential.

 

[blackrave]

While I agree that game should be evaluated by it's content not by it's name
Making X-Com into just a shooter was kinda dumb idea (similar to Syndicate)
On the other hand...
X-Com as 1st person shooter with strategic and tactical elements?
Do want, do want NOW!
(Once again Syndicate could be done like that and that would be awesome)

 

[Skarvig]

I don't want to read through all the comments, so I apoligize if there's already a comment like mine.

Names are used to recognize things. For example if you would buy a bottle of Coke, you expect that good old Coca Cola taste. But if they change that radicaly, you are obviously pissed off.
This is why fans are outraged if something is changed in that formula they know.
This is an understandable reaction. But this also why spin-offs are great.

If they would have called Final Fantasy: Tactics, Final Fantasy VIII, fans would have rioted, but they changed the name so that people know that this would be something different. Like Cherry Coke. It's not coke it's something different.
Brand recognition is important and if it's used wrong, it can unleash a backlash.

 

[chstens]

I have to say one thing in terms of Banjo Kazooie, the first teaser shown for the next-gen Banjo game promised a 3D platformer, all the build-up to the game, until it was properly shown was about a 3D platformer, and then we get Lego Racing 2. I enjoy nuts & bolts for what it is, but I was very disappointed when they didn't deliver the game we were told to expect.

 

[Mistilteinn]

While I agree that fans tend to overreact at the slightest changes--great or small--to their beloved franchise, sometimes developers take things way too far. My whole problem with the DmC reboot isn't so much that Dante looks different, it's that he doesn't look like a remotely interesting character, and his attitude is complete shit. He's gone from being incredibly corny and cheesy (which has been the whole point of his previous iterations, ignoring DMC2) to falling victim to the whole "dark and edgy" theme that's been sweeping through all sorts of media like wildfire. When will people realize that making a character look like a drug-addict, and giving them a foul mouth and douchebag attitude doesn't make them a 'relateable' or even interesting character? It just makes them a punk, and not many people find that to be an attractive personality in any context.

 

[blackdwarf]

well, when a new game with a certain title is announced, you have some kind of expectations for the gameplay and the story. when you see it is a spin-off, it would be reasonable to be disappointed. even if the game is good, if you don't like the spin-off, the game is in your eyes a waste of time. problem is that some people can't accept so they hate it with their fanboyism and ridicule everyone who does like it.

 

[Guy from the 80's]

First time I have disagreed with Mr.Jimquisition.

Why not name a game something else when its nothing like its original. Take Splinter Cell. when Splinter cell came it was a revolutionary stealth game, with focus on yeah stealth and finesse. The newest one is very little stealthy, its not splinter cell at all. There I said it. If the game had been named ex-agent kills stuff, then no one would have known it was a splinter cell game. The reason for this is simply that launching a new title would add almost 50% to the marketing budget. So all these franchises being whipped like a dead horse is motivated purely by money.

The game industry is becoming more and more like the movie industry. So no thank god for you this time mr.Stirling.

 

[Khazoth]

I liked Fallout 3, and I think Dragon Age 2 would've probably gotten less gripe if it didn't have the name attached. Maybe I have a taste for 'bad games' or whatever, but I liked them both. People get waaaay too up in arms over their beloved franchises being changed. Personally, I would prefer people just MAKE NEW GAMES instead of re-using old games over and over and driving them into the ground. I desire new things, new characters, universes, places. Stop releasing the same franchises over and over. So my opinion is less of the "I can't stand my favorite characters being changed" and more "I'd like new games instead of rehashing oldhat."


Also, i'm just gonna put this here for the inevitable fanrage to come.

 

[disappointed]

I'm just fed up with all the endless IPs. Gaming is second only to porn in its fetish for sequels. If you're making something new, make something new. Have some courage. You're supposed to be in a creative industry. You're supposed to relish the opportunity to innovate. By recycling names, you just emphasise how little gaming has moved on over the years. It's boring.