The logic behind the rage for the "alienation" of Videogame series.

[NiPah]

This is just a random thought of mine, but a lot of the time the rage does not come due to the change, but the reason for the change.
If a developer states "We're going take out the RPG elements to more people will like us" or "make our title more accessible to the casual gamer" an instant red flag goes up, it's tantamount to a slap in the face, they're stating "hello fans of our series, you're not profitable enough so we're going to focus on appeasing these other people who didn't buy the first game".
A good developer will not say these things, the changes will speak for themselves. Valve made several changes to make Portal 2 more accessible to the casual gamer, but they didn't cheapen the core game play for the experienced fan, and through it all the only reasons they gave was "we're making an awesome game".

 

[SweetShark]

a new take on a series is most likely to be accepted if the original series is technically obsolete - [...] or isometric rpgs in Fallout. People didn't resent breaking away from the old styles as much because the old styles in those cases were already effectively dead.

Freeze! Nitpick police!

Fallout 3 being 3D and first person actually pissed off quite a few people. Hell, you can still find folks moaning about it to this day.

but it wasnt in first person!...or at least it didn't have to be it was optional...the game was dull eough visually without having ot play it in first person....WHY DO PEOPLE SAY ITS IN FIRST PERSON WHEN IT ISNT AAAAGHHHHHHHHH!!!!

*ahem* sorry, carry on

Yeah I know this feeling as well...
I am not saying that I am the "pure one" that I will never rage for some major changes from a game, but I am not that angry.
If this happened, I rage a little, then I let it go and I erased from my memory........but I digress cause in reality I will still remember it for the scar this specific game left to me...

Btw, my biggest rage I had isn't for a videogame......it is for the new TMNT movie from Michael Bay.......seriously f*ck this guy....
Thinking about him, I think we will see "only" again American marines fighting the enemies aliens of the Alien Ninja Turles.............The tranformers-like Footclans of the Reptile Alien Lord Shredder.......YOU SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE BAY?!!??!??! YOU SEEE MOTHERF*CKER OF YOUR ASSHOLE!?!?!?!??!

P.S.
Sorry, my assh*le-self show my real color for some things I hate...

 

[SweetShark]

This is just a random thought of mine, but a lot of the time the rage does not come due to the change, but the reason for the change.
If a developer states "We're going take out the RPG elements to more people will like us" or "make our title more accessible to the casual gamer" an instant red flag goes up, it's tantamount to a slap in the face, they're stating "hello fans of our series, you're not profitable enough so we're going to focus on appeasing these other people who didn't buy the first game".
A good developer will not say these things, the changes will speak for themselves. Valve made several changes to make Portal 2 more accessible to the casual gamer, but they didn't cheapen the core game play for the experienced fan, and through it all the only reasons they gave was "we're making an awesome game".

That actually it is a very good idea indeed, and I think you have right.

I still remember something similar happened with Dead Space 3:
At first we saw a trailer and we guessed that the game will have co-up gameplay. But we didn't reacted at first.
BUT then after one of thedevelopers said they made this decision cause it was very scary to play alone this game..............the fanbase reacted really, REALLY BBBBAAaaAAADDDddDDDddDDD!!!

Or for Resident Evil 6. Only after a developers said that wanted to "borrow" some elements from FPS cause COD is popular, again the favbase reacted.

Very good point indeed.

 

[Infernai]

Many times in the past and of course now recently, we saw many Videogame series get alienate for many different reasons.
Some developers say they wanted to try to make the series more darker and more serious that the previous games [Bomberman Zero], some others said they wanted to tell a different story than the original had [Devil May Cry 2012], some others wanted to change the gameplay entirely and make it a different style of game [Xcom 2012, the FPS], etc, etc...

When something like that happen, many people start rage to the developers for not trying to make the make like the original.
They rage for the new look of the main character, they rage for complete change of the gameplay, they rage for some tiny details that maked the game unique and the list go on...

With that said.....
Why we don't see this kind of rage in some other Videogames that they as well changed a lot from the original games?

Why for example they didn't raged about the Doom 3? Doom 3 is a very good example of alienation of the original game. Doom 3 have a different look, the monsters doesn't exacly the same, diffeent type of action, the horror elements etc, etc...
But yet, the fan of the series [like me] didn't make it something so serious that believed it will "murder" the series.

Another example is Resident Evil 4. Seriously, the developers make the biggest alienation and stick with it in the others titles cause it had success. They made the Resident Evil series from a pure horror series, to a Fast-Third Person-Action B-movie series.
But again, never I saw a serious negative reaction for this game.

Of course there are many, MANY examples I can say [The Anime like Lost Planet, Metal Gear Solid Card game, etc...], but why we see this rage in specific games and not in some other game even they clearly changes a lot of things?

With the Devil May Cry case it's down to alot of reasons that sort of just ended up combining into one helluva shit storm:

At first it was the change of appearance of the main character to one that looks Absolutely NOTHING like the original design in any way, shape or form. Admittedly, people started to back off when they heard it was supposed to be a prequel and the game would explain his change.

Then we heard it was going the main characters origin story was changed. The latest footage has also shown the main character to be acting in radically different personality to his recent form (Please remember, DMC 3 Dante was still in his late teens and it's damned hard to see this new one adding up in any capacity to our current lovable Demon slayer).

After that, they said it was going to be a reboot, then a reimagining, and then set in a parallel universe, then back to reboot again. And, then there was the comment from the creators that everyone just 'secretly wanted to like it'.

And that is the key problem here: The developers. They aren't communicating what they want and are getting damned smug and hostile whenever we throw a bit of a fit over what we see as some glaring continuity errors. As far as we fans can tell, this is basically like Dragon Ball Evolution to Devil May Cry but in video game form (If dante is a highschool student in this...I so fucking called it). Admittedly, you can't cave to everything the fans ask but as a designer you need to at-least remain civil and show some measure of respect for your fanbase when addressing them. If they have concerns, explain everything clearly and don't flip-flop around everything. And if you fail to meet this criteria...well, just look at the backlash to the new Devil May Cry for your answer. While i admit some of the fanbase hasn't been showing exemplary behavior, alot of the problems could for this game could been solved by Ninja Theory just laying some cards on the table and explaining what the hell they're doing and just asking for the people to give them a chance.

From that I reckon it all comes down to perceived sincerity of the creators. If they are perceived as sincere by the fanbase then they will embrace a change of direction.

^ Pretty Much this.

A good example is Final Fantasy 12.
I f*cking love FF12, but I also know the reason why many,MANY FF fans hate this game...the gameplay is like you play a classic MMO.
Personally, I loved it for that and also I was very invested to the Sub-quest it have. So mch fan.

I thought people hated 12 primarily because it's lead protagonist (Vaan) was completely and utterly pointless to the story (When you can take your main character out of the story and absolutely nothing will change: That character has utterly failed as a protagonist), and also an outright annoying as all hell character. There was also the fact the story was a bit...difficult to follow to start with in some area's and didn't get going for a while. There was also the gameplay problem, but that was mentioned.

I can see why some people might like 12 and i can respect that you like it as well so don't perceive this as an attack, but i still view it as the worst game of the series so far for the reasons i listed above so it was a bit more then just 'the gameplay was like an MMO'

 

[SweetShark]

A good example is Final Fantasy 12.
I f*cking love FF12, but I also know the reason why many,MANY FF fans hate this game...the gameplay is like you play a classic MMO.
Personally, I loved it for that and also I was very invested to the Sub-quest it have. So mch fan.

I thought people hated 12 primarily because it's lead protagonist (Vaan) was completely and utterly pointless to the story (When you can take your main character out of the story and absolutely nothing will change: That character has utterly failed as a protagonist), and also an outright annoying as all hell character. There was also the fact the story was a bit...difficult to follow to start with in some area's and didn't get going for a while. There was also the gameplay problem, but that was mentioned.

I can see why some people might like 12 and i can respect that you like it as well so don't perceive this as an attack, but i still view it as the worst game of the series so far for the reasons i listed above so it was a bit more then just 'the gameplay was like an MMO'

Well, Like SpoonyOne said in one of his video [btw, I don't care anymore for his personal problems], I don't really cared for the Vaan.......that of course it is very difficult to do, I stii manage to erased this girly as f*ck f*cker away while I was playing. On the other hand I really liked the other characters especially Fran and Basch.
Seriously if Basch was the main protagonist, the game would had been much, MUCH better!!!

Also I don't really cared for the story much........and yes, I know always an RPG MUST have a solid story to keep yu playing and make you care about the characters and the world that you put so much effort in this game.

But.....do you know where I put a lot more effort in this game? Finishing ALL the subquest the game have. And believe it or not, the sudquest was the major part of the game for me.

 

[SpaceBat]

MGS3 was objectively rubbish (it really was)

You not liking it doesn't make it objectively rubbish. It's adored by the fanbase, because it's "objectively good" (it really was) and is nearly on par with the first even.

 

[Vault101]

A good developer will not say these things, the changes will speak for themselves. Valve made several changes to make Portal 2 more accessible to the casual gamer, but they didn't cheapen the core game play for the experienced fan, and through it all the only reasons they gave was "we're making an awesome game".

what changes did they make? I mean I heard some people say the puzzles were a little easy (but me being a dumbass and sucking at puzzles didnt notice)

I mean they "expanded" Portal 2 to make it a stand alone game (as in worth full price) I don;t see how that's making it more accessible

 

[Bertylicious]

MGS3 was objectively rubbish (it really was)

You not liking it doesn't make it objectively rubbish. It's adored by the fanbase, because it's "objectively good" (it really was) and is nearly on par with the first even.

*furrows brow* Are we talking about the same thing? MGS3 was the one in the jungle, right? Where you had to mess about with camoflage? Everyone I know who owns that game, all 4 of them, hated it. I played it and I hated it. The mechanic was fiddly, the environment sprawling and felt ill suited to the interface. Stealth had gone from loads of fun to a chore. I didn't even think the fanbase liked it which was why the franchise went back to sneaking around bases.

Or was MGS3 Guns of Liberty? If so then I retract everything because I rather enjoyed the brief go I had on that.

 

[Infernai]

A good example is Final Fantasy 12.
I f*cking love FF12, but I also know the reason why many,MANY FF fans hate this game...the gameplay is like you play a classic MMO.
Personally, I loved it for that and also I was very invested to the Sub-quest it have. So mch fan.

I thought people hated 12 primarily because it's lead protagonist (Vaan) was completely and utterly pointless to the story (When you can take your main character out of the story and absolutely nothing will change: That character has utterly failed as a protagonist), and also an outright annoying as all hell character. There was also the fact the story was a bit...difficult to follow to start with in some area's and didn't get going for a while. There was also the gameplay problem, but that was mentioned.

I can see why some people might like 12 and i can respect that you like it as well so don't perceive this as an attack, but i still view it as the worst game of the series so far for the reasons i listed above so it was a bit more then just 'the gameplay was like an MMO'

Well, Like SpoonyOne said in one of his video [btw, I don't care anymore for his personal problems], I don't really cared for the Vaan.......that of course it is very difficult to do, I stii manage to erased this girly as f*ck f*cker away while I was playing. On the other hand I really liked the other characters especially Fran and Basch.
Seriously if Basch was the main protagonist, the game would had been much, MUCH better!!!

Also I don't really cared for the story much........and yes, I know always an RPG MUST have a solid story to keep yu playing and make you care about the characters and the world that you put so much effort in this game.

But.....do you know where I put a lot more effort in this game? Finishing ALL the subquest the game have. And believe it or not, the sudquest was the major part of the game for me.

Fun Fact, i'd actually heard that originally Basch WAS supposed to be the main character. But, the guys at square thought that an FF game with an older protagonist wouldn't work so...we got lumped with Vaan instead.

 

[SonicKoala]

MGS3 was objectively rubbish (it really was)

You not liking it doesn't make it objectively rubbish. It's adored by the fanbase, because it's "objectively good" (it really was) and is nearly on par with the first even.

*furrows brow* Are we talking about the same thing? MGS3 was the one in the jungle, right? Where you had to mess about with camoflage? Everyone I know who owns that game, all 4 of them, hated it. I played it and I hated it. The mechanic was fiddly, the environment sprawling and felt ill suited to the interface. Stealth had gone from loads of fun to a chore. I didn't even think the fanbase liked it which was why the franchise went back to sneaking around bases.

Or was MGS3 Guns of Liberty? If so then I retract everything because I rather enjoyed the brief go I had on that.

No, you're right, MGS3 was "Snake Eater", a.k.a the one in the jungle. And it seems as though you are basing your "MGS3 was objectively rubbish" opinion on the feedback of 4 other people and you. From what I've seen in terms of both critical reception and fan reception, MGS3 was an enormous hit. It was a fresh departure from the "sneaking around bases" trope, it introduced an interesting new setting, an enjoyable and entertaining new game mechanic (the camouflage), and some pretty tight writing (for the MGS series), something which was very much welcome after MGS 2's labyrinthine plot. Plus, you had moments like the epic tank chase near the end, or the absolutely brilliant boss fight with "The End". Hell, all the boss fights were well-executed.

If you don't like it, that's fine, but saying it's "objectively" rubbish simply isn't true. Oh, and you sort of conflated your MGS titles at the end there. MGS 2 was subtitled "Sons of Liberty", whereas MGS 4 was subtitled "Guns of the Patriots". To be fair, though, I would play the hell out of "Guns of Liberty".

 

[SweetShark]

A good example is Final Fantasy 12.
I f*cking love FF12, but I also know the reason why many,MANY FF fans hate this game...the gameplay is like you play a classic MMO.
Personally, I loved it for that and also I was very invested to the Sub-quest it have. So mch fan.

I thought people hated 12 primarily because it's lead protagonist (Vaan) was completely and utterly pointless to the story (When you can take your main character out of the story and absolutely nothing will change: That character has utterly failed as a protagonist), and also an outright annoying as all hell character. There was also the fact the story was a bit...difficult to follow to start with in some area's and didn't get going for a while. There was also the gameplay problem, but that was mentioned.

I can see why some people might like 12 and i can respect that you like it as well so don't perceive this as an attack, but i still view it as the worst game of the series so far for the reasons i listed above so it was a bit more then just 'the gameplay was like an MMO'

Well, Like SpoonyOne said in one of his video [btw, I don't care anymore for his personal problems], I don't really cared for the Vaan.......that of course it is very difficult to do, I stii manage to erased this girly as f*ck f*cker away while I was playing. On the other hand I really liked the other characters especially Fran and Basch.
Seriously if Basch was the main protagonist, the game would had been much, MUCH better!!!

Also I don't really cared for the story much........and yes, I know always an RPG MUST have a solid story to keep yu playing and make you care about the characters and the world that you put so much effort in this game.

But.....do you know where I put a lot more effort in this game? Finishing ALL the subquest the game have. And believe it or not, the sudquest was the major part of the game for me.

Fun Fact, i'd actually heard that originally Basch WAS supposed to be the main character. But, the guys at square thought that an FF game with an older protagonist wouldn't work so...we got lumped with Vaan instead.

Oh my god.....I didn't knew that....if only it was like that in reality.
Seriously though, why the Japanese developers are eager to use only young characters for protagonist? If the japanese people want to see something Kawwai [yes, I said that], they have the girl do thisjob for them.......don't make the young characters so cute goddammit!!!!
This is so wrong!!!!

 

[Kekkonen1]

I think as people have noted before it comes down to the percieved sincerity of the developer that made the change in the franchise to begin with. I can feel no such sincerity when it comes to changes such as the new Syndicate, X-com, Devil May Cry and Max Payne 3. And I'm not even a fan of Devil May Cry but even I thought they sounded like insincere patronizing douchebags in interviews and if I were a fan I would be upset, not because of the changes per se but because the creators show no sign of respecting neither the fanbase nor the material.

I for example felt ok with the Resident Evil changes in 4 and to a slighter less degree 5 because it still felt like they were simply trying (to various degrees of success) to modernize survival horror, but with the upcoming 6 they seem to be wholeheartedly going for the CoD-crowd. Seriously, when the zombies start using guns (which they did in 5 as well towards the end), then it's not horror anymore, just a badly controlled shooter.

Incidently, MGS is also a great example of a franchise that has evolved with great respect to what made the series so good. The core mechanics are there, an intriguing story, colorful characters and a good mix of stealth and action. Then they refined that from an isometric 2D-game to an isometric 3D-game to a over the shoulder-camera 3D-game while still staying true to what makes Metal Gear good.

Also, MGS3 is, together with MGS1, by far the best of the series. No matter how much I love the MGS-games even I have to admit that Kojima can truly get a bit carried away with his writing from now and then and so I think that the reason I like MGS3 so much is that it is basically the only game that is actually coherent, well structured, well-edited and self-contained. All in all a great game! I Would rank them MGS1, 3, 4, 2 (but I dont dislike 2, just thought it was the weakest in the series).

 

[Bertylicious]

No, you're right, MGS3 was "Snake Eater", a.k.a the one in the jungle. And it seems as though you are basing your "MGS3 was objectively rubbish" opinion on the feedback of 4 other people and you. From what I've seen in terms of both critical reception and fan reception, MGS3 was an enormous hit. It was a fresh departure from the "sneaking around bases" trope, it introduced an interesting new setting, an enjoyable and entertaining new game mechanic (the camouflage), and some pretty tight writing (for the MGS series), something which was very much welcome after MGS 2's labyrinthine plot. Plus, you had moments like the epic tank chase near the end, or the absolutely brilliant boss fight with "The End". Hell, all the boss fights were well-executed.

If you don't like it, that's fine, but saying it's "objectively" rubbish simply isn't true. Oh, and you sort of conflated your MGS titles at the end there. MGS 2 was subtitled "Sons of Liberty", whereas MGS 4 was subtitled "Guns of the Patriots". To be fair, though, I would play the hell out of "Guns of Liberty".

Ah well there we are then. I cede the point; I've gone and assumed a belief is truth which is proper numpty.

Still though, I am suprised you enjoyed the camoflage system. I found it very intrusive and unintuitive; you'd be crawling along some leaves and then you'd hit some different colour leaves so you'd have to stop, go into the menu system, change your camo, go back out of the menu system, wait for bloke to wander off, crawl another few meters to get to some different coloured leaves, stop, go back into the menu...

The whole experience was like riding a British train in the autumn.

 

[WindKnight]

I guess with the new technlogoy, the try to advance the game, like with Doom 3 they kept it as an FP, just gave it better graphics.

Games like Silent Hill fans rage at, because the developers seem to keep missing the point for some reason

While I don't think there was a lot of rage against it, Doom 3 was met with pretty much a rather 'meh' response for feeling more like a survival horror game and trying and failing to have the feel and atmosphere of the system shock games (I for one felt through both system shock games that I'd have liked to visit citadel station and the Van Buren under better days. Doom 3 never gave me that feeling... more like 'I'd want to get the hell out of here and never come back' even before things went to hell).

 

[Vault101]

and from what perspective would you describe it?

whatever perspective you want...I'd describe it more as an RPG than a shooter since you really don;t need to shoot if you absolutely don;t want to

 

[ACM_Shadow]

Fun Fact, i'd actually heard that originally Basch WAS supposed to be the main character. But, the guys at square thought that an FF game with an older protagonist wouldn't work so...we got lumped with Vaan instead.

i actually heard from a mate that it was due to western vs Jap idea of the hero that Vaan became the protagonist... at least i think it was that (was 2+ years ago that conversation).

Doom 3 had a "meh, ok i spose" reaction because the horror (what it had) was gone... walk in a room, lights dim, kill things, lights come back on, proceed through a corridor and repeat.
But chainsaw multiplayer was fun.

Resident evil.... well i dont know what they are doing, but i do know that they change them far too radically per game. if you change it too much (thinking 4 and 5) you just might as well change the name as well to "Not zombie-but zombish game type".

 

[SweetShark]

TEXT

Well, yeah, the Doom 3 is still a FPS, but not the same as the old ones [Doom and Doom 2].
As I said before, Doom 3 is a diferent type of FPS, specifically a Horror driven FPS game.
That is a huge change for the Doom series.

The same goes for other games, the developers keep the same kind of game, but with some major changes.

Also about RE4, I didn't knew it got so much hate.