C'mon, you guys really think the worse thing about this game is how he looks?
Do we know enough about the game to complain about something else? Give it time!
Actually, there is one complaint I can make about how he looks:
Seriously, that's the lead director of Ninja Theory whose involved with DmC. The resemblance is so goddamn uncanny I'm starting to wonder if this is really a chance for this smug-looking fellow to just get himself noticed through a popular franchise name.
Opa-Opa wrote:But is this really a reboot? I thought it was just, I dunno, a younger Dante. Like the Flinstones Kids, A Pup Named Scooby-doo or something.
Yeah, speculations are flying around saying that this is suppose to be a prequel for DMC3, to which I think to myself "oh great, let's do waste more effort and time to actually look deeper into a character's back story that I hardly gave a shit about beforehand". Really, do we seriously need to look further back into Dante's past to figure out what made him became a demon hunter. I thought that was already covered by the third game - we're not suppose to be going ass-backwards, Capcom.
It's not like Capcom's never done that before. The Ace Attorney series, for instance. The first game sets up the backstories for both Phoenix Wright and Miles Edgeworth pretty handily. Then Trials and Tribulations (the third one) goes and tosses in even more for both men (college years for Wright, and Edgeworth's first case in the courtroom)... and as I'm playing through Investigations, I see they've gone and given Edgeworth more backstory, highlighting his real first case, supposedly taking place before even his supposed first from the third game! Never mind that this case is, in itself, a flashback taking place inside a flashback. Granted, it's the same character doing both flashbacks, and it's not farfetched to say he couldn't flashback to flashing back, but it's rather absurd.
Oh, and I haven't beaten the case I just highlighted (Case 5-4, if you must know), so I dunno if something comes up that makes this weird contradiction (seriously, two "first case"s?) make sense. I'll only hope that it does.
And I know Capcom had done this kind of thing with their games before, but that doesn't make up for lack of creativity the company has when it comes to writing. Not saying that they're doing a horrible job, but I am saying that when you mention the word 'backstory' in a game that has already covered backstory beforehand, it doesn't give the game any more appeal than the game that already done the job. If Sega pulled this with any of their games in this current age, a lot of us would be groaning in agony because we already know enough about the character to understand how he came about*.
*I would have thrown Nintendo into this, but they're guilty of going ass-backwards with their Zelda series.
Shadow Hog wrote:Oh, and I haven't beaten the case I just highlighted (Case 5-4, if you must know), so I dunno if something comes up that makes this weird contradiction (seriously, two "first case"s?) make sense. I'll only hope that it does.
