PDA

View Full Version : Devil May Make Sony Cry..


MacRumorUser
May 18, 2006, 05:34 PM
In an interview with Japanese gaming magazine Famitsu, Capcom producer Hiroshi Kobayashi hinted at the possibility of Devil May Cry heading to Wii and Xbox 360 as well, instead of just the PS3 for it's next iteration. This would be another big loss for Sony after Microsoft announced the next Grand Theft Auto for the Xbox 360.

Kobayashi said he still isn't sure about the real power of Sony's new console, but expects the visuals of a new DMC title to look like the trailer shown at the E3 last year. He didn't reveal anything gameplay-wise except for a definitive change in the fighting system. In order to appeal to more gamers, it's difficulty will be lowered and controls will be made easier to master.

The Devil May Cry series was has been one of the biggest selling franchises for the Playstation 2, especially in Japan. And while Sony still holds key brands like Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid, that may not be enough to convince most gamers to shell out over $500 for the PS3, when they'll be able to play most of the next-gen titles on consoles half as expensive.


------------

Oh dear that's a shame Sony :) With big name IP games costing 20-40 million to make nowadays I think we'll be seeing the definition of 'exclusivity' fading even further.... Just doesnt make business sense..

XNine
May 18, 2006, 05:56 PM
There was nothing special about Devil May Cry anyway. It's another hack 'em slash 'em game with nothing really that enjoyable other than 70 hit combos and a bit of gore. There was horrible story, horrible cinemas and no suspense whatsoever. It took Resident Evil's crappy Puzzles and mixed it with better directional control and the ability to jump. woohoo.

The 360 is not a cheaper console, it's been shown that it isn't. The Wii may be cheaper, but there again no HD signal.

I think anyone who thinks that a crappy series like DMC would break Sony is fooling themselves. If Metal Gear moved solely to the Xbox, then that would hurt Sony tremendously. Or even if it moved solely to the Wii. But not if it's a multi-platform release.

Multi-platform releases are generally only good one one console anyway. Take MGS2 for example. Great on PS 2, sucked like balls on the Xbox. Or Super Monkeyball. Great on the GC, sucked on the Xbox. COD series, great on Xbox, sucked on PS 2.

My point, it won't matter, because a game like DMC will be better with Sony's controller configuration than Xbox or Nintendo's. SuperMonkey ball would be superior on a Nintendo than an Xbox for the same reason. FPS are better on the Xbox, almost always.

Mord
May 18, 2006, 06:14 PM
wow xbox 360 owners will have the opportunity to play a crappy linear hack and slash games just like those who buy a ps3 do too.

Dagless
May 18, 2006, 06:23 PM
I've never played DMC but I hear the combat system is pretty good. A lot of freeware developers use similar complex systems and deliberately model it on DMC.


I'm sorry Onizuka but your sounding a little hurt.

Sony remove rumble from controller= "Rumble sucks"
Sony lose DMC franchise= "it sucked anyways"

whats next? Sony forget outputting to a display and go audio only= "I never liked looking at screens, go Sony!"

Your making out MGS to be the be-all end-all Sony game. DMC sold a crap load and was highly rated. 1 series (that's no longer bound to a single console too) doesn't make a system.

XNine
May 18, 2006, 07:03 PM
I've never played DMC but I hear the combat system is pretty good. A lot of freeware developers use similar complex systems and deliberately model it on DMC.


I'm sorry Onizuka but your sounding a little hurt.

Sony remove rumble from controller= "Rumble sucks"
Sony lose DMC franchise= "it sucked anyways"

whats next? Sony forget outputting to a display and go audio only= "I never liked looking at screens, go Sony!"

Your making out MGS to be the be-all end-all Sony game. DMC sold a crap load and was highly rated. 1 series (that's no longer bound to a single console too) doesn't make a system.

No, rumble does suck and so does DMC. So what? You wanna flaimbait? I'll PM you my AIM and we can talk it out there.

2nyRiggz
May 18, 2006, 07:35 PM
DMC sucked.....it got worse as they made them...DMC1 was the best and it was down hill from there.


Bless

Spanky Deluxe
May 18, 2006, 07:53 PM
And while Sony still holds key brands like Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid

I've never even heard of this Devil May Cry game (maybe because I've never owned a PS2) but I'm pretty sure there's a new version of Final Fantasy heading to the Wii. I'll have to check though...

Edit: Took all of three seconds of searching, I love Google!! In a nutshell, Final Fantasy is coming to Wii: http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news.php?newsId=3269

They won't be the same versions as anything made for PS3 because they're meant to be designed from the ground up to make the fullest use of Nintendo's latest technologies.

Dagless
May 18, 2006, 07:58 PM
I've never even heard of this Devil May Cry game (maybe because I've never owned a PS2) but I'm pretty sure there's a new version of Final Fantasy heading to the Wii. I'll have to check though...

Edit: Took all of three seconds of searching, I love Google!! In a nutshell, Final Fantasy is coming to Wii: http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news.php?newsId=3269

They won't be the same versions as anything made for PS3 because they're meant to be designed from the ground up to make the fullest use of Nintendo's latest technologies.

It's Crystal Chronicles, a multiplayer centric FF game. Was on the Cube but sucked due to no online play. Give it online play and a better story then you're talking. talking a bit too as the local matches of the Cube version I played were awesome. Coming out on the DS too, IIRC. If so then chances of the DS acting as a controller are massively increased.

cycocelica
May 19, 2006, 12:17 AM
So does Sony have a game for only the PS3 that really defines it? Xbox has Halo (and say what you will, it still is an absolute phenom). Nintendo has the Mario franchise. Sony has...well Grand Turismo but I played a game (god help me remember the name) that out did GT by a long shot. I mean maybe I am just missing something. This is no bash on Sony, but I really do not associate any one single game to Sony. Fill me in if I am wrong.

AP_piano295
May 19, 2006, 12:26 AM
So does Sony have a game for only the PS3 that really defines it? Xbox has Halo (and say what you will, it still is an absolute phenom). Nintendo has the Mario franchise. Sony has...well Grand Turismo but I played a game (god help me remember the name) that out did GT by a long shot. I mean maybe I am just missing something. This is no bash on Sony, but I really do not associate any one single game to Sony. Fill me in if I am wrong.

spyro?

cycocelica
May 19, 2006, 12:45 AM
spyro?

eh, maybe. But I thought that was multi platform, so still nothing that really defines PlayStation.

bluebomberman
May 19, 2006, 03:23 AM
This is going to be a big problem for Sony. The PS3's price point is so stratospheric that Sony is going to have a really hard time convincing publishers to maintain exclusivity for their console. The loss of exclusivity for GTA hurts Sony big time; Devil May Cry less so.

Losing exclusivity for Metal Gear Solid or Final Fantasy might be enough to send Sony into a freefall.

EDIT: sure sign I should be asleep. I basically paraphrased the original post. Ugh, shoot me.

EDIT v2: There's something to be said for adrenilin-pumping action games that don't make me nauseous or punish my horrible first-person aim.

MacRumorUser
May 19, 2006, 03:43 AM
Devil May Cry was one of the BIGGEST selling titles on the PS2, regardles of whether some of you Sonyiacs are now slagging it. This is a loss to Sony no matter what..

takao
May 19, 2006, 05:15 AM
hmm i don't see that as a huge problem for sony.. perhaps because i simply didn't find any fun at all when playing it at a friends house

after about 30-45 minutes:
me: "is it going to get more interesting ?"
him: "no"
me ejects disc

Dagless
May 19, 2006, 06:17 AM
They lose MGS even more so and that Shadow Colossus game. Would be the biggest uh-oh to Sony.

I associate ICO/SofC with Sony. and Destruction Derby. Battle Arena Toshinden? Tekken.

None really grab me though. Those aforementioned fighting games will be nothing without Snake :D

MacRumorUser
May 19, 2006, 07:26 AM
I honestly think exclusivity means jack **** nowadays. Exclusive for a few months sure, but that's it.

Only first party titles really remain exclusive.

Haoshiro
May 19, 2006, 09:22 AM
They lose MGS even more so and that Shadow Colossus game. Would be the biggest uh-oh to Sony.

I associate ICO/SofC with Sony. and Destruction Derby. Battle Arena Toshinden? Tekken.

None really grab me though. Those aforementioned fighting games will be nothing without Snake :D

God of War, Ico, and Shadow of Colussus are all developed and published by SCEI - They are first party games. Also a sign that Sony may have actually started having good first party games, about time!

Haoshiro
May 19, 2006, 09:26 AM
The 360 is not a cheaper console, it's been shown that it isn't.

That is simply not true. Gamers have the choice of buying a $299 Xbox 360 Core vs a PS3 Basic for $499. The Xbox 360 is $200 cheaper.

I believe you are basing that off "fully loaded" systems, that is, if you were to get an Xbox 360 Premium + HD-DVD + Wi-Fi vs the PS3 Complete. But comparing only entry level systems the 360 is cheaper.

I, for example, bought a Xbox 360 Premium for $399 and have no intention of getting the Wi-Fi nor HD-DVD accessories.

GFLPraxis
May 19, 2006, 09:57 AM
That is simply not true. Gamers have the choice of buying a $299 Xbox 360 Core vs a PS3 Basic for $499. The Xbox 360 is $200 cheaper.

I believe you are basing that off "fully loaded" systems, that is, if you were to get an Xbox 360 Premium + HD-DVD + Wi-Fi vs the PS3 Complete. But comparing only entry level systems the 360 is cheaper.

I, for example, bought a Xbox 360 Premium for $399 and have no intention of getting the Wi-Fi nor HD-DVD accessories.

Though it should be noted that the PS3 Basic has a built in 20 GB hard drive (like the 360 PRemium), and that you have to actually spend a minimum of $40 for a tiny memory card before you can actually save a game, so the 360 core should really be considered at least $340 with a puny 64 MB of memory.

Still cheaper though.

Haoshiro
May 19, 2006, 10:05 AM
Though it should be noted that the PS3 Basic has a built in 20 GB hard drive (like the 360 PRemium), and that you have to actually spend a minimum of $40 for a tiny memory card before you can actually save a game, so the 360 core should really be considered at least $340 with a puny 64 MB of memory.

Still cheaper though.

Right, but simply at entry level pricing it's cheaper - even comparing the 360 Premium to the $499 PS3. Also, you can pick up a 64MB 360 memory card for ~$30, which means you could get a Core+Memory Card+Game for the same cost as the Premium system.

I of course wouldn't recommend because I think the Premium is definitely the system to get (hey, and you get Hexic HD for free! heh). But if someone was really trying to save money, they could save themselves the cost of a game.

2nyRiggz
May 19, 2006, 02:48 PM
God of War, Ico, and Shadow of Colussus are all developed and published by SCEI - They are first party games. Also a sign that Sony may have actually started having good first party games, about time!

Indeed...dont forget about primal(which got perfect scores and was really fun). Sure DMC was great for the PS2...but the others was crap and did not do well at all so who the hell cares if they put it on another system...the more the better i think.

I would like to see sony focus on these type:

IC0
Shadow of the Colussus
god Of War
Primal
Mark Of Kri(sp)
GT

Bless

Haoshiro
May 19, 2006, 03:07 PM
Yeah, that is what they need to do. Focus on internal games and if they get a handful of real gems then they'll do good.

That's really what it comes down to, what games does each system offer that none of the others do? Okay, now which ones do you prefer? By that system... or all if need be. The games have to so good they are considered worth the price of the system.

I almost bought a PS2 for a number of those SCE developed games like Ico. But ultimately I was kept busy enough with my Cube and Xbox that I never did. Sony's system have always been those I look at and say "After the price goes down and the release a revision, then I'll puck up the system." Loved my PSOne. Of course that has already happened with PS2... but I'm still playing my Cube and now 360 (and GBA!). *shrugs*

sk1985
May 19, 2006, 07:44 PM
God of War, Ico, and Shadow of Colussus are all developed and published by SCEI - They are first party games. Also a sign that Sony may have actually started having good first party games, about time!
Actually GOW was made by a sony development company in San Diego (they were at one point a pretty crappy developer but have had a recent turn around). Ico and SOC were made by a sony owned devo company in japan. SCEI just publishes games and highers or buys out development companies to make their games or they have their second party companies make games for them (this is pretty standard, M$ and Nintendo does this too).

Anyway the first DMC was one of my favorite games when it first game out (the second one sucked, and the third one was overly difficult). Needless to say I'll be playing DMC regardless of what system it's on. I plan on buying all three consoles like I usually do.

PD4Ever
May 21, 2006, 11:08 AM
Isnt Ratchet & Clank series Playstation exclusive. Also Naughty Dog does the Jak series and that was PS2 exclusive.

Uma888
May 21, 2006, 05:20 PM
Isnt Ratchet & Clank series Playstation exclusive. Also Naughty Dog does the Jak series and that was PS2 exclusive.

Naughty dog sold themselves to SOny a few years ago....but the crashbandicoot franchise was left out......