Dante's Inferno

[RickRoll]

I only played the demo and haven't played GoW but it seemed ok for it's genre to me.

Nothing seemed god awful or that great (I am not a fan of this genre at all), everything was just as I expected.

You talk like GoW is the first game of it's kind, I believe it isn't even close to being first, you could argue streets of rage and golden axe was (near) the start or a more comparative game is DMC.

If your attacking this game for being like GoW, then attack GoW for being like DMC.

Also, user reviews?

DMC is considerably more different from GoW than DI is from GoW. DI has virtually identical combat to GoW, while GoW has a totally different set of moves and style overall than DMC; plus DMC uses guns and demonic powers, while GoW uses spells and special abilites.

My point is, GoW is definitely different enough from DMC to be a standalone, innovative game, while DI simply is just faaaaaaar too similar to the game it rips off to have any good, original merit.

Man i can't wait until Yahtzee rips this game a new arsehole!

 

[Delock]

Snip

Ok, I actually meant to explain that before I finished up, but well, forgot. It actually goes back to my mention of Shadow of the Colossus and Portal. You see, the game respects us enough to not say everything, and to subtly suggest things.
One of these things you mentioned. Dante's attacks don't really suit a hero. That's because though he wants to change, his body fights like it always has since that's kept him alive. He's an ex-war "hero" who wants to leave his brutality behind him, but he just can't. His body isn't obeying him.
Another suggested thing is that Beatrice may not be his wife, since she might be a nun (yet more of Dante's sins coming up in the story). He corrupted her, and drove her from God to Lucifer.
Also, this is a game where you can define Dante how you want, since he doesn't speak often enough to really complete his personality. Yes he's the hero of the tale, but you choose how much of a hero he is through his actions. Early in the game, it is suggested that though Dante is a sinner, God still reaches out to give his blessings through Beatrice's cross' newfound powers. You choose then if Dante accepts this with Absolving or Damning, and leaving out the gameplay features about it, it allows you to choose what Dante really is. Is he caught up in his brutal past and tapping back into it for strength, or is he coming to terms with himself and accepting help when he falters. I know most players will ignore this in favor of skill sets, like with the paragon/renegade features in mass effect, but it really is a great way of defining the hero.

It really is about the fact that game respects enough to both figure out things on my own as well as form my own conclusions that draw me to it. Like with Portal and SotC, there is still my character's objective and the means in which he gets to it, but I'm allowed to select what I want to insert into the missing sections.

I'm not going to say that some things in the game don't annoy me, or that it is on par with those two great games, but it can't just be dismissed so casually. After all, I declared SotC to be the worst game I played the first time I got to sit down with it. Once I gave it a chance, I discovered I was dead wrong and that it was my favorite game.

 

[RickRoll]

Snip

Ok, I actually meant to explain that before I finished up, but well, forgot. It actually goes back to my mention of Shadow of the Colossus and Portal. You see, the game respects us enough to not say everything, and to subtly suggest things.
One of these things you mentioned. Dante's attacks don't really suit a hero. That's because though he wants to change, his body fights like it always has since that's kept him alive. He's an ex-war "hero" who wants to leave his brutality behind him, but he just can't. His body isn't obeying him.
Another suggested thing is that Beatrice may not be his wife, since she might be a nun (yet more of Dante's sins coming up in the story). He corrupted her, and drove her from God to Lucifer.
Also, this is a game where you can define Dante how you want, since he doesn't speak often enough to really complete his personality. Yes he's the hero of the tale, but you choose how much of a hero he is through his actions. Early in the game, it is suggested that though Dante is a sinner, God still reaches out to give his blessings through Beatrice's cross' newfound powers. You choose then if Dante accepts this with Absolving or Damning, and leaving out the gameplay features about it, it allows you to choose what Dante really is. Is he caught up in his brutal past and tapping back into it for strength, or is he coming to terms with himself and accepting help when he falters. I know most players will ignore this in favor of skill sets, like with the paragon/renegade features in mass effect, but it really is a great way of defining the hero.

It really is about the fact that game respects enough to both figure out things on my own as well as form my own conclusions that draw me to it. Like with Portal and SotC, there is still my character's objective and the means in which he gets to it, but I'm allowed to select what I want to insert into the missing sections.

I'm not going to say that some things in the game don't annoy me, or that it is on par with those two great games, but it can't just be dismissed so casually. After all, I declared SotC to be the worst game I played the first time I got to sit down with it. Once I gave it a chance, I discovered I was dead wrong and that it was my favorite game.

okay no, this game is terrible. i don't have to play it a second time; it'll just result me in hating it even more. I was going to be nice, but when you said something so dumb as Beatrice possibly being a nun, i simply couldn't. if Beatrice was a friggin' nun, she wouldn't be dressed in revealing clothes, wouldn't be mentioned as Dante's wife over and over again, and, most of all, wouldn't have sex with Dante, dummy!

Now about the whole bullshit of defining who Dante is as a sinful or holy person, the choices and effects of these choices are as bare-boned as they could possibly be. All that they do is cause you to get better with either the scythe or the cross....that's it.....nothing else whatsoever.....the lame developers didn't even bother putting multiple endings in the game. Not only that, but nobody comments on or changes there behavior towards you based on your actions, because, oh yeah, THERE IS NO ONE ELSE IN THE GAME OTHER THAN FRIGGIN' VIRGIL!

The whole absolve/punish thing is so incredibly lame and repetitive to do with every single goddamn enemy and makes absolutely no fucking sense at all, just like the killing of Death. How the fuck can you absolve Demonic creatures of the underworld? How the fuck does a horned demon that has giant wings and goes around torturing souls constantly even have the slimmest chance of getting into Heaven, especially since Demons almost certainly don't even really have souls to send to either region. Also, why the fuck would you want to absolve a crazy bastard that hates you and everything good and has been trying to rip your head off and eat your eyeballs for breakfast? i sure as shit don't, so i punished every last one of those asshats.

I suppose it makes a bit more sense with regards to those lame douches that you encounter every once in a while that you can send to heaven or stab your scythe into their head, but even so, the choice is so unbelievable bear minimum and unemotional to me that i really didn't give two shits for any of the fools i came across. the lame developers didn't even bother making them look different from one another or try to explain their crimes in a more interesting manner than just putting a little paragraph of text bellow them explaining their actions.

This brings me to probably the biggest problem in the game: i don't give a shit about ANYONE in this game. They all have the emotional range of a cabbage, and some even less than that (e.g. the souls that you can absolve or punish). The developers literally went for the absolute bear minimum when it came to character development and player choice and their half-assery is more obvious than Nicolas Cage's hair extensions.

 

[RoboMohawk]

I slightly enjoyed this game probably becuase I have never played God of war 1/2 or Devil May Cry or anything similar. I agree that they seem to have the "emotional range of a cabbage" but I usually tried to skip any cutscenes after the first 2-3.

I am tempted to hold onto this game for the Co-op DLC coming but I may just trade it in.
If you see this Rickroll, have you seen the in-game trailer for the DLC and what do you think?

 

[Gunner 51]

Spoiler

So what if it's a God of War style game, the X-box 360 hasn't had the privilege of having the God of War games. Besides, if having a God of War game was such anathema to you - why did you buy it to start off with? Especially if you'd already played the demo and didn't like it.

I can't say that I had any complaints with killing Death, I thought the fight was a lot of fun. Plus hearing him begging for mercy was kind of funny in my opinion.

Of course the story isn't going to be up to much, if you read the poem - it wouldn't actually make a very good game. We're talking "Press Y to listen to Virgil musing" territory here. The game only really came about because of the setting and the vivid descriptions of the demons. (Which were pretty frightening back when the poem was first penned, but now seem trope-a-licious by today's standards.)

Though to answer one of your questions on how Dante could die if he were already in Hell: The answer is relatively simple - Dante was already dead the minute the Saracen put the knife in his back. But in Hell, according to the poem - when you die, you get made anew to be tortured all over again.

While Dante's Inferno might not be the best game since the hook and wheel - it's certainly better than having than Big Rigs Racing.

I think it would be nice to have a God of War style game available on the 360, but one that is just stylized like it, not a blatant rip off of it. Dante's Inferno's only true original merit that it adds to the combat is the addition of that cross attack thing, which is kind of cool at first, but starts to get kinda of dull to use as the game progresses.

I'm not against games borrowing from other games or just being similar in other ways, but add something friggin' new to the mix! for example, the FPS's Half-Life 2, Bioshock, Fallout 3, and Halo all have the same basic layout of the player being some dude with a gun in the first person perspective that goes around shooting at guys and has the ability to crouch and jump and hold multiple weapons. However, each game not only just feels different and controls differently and has very different weaponry, but they also have other really interesting unique aspects:

Half-Life 2 has the gravity gun, great level design with well-placed enemies that are varied and unique from one another, amazing physics, and a simply incredible storyline.

Bioshock also has a simply incredible storyline, plasmids/gene tonics, a level design that has each level be a sort of living, breathing area with respawning enemies and tons of interesting ways to trick and kill them, and it of course has the awesome big daddies and creepy little sisters.

Fallout 3 is pretty much the first legitimate free-roaming FPS, it has pretty damn varied character customization and specialization, lots interesting characters to talk to, a great environment to explore and get lost in, and multiple different endings and choices.

Halo had a cool storyline in, well, just the first game IMO, but it also had the great implementation of meleeing, it put in duel wielding and boarding in the second and third game, it allowed players to throw grenades without switching weapons, it has awesome vehicles to drive, and really smart and challenging enemies to fight that each hold clear class distinctions.

Anyways, my point is that pretty much the only thing DI added to the GoW equation was the addition of the cross move and a new setting for the game to take place in, which was sadly half-ass designed. Not only that, but it subtracted the fluid and powerful feel that Kratos' blades of chaos had and instead put a sub-par mimicry of it instead.

Btw, i never bought DI; I only rented the piece of crap, because i just wanted to play it to prove to myself just how bad I knew it would be.

I cannot see the reason why people make such a fuss over the similarities between Dante's Inferno and God of War. So what if they are similar?

The setting, characters, story and hero's motivation in DI were different from God of War. The whole game may have had the same hack'n'slash mechanics, but it had a completely different engine and paint job. Which also didn't need improving IMO. (Well, if it ain't broke - don't fix it.)

Long story short, there's very little originality under the sun. Everything is either troped to death or is a "homage" or rehash of something else. Besides, to make an accurate and entertaining game out of Dante's Inferno would have been next to impossible to make.

Though I have to say that you have some rather valid points about games like Fallout 3.
Though much like you, I thought the crucifix attack sucked donkeys too.

 

[RickRoll]

Spoiler

So what if it's a God of War style game, the X-box 360 hasn't had the privilege of having the God of War games. Besides, if having a God of War game was such anathema to you - why did you buy it to start off with? Especially if you'd already played the demo and didn't like it.

I can't say that I had any complaints with killing Death, I thought the fight was a lot of fun. Plus hearing him begging for mercy was kind of funny in my opinion.

Of course the story isn't going to be up to much, if you read the poem - it wouldn't actually make a very good game. We're talking "Press Y to listen to Virgil musing" territory here. The game only really came about because of the setting and the vivid descriptions of the demons. (Which were pretty frightening back when the poem was first penned, but now seem trope-a-licious by today's standards.)

Though to answer one of your questions on how Dante could die if he were already in Hell: The answer is relatively simple - Dante was already dead the minute the Saracen put the knife in his back. But in Hell, according to the poem - when you die, you get made anew to be tortured all over again.

While Dante's Inferno might not be the best game since the hook and wheel - it's certainly better than having than Big Rigs Racing.

I think it would be nice to have a God of War style game available on the 360, but one that is just stylized like it, not a blatant rip off of it. Dante's Inferno's only true original merit that it adds to the combat is the addition of that cross attack thing, which is kind of cool at first, but starts to get kinda of dull to use as the game progresses.

I'm not against games borrowing from other games or just being similar in other ways, but add something friggin' new to the mix! for example, the FPS's Half-Life 2, Bioshock, Fallout 3, and Halo all have the same basic layout of the player being some dude with a gun in the first person perspective that goes around shooting at guys and has the ability to crouch and jump and hold multiple weapons. However, each game not only just feels different and controls differently and has very different weaponry, but they also have other really interesting unique aspects:

Half-Life 2 has the gravity gun, great level design with well-placed enemies that are varied and unique from one another, amazing physics, and a simply incredible storyline.

Bioshock also has a simply incredible storyline, plasmids/gene tonics, a level design that has each level be a sort of living, breathing area with respawning enemies and tons of interesting ways to trick and kill them, and it of course has the awesome big daddies and creepy little sisters.

Fallout 3 is pretty much the first legitimate free-roaming FPS, it has pretty damn varied character customization and specialization, lots interesting characters to talk to, a great environment to explore and get lost in, and multiple different endings and choices.

Halo had a cool storyline in, well, just the first game IMO, but it also had the great implementation of meleeing, it put in duel wielding and boarding in the second and third game, it allowed players to throw grenades without switching weapons, it has awesome vehicles to drive, and really smart and challenging enemies to fight that each hold clear class distinctions.

Anyways, my point is that pretty much the only thing DI added to the GoW equation was the addition of the cross move and a new setting for the game to take place in, which was sadly half-ass designed. Not only that, but it subtracted the fluid and powerful feel that Kratos' blades of chaos had and instead put a sub-par mimicry of it instead.

Btw, i never bought DI; I only rented the piece of crap, because i just wanted to play it to prove to myself just how bad I knew it would be.

I cannot see the reason why people make such a fuss over the similarities between Dante's Inferno and God of War. So what if they are similar?

The setting, characters, story and hero's motivation in DI were different from God of War. The whole game may have had the same hack'n'slash mechanics, but it had a completely different engine and paint job. Which also didn't need improving IMO. (Well, if it ain't broke - don't fix it.)

Long story short, there's very little originality under the sun. Everything is either troped to death or is a "homage" or rehash of something else. Besides, to make an accurate and entertaining game out of Dante's Inferno would have been next to impossible to make.

Though I have to say that you have some rather valid points about games like Fallout 3.
Though much like you, I thought the crucifix attack sucked donkeys too.

I would have much less fuss with Dante's Inferno if it was just a Mod of GoW, not a seperate game. Seriously, i have seen more custom content in Mods of games like Half-Life 2 than i've seen in DI compared to GoW.

Also, I'm seriously pissed off about how unscary they made hell by making Dante into a super macho killer that isn't afraid of anything, plus, there wasn't any terror in the atmosphere of any of the game's levels.

 

[Gunner 51]

Spoiler

So what if it's a God of War style game, the X-box 360 hasn't had the privilege of having the God of War games. Besides, if having a God of War game was such anathema to you - why did you buy it to start off with? Especially if you'd already played the demo and didn't like it.

I can't say that I had any complaints with killing Death, I thought the fight was a lot of fun. Plus hearing him begging for mercy was kind of funny in my opinion.

Of course the story isn't going to be up to much, if you read the poem - it wouldn't actually make a very good game. We're talking "Press Y to listen to Virgil musing" territory here. The game only really came about because of the setting and the vivid descriptions of the demons. (Which were pretty frightening back when the poem was first penned, but now seem trope-a-licious by today's standards.)

Though to answer one of your questions on how Dante could die if he were already in Hell: The answer is relatively simple - Dante was already dead the minute the Saracen put the knife in his back. But in Hell, according to the poem - when you die, you get made anew to be tortured all over again.

While Dante's Inferno might not be the best game since the hook and wheel - it's certainly better than having than Big Rigs Racing.

I think it would be nice to have a God of War style game available on the 360, but one that is just stylized like it, not a blatant rip off of it. Dante's Inferno's only true original merit that it adds to the combat is the addition of that cross attack thing, which is kind of cool at first, but starts to get kinda of dull to use as the game progresses.

I'm not against games borrowing from other games or just being similar in other ways, but add something friggin' new to the mix! for example, the FPS's Half-Life 2, Bioshock, Fallout 3, and Halo all have the same basic layout of the player being some dude with a gun in the first person perspective that goes around shooting at guys and has the ability to crouch and jump and hold multiple weapons. However, each game not only just feels different and controls differently and has very different weaponry, but they also have other really interesting unique aspects:

Half-Life 2 has the gravity gun, great level design with well-placed enemies that are varied and unique from one another, amazing physics, and a simply incredible storyline.

Bioshock also has a simply incredible storyline, plasmids/gene tonics, a level design that has each level be a sort of living, breathing area with respawning enemies and tons of interesting ways to trick and kill them, and it of course has the awesome big daddies and creepy little sisters.

Fallout 3 is pretty much the first legitimate free-roaming FPS, it has pretty damn varied character customization and specialization, lots interesting characters to talk to, a great environment to explore and get lost in, and multiple different endings and choices.

Halo had a cool storyline in, well, just the first game IMO, but it also had the great implementation of meleeing, it put in duel wielding and boarding in the second and third game, it allowed players to throw grenades without switching weapons, it has awesome vehicles to drive, and really smart and challenging enemies to fight that each hold clear class distinctions.

Anyways, my point is that pretty much the only thing DI added to the GoW equation was the addition of the cross move and a new setting for the game to take place in, which was sadly half-ass designed. Not only that, but it subtracted the fluid and powerful feel that Kratos' blades of chaos had and instead put a sub-par mimicry of it instead.

Btw, i never bought DI; I only rented the piece of crap, because i just wanted to play it to prove to myself just how bad I knew it would be.

I cannot see the reason why people make such a fuss over the similarities between Dante's Inferno and God of War. So what if they are similar?

The setting, characters, story and hero's motivation in DI were different from God of War. The whole game may have had the same hack'n'slash mechanics, but it had a completely different engine and paint job. Which also didn't need improving IMO. (Well, if it ain't broke - don't fix it.)

Long story short, there's very little originality under the sun. Everything is either troped to death or is a "homage" or rehash of something else. Besides, to make an accurate and entertaining game out of Dante's Inferno would have been next to impossible to make.

Though I have to say that you have some rather valid points about games like Fallout 3.
Though much like you, I thought the crucifix attack sucked donkeys too.

I would have much less fuss with Dante's Inferno if it was just a Mod of GoW, not a seperate game. Seriously, i have seen more custom content in Mods of games like Half-Life 2 than i've seen in DI compared to GoW.

Also, I'm seriously pissed off about how unscary they made hell by making Dante into a super macho killer that isn't afraid of anything, plus, there wasn't any terror in the atmosphere of any of the game's levels.

I think DI did try to be different from God of War. But it was all a little bit half-arsed, with the crucifix and the rudimentary moral choice system. (Which ultimately fell flat on it's face come the end.)

I suppose if Dante have his insane yet brave personality, he wouldn't have ventured into deepest Hell to find his beloved Beatrice. He'd have most likely stopped off at Lust / Gluttony, found a hidey-holey and murmur about how messed up it all is.

Though I always thought Hell (or at least the Christian interpretation of it) was all about punishment for one's sins committed in life rather than abject terror.

Come the end, I shall defer to most of what Yahtzee has said in his review of the game. (Which also begs the question of how they slipped it past Mr Atkinson - but I digress.) I suppose DI is OK if you want something to tie you over till God of War 3. (Even if DI is a guide on how not-to-do-GOW3.

 

[RickRoll]

Spoiler

So what if it's a God of War style game, the X-box 360 hasn't had the privilege of having the God of War games. Besides, if having a God of War game was such anathema to you - why did you buy it to start off with? Especially if you'd already played the demo and didn't like it.

I can't say that I had any complaints with killing Death, I thought the fight was a lot of fun. Plus hearing him begging for mercy was kind of funny in my opinion.

Of course the story isn't going to be up to much, if you read the poem - it wouldn't actually make a very good game. We're talking "Press Y to listen to Virgil musing" territory here. The game only really came about because of the setting and the vivid descriptions of the demons. (Which were pretty frightening back when the poem was first penned, but now seem trope-a-licious by today's standards.)

Though to answer one of your questions on how Dante could die if he were already in Hell: The answer is relatively simple - Dante was already dead the minute the Saracen put the knife in his back. But in Hell, according to the poem - when you die, you get made anew to be tortured all over again.

While Dante's Inferno might not be the best game since the hook and wheel - it's certainly better than having than Big Rigs Racing.

I think it would be nice to have a God of War style game available on the 360, but one that is just stylized like it, not a blatant rip off of it. Dante's Inferno's only true original merit that it adds to the combat is the addition of that cross attack thing, which is kind of cool at first, but starts to get kinda of dull to use as the game progresses.

I'm not against games borrowing from other games or just being similar in other ways, but add something friggin' new to the mix! for example, the FPS's Half-Life 2, Bioshock, Fallout 3, and Halo all have the same basic layout of the player being some dude with a gun in the first person perspective that goes around shooting at guys and has the ability to crouch and jump and hold multiple weapons. However, each game not only just feels different and controls differently and has very different weaponry, but they also have other really interesting unique aspects:

Half-Life 2 has the gravity gun, great level design with well-placed enemies that are varied and unique from one another, amazing physics, and a simply incredible storyline.

Bioshock also has a simply incredible storyline, plasmids/gene tonics, a level design that has each level be a sort of living, breathing area with respawning enemies and tons of interesting ways to trick and kill them, and it of course has the awesome big daddies and creepy little sisters.

Fallout 3 is pretty much the first legitimate free-roaming FPS, it has pretty damn varied character customization and specialization, lots interesting characters to talk to, a great environment to explore and get lost in, and multiple different endings and choices.

Halo had a cool storyline in, well, just the first game IMO, but it also had the great implementation of meleeing, it put in duel wielding and boarding in the second and third game, it allowed players to throw grenades without switching weapons, it has awesome vehicles to drive, and really smart and challenging enemies to fight that each hold clear class distinctions.

Anyways, my point is that pretty much the only thing DI added to the GoW equation was the addition of the cross move and a new setting for the game to take place in, which was sadly half-ass designed. Not only that, but it subtracted the fluid and powerful feel that Kratos' blades of chaos had and instead put a sub-par mimicry of it instead.

Btw, i never bought DI; I only rented the piece of crap, because i just wanted to play it to prove to myself just how bad I knew it would be.

I cannot see the reason why people make such a fuss over the similarities between Dante's Inferno and God of War. So what if they are similar?

The setting, characters, story and hero's motivation in DI were different from God of War. The whole game may have had the same hack'n'slash mechanics, but it had a completely different engine and paint job. Which also didn't need improving IMO. (Well, if it ain't broke - don't fix it.)

Long story short, there's very little originality under the sun. Everything is either troped to death or is a "homage" or rehash of something else. Besides, to make an accurate and entertaining game out of Dante's Inferno would have been next to impossible to make.

Though I have to say that you have some rather valid points about games like Fallout 3.
Though much like you, I thought the crucifix attack sucked donkeys too.

I would have much less fuss with Dante's Inferno if it was just a Mod of GoW, not a seperate game. Seriously, i have seen more custom content in Mods of games like Half-Life 2 than i've seen in DI compared to GoW.

Also, I'm seriously pissed off about how unscary they made hell by making Dante into a super macho killer that isn't afraid of anything, plus, there wasn't any terror in the atmosphere of any of the game's levels.

I think DI did try to be different from God of War. But it was all a little bit half-arsed, with the crucifix and the rudimentary moral choice system. (Which ultimately fell flat on it's face come the end.)

I suppose if Dante have his insane yet brave personality, he wouldn't have ventured into deepest Hell to find his beloved Beatrice. He'd have most likely stopped off at Lust / Gluttony, found a hidey-holey and murmur about how messed up it all is.

Though I always thought Hell (or at least the Christian interpretation of it) was all about punishment for one's sins committed in life rather than abject terror.

Come the end, I shall defer to most of what Yahtzee has said in his review of the game. (Which also begs the question of how they slipped it past Mr Atkinson - but I digress.) I suppose DI is OK if you want something to tie you over till God of War 3. (Even if DI is a guide on how not-to-do-GOW3.

well said; you made some good points there and i pretty much agree with everything you stated.

 

[Gunner 51]

Spoiler

So what if it's a God of War style game, the X-box 360 hasn't had the privilege of having the God of War games. Besides, if having a God of War game was such anathema to you - why did you buy it to start off with? Especially if you'd already played the demo and didn't like it.

I can't say that I had any complaints with killing Death, I thought the fight was a lot of fun. Plus hearing him begging for mercy was kind of funny in my opinion.

Of course the story isn't going to be up to much, if you read the poem - it wouldn't actually make a very good game. We're talking "Press Y to listen to Virgil musing" territory here. The game only really came about because of the setting and the vivid descriptions of the demons. (Which were pretty frightening back when the poem was first penned, but now seem trope-a-licious by today's standards.)

Though to answer one of your questions on how Dante could die if he were already in Hell: The answer is relatively simple - Dante was already dead the minute the Saracen put the knife in his back. But in Hell, according to the poem - when you die, you get made anew to be tortured all over again.

While Dante's Inferno might not be the best game since the hook and wheel - it's certainly better than having than Big Rigs Racing.

I think it would be nice to have a God of War style game available on the 360, but one that is just stylized like it, not a blatant rip off of it. Dante's Inferno's only true original merit that it adds to the combat is the addition of that cross attack thing, which is kind of cool at first, but starts to get kinda of dull to use as the game progresses.

I'm not against games borrowing from other games or just being similar in other ways, but add something friggin' new to the mix! for example, the FPS's Half-Life 2, Bioshock, Fallout 3, and Halo all have the same basic layout of the player being some dude with a gun in the first person perspective that goes around shooting at guys and has the ability to crouch and jump and hold multiple weapons. However, each game not only just feels different and controls differently and has very different weaponry, but they also have other really interesting unique aspects:

Half-Life 2 has the gravity gun, great level design with well-placed enemies that are varied and unique from one another, amazing physics, and a simply incredible storyline.

Bioshock also has a simply incredible storyline, plasmids/gene tonics, a level design that has each level be a sort of living, breathing area with respawning enemies and tons of interesting ways to trick and kill them, and it of course has the awesome big daddies and creepy little sisters.

Fallout 3 is pretty much the first legitimate free-roaming FPS, it has pretty damn varied character customization and specialization, lots interesting characters to talk to, a great environment to explore and get lost in, and multiple different endings and choices.

Halo had a cool storyline in, well, just the first game IMO, but it also had the great implementation of meleeing, it put in duel wielding and boarding in the second and third game, it allowed players to throw grenades without switching weapons, it has awesome vehicles to drive, and really smart and challenging enemies to fight that each hold clear class distinctions.

Anyways, my point is that pretty much the only thing DI added to the GoW equation was the addition of the cross move and a new setting for the game to take place in, which was sadly half-ass designed. Not only that, but it subtracted the fluid and powerful feel that Kratos' blades of chaos had and instead put a sub-par mimicry of it instead.

Btw, i never bought DI; I only rented the piece of crap, because i just wanted to play it to prove to myself just how bad I knew it would be.

I cannot see the reason why people make such a fuss over the similarities between Dante's Inferno and God of War. So what if they are similar?

The setting, characters, story and hero's motivation in DI were different from God of War. The whole game may have had the same hack'n'slash mechanics, but it had a completely different engine and paint job. Which also didn't need improving IMO. (Well, if it ain't broke - don't fix it.)

Long story short, there's very little originality under the sun. Everything is either troped to death or is a "homage" or rehash of something else. Besides, to make an accurate and entertaining game out of Dante's Inferno would have been next to impossible to make.

Though I have to say that you have some rather valid points about games like Fallout 3.
Though much like you, I thought the crucifix attack sucked donkeys too.

I would have much less fuss with Dante's Inferno if it was just a Mod of GoW, not a seperate game. Seriously, i have seen more custom content in Mods of games like Half-Life 2 than i've seen in DI compared to GoW.

Also, I'm seriously pissed off about how unscary they made hell by making Dante into a super macho killer that isn't afraid of anything, plus, there wasn't any terror in the atmosphere of any of the game's levels.

I think DI did try to be different from God of War. But it was all a little bit half-arsed, with the crucifix and the rudimentary moral choice system. (Which ultimately fell flat on it's face come the end.)

I suppose if Dante have his insane yet brave personality, he wouldn't have ventured into deepest Hell to find his beloved Beatrice. He'd have most likely stopped off at Lust / Gluttony, found a hidey-holey and murmur about how messed up it all is.

Though I always thought Hell (or at least the Christian interpretation of it) was all about punishment for one's sins committed in life rather than abject terror.

Come the end, I shall defer to most of what Yahtzee has said in his review of the game. (Which also begs the question of how they slipped it past Mr Atkinson - but I digress.) I suppose DI is OK if you want something to tie you over till God of War 3. (Even if DI is a guide on how not-to-do-GOW3.

well said; you made some good points there and i pretty much agree with everything you stated.

Agreed, sir. Still, I have to admit, I do envy you for being able to play the God of War games. I once played it around a chum's house and I couldn't put the game down for love nor money.

 

[RickRoll]

Spoiler

So what if it's a God of War style game, the X-box 360 hasn't had the privilege of having the God of War games. Besides, if having a God of War game was such anathema to you - why did you buy it to start off with? Especially if you'd already played the demo and didn't like it.

I can't say that I had any complaints with killing Death, I thought the fight was a lot of fun. Plus hearing him begging for mercy was kind of funny in my opinion.

Of course the story isn't going to be up to much, if you read the poem - it wouldn't actually make a very good game. We're talking "Press Y to listen to Virgil musing" territory here. The game only really came about because of the setting and the vivid descriptions of the demons. (Which were pretty frightening back when the poem was first penned, but now seem trope-a-licious by today's standards.)

Though to answer one of your questions on how Dante could die if he were already in Hell: The answer is relatively simple - Dante was already dead the minute the Saracen put the knife in his back. But in Hell, according to the poem - when you die, you get made anew to be tortured all over again.

While Dante's Inferno might not be the best game since the hook and wheel - it's certainly better than having than Big Rigs Racing.

I think it would be nice to have a God of War style game available on the 360, but one that is just stylized like it, not a blatant rip off of it. Dante's Inferno's only true original merit that it adds to the combat is the addition of that cross attack thing, which is kind of cool at first, but starts to get kinda of dull to use as the game progresses.

I'm not against games borrowing from other games or just being similar in other ways, but add something friggin' new to the mix! for example, the FPS's Half-Life 2, Bioshock, Fallout 3, and Halo all have the same basic layout of the player being some dude with a gun in the first person perspective that goes around shooting at guys and has the ability to crouch and jump and hold multiple weapons. However, each game not only just feels different and controls differently and has very different weaponry, but they also have other really interesting unique aspects:

Half-Life 2 has the gravity gun, great level design with well-placed enemies that are varied and unique from one another, amazing physics, and a simply incredible storyline.

Bioshock also has a simply incredible storyline, plasmids/gene tonics, a level design that has each level be a sort of living, breathing area with respawning enemies and tons of interesting ways to trick and kill them, and it of course has the awesome big daddies and creepy little sisters.

Fallout 3 is pretty much the first legitimate free-roaming FPS, it has pretty damn varied character customization and specialization, lots interesting characters to talk to, a great environment to explore and get lost in, and multiple different endings and choices.

Halo had a cool storyline in, well, just the first game IMO, but it also had the great implementation of meleeing, it put in duel wielding and boarding in the second and third game, it allowed players to throw grenades without switching weapons, it has awesome vehicles to drive, and really smart and challenging enemies to fight that each hold clear class distinctions.

Anyways, my point is that pretty much the only thing DI added to the GoW equation was the addition of the cross move and a new setting for the game to take place in, which was sadly half-ass designed. Not only that, but it subtracted the fluid and powerful feel that Kratos' blades of chaos had and instead put a sub-par mimicry of it instead.

Btw, i never bought DI; I only rented the piece of crap, because i just wanted to play it to prove to myself just how bad I knew it would be.

I cannot see the reason why people make such a fuss over the similarities between Dante's Inferno and God of War. So what if they are similar?

The setting, characters, story and hero's motivation in DI were different from God of War. The whole game may have had the same hack'n'slash mechanics, but it had a completely different engine and paint job. Which also didn't need improving IMO. (Well, if it ain't broke - don't fix it.)

Long story short, there's very little originality under the sun. Everything is either troped to death or is a "homage" or rehash of something else. Besides, to make an accurate and entertaining game out of Dante's Inferno would have been next to impossible to make.

Though I have to say that you have some rather valid points about games like Fallout 3.
Though much like you, I thought the crucifix attack sucked donkeys too.

I would have much less fuss with Dante's Inferno if it was just a Mod of GoW, not a seperate game. Seriously, i have seen more custom content in Mods of games like Half-Life 2 than i've seen in DI compared to GoW.

Also, I'm seriously pissed off about how unscary they made hell by making Dante into a super macho killer that isn't afraid of anything, plus, there wasn't any terror in the atmosphere of any of the game's levels.

I think DI did try to be different from God of War. But it was all a little bit half-arsed, with the crucifix and the rudimentary moral choice system. (Which ultimately fell flat on it's face come the end.)

I suppose if Dante have his insane yet brave personality, he wouldn't have ventured into deepest Hell to find his beloved Beatrice. He'd have most likely stopped off at Lust / Gluttony, found a hidey-holey and murmur about how messed up it all is.

Though I always thought Hell (or at least the Christian interpretation of it) was all about punishment for one's sins committed in life rather than abject terror.

Come the end, I shall defer to most of what Yahtzee has said in his review of the game. (Which also begs the question of how they slipped it past Mr Atkinson - but I digress.) I suppose DI is OK if you want something to tie you over till God of War 3. (Even if DI is a guide on how not-to-do-GOW3.

well said; you made some good points there and i pretty much agree with everything you stated.

Agreed, sir. Still, I have to admit, I do envy you for being able to play the God of War games. I once played it around a chum's house and I couldn't put the game down for love nor money.

actually, im in the same boat as you now; i only got to play when my friend lent my his Playstation 2 to me for the entire school year, because they were bored of it, and I borrowed the first two games from my other friend and beat them both. Unfortunately, my friend went off to college and wanted the PS2 back, and my other friend wanted his games back, so now I have neither a PS2 nor GoW 1 or 2.

 

[Gunner 51]

actually, im in the same boat as you now; i only got to play when my friend lent my his Playstation 2 to me for the entire school year, because they were bored of it, and I borrowed the first two games from my other friend and beat them both. Unfortunately, my friend went off to college and wanted the PS2 back, and my other friend wanted his games back, so now I have neither a PS2 nor GoW 1 or 2.

Woah, if only I had a chum like that. But you've played GoW 2 as well - I am envious of you, sir. Is GoW 2 better than the first by any chance? (I might grab a copy of it for a friend of mine - so long as her PS2 still works.)

 

[RickRoll]

actually, im in the same boat as you now; i only got to play when my friend lent my his Playstation 2 to me for the entire school year, because they were bored of it, and I borrowed the first two games from my other friend and beat them both. Unfortunately, my friend went off to college and wanted the PS2 back, and my other friend wanted his games back, so now I have neither a PS2 nor GoW 1 or 2.

Woah, if only I had a chum like that. But you've played GoW 2 as well - I am envious of you, sir. Is GoW 2 better than the first by any chance? (I might grab a copy of it for a friend of mine - so long as her PS2 still works.)

well, it technically is better than the first one simply because of all the new moves and enemies that it has in it, but that doesn't mean that you should just skip over GoW 1. GoW has an awesome storyline and just a great single-player adventure just like GoW 2 does. In other words, playing 2 would only give you half the experience.

 

[Gunner 51]

Well, it technically is better than the first one simply because of all the new moves and enemies that it has in it, but that doesn't mean that you should just skip over GoW 1. GoW has an awesome storyline and just a great single-player adventure just like GoW 2 does. In other words, playing 2 would only give you half the experience.

Ah cool, so it's a bit like watching Aliens before Alien. While both are great films, it's better to watch the first one to see the context and reasoning of the sequel.

Man, right now I'd give my left nut to play GoW 1+2 right now. I wonder if Cousin Kalem still has his PS2...

 

[RickRoll]

Well, it technically is better than the first one simply because of all the new moves and enemies that it has in it, but that doesn't mean that you should just skip over GoW 1. GoW has an awesome storyline and just a great single-player adventure just like GoW 2 does. In other words, playing 2 would only give you half the experience.

Ah cool, so it's a bit like watching Aliens before Alien. While both are great films, it's better to watch the first one to see the context and reasoning of the sequel.

Man, right now I'd give my left nut to play GoW 1+2 right now. I wonder if Cousin Kalem still has his PS2...

hahaha, good luck with that!

 

[Gunner 51]

Well, it technically is better than the first one simply because of all the new moves and enemies that it has in it, but that doesn't mean that you should just skip over GoW 1. GoW has an awesome storyline and just a great single-player adventure just like GoW 2 does. In other words, playing 2 would only give you half the experience.

Ah cool, so it's a bit like watching Aliens before Alien. While both are great films, it's better to watch the first one to see the context and reasoning of the sequel.

Man, right now I'd give my left nut to play GoW 1+2 right now. I wonder if Cousin Kalem still has his PS2...

hahaha, good luck with that!

He sold his PS2 for a PS3. Now I'm going to have to miss out on all that Greek goodness. Cue a big "nooooooooo" from me.

 

[pnkntndr]

Don't worry Gunner... They released GOW 1 and 2 together for the PS3.

I will start off by saying this game really irritated me. I thought it was boring and very repetitive. The voice actor for Dante got under my skin too. I hated the scene with Cleopatra after defeating Marc Antony, the lack of Any consequences for your actions, severely cheap ways you could die and the "cliffhanger" ending. I thought they got Lucifer spot on though. He creeped me out.

I played thee entire game, missed one Judas coin (so pissed), and felt like I waisted a part of my life. I also knew I wasn't going to like it because of the demo! Why did I rent it? I wanted to see what someone's vision of Hell was like. A lot of it, I felt, was disturbing. But that was cool. Hell freezes over? They actually did it... and it was quite brilliantly done!

Rick, you did say that this topic was for people to discuss how they felt about the game, right? Now you're going apeshit because they all had a difference of opinion from you. Strange, but isn't that what you asked for?

I did like their take on Charon, being the boat, not just the boatman. But if you're having so many problems with the story and it's background... Let me mock you,

"Whine, whine, they stole Charon and Cerberus from God of War!!"

Looks like they aren't just from Greek mythology, eh?

Come off it brother. I was not a fan of the game but your ranting(I read it all) just shows that you may need to put down the video games, until you're a big boy, and grow up.

 

[RickRoll]

Well, it technically is better than the first one simply because of all the new moves and enemies that it has in it, but that doesn't mean that you should just skip over GoW 1. GoW has an awesome storyline and just a great single-player adventure just like GoW 2 does. In other words, playing 2 would only give you half the experience.

Ah cool, so it's a bit like watching Aliens before Alien. While both are great films, it's better to watch the first one to see the context and reasoning of the sequel.

Man, right now I'd give my left nut to play GoW 1+2 right now. I wonder if Cousin Kalem still has his PS2...

hahaha, good luck with that!

He sold his PS2 for a PS3. Now I'm going to have to miss out on all that Greek goodness. Cue a big "nooooooooo" from me.

nooooooooooo

 

[Gunner 51]

Oh well, I suppose I shall have to make do with Bayonetta for my hacky-slashy action for now.