My basic attitude is that gamers, as the ones paying, ARE entitled in a very genuine sense. Fans of a franchise are likewise entitled to specific expectations being met as that franchise is continued.
I think a big problem is that the gaming industry increasingly wants to "dial it in" and get upset when it doesn't work, one of the reasons so many gaming companies are fleeing to the "casual space" of "i" devices and their ilk where there is at the moment little expectation other than the constant production of shovelware, and where something of a little higher quality than the rest of the garbage stands out more simply because of the overall lack of competition.
Add to that incredibly greedy marketing, something that is even affecting "app space" now that bigger companies are going there (wanting microtransactions increasingly placed in the apps you pay to download), with companies expecting constant, monster, profits for very little in the way of actual work, and you see the problem.
I think games like DMC and the reaction they get is due to the over-franchsing of the game industry. The trend where to try and maximize profits, all game companies want to do is add a new subtile or 1 higher number increment to existing IPs to try and keep selling to the same fan base. Combined with their other tendencies you basically see them trying to shoehorn what they feel like developing into a franchise, rather than creating new games conceived entirely for that franchise and continueing it, or taking the risk at launching new IPs.
For example with "Dragon Age 2" the thought processes were probably along the lines of looking at how popular action RPGs were, especially with the casual audience (many of whom think they are hardcore or serious gamers, but actually aren't, but that's another discussion entirely), along with the praise for Bioware's cinematics and storytelling. Not to mention the plans at the time for "Kingdom of Amalur" and a few other projects which were getting big hype. EA as a publisher probably told Bioware to create a brawler-style action-RPG, add in better cinematics, and then slap a "Dragon Age" label and art style/writing onto it and claim it's a sequel to get a built in audience. Trying to double up on what they projected for Amalur (which they put on Origin and such).
The results of course were to enrage fans because "Dragon Age" was supposed to be a spiritual successor to "Baldur's Gate" (a real time/turn based hybrid based on stats) and specifically stand out as a counterpoint to action RPGs. Not to mention the overall quality of the game with constantly re-used enviroments and such, and a really pained script that made one wonder if Bioware even remembered what they did in their first game, or if they were basically writing it based on someone else's notes without really remembering it.
The same could apply to DMC, create what amounts to a new Brawler with more simplistic mechanics to make it more playable by casuals who think they are hardcore, create a "cool" protaganist that fits with modern youth sensibilities, and then brand it with an existing franchise to get those fans involved, because they will buy anything with a label attached (which is why they try and make everything possible into a sequel).
Such are my thoughts. They basically try and treat customers like mindless sheep, because to be honest we as a group tend to be, but fail to realize that eventually the collective herd starts to wake up, and nobody likes being exploited and treated this way, not to mention the bottom line is we want our moneys worth and what we pay for, and not to be constantly gouged for a product we've already bought (or be told we don't own what we paid for). Now we're seeing a lot of QQing and attacks because a gaming industry that got complacent with it's exploitation is being forced to change and actually start really working again.
