Bigeyez said:
So normally when sequels pop up we here cries of "milking", "beating a dead horse", and "same ole crap, different year", but when someone truly tries to make a sequel different and evolve a stagnant, aging franchise it's all of a sudden "too different" and "not Max Payne enough"...give me a break.
You know what makes a Max Payne game? The story and narration. Seeing as how we know next to nothing about either one of those right now it's far too early to go around crying about how the game is soooo different.
You know what made Max Payne unmistakably Max Payne? The atmosphere and the likable protagonist. It's one thing to make too many sequels of a game and drive a franchise into the ground, but to make something that doesn't even resemble a franchise and call it a sequel is a sin on a worse level.
Imagine Nintendo revealing a Mario game starring a character a main resembling Bruce Willis taking place in ancient China. Would this make sense? Of course not. It might even play like a proper Mario game, but it would feel wrong. The magic is lost.
There should at least be some feeling of familiarity with a sequel, otherwise it simply wouldn't count as one. It might be one of the most amazing gaming experiences, but it wouldn't be a Mario game.
To make matters worse, if this new style of Mario would get any popularity, any chance of bringing back the Mario people grew attached to over the years will be lost forever.
That is the feeling a lot of people had with Max. Sure, it's not as known a franchise as Mario, but it is a character we felt like we experienced quite a bit with. To see a different developer do whatever he likes with it has killed off our old Max. Chances are we are not going to see him again.
I'll give the game a chance, but the entire time playing I'll see him as Carl from the Aqua Teens. Not as Max.