Zero Punctuation: Dante's Inferno

[supergoon89]

lol, yahtzee ran out of breath- 1:40 - 1:45
i ROFLed...and actually rewinded the video just to hear it again...
"on his face"!..GASP!! "

kekekekeke

 

[tombom2117]

he referensed the rickroll box incident
yay

 

[supergoon89]

sorry, thats "he ran out of breath 2:40 - 2:45"

 

[shadow skill]

What are those elements though, and how then is it possible to say that it is the DMC formula given the fact that these games don't exist in some artificial vacuum that only you seem to know about? Even if we take what you said at face value it still makes no sense because these games all play very differently from DMC. With the except of DI the formulas of Bayonetta and God of War are distinct from DMC outside of the most general comparisons.

This is the first good question you asked me. Unfortunately (and I know this will sound like a cop out) I don't have the energy to isolate the specifics anymore. Besides, words aren't very good at conveying some things, the "feel" of a game is one such thing.

Suffice to say, if you've played Devil May Cry, Bayonetta (made by the DMC creators), God of War, and Dante's Inferno, you will notice a very specific isometric perspective, pacing, and interactivity mechanism involving combo chains and enemy dispatching, that is quite unique from your earlier example [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDK02S1tryo].

Besides, even if you did manage to find a game that pre-dated Devil May Cry and had enough characteristics involved that I believed it passed, why do you think I would have any reason to care? All I was saying is, "hey, these kinds of games are becoming derivative, I wish the developers would innovate a bit more." If you found an earlier game, what does that change? I'm still bored of it.

Even though I don't care, I wouldn't even be wrong as pertains to mentioning DMC as being the "first," because the context of the message did not include any earlier games. I could very well be meaning the first of only two games (God of War and Devil May Cry) because those are the only two that were mentioned when I said that.

I don't nessecarily care but I would say that your definition is rather weak. Gekido probably fits the bill depending on just which DMC you are talking about. I would continue saying that even if one was to accept your criteria you run face first into the fact that so many other games share boatloads of similarity to even the first DMC that your own logic cancels itself out; because the distinction is rendered meaningless, due to all of the other elements these games have in common with those other games. The way in which you try to distinguish these games flows in the opposite direction as well, with no trouble.

It's like the debate some people have about the difference between science fiction and fantasy. Or more appropriately the distinctness of Fantasy from Science-Fiction. When considered logically there really is no reasonable argument that can be made for fantasy being distinct from science fiction. Or at least I have yet to hear it.

In order for them to be distinct from each other one has to do more than say that within the context of the story in question the events are plausible based on the laws of that world. What such an idea really says is that if the author decides to explain it, it is not "magic" and therefore not "Fantasy." That isn't much of a distinction really, at the end of the day Fantasy is really just a type of "soft" science fiction.

Or for a slightly less verbose example the difference between a god and an alien is absolutely nothing. Gods, especially the more abstract variety, are by their very nature alien; regardless of whether there is a distinction made between physical and non physical.

 

[geldonyetich]

I don't nessecarily care but I would say that your definition is rather weak. Gekido probably fits the bill depending on just which DMC you are talking about. I would probably continue that even if one was to accept your criteria you run face first into the fact that so many other games share boatloads of similarity to even the first DMC that your own logic cancels itself out because the distinction is rendered meaningless due to all of the other elements in common with those other games. The way in which you try to distinguish these games flows in the opposite direction as well with no trouble.

That would make a lot of sense if it weren't being framed against a completely imaginary context of an argument that's not happening.

It's like the debate some people have about the difference between science fiction and fantasy. Or more appropriately the distinctness of Fantasy from Science-Fiction. When considered logically there really is no reasonable argument that can be made for fantasy being distinct from science fiction. Or at least I have yet to hear it.

In order for them to be distinct from each other one has to do more than say that within the context of the story in question the events are plausible based on the laws of that world. What such an idea really says is that if the author decides to explain it, it is not "magic" and therefore not "Fantasy." That isn't much of a distinction really, at the end of the day Fantasy is really just a type of "soft" science fiction.

Or for a slightly less verbose example the difference between a god and an alien is absolutely nothing. Gods, especially the more abstract variety, are by their very nature alien; regardless of whether there is a distinction made between physical and non physical.

Well, you're still hung up on "genre," which is something I was never that hung up on considering how little it matters to the actual point I was trying to make... but now you're actually disproving what you said earlier:

If you can't distinguish Fantasy from Science-Fiction, yet the two exist as popular genres, what's so wrong with my distinguishing games that are similar to Devil May Cry, Heavenly Sword, Bayonetta, God of War, Prince of Persia, ect as being a type of unnamed genre with specific characteristics in which I am bored?

In other words, earlier you said:

A. Genre can be used in the way you have used it.
B. The assertion that DMC did the genre first, is factually incorrect Because of A.

And while I don't agree with the truth of these premises, I would like to point out that what you just said is the opposite of what you're saying here. Because genre can be used in whatever way you see fit, an assertion that any body of works belonging to a genre is unable to be determined to be factually incorrect because of A.

Ah, who am I kidding? I'm taking you off ignore. Young Grasshopper does cause his ill-adjusted sensei much frustration, but this is merely the inquiring mind of youth.

 

[shadow skill]

I don't nessecarily care but I would say that your definition is rather weak. Gekido probably fits the bill depending on just which DMC you are talking about. I would probably continue that even if one was to accept your criteria you run face first into the fact that so many other games share boatloads of similarity to even the first DMC that your own logic cancels itself out because the distinction is rendered meaningless due to all of the other elements in common with those other games. The way in which you try to distinguish these games flows in the opposite direction as well with no trouble.

That would make a lot of sense if it weren't being framed against a completely imaginary context of an argument that's not happening.

But it is happening, all I'm doing is deconstructing the logic (argument) you are using here. Though yes there is no confrontation or debate persay. You already presented your argument by posting as you have. The only thing I have been trying to point out is the flaw in your reasoning. (Argument.)

 

[geldonyetich]

But it is happening, all I'm doing is deconstructing the logic (argument) you are using here. Though yes there is no confrontation or debate persay. You already presented your argument by posting as you have. The only thing I have been trying to point out is the flaw in your reasoning. (Argument.)

No, young grasshopper, you are deconstructing the logic (argument) that you are imagining.

Sensei only wishes to express he is bored with games similar to God of War and Devil May Cry, and consequently that he wishes developers would innovate more.

Anything else you think is going on here, such as the importance of "genre" or "first", is but an illusion you have wrought for yourself.

What, then, could you hope to accomplish? Would you like to attempt to disprove I am not bored with what I am bored with?

Actually, I suppose I was having an argument. It wasn't with you, however. It wasn't about games or definitions of words, per se. It was specifically with our failure to communicate. As I've yet to win this argument, I can only assume we're still failing to communicate.

 

[shadow skill]

I don't nessecarily care but I would say that your definition is rather weak. Gekido probably fits the bill depending on just which DMC you are talking about. I would probably continue that even if one was to accept your criteria you run face first into the fact that so many other games share boatloads of similarity to even the first DMC that your own logic cancels itself out because the distinction is rendered meaningless due to all of the other elements in common with those other games. The way in which you try to distinguish these games flows in the opposite direction as well with no trouble.

That would make a lot of sense if it weren't being framed against a completely imaginary context of an argument that's not happening.

It's like the debate some people have about the difference between science fiction and fantasy. Or more appropriately the distinctness of Fantasy from Science-Fiction. When considered logically there really is no reasonable argument that can be made for fantasy being distinct from science fiction. Or at least I have yet to hear it.

In order for them to be distinct from each other one has to do more than say that within the context of the story in question the events are plausible based on the laws of that world. What such an idea really says is that if the author decides to explain it, it is not "magic" and therefore not "Fantasy." That isn't much of a distinction really, at the end of the day Fantasy is really just a type of "soft" science fiction.

Or for a slightly less verbose example the difference between a god and an alien is absolutely nothing. Gods, especially the more abstract variety, are by their very nature alien; regardless of whether there is a distinction made between physical and non physical.

Well, you're still hung up on "genre," which is something I was never that hung up on considering how little it matters to the actual point I was trying to make... but now you're actually disproving what you said earlier:

If you can't distinguish Fantasy from Science-Fiction, yet the two exist as popular genres, what's so wrong with my distinguishing games that are similar to Devil May Cry, Heavenly Sword, Bayonetta, God of War, Prince of Persia, ect as being a type of unnamed genre with specific characteristics in which I am bored?

In other words, earlier you said:

A. Genre can be used in the way you have used it.
B. The assertion that DMC did the genre first, is factually incorrect Because of A.

And while I don't agree with the truth of these premises, I would like to point out that what you just said is the opposite of what you're saying here. Because genre can be used in whatever way you see fit, an assertion that any body of works belonging to a genre is unable to be determined to be factually incorrect because of A.

Ah, who am I kidding? I'm taking you off ignore. Young Grasshopper does cause his ill-adjusted sensei much frustration, but this is merely the inquiring mind of youth.

Uhh no. Simply put no. You can't just say something belongs to a given class without actually defining what that class is, that is why B is factually untrue because of A. A. is a classification, you can't say something belongs to a given classification without ever saying what it is or why this is the case. Not when there is already a class for those given items. Your assertion doesn't become relevant until you actually define what is, nor does it solve the problem of C. If C is left unanswered then B. cannot be said to be the first to do anything. (B is the given genre that DMC belongs to. DMC already has a genre and you have to explain what makes it distinct from it's given genre. Which you have done now.)

 

[geldonyetich]

Uhh no. Simply put no. You can't just say something belongs to a given class without actually defining what that class is, that is why B is factually untrue because of A.

Not true.

You can say something belongs to any class. When you define the rules of that class, you define the class, true. However, the arbitrary definition of the rules is why you can include anything you want.

For example, when I used the word "genre" originally [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/6.176837.5110383], the context in which I used the word only included one defined rule:
A) Include God of War, Devil May Cry, and (via the thread topic) Dante's Inferno.

There is no rule suggesting any other game is included. At least until I added an edit, which even better defined it was being specifically A and only A.

The genre's name was undefined. It is assumed the reader isn't so thick as to require a concept has a label to conceptualize it. You can call it "temporary genre A" if you prefer.

This is the power, and the uselessness, of a mere label - of which "genre" in terms how you're using it certainly is.

You decided I was implying "Beat'Em'Ups." I said no such thing. Thus, you tricked yourself. Though I've been opening my mouth, all I was doing was clarifying. There was no argument to be had except for the argument you created when you misinterpreted the use of a word. All I've been is a sounding board for the argument you've been having with yourself.

Granted, I have been a rather relentless sounding board. >:] Out of my own frustration with my failure to communicate to you the madness you've been propagating, I lost my temper more than once, and no doubt this fueled the fire.

Funny how human nature works.

 

[shadow skill]

Except that isn't what you said. What you said is that you are getting tired of the Devil May cry formula which isn't the same as saying that the gameplay of Dante's Inferno seems derivative in light of the existence of many Devil May Cry/God of War type games. You are actually changing the argument. Factually the God of War/Devil May Cry comparisons end at their being in the same genre and therefore possessing certain similarities. Anything beyond that would be like saying Blazblue is a Street Fighter clone because you punch, kick, throw, and shoot projectiles in both games.

Yes in fact it does change the argument because what you argue originally is that you are bored of Devil May Cry mechanics. You then proceed to change your argument to "I am tired of the genre itself."

It's the difference between saying that you are bored with the Lord of the Rings formula, vs. being bored with the fantasy genre itself. One implies boredom with items that seem to be derived from the tropes that Lord of the Rings created whereas the other says that you are bored of the tropes that make a given work a part of the genre itself.

I said this a whole page ago that saying you are bored of the DMC formula is not the same thing as saying you are bored with the genre itself. I also said later on that you shouldn't start belittling people while changing your argument from a very specific type of boredom to a more general one.


Furthermore you are trying to say now rather magically that you can make up a new class and not tell anyone you did and somehow everyone else is supposed to simply ignore the given classification that is already accepted. If you say DMC did the genre first, it is not in any way the same as saying that DMC created a new genre which these games are all a part of. Doing the genre first implies that it was the first to do what it does which it simply is not the case given the known category to which DMC belongs. If DMC didn't already have a known category the first statement would be perfectly fine by the way.

The two statements and the two arguments are markedly different from one another.

If you are going to be putting down people whether it be on the internet or elsewhere you should make sure what you say actually makes sense. Consider your words more carefully. The definition and how a word may be used is not the same as the logical construction created with a word.

 

[geldonyetich]

I said this a whole page ago [blah blah]

Very good! Now would you like to go and re-read the replies to those statements you made?

Perhaps you will understand why both passages you've just quoted are so mind-bogglingly deluded.

If you are going to be putting down people whether it be on the internet or elsewhere you should make sure what you say actually makes sense.

I'm going to continue to put you down while you frustrate me with your inability to communicate because this inability is, as far as I'm concerned, the initial put down.

Basically, that last post of yours made me think, "oh, God, I thought I was making progress -- now, it seems he's regressing."

Maybe repetition will help:

No, young grasshopper, you are deconstructing the logic (argument) that you are imagining.

Sensei only wishes to express he is bored with games similar to God of War and Devil May Cry, and consequently that he wishes developers would innovate more.

Anything else you think is going on here, such as the importance of "genre" or "first", is but an illusion you have wrought for yourself.

I dearly suspect this conversation of ours is a preview of a circle of Hell I'm destined for. Though, considering it tends to make up the majority of human interaction on forums, that seems sort of redundant.

 

[shadow skill]

I'm not worried you know you seem to only be capable of belittling people and inventing rules that nobody else knows about that make it safe for you to ignore whatever else is going on in the world outside of your own mind. While you ***** and moan about other people being deluded you demonstrate an inability to understand why it doesn't look good to go around making fun of people while your arguments change into forms that make no more sense than the previous one. You seem to think that if you just invent a genre in your head don't explain it until a page and a half after being asked on multiple occasions to actually define the elements that make all of these things a new genre that you have any business telling anyone to get perspective on anything.

 

[Lord Frunkamunch]

oh christ, it's turned into a debate club circle jerk.

you all lose. go to bed.

 

[geldonyetich]

I'm not worried you know you seem to only be capable of belittling people and inventing rules that nobody else knows about that make it safe for you to ignore whatever else is going on in the world outside of your own mind.

Ah, the irony that this should come from a fellow who's largely been arguing with the phantoms of his mind the whole time.

It's true I may have been behaving overtly belittling at times, but your youthful self-delusion runs so deep that you're subtly belittling the entire world with the certainty you apply in defining the undefinable. I like to think that my approach is, at least, honest.

Congratulations, you're a modern thinker. A modern thinker of the worst type, perhaps - one who is only capable of seeing what he wants to see and who then actively insists on the truth of what he is imagining - but your certainty establishes you as a modern thinker nonetheless.

Get back to me when you've reached postmodern thinking. I'm certain you'll reach there eventually. This little chat of ours has been much like speaking to a younger self of mine, eager to build a life interface of pure intellectualism and absolute right - long before understanding such a thing is little more than a cage that distances one from the truth. Life does not operate by the rules of a single perspective.

Your immaturity remains your undoing in this conversation, but it's an easily solved problem: you will age and, provided you do actively seek truth where you can find it, undoubtedly wisdom will come. So, what's my excuse for holding up this end of this fruitless waste of time that has been our conversation? Perhaps I too am still a bit immature, but I suspect I have no good excuse, just an irrational compulsion to try to correct those who misunderstand me.

oh christ, it's turned into a debate club circle jerk.

you all lose. go to bed.

Less a circle jerk and more pounding my head against concrete for lack adequate motivations to find a better way to spend the day, I'm afraid.

You're right that the only way to win is not to play.

 

[Big-T]

The game is actually not horrible to play, just a SUPER MASSIVE rip off of God of war.

like seriously, did NO ONE at EA think that they were copying it just a little too much??

 

[TheRocketeer]

Did anyone else find the graphic for the 'Sunday clock' funny?

I mean, he totally forgot to put 'Church' on it! How embarrassing!

 

[Wounded Melody]

How can one so pretty as Yahtzee not find a nice young person to provide all his sexual stimulation for him?

Come back to the US Yahtzee, I'll take care of your manly needs <3

 

[Candlejack DANZA]

Maybe it's because I've never played GoW but I loved Dantes Inferno. I hope it sells well, their marketing scheme alone warranted my buy and the game was worth it.

The game is actually not horrible to play, just a SUPER MASSIVE rip off of God of war.

like seriously, did NO ONE at EA think that they were copying it just a little too much??

You answered your own question: EA

 

[epic_ellen]

Does Yahtzee alternate hands every day of the week?

Don't you?

 

[incognito_me]

Here's my 2 cents.

Geldon was simply generalizing specific attributes of said games, because they have indeed become a staple of what is loosely defined as said genre. Or atleast, said elements play a heavy role in said titles (combos, chains, upgrading, etc.) Thus, said elements are becoming boring and said genre (or atleast, what the next-gen era has decided is the said genre based on these attributes) needs to step it up and integrate more into said genre, to make it seem less like other games in the same said genre.

Just because something is tried, tested, and proven, does not mean it will not eventually get boring and repetitive.

More elements mean more to do other than the tried and tested. Thus, he generalizes that said genre is getting boring because it refuses to integrate more than what already "works" and is "perfected". Perhaps the DMC comment was made because DMC popularized these elements, did come first when it comes to the generalized criteria, and now everyone who makes said genre game, usually follows rather the DMC or the GoW criteria without doing much else with it.