It should come as no surprise the subject that got me to write this blog. DmC of course. But I'm not even going to talk about the actual game itself, instead I'm going to talk about the concept of a reboot (necessary or not) and why developers like Capcom are lying through their teeth.
Reboots have been used in all mediums as a way of reintroducing a formerly (or in some cases still currently) beloved concept. They can be a way to reinvigorate the creative processes of talented people looking to try new things in a new light, or simply breathe life into something that's been dying for a long time. Reboots are always initially met with scepticism and mixed reaction because many subscribe to the idea (especially in Devil May Cry's case) "if it's not broken, don't fix it" and question the need to reboot something.
The reaction to DmC caused Capcom to make the statement that they may revisit the older style of Devil May Cry that fans already knew and loved, but I submit to you that that's a load of bull. Why do I say that? Well simply because it would undermine the DmC reboot and confuse all the "new fans" Capcom rebooted the series to capture the attention of. Imagine that DmC comes out, and sells well. Then imagine that Capcom decides to throw the old fans a bone and they come out with Devil May Cry 5, complete with the Dante we loved from DMC4 and the technical brilliance of the classic DMC style combat, with the jovial and aloof attitude we so adore, that would be business suicide for them. Such a move would completely alienate the new fans that DmC made because the combat would revert to the allegedly "too difficult to get into" style that was apparently such a big barrier to begin with.
A game like the DMC5 that we older Devil May Cry fans want would be a turn off to the new fans; and since Capcom are going for that massive casual market and their dollars, they won't release a game that the new fans won't buy because it's "too hard" or "not serious enough" for the tastes of the new audience. I think it's safe to say, unless DmC flops really bad, that there will never be a DMC5 thanks to this reboot.
But it's not all gloom and doom for reboots. Look at the Mortal Kombat reboot. That was an incredibly well done game. Going back to the basics that fans originally loved (gee, who would have thought that making a game for the fans could pay off right?) proved to the best move for the Mortal Kombat franchise and I don't think anyone will miss the 3D fighter style that pretty much ruined the franchise. Still, I would love to see another adventure style Mortal Kombat like Shaolin Monks.
There's also the Tomb Raider reboot, which seems to have a much greater emphasis on character development and engaging the player into Lara's origins than standard gameplay elements that became too great a focus of the previous games to its detriment.
It's definitely not a stretch to say though that when reboots are generally successful (usually financially, but sometimes critically) that the previous stuff from which the reboot is based upon will never again see the light of day. In some cases this is a good thing, in some it's a bad thing. Sorry to say it DMC fans, Uncle Dante doesn't look to be coming back anytime soon.
Waiting a decade for new instalments in franchises as massive as Fallout and Elder Scrolls feels like a waste.
Microsoft have Obsidian but I feel it's Bethesda who just don't want to play ball as they've always said they want to do it themselves.
Once MS bought Zenimax in 2020 they should have put the Outer Worlds 2 on the back burner, allow Bethesda to finish off its own Space RPG with Starfield (despite totally different tone why have two in your first party portfolio with two developers who's gameplay is a tad similar) and got Obsidian for one of their projects to make a spiritual successor to New Vegas.
When the Elder Scrolls VI is finished Bethesda can then onto the main numbered Fallout 5 themselves.
The Outer Worlds 2 started development in 2019 so putting it on the back burner wouldn't have been the end of the world, they'd have always come back to it once Fallout was done and it would have been nicely spaced out from Starfields release once they had most likely stopped supporting it and all the expansions were released.
If they did this back in 2020 when they bought Zenimax and the game had a good, steady 4 - 5 years development, you might have seen it release in 2025.
We are literally going to be waiting until 2030 at the very earliest for Fallout 5 and all they seem bothered about is pushing Fallout 76.
Its not just only Todd not playing ball.
Obsidian have made a name for themselves in delivering stellar RPGs, but most famous once have always been sequels/spin-offs to borrowed IPs like KOTOR 2, Neverwinter Nights 2, Fallout: New Vegas, Stick of Truth etc.
Obsidian wants to invest more in their own original IPs like Outer Worlds or Pillars of Eternity with Avowed.
Similar to what Bluepoint & inXile wants to do or Kojima is doing (i.e not involving anymore in Konami's IPs).
So yea, even if New Vegas has the most votes from 3D Fallout fans, Obsidian just wants to do their own thing, like any aspiring dev studio and MS is likely currently respecting that.
But a future Fallout game from Obsidian will surely happen. Founder Feargus Urquhart has already stated an year ago that they're eager to make a new Fallout game with Bethesda, New Vegas 2 or otherwise. Urquhart was the director of the very first 1995's Fallout game after all.
And don't forget Brian Fargo and his studio inXile, as Brian Fargo was the director of Fallout's 1988 predecessor: Wasteland
Obsidian should take over the FO IP. They're do far better with it than Bethesda who hasn't made a great game for almost 15 years
"The Vancouver-based (Canada) indie games developer Blinkmoon Games are today very happy and proud to announce that their dark fantasy bullet heaven "Necromantic", is coming to PC via Steam Early Access in 2024." - Jonas Ek, TGG.
Athenian Rhapsody is a JRPG with a difference: alongside turn-based combat & exploration, you'll need to complete WarioWare-style microgames.
I see where you're coming from, and I thought you were going to touch on a recent worry of mine.
The biggest problem I have with these reboots is what happens if a reboot fails (i.e. commercial failure, publishers don't care if a game is great, only if it sells)? I think that means the franchise, in its entirety, is over. Some seem to think that DmC failing would open up Capcom's eyes to the devotion of their existing fan-base, but that won't happen. Capcom is a business. DmC failing would prove to Capcom that DmC, as a franchise, has no more potential to attract new customers or grow, and is therefore dead-weight. It will be effectively dead, its IP shelved and its more recognizable faces may be occasionally trotted out to add a hint of charm and fan-service to more successful franchises (or to attract die-hards to new ones).
This is why reboots make me increasingly nervous, especially when they're being trotted out somewhat carelessly like it's en vogue somehow. Once a reboot fails, corporate types will see that as a franchise that's failed and it will be severed like a gangrenous limb. And they wouldn't be wrong, most of the time. Why should they devote millions to a project that will only have less fanfare or audience than likely any previous release?
Basically, I wish people like Capcom would err on the side of caution before they commit to projects like DmC. Seriously, does anyone think Bionic Commando is coming back? What about the Blue Bomber after the inevitable Megaman reboot (which will almost assuredly flop if they try to appeal to mature/western audiences)?
They will slowly kill off any and all of their weight in franchise gold and then evaporate, but not before the damage is done.
Anoter great blog in order for a reboot of say game franchise it to be successful it needs the feedback, criticism of the fans of say franchise without it it will.fail
Kind of like the way comics do constantly. Starting comics over at 'issue #1' all of the time, or killing off characters, or changing things fundamentally in order to try and cater to people they want to try to attract to the book, rather than the constant fans whom they feel they can take for granted.
'F'em. They're going to buy it anyway. Let's go completely against their wishes and hope it gets those people over there to buy our product!'
That of course is the right of any company. But when those reboots fail, they shouldn't expect their old loyal fans to remain as loyal as they were before.
Tomb Raider Reboot initially had me interested, but now i see what it is. I won't be getting it myself.
Touching on DmC, DMC 4 could've been much, much improved. Capcom shot themselves in the foot, because they scrapped a lot of content.