Not Finishing Devil's Third Was Never An Option

Not Finishing Devil's Third Was Never an Option

While it seems somewhat unclear as to who is publishing Ninja Gaiden creator Tomonobu Itagaki's latest game, Devil's Third in the West, the game will definitely be out in Japan next month. Thank goodness.

After its initial announcement in 2010, Devil's Third was dropped by its publisher, THQ. After seemingly getting locked in development limbo for the longest time, the game resurfaced during last year's E3 as a Wii U exclusive. Asked how he was able to persevere for so long in an interview with Weekly Famitsu, Itagaki replied, "If I gave up, I wouldn't be able to face the people who had supported me until then. I'd never be able to work in this industry again."

Itagaki expressed his heartfelt gratitude to the fans whose support had kept him going on to complete his game. "It's not only because of Nintendo and other game industry people involved, but because the fans had been waiting expectedly for so long." Itagaki said. "I didn't want to be the sort of person to turn his back on them."

Not Finishing Devil's Third Was Never an Option

Devil's Third consists of a full solo campaign and a multiplayer mode where up to 16 players will fight for dominance over a North America that has been split into 13 regions. According to Itagaki, the game is the product of everything he has learned as a game developer until now. "It's got so much in it, I've made it so both its solo mode and multiplayer mode each have enough to stand on their own as individual games." Itagaki said. "As a result, I've ended up keeping everyone waiting, but at last it's shaped into something people can play, so once the game is out, let's play it together."

Devil's Third is scheduled for release on the Wii U in Japan on August 4, and Europe on August 28. At present, the Western release is still TBD.


Comments

    ...if you haven't already I would go on google and read some of the previews for this game. It is genuinely looking like one of the worst games Nintendo has ever published.

      That's why Nintendo backed away from it at e3, they couldn't drag the game up to their standards.

      I have a remaining sliver of hope that the multiplayer is fun, it IS whacky, but the campaign is looking horrendous from the previews.

      But at least they're taking risks, right? Bayonetta was worth this.

      I don't believe most people have the requisite skills to actually determine whether or not a game is the worst a publisher has released prior to release, mostly due to the complex nature of games and the oversimplification of the craft and experience by fans coupled with an unhealthy level of certainty in their uneducated perspectives.

      Last edited 16/07/15 5:27 pm

        Sure.

        Agreed. This culture of pseudo-review WITHOUT actually having a hands on experience with the product is grating.

          Eurogamer DO have hands on experience with the game and yeah... it sounds like a steaming turd.

          http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-07-15-devils-third-is-a-terrible-game-but-can-it-be-so-bad-its-good

          Have you ever pondered over the question of what would happen if Tomonobu Itagaki made a mash-up of Ninja Gaiden and Modern Warfare-era Call of Duty, most likely while drunk and working on a PlayStation 2 devkit with a fiver and a pocketful of loose change to bring it all home? Boy does Devil's Third have the answer for you.

            That preview piece was one of the worst pieces of games "journalism" I have ever come across.

            The first paragraph opens up with the long development time being an indicator of poor quality.

            Really? By that token, the development time and scrapped versions of Resident Evil 4 should *indicate* it was a terrible game.

            Secondly, the "journalist" uses the technique of "have you ever wondered...".

            Well, no. I have never wondered any of those questions. They're leading statements designed to head back to a forgone conclusion.

            Look, if you want to base YOUR opinions on someone ELSES viewpoints, thats fine. But don't attempt to pass of SECOND HAND information as FACT. It's this completely ludicrous scenario of half baked ideas being echo chambered that is killing competent discussion and criticism.

            Last edited 17/07/15 2:36 pm

              The first paragraph opens up with the long development time being an indicator of poor quality.

              It doesn't suggest the long development time indicates poor quality, it suggests the long development time indicates a troubled development process. THAT, may in turn, indicate poor quality. Yeah, you could pick Resident Evil 4 as an example where prolonged development turned out for the best. Or you could have picked Duke Nukem Forever. But feel free to pick and choose whichever example best suits your preferred conclusion. The journalist's opinion of the game is not based on its development time but on the time that he has spent playing it himself. Which I suspect is a lot more than both you and I put together.

              Secondly, the "journalist" uses the technique of "have you ever wondered...". Well, no. I have never wondered any of those questions. They're leading statements designed to head back to a forgone conclusion.

              So you're not familiar with what a rhetorical question is? A simple definition from wikipedia: "A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question that is asked in order to make a point rather than to elicit an answer"

              But don't attempt to pass of SECOND HAND information as FACT

              It's not second hand information. The guy writing the article has played the game. It is first hand information. As far as my own post goes, I never expressed any opinion about the game itself, just referred to an opinion expressed by somebody who has actually played it.

              Last edited 17/07/15 2:50 pm

                Eurogamer DO have hands on experience with the game and yeah... it sounds like a steaming turd.

                Where in the review does it state the game is a "steaming turd"? I didn't come across that. The only thing drawn from the article is that the "reviewer" has played the game for a few hours. It is akin to judging a television series by viewing a few episodes.

                "A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question that is asked in order to make a pointrather than to elicit an answer"

                This is in line with my view that:

                "They're leading statements designed to head back to a forgone conclusion."

                Yeah, you could pick Resident Evil 4 as an example where prolonged development turned out for the best. Or you could have picked Duke Nukem Forever. But feel free to pick and choose whichever example best suits your preferred conclusion

                That's right, it's an arbitrary example. It renders the first paragraph useless as a critical device.

                It's not second hand information. The guy writing the article has played the game.

                He has played it. You have not. Which renders your "sounds like a steaming turd comment" second hand knowledge of the matter.

                  I never claimed the article stated the game is a steaming turd. I said that based on reading the article, the game sounds like a steaming turd. Playing a few hours of the game is probably enough to draw a preliminary assessment of its quality, which is what that article is - preliminary hands-on impressions of a few hours with the game, not a full review.

                  combat is clumsy, and the free-roaming camera disappears behind walls and refuses to stay focused on the action. Gunplay is no better either. Sights lurch around messily as the frame-rate stutters, hit detection feels wayward, and the arsenal prattles along with an almost apologetic whimper. Back this up with up with set-pieces that never go beyond limp arena shoot-outs and corridor crawls - not to mention boss-fights that introduce zero strategy - and you've a recipe for the purest sort of apathy from any player. There's little depth to the combat, no spark to the encounters and it's all mesmerisingly dumb.

                  So that's his impression based on however many hours he played it for. Is it possible the game will get dramatically better in its later hours? Perhaps. But how many times have you seen that happen? Those kind of technical and mechanical issues tend to be present across the duration of a game. Potentially the boss fights and set pieces could get better, as they're more to do with level design - some levels might be better than others. But it's unlikely a bad frame rate or dodgy hit detection etc are suddenly going to be better in some later part of the game.

                  I never claimed to express any kind of knowledge or opinion on the game, second hand or otherwise. I said it "sounds like a steaming turd", in reference to tone of the article I linked to. Reading that article, the game does, indeed, sound like a steaming turd.

                  A rehtorical question is not a "leading statement designed to head back to a forgone conclusion", it's a statement phrased in the form of a question and is extremely common across many different kinds of writing. In this case, it's equivalent to the writer saying something like "This feels like Tomonobu Itagaki made a mash-up of Ninja Gaiden and Modern Warfare-era Call of Duty, most likely while drunk and working on a PlayStation 2 devkit with a fiver and a pocketful of loose change to bring it all home".

                  I don't know what your involvement is for you to be getting so defensive about this game... if you're a shareholder in the developer of the game or have some other kind of vested interest in it doing well or something I might understand it. Otherwise you'd do better to take up your issues with writer of that article (and numerous others like it that have appeared in recent times) - he's the one with the opinion.

                As per below:

                "I said that based on reading the article, the game sounds like a steaming turd."

                Which part of "second hand" information are you having trouble with comprehending?

                Is it possible the game will get dramatically better in its later hours? Perhaps. But how many times have you seen that happen?

                I am not sure what the refinement of other, unnamed games in the development cycle have to do with this title.

                I don't know what your involvement is for you to be getting so defensive about this game...

                I don't have any vested interest in the title. I have an issue with people, especially in the gaming community, whoo mindlessly echo chamber other reviews/opinions without experiencing the product for themselves.

                he's the one with the opinion.

                *Echo*

                Last edited 17/07/15 6:46 pm

                  Echoing the opinion of the article would be if he'd said "This game is a steaming turd", but he didn't, he said "It sounds like this game is a steaming turd". The words 'it sounds like' aren't there for decorative purposes, they fundamentally alter the meaning of the sentence.

                  He didn't pass off anything as fact, second hand or otherwise, and he didn't echo anyone else's opinion. He expressed his own opinion on what the conclusion of the article seems to be.

                @zombiejesus

                Echoing the opinion of the article would be if he'd said "This game is a steaming turd", but he didn't, he said "It sounds like this game is a steaming turd". The words 'it sounds like' aren't there for decorative purposes, they fundamentally alter the meaning of the sentence. He didn't pass off anything as fact, second hand or otherwise, and he didn't echo anyone else's opinion. He expressed his own opinion on what the conclusion of the article seems to be.

                No direct, first hand observation of the material has been provided. Any attempts to link to, provide or acknowledge someone elses opinions, thoughts or observations is second hand material.

                You also largely ignored my other points, and continue to choose the "style over substance" route.

                And furthermore @zombiejesus from an unrelated post, you are yet to provide specifics as to which legal systems you refer to.

                Your first, of many, mistakes was to bundle the concept of "justice" system with a "legal" system. Secondly, you would be well aware that not all "western justice systems" consider the notion of Mens Rea. Yet, you were able to dodge this claim by using the vagary of "most justice systems".

                You are a sloppy arguer, vexatious and prone to "shifting the goalposts" when at a loss.

                Last edited 17/07/15 10:58 pm

                  This is simple logic, friend. There's nothing sloppy or vexatious here and no goalposts have been moved. You have made an assertion based on two premises, that the information is second hand, and that the information was presented as fact. Both @braaains and I have pointed out to you that your second premise is false, which renders your conclusion unsound. You can defend your first premise as much as you like but the result remains unsound.

                  I'm sorry that you find having your logic shown to be unsound is frustrating, but the better way to avoid it in future would be to check your own logic before you post it, rather than getting upset with the people who counter it.

                  If you want to discuss the other topic, you can do it in the other thread.

                @zombiejesus

                This is simple logic, friend. There's nothing sloppy or vexatious here and no goalposts have been moved. You have made an assertion based on two premises, that the information is second hand, and that the information was presented as fact. Both @braaains and I have pointed out to you that your second premise is false, which renders your conclusion unsound. You can defend your first premise as much as you like but the result remains unsound. I'm sorry that you find having your logic shown to be unsound is frustrating, but the better way to avoid it in future would be to check your own logic before you post it, rather than getting upset with the people who counter it. If you want to discuss the other topic, you can do it in the other thread.

                Again, you largely reply in a circumlocutory manner believing it adds substance to your comments.

                It dosn't.

                Again, I will repeat, and continue to do so, no direct, first hand, experience, review or preview has been provided by @Braains. That is a fact. All that has been offered is an opinion of an opinion. It's worthless, amounts to nothing, is the equivalent of gossip, does not indicate or convey any meaningful, useful or informative value about the game under discussion. You ignore these facts and go about discussing details which I never provided.

                Last edited 18/07/15 3:50 pm

                  You can repeat yourself as much as you like, your conclusion remains unsound.

                  Your statement: "But don't attempt to pass of SECOND HAND information as FACT."

                  1. Braaains did not give second hand information, he gave his first hand impression of the conclusion of the article.
                  2. Braaains did not pass any of his comment as fact, he expressed his opinion.

                  Your premises are false, therefore your conclusion is unsound. If you want your argument to be sound, you must correct its false premises. It's as simple as that.

                  All that has been offered is an opinion of an opinion. It's worthless, amounts to nothing, is the equivalent of gossip, does not indicate or convey any meaningful, useful or informative value about the game under discussion.

                  It takes a special level of mental disjunction to give your opinion that an opinion of an opinion is worthless and not realise that your own logic renders your own opinion equally worthless. Yet here you are. Thanks for the entertainment.

        @losturtle1 Truer words have never been spoken...

        Last edited 16/07/15 10:40 pm

          Look Bobby, I would rather that people did not take video games so seriously, this whole issues with game previews crap is hardly all that important in the grand scheme of things, it's like ethics in games journalism, who really cares and does it really matter? Down-voting me for the sake of down-voting me is pretty childish btw.

        unhealthy level of certainty in their uneducated perspectives

        Just to clarify Chris, you are in fact calling me uneducated?

    Isn't Europe part of "the West"?

      Yes, yes it is.

      America IS acountry with a domestic "world series" of sports ball.

      Last edited 16/07/15 4:24 pm

        You mean "The World" newspaper sponsored series?

        Ahhhhh sports ball, 'a ball game'.

    @zombiejesus

    It takes a special level of mental disjunction to give your opinion that an opinion of an opinion is worthless and not realise that your own logic renders your own opinion equally worthless. Yet here you are. Thanks for the entertainment.

    It takes an even greater level of mental disjunction to keep engaging.

    Last edited 18/07/15 11:32 pm

      Says the person who is still engaging with me. You don't think your statements through very well, do you.

        And yet you keep responding?

        This is simple logic, friend.

        The same logic that provided the comment:

        You can't prove a negative

        Last edited 19/07/15 3:57 pm

          I didn't make any assertions about what continued engagement means, that's your attempt at logic, and it's by your logic that your own arguments are repeatedly sabotaged. That's why I choose to respond, because it's fun to watch you struggle so badly you defeat yourself in the process.

          Why do you keep responding?

            The only one struggling is you so far. Talking at length around an issue might have worked for you in the past, but it dosn't hold water with me.

            Last edited 21/07/15 12:26 am

              No, I don't imagine logic and rational debate do work with you. The longest reply I've made to you in this article is three paragraphs, if you find that excessive then you really are out of your element here.

              The fact is you attacked someone else here on false pretences and when it was pointed out to you that you were mistaken you decided denial and pressing your attack was the better option than simply admitting you had made a mistake and apologising. You seem to be under the impression that if you just keep arguing the point, eventually people will stop wasting time replying to you and in your mind that will equate to a win for you.

              Really, all you had to do was admit you were mistaken. It was that simple. The fact you seem incapable of that speaks volumes. It's time to move on, you've accomplished nothing positive here.

Join the discussion!