his in-yer-face attitude, his witty one liners in the midst of battle, the grace of movement and being able to combine sword and gun moves so easily make him the perfect lead game character.

and as for all u lot above accusing the games of being button mashers, u all obviously have no style to ur game playing! i bet ur all rubbish at sex too lol

I am presuming you are referring to a croaking device to hide one’s amphibian sexuality, rather than meaning that an entire race of people living in Europe are being depicted as lacking in intelligence.

Either way, if you wanted such characters in a game surely you could play “The Elder Scrolls IV” or some other sort of fantasy-theme role-playing massively-pointless adventure game?

Dante, in my opinion, has always come (across) as a gothic, if not, asexual, camp-style figure.

“Sex Appeal… 9″? Perhaps he just appeals to both sexes, and to frogs?

BFN,

fp.

That does seem to be the way of some games these days… you neither need any skill nor timing, just the ability to hit buttons at the relevant point (and not necessary in a designated order).

Martial Arts/Fighting titles (”Tekken”, “Dead Or Alive”, “Virtua Fighter”, “Mortal Kombat”, and probably “Soul Calibur” [out this week!]) have come full circle in this respect. In the 80s & early 90s, the depth of gameplay meant it didn’t matter if you kicked then punched, or punched then kicked, whether it was a lead leg, or a rear leg, a hook punch, or an uppercut, as the in-game character was so small & so lacking in expression & movement so all that mattered was that you gained a strike on the opponent. When the first few iterations of the current genre leaders were released, they concentrated, to some extent, on the realism of the martial art styles, and the differences between the various methods of attack. And times were good. We had variation & personal choice. We had the ability to fight on our own terms, and each character was better than another in certain attributes (strength, speed, stamina, and so on).

Now, unfortunately, with every successive release more & more in-game characters are seen as ‘the way forward’ and the effectiveness of selecting a character with a distinct fighting style seems to come down to who has the fastest internet connection (slowest lag time), and who can remember 10-button combinations in the correct order. No skill is required at all. Somebody who appreciates the differences between fighting styles, and why one character should win a bout with another is beaten by an opponent who can mash buttons faster.

I am particularly looking forward to “Facebreaker”, now only for the cartoon-like humour that will not take itself too seriously, but because the range of punches on offer vary from just ‘jab’ & ‘cross’.

I will probably buy not just the PS3 version (following the demo on the ‘Store on 7 August 2008; a week later than original planned), but also the Wii version too (so that the Wiimote/Nunchuk controls can make up for the poor showing in the Wii Sports Boxing game). The current release date for the PS3 version is 5 September 2008.

Unfortunately, this week is particular busy for releases (”Golden Axe”, “Mercenaries 2: World In Flames”, “Monster Madness: Grave Danger” [that I did actually enjoy... my three kids & I played the demo several times over yesterday], and “TNA Impact!”), so I hope the “Facebreaker” release receives the attention it deserves.

Back to “Devil May Cry, though… should I go back to the first instalment & play from start to finish in the series, or just assume that the fourth title is what to expect from the other three?

I do have all but the last title in-hand (including the “Special Edition” version of “Devil May Cry 3″). But given what I saw in the demo for the last release, I just didn’t want four times the disappointment

BFN,

fp.

Really liked first Devil May Cry, didn’t play 2 or 3 and hated 4. Offered nothing new except ermmmm button mashing & getting to explore the same environments over, and over and ovvvver.

You’re right it says nothing about my gaming knowledge. It does say that I was prepared to give “…Jericho” & “Kane & Lynch…” the benefit of the doubt, whereas “Devil May Cry 4″ was more of a “meh… I can’t see the point or why people like this” point of view. I didn’t say any of the titles very any ‘better’ than any of the others.

It did rate very highly at GameRankings [ gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/928376.asp ], I don’t disagree with the fact that the series is very popular. It is just not for me, and hence not for everyone (see the other responses so far)… if I don’t like something I’m not afraid to say so. I won’t adopt an opinion based on the general consensus.

Is “Devil May Cry 4″ any better than the previous instalments, or is the series being diluted trying to appeal to a wider audience?

BFN,

fp.