[Okay, so I decided to start my own off-Dtoid gaming blog, dorkily titled "The Gentleman Gamer," since I apparently enjoy pretentious oxymorons. I figure I may as well cross-post the opinion pieces here, since no one is likely to read the other one, and I've really been neglecting my Dtoid blog. So, yeah. I'm back. Love me. I'm also too lazy to re-add all the links in the article, so visit the site if that bothers you, you freak.]

There’s a lot of complaining and arguing going around — oh yes, on the internet — about Dante’s Inferno, the upcoming EA game loosely based on Dante Alighieri’s epic poem, The Divine Comedy. Many of the complaints revolve around the basic idea of EA turning a classic piece of literature into a third-person hack-em-up. To an extent, this is understandable.

However, I can’t help but wonder if everyone is getting up-in-arms over nothing. I can sympathize with not wanting to see a favorite work of literature massacred in the name of entertainment and sales. I really can. But when I watched the trailer, all I saw was a concept for a game that looked really damned fun (no pun intended). Am I wrong? Is there a place for taking a revered work of art and reimagining it as a hilariously violent video game?

Adapting works of literature to the video game medium is still a fairly uncommon practice. Obviously, we’ve seen games based upon the likes of The Lord of the Rings and The Chronicles of Narnia, but those were more movie adaptations than book adaptations. Even the Conan the Barbarian games don’t strike me as being as difficult of a choice as The Divine Comedy. And dare I even mention Where’s Waldo?

No, Dante’s Inferno is definitely a stand-out, easily the oldest and most revered work to be adapted. (That is, of course, excluding The Bible. I refuse to intelligently consider something like Bible Adventures, here.) And awkwardly enough, it also appears to be one of the loosest adaptations yet, perhaps inducing a facepalm from anyone hoping to get through this peacefully. But no — if this adaptation is anything, it’s loose.



In Alighieri’s original poem, Dante himself is guided through the three realms of the afterlife — Hell, Purgatory, and Paradise. (The video game is likely based solely on the Hell, or “Inferno,” portion of the poem.) The recent Dante’s Inferno panel at Wondercon revealed that the game will revolve around Dante traveling through the nine levels of Hell in order to rescue the princess from Bowser’s cas- er, I mean, to save his late fiancée, Beatrice, from Satan’s clutches. Already, the game is way off-course.

I think that the key, here, is to remember that this is based on Dante’s Inferno. Based on. I don’t believe that EA ever claimed to be developing a strict retelling of the story. And while the title does suggest a direct adaptation — Dante’s Inferno — it actually ends up being a play on words: The game’s lead character is named Dante; undoubtedly whom the title refers to, as opposed to Alighieri. So, while there may be a small handful of literary scholars who will end up feeling dismayed and deceived on release day, I don’t feel that the title is something to be legitimately bothered by.

Is the title a crass marketing ploy? (Well, we all know how gamers go ga-ga over 14th-century Italian literature…) The game is based on Dante’s Inferno, so I fail to see why it’s a bad thing that they’ve indicated that in the title. I guarantee you that three-quarters of the gamers who play this game will not have any prior knowledge of The Divine Comedy. The game may, however, inspire more-thoughtful gamers to actually read the poem. Is that a bad thing? No. It’s just a name. Alighieri’s reputation, and his original work, still remain the same as ever, no harm done.

Is it the seemingly exaggerated ridiculousness of the game? I mean, turning a 14th-century poem into a hack-and-slash game of the God of War/Devil May Cry variety — complete with demons having crucifixes shoved through their skulls, and the lead character apparently slaying Death himself and stealing his scythe within the opening minutes of the game — well, there’s a lot there to find ridiculous. But ridiculous can be fun. Why are gamers dying to get their hands on the forthcoming MadWorld game? Why do people love the Evil Dead films? Because they’re ridiculous.



Many in the industry desperately want to see video games receive the same respect as movies do, and we’re definitely moving in that direction. But I think it’s unfair to decry the game as a huge step backwards. Do we really want an industry filled with nothing but serious games? Has the entire film industry fallen into an abyss of mediocrity because Rob Schneider and Dane Cook continue to star in movies? Is BioShock any less of a masterpiece because Earth Defense Force 2017 exists? No. We cannot have legitimacy and respect at the cost of being able to laugh at ourselves and have a little fun. Gaming is fun, first and foremost.

The God of War series took Kratos and completely changed key aspects of the character. (To start with, in Greek mythology, Kratos was actually a huge Zeus fanboy, and never once attempted to overthrow him.) Did this deviation from the character’s original story diminish the games at all? An overwhelming majority probably wouldn’t even consider it an issue. Granted, God of War deals with mythology, and Dante’s Inferno deals with one man’s work of fiction. Still, a lot of the same general principles apply. When a work of fiction makes the jump from one medium to another, changes usually have to be made, in order for the transition to work well within that new medium. Acceptable losses, etc.

So, I implore you: Relax. This looks, at the very least, like it will be an amusing, ridiculous third-person action game filled with over-the-top violence. Best-case scenario, we end up with an epic, surreal, dramatic gaming masterpiece. I absolutely adore the design and style of what little I’ve seen so far. Whether it’s based on Dante Alighieri’s The Divine Comedy or Matt Groening’s Life in Hell, I don’t care. A good game is still a good game. Even if its tagline is “Go to Hell.”

WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH EVERYONE HOLY FUCKING SHITCUNTS HOLY SWEET GODDAMN YOU PEOPLE WHAT ARE YOU THINKING SWEET MOTHER OF ELVIS WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM SWEET BABY JAMES

I mean, seriously. If I get into a game of Left 4 Dead with you, and I get ahold of Francis, I ain't giving him up to any of you bastards. I mean, seriously? You think "dibs" is going to do anything? I fart on your goddamn dibs. In fact, if you call dibs, I'm going to gank your shit and wiggle my stupid sexy ass at you. So, there. Stop that goddamn shit, people. "Dibs"... pfft. I've got your dibs right here, and I'm pointing to my penis when I say that.

Also, dibs on Cammy.

The Kids In The Hall and Portal. Two great tastes that go great together.

In the above video, posted to the Kids' MySpace channel, the other four Kids watch Scott Thompson (the gay one, if you're keeping score) playing Portal on their (really freaking, ridiculously huge) tour bus, from the next room over. Now, I'm going to assume that alcohol and/or drugs were heavily involved, as not only does Thompson seem thoroughly incapable of doing something as simple as placing a cube on a button, but the other four Kids are finding all this ridiculously amusing. It's really not that interesting of a video, but if you love Kids In The Hall and Portal like me, or you enjoy watching middle-aged, Canadian comedians in hysterics over virtually nothing, then you'll like it.

The Orange Box? I've never been more proud to be a Kids In The Hall fan... Even if Kevin thinks that a test chamber is called a portal, and Scott can't seem to stop crouching. And is it my imagination, or is Dave Foley (my favorite, FYI) the only one who definitely isn't under the influence of anything?

In before BlindsideDork.

Yeah, not much to say about this, other than that IT'S REALLY FREAKING AWESOME. Someone modded Left 4 Dead to play on a completely opened up version of Team Fortress 2's Dustbowl map. Obviously, it's not a terribly long level, probably not even clocking in at the length of a single L4D chapter, but it's still undeniably awesome. Sadly, my laptop has proven itself incapable of running Left 4 Dead at a playable quality, so I shall continue to miss out on the PC-mods goodness.

Now, could someone please put the TF2 characters in L4D? I would give anything to mow down the infected with the Heavy's minigun, run circles around a Tank as the Scout, or sneak past a Witch as the Spy. Also, sentries.

Though my experience with them is sadly minimal, I'm a huge fan of sandbox games. The idea of being able to go wherever I want and do whatever I want is one of the greatest draws in all of gaming, for me. Mercenaries 2 is apparently one of those sandbox games, though I admittedly don't know to what extent they take that sandbox. When the demo popped up on XBL this past week, I couldn't not download it.

In Mercs 2, you're a mercenary given the task of blah blah blah, Venezuela, blah blah blah. Whatever. Completing the mission objectives is likely just a necessary evil that allows you to keep on destroying more things in satisfying explosions. The demo certainly makes that clear. You're given around 15 minutes to complete your objective, which involves a helicopter and a listening post and... I don't know. In my several playthroughs of the demo, I didn't complete a single objective, as far as I could tell. Admittedly, I'm stupid, but I felt like the menus and info were a little lacking.

Honestly, I found the demo restrictive, in that regard. The fact that it limited my playtime with the objective timer was a little obnoxious. But I found the gameplay surprisingly strategy-intensive, deeper than I'd anticipated. I had assumed you would just run through levels, casually wreaking havoc. In reality, you actually have to think things through a lot more. Numerous times, I found myself face-to-face with superior firepower, requiring that I either run or strategically, and slowly, take down my enemies. The time limit made these adjustments cumbersome, but otherwise they were welcome.



The game has an interesting in-game currency system. Evidently, you can make money by committing certain acts, such as destroying billboards. You can also lose money by killing civillians. I thought this was a nice touch, even though the reason for the financial loss -- your employers pay off the media(?) to sweep it under the rug -- is a little creepy. I did enjoy the fact that I could fly or drive into the city and hijack sportscars, even using vehicles to go incognito.

Essentially, despite some shortcomings, Mercenaries 2 appears to be a fairly well thought-out game. I was downright shocked to find that I'd actually run out of missiles in the helicopter, and that I didn't have an inexplicably unlimited supply. Even the chopper's bullets had a (generous) limit. Some might say that this breaks the already-ludicrous flow of the game. You can hijack helicopters from the ground, for frak's sake. It wasn't too jarring of an intrusion by reality, though.

Frustration did, however, set in a few times. For example, I picked up a pistol that someone had dropped, only to find that the assault rifle I'd dropped had mysteriously vanished, leaving me with only a pistol and a near-empty rocket launcher. So, it's not without its bugs. But even when I found myself with the short end of the stick in a ridiculously overwhelming situation, I was still having a figurative blast. All in all, a good demo for a promising, though questionable, game.

Does it make me want to buy it? Yes. Just barely. I feel like the (in my opinion) confusing mission objectives could get on one's nerves, but the game should hopefully make up for that with its sheer, glorious "mayhem factor."