BTW, for all that don't know.... The Divine Comedy is NOT copyrighted, so you can read it anywhere you like
Italian Version
German Version
English Version
You can also find scans on Google Books

Actually nothing belonging to the public domain is burdened by copyrights :)

well i have no poblem if it would be an adventure game, i even enjoyed an adventure game based on Dracula; but if it's a shooter like Dead space (not that the game is bad) were you go in hell and kick satan's ass well... WTF? why not call it Devil may cry 6? or Dead Hell?
why does EA have the urge to call it directly after the book if they don't intend to make it pertinent in the gameplay,.

But would it be OK to play Messiah, where you're an angel who could posses people? Or play Inferno where you absorb peoples souls? War of the Worlds which does not really tie into the original texts or Lord of the Rings, arguably a classic if ever there were any "modern classics" which was also used by the games industry but expanded and some say butchered?
If religeous texts (which are arguably just stories) can be used as a premise and building blocks to games then other works have no chance?
Having said that should real events such as World War 2 or conflicts around the world, real events where hundreds of thousands of people died, be protected from being used in the gaming industry, no?
The historial settings have been used for many, many years. I think the words "Ah well, get over it" covers it very well when you refer to some books that should not be ussed, .most of which are fiction, but own and play war games that cover real events

I often wonder why people think bad sequels or bad adaptations cheapen the original... just don't play them or pretend they don't exist... there you go.

it's because a bad sequel or adaptation could have been great, and with a poor one, you're unlikely to see a good one any time soon.

It still doesn't cheapen the original. If anything, it makes the original look that much better.

That's more a result of current copyright law than anything else. A company will be sold the adaptation rights to some work, and then for some set period of time they're the only ones who can legally make a movie/game/etc based off of the original work. However, when dealing with classic works that have passed into the public domain exclusivity goes out the window, and one bad adaptation doesn't mean that someone else can and will take a crack at a better adaptation.

no, it's not about legal dealings, it's about the market.
if they release a really shitty dante's inferno game, the market isn't going to want to play or hear about another dante's inferno game, unless it's done right and completely different without any association to the previous.
not going to happen.
That's why, it's because you will lose market interest. nobody is going to want to play it so soon.
And then there's the whole brand association from a company, the company who releases it will be confused for the company who released the shiatty game. It means poor sales.
It is not financially sound to create a game on the same topic of a game, that was just released and is shiatty as all hell.

Well, there needs to be a target audience so it will actually move a few units. Considering Dead Space was considered to be a substantial commercial flop, I'm a little surprised to see Redwood Shores choosing such a commercially obscure license for it's next project.

I dont consider myself apart of any target audience, and Im interested in it. :P

While all valid concerns, it's been my observation that (unfortunately) consumers have pretty short memories. While releasing two titles based upon the same work within months of each other is probably a bad idea, wait just one year and there aren't that many consumers who will remember or even care about the first title (especially if it wasn't particularly memorable to begin with). Branding and marketing also are key; if the second games looks, feels, and is pitched the exact same way as the first then naturally there will be people saying "didn't I already play this, and wasn't it bad?" But if you have a completely different game, created by a different company, branded and marketed in a completely different way, then it's pretty much a clean slate. Hell, depending on how it's done all but the most astute consumers probably wouldn't even notice that the two games were even based on the same source material.
So what it ultimately comes down to is that if you have two games that are basically carbon copies of each other and the first one was shit, then yes, naturally there won't be much interest in the second. Although I doubt many would complain that a carbon copy of a shit game went unmade. On the other hand, if the game is done differently enough (and if the first game was terrible the second certainly should be done differently) then there simply isn't going to be enough similarity between the games (both in fact and in appearance) for consumers to notice and sales to be significantly affected.

Redwood Shores is owned by EA, hence it's full name "EA Redwood Shores."
As far as the game, I think it's wrong to take the title and make a game about it if it's not going to be accurate to the text or spirit of the work though I wouldn't mind it if they took themes from the book. But as others have said, this isn't the first time this has happened and it will continue. All you can do is ignore it and/or hope they fail.

The best way to butcher a great author is to completely destroy the story.
2 perfect examples are Clive Cusslers "Raise the Titanic" or "Sahara".
I thought that Sahara was not a bad movie until I read the book. However I would never have heard of this great author if it was not for Sahara. Now because of this forum I am going to check out Dante’s Inferno and hopefully enjoy it. So I guess that sometimes adaptations of great books can be good or bad depending upon the public reception of the media/
My opinion is that these two movies are the worst I have seen based upon the book that I have ever seen.

Why can't we hope it's good? Like you yourself said, it is going to happen, so at least let it be good no?