I don't care about what I score when playing a DMC game but I know I'm not an amateur player either. If it were up to me then the letter grade ranking system would be thrown out and simply replaced with a points system. So the game doesn't show the players who aren't that great that it hates them and the ones who really rack up high numbers would gain their bragging rights through that. I hate this elitist attitude games especially like this the players adapt. It really does discourage anyone else because it makes a community of gamers who feel as if the ones who can't rack up SSS don't belong here or something. Adam Sessler really hit the nail on the head about stuff like this.
You're a casual player and it's written on your face, not intend to offend you, but you don't seem to even understand the mechanics of DMC games, mainly for DMC4 who has the most diverse and deep mechanic from all the series. Do you even jump cancel, brah? You come with this "argument" and call DMC fans "crybabys"? Just look to what you're saying: you find it better to have a crap ranking system with no good criterias for everyone to feel good and "welcome" to the game, it's another proof why the "casualize it" philosophy from NT downgraded the gameplay to a dumb level; the best ranking system of the series was at DMC3, where it counted various aspects of you run like the damage taken (who needs to be 0 at DMD for a S rank), time, stylish points, item usage and orbs.
They did nerf it. I just told you NT actually accessed this stuff.
And where i said they've not? Jesus Christ, you have a hard time understanding stuff.
You'd didn't play Vergil's Downfall so you'll just pass rash assumptions that Vergil doesn't play differently even though everyone who really plays it and dives in to it can tell you he differs quite a bit.
I can say nearly the same about what you're saying about Nero and Dante, Vorgil in DmC is not a complete different gameplay from Donte, it's the same foundation with some different mechancis and that's it, just like Nero is to Dante. You're reducing the diferences from Nero to Dante to nothing just for the sake of setting up a defense to DmC.
Nero basically brought nothing but the grappling and DmC's angel and demon pull are evolutions of Nero's arm and Vergil's teleportation in one package.
It's not an evolution, it's the exact same ****. DmC just took the concept and translated it to his own world and added an independent grab mechanic to it (which already existed in Devil Bringer but depends on the enemy you're fighting).
They did listen. They also shouldn't listen though to the ridiculous crybaby butthurt fans. I mean hell, do you even want to have a conversation with them? It's better to listen to the ones worth listening too.
They HAD to listen, because they are new and inexperienced company that is incapable of doing a game that's not glitchy, broken or seriously poorly-designed. All the DD thing was a miscalculation by NT, one failure in the design of the movement itself, they're a new company with little experience and it's expected they commit such errors.
THIS BROKEN GOD MODE MECHANIC DOES EXIST! And we know it's not replacing MGS. Just like DmC isn't replacing the original. They said this multiple times. DmC however pays homage and tribute to its predecessors. MGR still has the METAL GEAR in the name so us Metal Gear fans still expect that Metal Gear experience. I never said MGR is bad but it is not Metal Gear. P* is all about "style over substance" Metal Gear is about both. Kojima didn't work on the game and that's obvious. Am I condemning it for that? No. Am I disappointed? Sure. Especially since Kojima wanted to make the Gray Fox game all us fans have been asking for and we got stupid Raiden instead. I'm positive Gray Fox is more universally loved and Metal Gear fans would have wanted a Gray Fox game. Guess Komami isn't listening to fans though. I swear it was the butthurt DMC fans that gave more attention to Rising than actual Metal Gears fans did. Thank goodness The Phantom Pain is on the way so enjoy your short lived mediocre hack n slasher.
Fast forward to 11:20 for the HUGE exploitation I discovered playing the game. I'm not asking you to watch the review but Joe was the only other person that actually also caught on to this and it deserves attention if you honestly feel the need to antagonize DmC and not point out a very bad flaw the one you personally enjoy for your own reasons.
Yeah, it is possible to just spam parry and doesn't get hit by the enemies normals attacks (most of the bosses have attacks that cannot be parried if you don't do a just frame parry), and it is as moronic as the dodge i-frames on DmC. They give an easy way to the player get no punishment from errors, i don't like this easyness too. DmC doesn't get attention because it's a mediocre game compared to the DMC original series, it became hidden in the shadow of the greatness of other DMC games, the "butthurt from DMC fans" was just the spice for the market failure of this game. If they had made a new IP out of this ideas the market outcome could be much different.
The creative dead end is obvious. DMC just copping out and copy and pasting things just shows their lack of creativity and maybe it was just a cry for help to get you to stop buying these games because they were tired of making them. There is nearly 0 effort to introduce enough new features and characters that really give you a reason to say DMC has sure evolved because it just looks as if it's all running on fumes. The game overall never did anything to really push itself as you still just kept seeing the same gothic castles, the same stupid drama, the same anime cliched characters, etc. etc. it's not just what you think is better because saying DMC was going stale brings in multiple things of as to why some players felt that way. Of course you're just one of those people who just doesn't want that change and sees nothing wrong in your personal preferences so you think it's the voice of the entire fandom and anyone who doesn't agree with that just doesn't get Devil May Cry.
DMC1 is totally different from DMC2, which is totally different from DMC3. The only similar games on the franchise are DMC3 and 4, this argument doesn't fit the reality. And what DmC introduced that was new for the franchise? Absolutely nothing, it only dumbed down arguably the best hack'n'slash mechanics already made until today, get your facts straight, and don't come with that "creative edge" bullshit because story-wise DmC is as crappy as much DMC games, the only thing that DMC is worse is the plotholes DMC4 inserted on the franchise storyline. The sellings and the opinion of much people on this forum and mainly on PhantomBabies forums doesn't agree with you, and they were people who really loved and played the old DMC series, and DMC was never for you if you don't ever liked this traits on the franchise. You're just a casual butthurt because your game with social commentary did a pathetic job on sellings, and the reality hurts that DMC old series is miles away from DmC as a game as people already discussed why exhaustively on another topics like "Why do you want a DMC5?" or in this very topic.
EDIT: And i'm done with this discussion, you simple choose to ignore all the discussion on another topics and starts to talk about the same things all the time. They're already have been answered, even the real failures of the old DMC series had and i've admited its failures, even if the purpose of the game itself was not intended to give the experience some players says they want to have in DMC.