Devil May Cry Forums

DMC 3 Dante is a wannabe frat boyish ninja turtle who thinks he's cooler than he actually is and never shuts the f*** up. The one from the first game was always the best because at least there was this cool laid back professional vibe with more of a sense of self awareness.

@Enigma DmC Dante DEFINITELY tries harder to be edgy, in both personality and outfit. He also tries to be cool but he often comes across as just mean spirited rather than cool. He's just an ignorant view on what being cool is.

When DMC1/3/4 Dante insults a boss, it all sounds and looks cool because of how care freely show off he is. When nDante does it, he resorts on vulgarity and a-holish faces. That's a cheap way to make a character cool.

Old Dante always had this witty yet cheesy way of talking and acting, which got along pretty well together and provided an entertaining and pumpin-up show almost every time.

Not the case in DMC2 and DmC.

And the main problem with DmC Dante is that it feels he tries to be like his past versions but the lines and how he acts doesn't allow him to be and it results in a way of acting that feels outta place and overly try hard.

Spot on, Chance. Anyway, DmC Dante is better than DMC3 Dante for one, single, crucial reason: he pauses from being a self-absorbed child to display actual emotions and development. DMC3 Dante, however, was one-note and unbearable from start to finish. He's like that obnoxious twit in high school that shrieks random phrases in a brain-dead attempt to be cool.

@Foxtrot94 Old Dante had wit? At what point, when he was clapping his hands and making dog jokes, or the dick-thrusting dance he did in 4? He had all the wit and subtlety of Adam Sandler, and was about as half as tolerable.

That reason is pretty easily debunkable, Wolf. However I'd be writing a wall of text and this is not the place nor time for me right now.

Compared to DmC Dante, even Homer Simpson could look a smartass.

Wow. I think 'some' of you really need to draw the line with all of this and bury your differences in the sand. Another thing I'd like to make clear, despite the 1000 times I've already made it clear, is that profile pages are still not somewhere where you're all free to hate on each other and name-call etc

I honestly don't understand how hard it is for some of you to grasp, but all of your little outbursts and remarks are viewable to other members and all of this petty arguing and inability to accept another person's opinion is equally unnecessary here as it is anywhere else on the boards.

As much as you have the right to express points and debate about things this only comes with the maturity and decency to accept and acknowledge another person's points. Otherwise it's less of a debate but more so just another argument filled with hateful views and harsh judgement. This applies to most who have posted here, not just anyone in particular.

I think you're mistaken LoD. Nobody here is chastising Wolf because he has a different opinion than them. It's just, some of us are not skittish to call out bullshit when we see it.

You don't like MGS, fine? You want to baselessly hate? Okay, fine with that too - as long as you don't make it some sort of point of superiority. You want to make up random bullshit? Sorry, gonna call you out on that one. :<

Funny. Because "calling out bullshit" was the exact motivation behind my initial post in the first place. Also, I like how any criticism of MGS whatsoever is defined as "baseless hate"...even when I point out actual, irrefutable flaws that plague the game, the kind that even a MGS Fan like chance will admit.

I don't think you can really say how someone else feels from what you or others have posted. I mean if you've specifically got a problem with something/someone, don't you think 'calling it out' is going to lead to arguing?

And that's really not necessary, in my opinion. Only Wolf can say if he felt insulted or whatever. It is his profile and we're not going to try and stop him or anyone else from expressing an opinion, just try to deal with arguments or problems.

I only kept my initial commentary on a person's review of a game. I wouldn't have done it at all if I had known there would be a full-fledged monsoon over it.

You seem to be under the impression that arguing is a bad thing, LoD. If no one argued ever, we'd still be cavemen.

I think his point is that arguing using name calling and excessive aggressiveness is a bad thing.

I'm not going to point fingers, but I'm pretty sure this discussion was sabotaged by hypersensitive cavemen about 40 posts ago.