Devil May Cry 5: What should it have?

[berto]

more is better,

But less is more. HA!:devil:

But seriously. If you think about the idea of having more than one playable character then we should see it from the point of view of how Capcom would do it. Second playable characters or unlockable characters aren't exactly new, even the original RE had this, Onimusha, Bayonetta, and any other game that you might associate with DMC, which in the original Trish was going to be but budget and release dates prohibited it.

What are some of the most recent games with a large cast from Capcom? RE6 and RE:Revelations 2.

With RE6 the game ended up been a weird mess because each pair of playable campaigns were a different genre, it lacked focus, there was too much in too little and all of the campaigns suffered for it.

RE:R2 had fewer characters. Two campaigns with 2 characters each, which was a classic RE way of doing things and it worked well for it. Each campaign relied on stage design to keep from making passing through the same areas fresh. The thing is, though, even if there are 4 characters there is only 3 different forms of gameplay which are the lead characters, who play the same, and their backups, who have very simple mechanics. There isn't much in the way of variation, just different guns.

And this is RE. They get all of Capcom's money and attention. DMC does not.

The issue with half a dozen characters is a lack of focus, on the both narrative and game design aspects. No one is going to say we just want skins of other characters, either. Yeah, right. They want full blown story campaigns and an entire set moves for them, and who is going to pay to have that made? So what we have is a whole bunch of chunks. Rather than one single defined and tuned experience we have a whole bunch of fragmented little ones that lack on everything. We already saw something like that with DMC4 and SE. Nero is shy on armament, that has always been a complain, he lacks other weapons and moves for them so he can get old fast. Trish doesn't have that much in the way of unique moves; she has pretty a recycled galley and it's kinda messy with moves that you wish were there but aren't.

One character with an outstanding campaign and set up rather than 20 with fragmented ones is the preferred choice for me. More is not better, especially when it means dividing your resources.

 

[VineBigBoss]

But less is more. HA!:devil:

But seriously. If you think about the idea of having more than one playable character then we should see it from the point of view of how Capcom would do it. Second playable characters or unlockable characters aren't exactly new, even the original RE had this, Onimusha, Bayonetta, and any other game that you might associate with DMC, which in the original Trish was going to be but budget and release dates prohibited it.

What are some of the most recent games with a large cast from Capcom? RE6 and RE:Revelations 2.

With RE6 the game ended up been a weird mess because each pair of playable campaigns were a different genre, it lacked focus, there was too much in too little and all of the campaigns suffered for it.

RE:R2 had fewer characters. Two campaigns with 2 characters each, which was a classic RE way of doing things and it worked well for it. Each campaign relied on stage design to keep from making passing through the same areas fresh. The thing is, though, even if there are 4 characters there is only 3 different forms of gameplay which are the lead characters, who play the same, and their backups, who have very simple mechanics. There isn't much in the way of variation, just different guns.

And this is RE. They get all of Capcom's money and attention. DMC does not.

The issue with half a dozen characters is a lack of focus, on the both narrative and game design aspects. No one is going to say we just want skins of other characters, either. Yeah, right. They want full blown story campaigns and an entire set moves for them, and who is going to pay to have that made? So what we have is a whole bunch of chunks. Rather than one single defined and tuned experience we have a whole bunch of fragmented little ones that lack on everything. We already saw something like that with DMC4 and SE. Nero is shy on armament, that has always been a complain, he lacks other weapons and moves for them so he can get old fast. Trish doesn't have that much in the way of unique moves; she has pretty a recycled galley and it's kinda messy with moves that you wish were there but aren't.

One character with an outstanding campaign and set up rather than 20 with fragmented ones is the preferred choice for me. More is not better, especially when it means dividing your resources.

Your analysis is interesting. And i agree with almost everything.

But i've never really wanted campaigns for all these characters, just having them in the game polished as playable characters is sufficient, pretty much like Vergil, Trish and Lady in DMC4; and while i agree that Lady and Trish are pretty simple characters, i think they add a lot to the game as a package exactly because of this, you cannot have 5 characters and 5 of them being DMC4 Dante-complex, but you can have a variety of simple characters while you have few like Dante and Vergil for hardcore players, i think they even could work a lot more on Nero too. A lot of CGs and story pieces is not needed, unless it's viable to make it in a cheap way, kinda like DmC did with Vergil's Downfall.

EDIT:

The thing with Nero is that Capcom wanted a more simple character in the game to bring new people to the series. Now they can give more to Nero and give this role to Lady and Trish, for example.

 

[Chancey289]

Your analysis is interesting. And i agree with almost everything.

But i've never really wanted campaigns for all these characters, just having them in the game polished as playable characters is sufficient, pretty much like Vergil, Trish and Lady in DMC4; .

No.

I don't want another DMC 4. Don't you dare even ask for another lazy package of a game. If we're gonna get even more playable characters, then they better make damn sure they each have their own campaign and levels.

 

[VineBigBoss]

No.

I don't want another DMC 4. Don't you dare even ask for another lazy package of a game. If we're gonna get even more playable characters, then they better make damn sure they each have their own campaign and levels.

Sadly, this is almost impossible, as berto said.

 

[V's patron]

I want some twists and turns in the story as DMC4/DmC/DMC'S trailers told you everything. I want some out of the left field content.

 

[Director Bison]

I want some twists and turns in the story as DMC4/DmC/DMC'S trailers told you everything. I want some out of the left field content.

SPARDA IS STILL ALIVE!

AND HE'S EVIL!

AND HE'S PREGNANT!

those kinds of twists right?

 

[absolitude]

i've been thinking these past days, you know that move Y Y pause Y? i don't understand the programming behind them cancels, but is it possible to make the pause Y moves or afterwards to have some cancel so that we can repeat that move only? i think they will look good for combos..

and i think i want that for 5

 

[LordOfDarkness]

DMC 5, what should it have? Well...

It should have come out already.

But seriously, I've changed my mind on the whole Sparda game - DjRunza and Foxtrot have a part to play in that. -

Okay, think about this: DMC 4 added Nero. And in some ways it kind of took away Dante's spotlight. Then we have Vergil, Dante's brother. You can't really do a lot with him in terms of a game because his story is all over the place. Plus, as it stands he's pretty much 'MIA'.

So, what (or who) does that leave us with besides Dante? Well, since Dante has had A LOT of focus in DMC; including DmC, as he was again the main character. It makes you wonder that IF Nero's purpose/aim was in any way some sort of attempt to "take the spotlight" off of Dante, and DmC was also in some form an approach to make DMC different - Again, giving a new angle and focus on Dante - That 'if' any of that is remotely the case, then wasn't the issue not a matter of making a reboot to bring in new interest, but simply a matter of making Dante the main interest again? I mean, think about it a bit more. Tameem made a big point about how Dante had lost a lot of relevancy; he wasn't 'cool' from a nowadays point of view, and wasn't 'edgy' enough. Well let's take a look at Nero, then. When Nero first appeared, everybody assumed that he was going to be the new guy to focus on. They suspected that he'd steal Dante's spotlight, and DMC 4 was Nero's game. So in essence, the problem with continuing DMC had kicked in before DmC (a while before).

What I'm trying to say is, a much better approach to all of this wasn't considered. For me, what they should have done is given it more thought. Instead of introducing a completely random new guy into the series, and consequently confusing the hell out of the entire fanbase (even to this very day), they could've done the following;

They could've decided to continue DMC without Dante altogether. After all, the story began with the legendary dark knight Sparda. Why create a new character with no established background, when you already have a character that you have created and not further expanded upon? Doesn't make sense. There's a ton of things they could've done with Sparda. It would have been interesting! And not even that, but the fans have been asking for a game with Sparda in it for years.

I honestly don't even know why it never came to mind to take DMC in that direction. It would've saved us from the plot-holes of DMC 4, and (not that it bothers me), but DmC might've never even came to light.

 

[Foxtrot94]

is it possible to make the pause Y moves or afterwards to have some cancel so that we can repeat that move only?

With Dante, try RG cancel. With Nero, a simple Snatch.

Then we have Vergil, Dante's brother. You can't really do a lot with him in terms of a game

You can, actually. He's got the same potential as Sparda. You could make a game set between DMC3 and 1, narrating his journey through Hell to reach Mundus and fight him, maybe having a bonus cutscene at the end setting up his return. Just an example.

Would be interesting to actually see Hell extensively, from Vergil's point of view and post-Sparda's rebellion, with all the power vacuum left by Mundus's defeat and so on.
It's one of the reasons why I want a Sparda game, although in his case I guess Hell would have to be structured differently, and the story would have a much bigger scale.

 

[absolitude]

DMC 5, what should it have? Well...

It should have come out already.

But seriously, I've changed my mind on the whole Sparda game - DjRunza and Foxtrot have a part to play in that. -

Okay, think about this: DMC 4 added Nero. And in some ways it kind of took away Dante's spotlight. Then we have Vergil, Dante's brother. You can't really do a lot with him in terms of a game because his story is all over the place. Plus, as it stands he's pretty much 'MIA'.

So, what (or who) does that leave us with besides Dante? Well, since Dante has had A LOT of focus in DMC; including DmC, as he was again the main character. It makes you wonder that IF Nero's purpose/aim was in any way some sort of attempt to "take the spotlight" off of Dante, and DmC was also in some form an approach to make DMC different - Again, giving a new angle and focus on Dante - That 'if' any of that is remotely the case, then wasn't the issue not a matter of making a reboot to bring in new interest, but simply a matter of making Dante the main interest again? I mean, think about it a bit more. Tameem made a big point about how Dante had lost a lot of relevancy; he wasn't 'cool' from a nowadays point of view, and wasn't 'edgy' enough. Well let's take a look at Nero, then. When Nero first appeared, everybody assumed that he was going to be the new guy to focus on. They suspected that he'd steal Dante's spotlight, and DMC 4 was Nero's game. So in essence, the problem with continuing DMC had kicked in before DmC (a while before).

What I'm trying to say is, a much better approach to all of this wasn't considered. For me, what they should have done is given it more thought. Instead of introducing a completely random new guy into the series, and consequently confusing the hell out of the entire fanbase (even to this very day), they could've done the following;

They could've decided to continue DMC without Dante altogether. After all, the story began with the legendary dark knight Sparda. Why create a new character with no established background, when you already have a character that you have created and not further expanded upon? Doesn't make sense. There's a ton of things they could've done with Sparda. It would have been interesting! And not even that, but the fans have been asking for a game with Sparda in it for years.

I honestly don't even know why it never came to mind to take DMC in that direction. It would've saved us from the plot-holes of DMC 4, and (not that it bothers me), but DmC might've never even came to light.

the moment they decided to reboot DMC, it should already give the picture how capcom think there's a problem with the franchise, DMC4 sells the best in the franchise and they thought of rebooting it.. i could say what the problem is but that would sorta be my opinion.. but objectively speaking, the problem is on their side -capcom

i'd bet each and any one of you often think how hard can it be expanding and continuing DMC right? i thought so myself, then the problem definitely lies with capcom.. i kinda think they're bored or not interested with the franchise, they rushed the development, they ditched dante as the spotlight --and this is after the awesomeness -IMO- of DMC3, this just don't make any sense

i think the main reason for this is -and i'm also curious- how many key people have changed behind the scene of DMC franchise? because each are so different than the other.. and the history goes success, non-success, gambling, succes, gambling.. unstable, not good for a company.. the point is still maybe capcom isn't interested with the franchise since it's too convoluted -their own doing- and too much of a gamble

BUT, surely capcom learn something after DmC and the release of DE and SE, and if SE did net them more money, as much as i love DmC, i don't mind if it's not getting a sequel as long as the franchise continues

 

[LordOfDarkness]

@Foxtrot94: Yeah I know there are some things you could do for a Vergil game (never said it was an impossibility), and I like your ideas.

What I was trying to get at was how I think they should've continued DMC after DMC 3. For me, they could've quite easily of done what you just mentioned. But that could've been for DMC 3: Special Edition. And DMC 4 (or DMC: 0), could've continued DMC with Sparda.

 

[Innsmouth]

I actually tend to agree with @berto. Its impossible to make 5 full campaigns so better made coop BP with optional characters. What I disagree about Im sure Nero must be in it to establish his role in the world instead of throwing him into another plot hole.

 

[Erian1Mortal]

I wouldn't mind more characters if they

So, what (or who) does that leave us with besides Dante? Well, since Dante has had A LOT of focus in DMC; including DmC, as he was again the main character. It makes you wonder that IF Nero's purpose/aim was in any way some sort of attempt to "take the spotlight" off of Dante, and DmC was also in some form an approach to make DMC different - Again, giving a new angle and focus on Dante - That 'if' any of that is remotely the case, then wasn't the issue not a matter of making a reboot to bring in new interest, but simply a matter of making Dante the main interest again? I mean, think about it a bit more. Tameem made a big point about how Dante had lost a lot of relevancy; he wasn't 'cool' from a nowadays point of view, and wasn't 'edgy' enough. Well let's take a look at Nero, then. When Nero first appeared, everybody assumed that he was going to be the new guy to focus on. They suspected that he'd steal Dante's spotlight, and DMC 4 was Nero's game. So in essence, the problem with continuing DMC had kicked in before DmC (a while before).

Nero was brought in because the team was burnt out on Dante. It's as simple as that. I'm loosely quoting the DMC 3142 Graphic Arts book (cannot find the quote right now). Besides they wanted to bring new people into the series and Dante wasn't the character to do that, since he was the mainstay in 3 games. In hindsight the inclusion of Nero really makes sense from a design standpoint but not from a story standpoint.

 

[Gray Knight]

If you had problems cycling through the weapons then that's your problem because once you got in to the habit of memorizing the line up, it was a breeze and fun to swap so many weapons on the fly whenever you wanted. People can knock it around all they want, but the mechanics in the latest game were still refined and smooth as silk. Bringing also a lot of signature mechanics to a more natural evolution that definitely shouldn't be forgotten when it comes to a hypothetical 5th installment.

Sorry, when you said previous game I thought you were talking about DMC4 not DmC, since this was talking about a possible DMC5. I was noting that DMC4's weapon switching system would fall apart if you had more weapons to choose from than the three weapons provided, so an option to only have two actively equipped onto a person would be preferred.
On the note of DmC's weapon swapping system, with whatever limited experience I have with it I found it nice to be able to go back and forth between the weapons pretty quickly, as that allowed good flow and the option to have immediate access to 3 weapons at a time. Though I'm not sure how that system could work if one had to balance it out with style switching or didn't have the angel/demon/neutral weapon trinity going on.
The DmC remind me of how Vergil is able to cycle through his 3 weapons in DMC3:SE as you always have two choices of what to go with you want to switch, incidentally, he also had a light, dark and neutral weapon thing going there.
On the other hand the fact that one constantly had to hold a finger down on a button to use it did limit some options, as in the default control scheme one's hands would be constantly decicated

 

[V's patron]

@Director Bison
Whose to say Eva actually gave birth hmmm?

I meant more hidden content, like Assassins creed where they have hidden characters or a stage that was a part of the story but you didn't see it coming.

 

[Chancey289]

Sorry, when you said previous game I thought you were talking about DMC4 not DmC, since this was talking about a possible DMC5. I was noting that DMC4's weapon switching system would fall apart if you had more weapons to choose from than the three weapons provided, so an option to only have two actively equipped onto a person would be preferred.
On the note of DmC's weapon swapping system, with whatever limited experience I have with it I found it nice to be able to go back and forth between the weapons pretty quickly, as that allowed good flow and the option to have immediate access to 3 weapons at a time. Though I'm not sure how that system could work if one had to balance it out with style switching or didn't have the angel/demon/neutral weapon trinity going on.
The DmC remind me of how Vergil is able to cycle through his 3 weapons in DMC3:SE as you always have two choices of what to go with you want to switch, incidentally, he also had a light, dark and neutral weapon thing going there.
On the other hand the fact that one constantly had to hold a finger down on a button to use it did limit some options, as in the default control scheme one's hands would be constantly decicated

Well, the latest game was DmC so.

And playing only the demo really doesn't justify the full experience. Regardless of what you hear people say, it still has a ton of combat depth in its own right. Just look at some of those combo vids. You're missing out man. It's still a fun Devil May Cry game and I say that as a player that's been playing since the very beginning.

And since I've been playing so long, that kind of made me never the biggest fan of styles. I can seriously do without them because I really think its annoying to have to cycle through separate playstyles just to access certain moves. Kind of how I feel about the lock on system and how it restricts certain things from you unless you do that.

I much prefer the hybrid of everything. And having the hybrid of so many of my favorite moves and access to all my weapons was one of my favorite things about the latest game. If I would have had Free Ride, and a Turbo mode out the gate, I would have been all set.

 

[Foxtrot94]

Well I wasn't that much of a fan of DmC's system since it stripped out mechanics and limited combo variety and potential, but how about having two characters, one of which is Dante, with the Style switching and all, and one with a more streamlined control scheme.

A win win situation for everyone and no one is gonna be butthurt that DmC's mechanics get ignored and all that. Obviously that's an ideal situation, I doubt Capcom will ever pull it off, but I think it'd be cool.

 

[Chancey289]

Well I wasn't that much of a fan of DmC's system since it stripped out mechanics and limited combo variety and potential, but how about having two characters, one of which is Dante, with the Style switching and all, and one with a more streamlined control scheme.

A win win situation for everyone and no one is gonna be butthurt that DmC's mechanics get ignored and all that. Obviously that's an ideal situation, I doubt Capcom will ever pull it off, but I think it'd be cool.

There's still ton of combo potential. Just look at some of those videos floating around online or as they say, get good.

You guys came in a Devil May Cry 3 and 4 and define the series as a whole based on those two games only basically. You think every Devil May Cry game should be like those. I think regardless of which version they continue with, they need to use things from both for the superior experience.

I can do without styles. I mean, look at a game like Bayonetta. No such thing as styles in that game and its combat also pretty much Devil May Crys harder than Devil May Cry ever did.

 

[Innsmouth]

A win win situation for everyone and no one is gonna be butthurt that DmC's mechanics get ignored and all that. Obviously that's an ideal situation, I doubt Capcom will ever pull it off, but I think it'd be cool.

Suspect you're wrong about this and some people will get butthurt if DmC ignored, but than again its mostly those people who complain how bad old franchise was, so if capcom ignores them for DMC5, nobody get hurt indeed

 

[Foxtrot94]

@Chancey289
No, I just want the most variety and experimentation possibilities possible. DMC3 and 4's system happen to give me that, while DmC's was a step back in that regard, even though on its own, it still offers a fairly in depth combat experience.
Then, if they somehow manage to offer the same depth as DMC3/4 merging their system with DmC's or whatever else, that would be fine with me too. What's important is that they don't sacrifice too much of the advanced combat techniques and features they previously established, which is what DmC felt.

If I were to say how DmC's combat was less deep than the previous title I would write a huge wall of text, and it's not even the point of the thread, so let's just leave it at that. I expressed my view, you've expressed yours.