DmC Dante VS DMC3 Dante

[AgentRedgrave]

The writers seem pretty selective when he can feel pain, and when he can't. On one hand, he can be stabbed in the heart with Rebellion and be shot in the face by Lady without so much as wincing or cringing in pain.

And even when he does feel pain, there's no weight to it. He's up and about in only a few seconds---without a stagger in his step, or even a hindrance to his physical performance. The only instance where showed any kind of strain was when he got up after first fighting Vergil, and even then, he dove into an extravaganza of over-powered acrobatics and skill like he hadn't even taken a scratch.

If Dante can feel pain---and there's not a consistent basis to determine whether or not he actually can, especially since the extent of his powers, limitations and weaknesses are never given over the course of four games and multiple media spin-offs---he sure has hell doesn't have to endure the traumatic or taxing effects of it. Why? Because that would actually weaken him as a character---and God knows we can't have Dante not be an overpowered Gary Stu for more than three seconds.

He had just Devil Triggerd for the first time, he had unlocked his inner devil. That's why he got stronger then before

We wouldn't know if Dante would've lost the fight or not, or if the exhaustion would've amounted to anything because Dante would never lose that fight....because he wins practically every fight.

Dante's never experienced the struggle of a personal defeat, and won't ever be shown enduring any kind of actual pain. A character's feats of strength are only impressive if he performs them in the face of certain vulnerabilities or weaknesses...overcoming any possible barriers of strength, or shortcomings they may have. It's something that causes them to work harder, to train harder...to bypass the limitations over a span of time, and prepare themselves for the heat of the next battle.

But Dante just ends up winning 99% of every fight he's dealt with, and whatever pain he feels is showered upon him without any real consequence. He has no limitations, no logical or anatomical fallacies, and no danger of being defeated or killed...

....thus making every battle a cakewalk instead of a real obstacle. And that just makes him a weak character...the kind of Gary-Stu that Deviantartists cook up on an afternoon of eating sugar and watching devoid-of-logic hyper bishonen.

Tell that to Alucard

 

[TerrorA]

He had just Devil Triggerd for the first time, he had unlocked his inner devil. That's why he got stronger then before



Tell that to Alucard

Please, I showed Alucard a Vampire Hunter D profile ad he ran away

 

[AgentRedgrave]

Please, I showed Alucard a Vampire Hunter D profile ad he ran away

Lol, Alucard aint scared of his own son lol

 

[Demi-fiend]

And that just makes him a weak character...the kind of Gary-Stu that Deviantartists cook up on an afternoon of eating sugar and watching devoid-of-logic hyper bishonen.

I resent that.

That's my OC you're badmouthing there! :bored:

The sad part is, is that I'm not even joking... :'(

 

[TerrorA]

Lol, Alucard aint scared of his own son lol

Bro compare their stats

http://kaoskid1.deviantart.com/art/Alucard-vs-D-Prelude-510910206

 

[AgentRedgrave]

Bro compare their stats

http://kaoskid1.deviantart.com/art/Alucard-vs-D-Prelude-510910206

Take into account that D in his series is over 10000 years old and his series takes place in the far future. While Alucard is less then 600 and his series takes place in modern day. Considering the fact vampires grow stronger with age. That has to be taken into account.

 

[TerrorA]

Take into account that D in his series is over 10000 years old and his series takes place in the far future. While Alucard is less then 600 and his series takes place in modern day. Considering the fact vampires grow stronger with age. That has to be taken into account.

That is very true.

 

[AgentRedgrave]

That is very true.

Yeah I'm not trying to turn it into a debate, cause I actually do really love both characters (Alucard's my favorite Dracula, while D was one of my many influences when coming up with my own dhampir character) I just think that needs to be taken into account as, like i said, vampires grow stronger with age, also they feel the need to say D technically has more experience. It be an awesome fight either way though

EDIT: I made a screw up. D's about 5000 and his series takes place over 10000 years into the future.

 

[WolfOD64]

He had just Devil Triggerd for the first time, he had unlocked his inner devil. That's why he got stronger then before

Yeah...he unlocks his Inner Devil mere seconds after he's defeated. And then he proceeds to repeat the same process of never being defeated every single time he fights an enemy for the rest of the series.

He was defeated once, and it had all the consequence and weight of every other time he was stabbed in the heart or shot in the face...NONE.

Tell that to Alucard

...except that Alucard actually had to suffer a lifetime of agonizing pain, oppression, humilation, guilt and numerous defeats before he ever got the luxury of being all-powerful.

He endures defeat at the hands of many characters throughout the canon of Hellsing, one such defeat rendering him so miserable that he dedicates his life towards a single goal: to find death at the hands of a human being, worthy of slaying the ultimate vampire. Almost every loss he's endured has shaped him as a character, and every bit physical and emotional trauma ended up molding Alucard's persona...something that Dante doesn't experience EVEN ONCE over the course of the Devil May Cry mythos; he's just too perfect to face the hard reality or endurance of a real loss. It would damage his "Oh-my-God-so-OP-could-curbstomp-anyone-any-day-of-the-week" status, and actually make him more of a character instead of a shallow bishonen caricature.

Not to mention that unlike Dante, Alucard has very specific weaknesses and limitations. He can't survive anything, and if he does, there's always a perfectly-legitimate reason as to why...or, he suffers some kind of massive consequence. When he came close to dying at the hands of Anderson, he barely clung to his livelihood...but his survival rendered him 1/16th as powerful as he was initially, since Anderson had destroyed all of the "extra lives" Alucard summoned upon unleashing Level Zero.
When he survived Schrodinger's "poisoning" of all the lives he was trying to absorb, he managed to return 30 years later...severly weakened, without a single drop of blood in his body, and only one of his overpowered and devastating abilities left: the ability to be everywhere and nowhere, the last power he absorbed before he was utterly destroyed.

Not only can Alucard be killed, but he also has specific means of being killed...and specific reasons for surviving, that not only build him up as a character, but compliment the weight of the narrative.

Dante is just invincible without any real explanation or detailed limitations as a result of lazy conception, and poorly-developed as a result. Whatever pain he feels is minimal, whatever defeat he suffers is practically non-existent...and whatever invincibility he possesses just makes him weak and shallow as a character.

Yeah I'm not trying to turn it into a debate, cause I actually do really love both characters (Alucard's my favorite Dracula, while D was one of my many influences when coming up with my own dhampir character) I just think that needs to be taken into account as, like i said, vampires grow stronger with age, also they feel the need to say D technically has more experience. It be an awesome fight either way though

D's one of my favorite fictional characters as well, actually...particularily because most of his characteristics and origins provided a signifcant amount of inspiration for the later incarnates of Castlevania's Alucard. Konami even pays some small homage to D in Castlevania: Curse of Darkness.

My favorite depiction of Dracula, however, has to go to Gary Oldman's depiction in the Francis Ford Coppla movie. Hellsing's Alucard is cool, but he's a little bit too psychotic to be my favorite interpretation of the character. On his worst possible day, Dracula is many things: vile, cruel, sadistic, malevolent....but batsh!t crazy? I don't know about that.

Lords of Shadow's Dracula came damn close to the Coppola Dracula, though. An excellent interpretation of the character, to be sure.

 

[AgentRedgrave]

Yeah...he unlocks his Inner Devil mere seconds after he's defeated. And then he proceeds to repeat the same process of never being defeated every single time he fights an enemy for the rest of the series.

He was defeated once, and it had all the consequence and weight of every other time he was stabbed in the heart or shot in the face...NONE.

Okay you got me there

...except that Alucard actually had to suffer a lifetime of agonizing pain, oppression, humilation, guilt and numerous defeats before he ever got the luxury of being all-powerful.

He endures defeat at the hands of many characters throughout the canon of Hellsing, one such defeat rendering him so miserable that he dedicates his life towards a single goal: to find death at the hands of a human being, worthy of slaying the ultimate vampire. Almost every loss he's endured has shaped him as a character, and every bit physical and emotional trauma ended up molding Alucard's persona...something that Dante doesn't experience EVEN ONCE over the course of the Devil May Cry mythos; he's just too perfect to face the hard reality or endurance of a real loss. It would damage his "Oh-my-God-so-OP-could-curbstomp-anyone-any-day-of-the-week" status, and actually make him more of a character instead of a shallow bishonen caricature.

Not to mention that unlike Dante, Alucard has very specific weaknesses and limitations. He can't survive anything, and if he does, there's always a perfectly-legitimate reason as to why...or, he suffers some kind of massive consequence. When he came close to dying at the hands of Anderson, he barely clung to his livelihood...but his survival rendered him 1/16th as powerful as he was initially, since Anderson had destroyed all of the "extra lives" Alucard summoned upon unleashing Level Zero.
When he survived Schrodinger's "poisoning" of all the lives he was trying to absorb, he managed to return 30 years later...severly weakened, without a single drop of blood in his body, and only one of his overpowered and devastating abilities left: the ability to be everywhere and nowhere, the last power he absorbed before he was utterly destroyed.

Not only can Alucard be killed, but he also has specific means of being killed...and specific reasons for surviving, that not only build him up as a character, but compliment the weight of the narrative.

Dante is just invincible without any real explanation or detailed limitations as a result of lazy conception, and poorly-developed as a result. Whatever pain he feels is minimal, whatever defeat he suffers is practically non-existent...and whatever invincibility he possesses just makes him weak and shallow as a character.

.

I would argue that Dante had to suffer losing his family. I just see Dante as the type of guy who doesn't let his troubles get to him. I don't think it's that he doesn't feel pain, i think he just doesn't openly express it. If that makes sense

D's one of my favorite fictional characters as well, actually...particularily because most of his characteristics and origins provided a signifcant amount of inspiration for the later incarnates of Castlevania's Alucard. Konami even pays some small homage to D in Castlevania: Curse of Darkness.

My favorite depiction of Dracula, however, has to go to Gary Oldman's depiction in the Francis Ford Coppla movie. Hellsing's Alucard is cool, but he's a little bit too psychotic to be my favorite interpretation of the character. On his worst possible day, Dracula is many things: vile, cruel, sadistic, malevolent....but batsh!t crazy? I don't know about that.

Lords of Shadow's Dracula came damn close to the Coppola Dracula, though. An excellent interpretation of the character, to be sure.

Lol, dude LoS Dracula, and Gary Oldman are actually my other two favorite Draculas

 

[WolfOD64]

I would argue that Dante had to suffer losing his family. I just see Dante as the type of guy who doesn't let his troubles get to him. I don't think it's that he doesn't feel pain, i think he just doesn't openly express it. If that makes sense

True, but all that incident does is gives the narrative an excuse to propel him in the direction of the whole "Mundus-killed-my-mommy-and-now-I'm-getting-revenge-plot"...like giving a superhero vague and simplistic origins, and then running with it.

It doesn't really shape him as a character, and it certainly does nothing to add to his personality or experience as a character. You could remove that entire portion of his origins, and it wouldn't change a thing about how arrogant and egotistical he acts within the context of the game.

But that's something that applies to the New Dante, as well...he didn't react to the news of his mothers' death with any real lasting impact. But a lot of the events that did shape him as a character---Phineas's teachings, Kat's torture/kidnapping, Vergil's betrayal---DID develop him in a lot of real ways.

Lol, dude LoS Dracula, and Gary Oldman are actually my other two favorite Draculas

Judging by your Avatar, I didn't have to guess that you were somewhat infatuated with Lords of Shadow. :thumbsup:

 

[absolitude]

Lol, Alucard aint scared of his own son lol

D is alucard's son? serious?

D's one of my favorite fictional characters as well, actually...particularily because most of his characteristics and origins provided a signifcant amount of inspiration for the later incarnates of Castlevania's Alucard. Konami even pays some small homage to D in Castlevania: Curse of Darkness.

what homage in curse of darkness?

 

[AgentRedgrave]

D is alucard's son? serious?

Well technically. D is the son of Dracula, and Alucard is Dracula.

 

[WolfOD64]

D is alucard's son? serious?

Well technically. D is the son of Dracula, and Alucard is Dracula.

...Not, technically...
Alucard and D are both based off two different timelines, anyway...
Alucard is based off of Dracula if he Van Helsing spared him, bound him as the eternal servant of the Hellsing Family.
D is based off an post-apocalyptic universe where an all-powerful Dracula---who was never defeated by anyone, least of all Abraham Van Helsing---established himself as the forefather of the Nobility (the lineage of vampires occupying D's world), with D being his off-spring as a result of his experimentation with a human female.

what homage in curse of darkness?

One of Hector's forgeable armors, the Clown Suit, is described as "worn by the heroic Vampire Hunter Comesafter C. Filled with the rage of those he killed."
What letter comes after "C"? Take a wild guess...[/QUOTE]

 

[absolitude]

oh ofc, i forgot about this.. curse of darkness was one of my fav game, must be sure i didn't miss anything,

 

[WolfOD64]

oh ofc, i forgot about this.. curse of darkness was one of my fav game, must be sure i didn't miss anything,

Love Curse of Darkness. I just got an Xbox recently, and I'm probably going to pick up CoD for it. Heard it looks way better than the PS2 version.

 

[LordOfDarkness]

Oh my...

I'm starting to feel as if some of my hopes and expectations from some of you lot are going, and fast.

I've been here before, seen it before. At first it starts off with somebody pitting Dante up against somebody else. Mundus, Vergil, another incarnation of himself. And then it just ends up with the same result after a few pages. Dante against any other damn character everybody can think of which leads to more pages that actually constitute as being off-topic.

I mentioned a couple of pages back that these types of threads were once banned. And how now you guys are lucky enough that we just about tolerate them. Well, my tolerance is out of the window. And whether this is ultimately fair or not, I think it's for the best.

Thread locked.