DmC Intellectual Discussion

[seraphmaycry]

Totally agree on that, a more open ending would have been awesome. That's why I'd really like to see Vergil regain his wita and becoming a beacon for humanity in their fight against demons. Not that this is going to happen anytime soon after VD but a fangirl still can dream right?

a fangirl can but DmC will remain biased forever possibly DmC2 as well just like every video game the sam plot happens "i am the good guy" "i am the bad guy and am more powerful, you dies now" "ARGH IM DYING (miracle occurs stupid speech is made) now YOU die" a good example of why most movies are not worth watching their target intelligence for people my age is about that of a good little sheepie that allows follows the rules

 

[VineBigBoss]

I don't think it's purely a question about anarchy x state. Dante never stated anything about the state itself, more about the way Mundus' controlled people, i think he would not interfere if a human government stabilishs itself in the world, he was defensive with Vergil because he believed that a nephilim rulling over humans would not be different from a demon rulling humans, he values freedom but even excessive freedom kills freedom itself; if i had the freedom to kill anyone who stands in my way or anyone that i disliked for sure i would be taking their most important freedom (life) away with my power, the same goes for everyone in this world.

A lot of questions remain without a proper answer to think about this. But i'm a political libertarian with a conservative (judeo-christian) personal view of the world, i think i cannot interfere with others lives through laws or force (that's why God gave us free-will in the first place) unless they harm innocent people, i think the only real justice can only come from Perfection and Perfection is only possible in the realm of Divine and not in the natural world that is only a flawled reflection of the Divine, so i don't try to regulate peoples lives but i stand to defend those who are good if i have the power to do so; so, in a certain way, i think that people are better with a state that just prevents people from causing harm to other people in a direct way.

 

[Railazel]

So, I can assume that the majority of views here are optimistic of humanity's future? I would imagine so but you guys have to remember that what Limbo is facing is different from other disasters in that three of them are happening at the same time. But I would like to move on from this subject and on to another one.

Now, VineBigBoss, while the game doesn't outright state it, Dante himself does have an antagonism towards how the world is structured. To be exact, in the beginning of the game, as much as he hated demons, he never cared for how they ran the world until the end of the game where he would prefer total freedom over any control, even if his brother was the one running things. Basically, the game does have an anti- establishment message, my question is how do you think the ending contributes to that message? I personally believe that the ending portrays the result of violent revolution, destructive but enforcing a need to build from the ground up.

 

[Chancey289]

So, I can assume that the majority of views here are optimistic of humanity's future? I would imagine so but you guys have to remember that what Limbo is facing is different from other disasters in that three of them are happening at the same time. But I would like to move on from this subject and on to another one.

Now, VineBigBoss, while the game doesn't outright state it, Dante himself does have an antagonism towards how the world is structured. To be exact, in the beginning of the game, as much as he hated demons, he never cared for how they ran the world until the end of the game where he would prefer total freedom over any control, even if his brother was the one running things. Basically, the game does have an anti- establishment message, my question is how do you think the ending contributes to that message? I personally believe that the ending portrays the result of violent revolution, destructive but enforcing a need to build from the ground up.

Dante has always had the ideal of fighting against oppression. It's why his sword is named Rebellion. Vergil is not an ideal leader. He's not a good person. Vergil was using people as means to an end just because he's power hungry. That's why Dante had to stop him. I honestly don't see why there was even a debate of who's in the right or wrong because it's clearly Vergil. He's the bad guy. Dante is fighting the hero's fight.

And DmC isn't trying to pass on some anarchic influence. It's a social satire yes but, it's not saying "fight the power, bring anarchy." That's just silly. The game doesn't seem to take itself too seriously as it is very over the top with how the propaganda is even presented in that world.

I don't think anyone should take DmC seriously. It's clearly not taking itself seriously or asking the audience to. It's just simply a social satire and that's all.

 

[Demi-fiend]

I don't think anyone should take DmC seriously. It's clearly not taking itself seriously or asking the audience to. It's just simply a social satire and that's all.

Oh... um, I see. Well, I took it seriously, and will continue to do so. At the very least, I'll take certain aspects seriously while leaving the others behind.

Most people would rather die on their feet then live on their knees.

Oh, how I wish this were true. I'm sorry, it's just that, looking at recent events... I honestly don't think this an entirely accurate statement. Not saying you're lying, just saying you might be wrong. Maybe.

 

[LysseC]

I don't think anyone should take DmC seriously. It's clearly not taking itself seriously or asking the audience to. It's just simply a social satire and that's all.

Surely I'm not going to take DmC as my moral becaon in this world, but even if it doesn't take himself completely seriously it still touches very important issues, and it can be taken as a suggestion for beginning a more serious debate.

 

[MephistoCarnival]

Surely I'm not going to take DmC as my moral becaon in this world, but even if it doesn't take himself completely seriously it still touches very important issues, and it can be taken as a suggestion for beginning a more serious debate.

To be sincere,the majority of people know about political corruption,DmC doesn't bring something unique or original either.
If we look at how many important political events happened this year,I wouldn't say people are so 'blind'. (starting with the ones in Greece,Brasil,Texas etc)
DmC just put the problem from another perspective involving supernatural elements and such,it's not that much of a great issue,because I've seen it done many times before. It's a video game after all,which just showed facts that are widely known in these times.It shouldn't be taken so seriously but it's okay in its own way,I wouldn't call it something really impressive.

 

[MultiBro]

What made me scratch my head about the political situation in DmC is that they just mention it briefly but never do anything with it. Vergil mentions that they have inside info and whatnot but never once do they actually do anything with it. Same goes with how desperatly Vergil wants to protect their mainserver but it's not like Vergil would keep a file about himself on that server right?

 

[TWOxACROSS]

What made me scratch my head about the political situation in DmC is that they just mention it briefly but never do anything with it. Vergil mentions that they have inside info and whatnot but never once do they actually do anything with it. Same goes with how desperatly Vergil wants to protect their mainserver but it's not like Vergil would keep a file about himself on that server right?

It's just things that are known but aren't necessarily integral to the story being told. Mundus controls the economic/political stratum with debt, but it's not as important as his overall oppression, and how he rules over everything in demon-human dichotomy.

NT may have planned a lot of different things that time and resources just didn't allow them to get to. That's my guess. I remember their mention of popstars being part of demons, too. Another missed opportunity that could have been interesting. It's possible Devil's Dalliance could be a remnant of something to do with popstars

It's just something that happens. I'm currently writing up all this extra stuff that fills out a bunch of background information. There's so much that isn't exactly necessary to the plot, but still serves to illustrate the entire setting. I sorta think that it's become a thing with audiences to expect every bit of information we ever learn or hear in a story to have some sort of significance. Probably comes from wanting to be able to see if they can figure out a twist or somethin' before it reveals itself, haha.

With the server, I think it has to do with knowing what you're enemy knows. Think of how you could win against an enemy knowing everything they do, even things like them planning to exploit weaknesses you might overlook. Not to mention information on other supporters of The Order's cause and suppliers and stuff like that.

 

[LysseC]

To be sincere,the majority of people know about political corruption,DmC doesn't bring something unique or original either.
If we look at how many important political events happened this year,I wouldn't say people are so 'blind'. (starting with the ones in Greece,Brasil,Texas etc)
DmC just put the problem from another perspective involving supernatural elements and such,it's not that much of a great issue,because I've seen it done many times before. It's a video game after all,which just showed facts that are widely known in these times.It shouldn't be taken so seriously but it's okay in its own way,I wouldn't call it something really impressive.

That's not exactly what I was talking about: I was referring to the conflict between Dante and Vergil at the end of Mission 20, that, although only through brief hints, raises the great problems of freedom and democracy.
I agree with you that DmC doesn't give a great insight of such problems: as you already said, it's not a video game's job to do so.
Point is, they still are there, an element that was not really present in DMC for example. For someone like me, who has a great interest in such issues, this can only be listed as a pro of the game, even if a small one.

 

[MephistoCarnival]

That's not exactly what I was talking about: I was referring to the conflict between Dante and Vergil at the end of Mission 20, that, although only through brief hints, raises the great problems of freedom and democracy.
I agree with you that DmC doesn't give a great insight of such problems: as you already said, it's not a video game's job to do so.
Point is, they still are there, an element that was not really present in DMC for example. For someone like me, who has a great interest in such issues, this can only be listed as a pro of the game, even if a small one.

I also have interest in politics.I have been interested for a long time and I'm still interested,not to add I'm an activist.But a video game for me remains a form of entertainment rather than a real important world issue.
DMC and DmC for me are two different things because each of them focuses on a different aspect so I take them separated. I can like both but for different circumstances.

 

[Railazel]

Vergil is not an ideal leader. He's not a good person. Vergil was using people as means to an end just because he's power hungry. I honestly don't see why there was even a debate of who's in the right or wrong because it's clearly Vergil. He's the bad guy.

That's actually very arguable and depends on how you place Vergil as being "wrong" or "bad". To get one point out of the way, generally, power- hungry guys don't share their power. Vergil seemed very open to share his power with his brother, so I don't think power was his major motivation. I also can't say that he has done anything that would put him in the "villain" category as he hasn't done anything evil by the game's standards. I would say that Vergil is fueled by the same idea that motivated Dante: to get rid of Mundus' oppression. The problem was that Vergil held the view that people were lesser beings which is what scared Dante. Whether that makes him a bad leader or not is also up to question. If you're going to be a leader, you have to place a certain value on people. Placing too much would make hesitant when a decision could risk their lives. On the other hand, placing too little would simply make you cold- hearted.

Now, as for how serious the game actually portrays all this, I can definitely say that it doesn't. I'm just making this discussion because I like doing so. Intellectual discussions are the best kind after all.

 

[Demi-fiend]

snip

Damn, you just gave me a reason to take Vergil's side.

 

[Chancey289]

That's actually very arguable and depends on how you place Vergil as being "wrong" or "bad". To get one point out of the way, generally, power- hungry guys don't share their power. Vergil seemed very open to share his power with his brother, so I don't think power was his major motivation. I also can't say that he has done anything that would put him in the "villain" category as he hasn't done anything evil by the game's standards. I would say that Vergil is fueled by the same idea that motivated Dante: to get rid of Mundus' oppression. The problem was that Vergil held the view that people were lesser beings which is what scared Dante. Whether that makes him a bad leader or not is also up to question. If you're going to be a leader, you have to place a certain value on people. Placing too much would make hesitant when a decision could risk their lives. On the other hand, placing too little would simply make you cold- hearted.

Now, as for how serious the game actually portrays all this, I can definitely say that it doesn't. I'm just making this discussion because I like doing so. Intellectual discussions are the best kind after all.

Vergil thinks he is better than everyone because of his demonic heritage. He considered humans beneath him. Him offering Dante a place by his side was him hoping Dante would feel the same because he does love his brother. Just look at the events leading up to their final battle at the end of DmC.

Dante just sees that Vergil wasn't fighting for liberation but his chance to take Mundus's throne. That was his plan all along. And he also obviously sees people who were suppose to be his friends as expendable. The way he just abandoned Kat and wasn't going to save her after she was captured shows how much people mean to him. He doesn't want to go out of his way to save Kat. Kat is nothing to him but an asset that pretty much served her purpose at that point. Dante was the most important person to Vergil. Not just because he was his brother and he had love for him but because Dante was a very important key to achieving his goal.

Vergil isn't a good person and he sure as hell isn't an ideal leader. I wouldn't follow the guy who also views me as some lesser being. You want to argue there is some gray area of what's right and wrong here. On one hand with Dante you are getting freedom. Now, what we do with that freedom is up to you. That's how it should be though.

While humans are an imperfect species to act like we need a babysitter is sure as hell not giving us enough credit. Just look at what has been accomplished. When you look on the positive end of the spectrum we are truly extraordinary people.

There's no telling what Vergil would do down the line. Maybe he has good intentions but, don't blame me for being skeptical when I also know how he is willing to use people for his own selfish gain. And I wouldn't trade freedom for stability. That's freaking dystopian terrors right there.

 

[Demi-fiend]

And I wouldn't trade freedom for stability. That's freaking dystopian terrors right there.