DMC2 had it possibilites that a majority missed out on?

  • Welcome to the Devil May Cry Community Forum!

    We're a group of fans who are passionate about the Devil May Cry series and video gaming.

    Register Log in

Honestly, I found the game very entertaining in terms of combat, and I think the game deserved a better score than it received. BUT, as I enjoyed the previous game mostly because of Dante's playful personality, I couldn't help myself but think how Dante became from a ninja turtle to a murky cliche character.

Other than that, the game was very decent. For the first time in the history of Capcom, it didn't sexualize the female characters, the bosses were okay, albeit very easy and the level design although sometimes very dark was nonetheless good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MigsRZXAStylish
Ya I gotta agree Dante had no personality , however his attire and styling were badass.The combat had really nice touches and although some of the enemies sucked , some of the bosses were cool as were the secret rooms and bloody palace.You just gotta experiment with the gameplay and combat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MigsRZXAStylish
I dunno, I agree that its bashed on a little too harshly but it just felt so easy.
Im positive you could beat the game by just spamming Pistols and DT.
All the acrobatic moves and animations are really cool tho.
 
Oh yes the difficulty was terrible it had no proper challenge except on DMD.However DMD pales in comparison to the others, it is harder than normal on DMC 1 but less difficult than hard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MigsRZXAStylish
Oh yes the difficulty was terrible it had no proper challenge except on DMD.However DMD pales in comparison to the others, it is harder than normal on DMC 1 but less difficult than hard.
Its a shame too because some of the boss designs are really neat.
 
The problem with DMC2 is that it came out after DMC1. Although a fun game, with some interesting elements added in (circle being the proto-trickster style, ability to change weapons, etc.), it was an overall downgrade from DMC1. A sequel should be a lot better than its predecessor, like DMC3 was to the earlier games. This is why DMC3 is generally praised as the best in the series, and DMC4 gets mixed feelings from fans; DMC4 was definitely a good game, and REALLY polished up Dante's mechanics, but forcing Nero on us and sacrificing Dante time, backtracking, lack of bosses, gopping story, etc. let it down as a whole.

If we judge the games solely on gameplay mechanics, then IMO it would look like this: 4-3-2-1 as each sequel brought something new to the table. If however we judge the games as an overall package including mechanics, fun of combat, story, arsenal, replay value, importance of skill based playing, etc. it would, IMO, look more like: 3-4-1-2.


tl;dr - 2 is a great game, but it's overshadowed by the fact that its predecessor was a vastly better game
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kaim Argonar
I gotta agree with you on that , if they had allowed you to earn devil arms with more moves and given better enemies and levels similar to dmc1's Gothic style, then it could have been great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MigsRZXAStylish
I now admit I have come to realize I have been jumping in the typical DMC fan bandwagon when I saw this thread. Guess I was biased towards DMC2 due to the easy difficulty and gameplay it offered...

According to Kamiya-san, he would've ended Dante's journey up to there. And then DMC3 would've starred his replacement, a descendant of his. It could possibly have been Nero. I did make a thread in the DMC General Discussions sub-forum here that Kamiya-san would've made DMC similar to Castlevania in terms of setting and plot (not exactly on 2D gameplay).