I don't know why people are acting like the change is "too extreme"

[ZeroLove]

But the old DMCs were easy to learn?

I've been playing DMC for about 3 years now and do the "almighty" combos people speak of, however when I bought the game that wasn't my intention. I enjoyed how accessible the combat was which kept me coming back and I was a terrible, TERRIBLE player. Then I saw the advanced things and becuase of my confidence from how accessible everything was I thought I'd have a go. I failed at first but rather than just saying "oh that's too hard" I stuck with it and the rewarding feeling has been great. It gave me something to do when the experience was finished and has kept me playing all this time and it all stems from the initial accessibility I had.

What exactly makes DmC more accessible gameplay wise than DMC?

That's the thing... Is DmC different in the sense of accessibility? Well, people say it is alot easier, even on the harder difficulties.

The original series was full of tricks which we see the more experienced players use.... those tricks aren't really stuff casual gamers know how to do and unless you practise it, it's not something they will ever make use of.

 

[SpawnShooter]

Controls. I'm surprised you haven't figured it out yet.

Rather than being surprised perhaps you could elaborate. Moves are easier to perform, they follow Fitts law better?

EDIT:

That's the thing... Is DmC different in the sense of accessibility? Well, people say it is alot easier, even on the harder difficulties.

The original series was full of tricks which we see the more experienced players use.... those tricks aren't really stuff casual gamers know how to do and unless you practise it, it's not something they will ever make use of.

Ok so are we talking accessability from an input perspective (as GF9000 is putting it), game difficulty perspective or ranking perspective here?

 

[Marionette Cherry]

Off topic:
You guys might hate it, but debating and arguing is good as long as we don't call each other names. these sorts of things will help you get even better at debating and persuading, etc.

 

[CheeseKao]

Off topic:
You guys might hate it, but debating and arguing is good as long as we don't call each other names. these sorts of things will help you get even better at debating and persuading, etc.

The problem is things almost always go from hell to a handbasket in this forum.

 

[GF9000000Returns]

Actually no, you're saying that apparently i shouldn't be rewarded for putting in practice and getting rewarded for it, that instead i should be satisfied with a battle system so pathetically easy that it only tailors to people who don't care about that sort of thing. I'm selfish for apparently wanting something easy to pick up but difficult to master. THIS is what you imply and THAT is what gets on my nerves. Why should i be denied when all i want is to feel rewarded for my efforts? Not all gamers play for the simple satisfaction of just finishing the story, some of us like to have reason for continued play and to challenge our own personal limits. DmC does NOT offer this on the scale of previous games and that's what i was trying to discuss here.


You paint a picture of me wanting a game that's too hard for "casuals" to pick up, which i'm calling you out for as a load of bull, ever since i started posting in this thread i've never even HINTED at wanting any player shut out, instead i'm making a case for why the style system could have been better implemented into DMC4 and by extension future DMC/DmC games. So that everybody can have fun, feel good about the moves they're doing while giving that extension to players who like to chain together all those combos and rack up a massive score by performing in style.

So tell me again exactly, how am i being selfish, as opposed to you who says "Gaming isn't about what you want." It SHOULD be what i want. It SHOULD be what others like me want. But that says NOTHING about it not being able to be what YOU want too.

*smh* Just read this...

http://www.gamesradar.com/the-death-of-hardcore-gaming/

That's what I'm talking about. I understand where you and the others are coming from but like I said again, today's gamers aren't all about learning curves. If you want a HnS game with real learning curves, there's Metal Gear Rising.

 

[SpawnShooter]

*smh* Just read this...

http://www.gamesradar.com/the-death-of-hardcore-gaming/

That's what I'm talking about. I understand where you and the others are coming from but like I said again, today's gamers aren't all about learning curves. If you want a HnS game with real learning curves, there's Metal Gear Rising.

But the point we're trying to make is that in DMC you never had to be hardcore to complete it. There were multiple difficulties and an automatic mode for those that combat went over their head.

The "hardcore" side only existed for those that wanted it and it was never forced on any player.

 

[GF9000000Returns]

But the point we're trying to make is that in DMC you never had to be hardcore to complete it. There were multiple difficulties and an automatic mode for those combat went over the head.

The "hardcore" side only existed for those that wanted it and it was never forced on any player.

I understand that, and I wasn't playing hardcore in the original games too back then. It's just the fact that people are b*tching about Capcom making DmC for the casuals. If it's time for a game to tone down its toughness, then you let it go and move on to other games that you think are hard to master.

 

[Rayl]

You've not read what i said carefully enough, read again and you'll see what i'm saying is:

"Easy to play, hard to master" That doesn't mean you're unable to play it without huge amounts of practice, it's that there's more depth to the combat system if you care enough to look. Something for everybody regardless of how you choose to play.

I understand that, and I wasn't playing hardcore in the original games too back then. It's just the fact that people are b*tching about Capcom making DmC for the casuals. If it's time for a game to tone down its toughness, then you let it go and move on to other games that you think are hard to master.

Incorrect, i want a DMC game that allows me to play in a many number of ways. Not just a few.

 

[SpawnShooter]

I understand that, and I wasn't playing hardcore in the original games too back then. It's just the fact that people are b*tching about Capcom making DmC for the casuals. If it's time for a game to tone down its toughness, then you let it go and move on to other games that you think are hard to master.

Well for me personally I really liked the universe of DMC and the way the combat worked at a basic level. I've never been too interested in the difficulty range it's just a nice bonus to have in something you loved. So for me there wasn't any "I'm playing this because it's hardcore" I just enjoyed everything so wanted to get better.

While these are basically the reason of my disdain towards DmC I just get confused when people say DMC is not accessible when it was the most accessible action game I feel I've ever played.
I completely agree that the advanced mechanics of the game are not accessible though so is that where you are coming from? you feel that everyone should be able to perform the game at a high level?

 

[Marionette Cherry]

"Let's play Chess"
"Sure, I've never played before but I'll give it a go" < accessibility
*Further in the game*
"wow, you're kicking my butt, I think I'm getting the hang of it" < Learning curve
"Damn, good game, to bad I lost, maybe next time we play a game I'll be a bit better" < Willing to put in an effort to learn the game and get better at it.

I think that's a good comparison to a video game and a okay example in my opinion of anything being accessible like Mega man, DMC, any fighting game, etc. but if you want to be good at it you need to learn how the games work without being spoonfed.

Same as riding a bike, gotta take off those training wheels sometime, if you ever hope to ride it properly you should take them off.

 

[CheeseKao]

DMC - easy to learn how to play
DmC - esier to learn how to play

Therefore, DmC is by definition more acessible than DMC.





I'm just screwing around btw.

 

[GF9000000Returns]

Well for me personally I really liked the universe of DMC and the way the combat worked at a basic level. I've never been too interested in the difficulty range it's just a nice bonus to have in something you loved. So for me there wasn't any "I'm playing this because it's hardcore" I just enjoyed everything so wanted to get better.

While these are basically the reason of my disdain towards DmC I just get confused when people say DMC is not accessible when it was the most accessible action game I feel I've ever played.
I completely agree that the advanced mechanics of the game are not accessible though so is that where you are coming from? you feel that everyone should be able to perform the game at a high level?

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. Sometimes it's best to stay away from a game that might break one of your buttons or sticks and then waste $50 for a new one.

"Let's play Chess"
"Sure, I've never played before but I'll give it a go" < accessibility
*Further in the game*
"wow, you're kicking my butt, I think I'm getting the hang of it" < Learning curve
"Damn, good game, to bad I lost, maybe next time we play a game I'll be a bit better" < Willing to put in an effort to learn the game and get better at it.

I think that's a good comparison to a video game and a okay example in my opinion of anything being accessible like Mega man, DMC, any fighting game, etc. but if you want to be good at it you need to learn how the games work without being spoonfed.

Same as riding a bike, gotta take off those training wheels sometime, if you ever hope to ride it properly you should take them off.

That's a good example, but it's still won't change the fact that it's not about what today's gaming is about. DmC may not have its "hardcore" learning curve, but it has its "casual" one.

 

[Marionette Cherry]

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. Sometimes it's best to stay away from a game that might break one of your buttons or sticks and then waste $50 for a new one.



That's a good example, but it's still won't change the fact that it's not about what today's gaming is about. DmC may not have its "hardcore" learning curve, but it has its "casual" one.

I guess, I'm starting to sound like a broken record now anyway.

 

[SpawnShooter]

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. Sometimes it's best to stay away from a game that might break one of your buttons or sticks and then waste $50 for a new one.

Learning advanced combat won't break a gamepad more than any other game will, it just depends on the user. If they go around smashing buttons they probably will break a few controllers, but that's the person playing. I doubt they would input a different way in DmC for example.

 

[Gorbashou]

Now I'm coming really late into the discussion here, it seems like the hot topic right now in the thread is about how DMC combat is different from DmC, and their accessibility.

Both are really accessible, and DmC might even have some hard moves and tricks just like DMC3 and DMC4 were filled of, I'd say that both games are equally accessible since I feel exactly like Spawnshooter. When I got DMC3 and played for the first time I loved it because of its simplicity and easy to use combos, it wasn't about mastering input to do a single move, but it was about chaining together moves creatively whilst avoiding whatever the enemies are throwing at you.
How long can I play seamlessly without a pause or misstep in my comboing? Can I clear full fights in one gigantic combo? These things are what I thought about instead of "I gotta master the way of doing a Stinger seamlessly, I always mess up performing it".
Both DmC and DMC keep this, they have that simplicity and accessibility, however, they do it very differently.
And that's where everything splits. The basics of DmC combat mechanics and DMC combat mechanics are very very different, both are simple for sure, but they aren't the same. Similar movesets and styles are in the games, but you have to agree the feeling of playing DmC and DMC is different, because the systems are built up differently.
I myself usually want something based out of the core mechanics of its predecessor in a series, in which it improves on.

What makes me think the change is so extreme is that they changed everything, and when you change everything in a thing it's a pretty extreme change.

Now if this is a question of accessibility or difficulty of a game I'll try to make a comparison between DMC3 and DMC4:
Many agree that DMC4 is easier than DMC3 when it comes to difficulty, but one thing always remained certain, in DMC3 you only had 1 style active, 2 guns, and 2 devil arms at one time, you never feel overwhelmed by the amount of options you have at your disposal and it gives a hard challenge in which you can overcome with simple actions.
DMC4 stepped it up so you can have everything available at all times, 5 styles, 3 guns, 3 devil arms. Many feels that the game is instantly complex when you start out as Dante and got so much to pick from. However, having this many options immediatly, isn't that what accessibility really is?
Every move is still simple to perform, you don't have to use every single move immediatly, and you don't need to be a mastermind. You can beat DMC4 with 1 style, 1 gun and 1 devil arm on any difficulty still, and without much extra hardship.
DMC3 was hard and had a few options whilst DMC4 wasn't equally hard but had so many options it could feel overwhelming.
But neither of these are less accessible for this. They both have a nice curve in difficulty.

DmC has this curve as well, but many feel that is goes slate far too soon and that it doesn't really develop into this complex state that DMC4 Dante has. Everything isn't explored yet in DmC, so the possibility of something being there might still be there, but for some players who prefer the feeling of DMC's combat mechanics they will still stick to it and continue to prefer it.

 

[DragonMaster2010]

You people are so entertaining.

 

[Lionheart]

Then ponder this.

Think 12 years back. Take whatever you thought was cool then. Not just Dante, but in general.
Now, would those things be considered cool today? The answer should generally be no. And do you know why? Because times are changing. The definition of cool is different from person to person, but what is generally seen as cool is a definition that is different today than what it was 12 years ago. So he isn't really wrong in that statement.

I thought Star Trek (many kinds of the show) were pretty cool, and they still are. Times changing has very little to do with it. I can watch a documentary from the friggin sixties and go ''hey, that's actually better than most **** on TV today''.

I hate people who go ''times are changing, therefore what's cool is changing''. Not really. It just reminds me of those morons who keep saying old DMC fans don't like change (in general). It's a weak, inaccurate assumption. Something tells me Star Trek was hated by some people at that time as well, who are probably the same kind of people who hate it today. The times don't change people THAT much.

 

[Lionheart]

Going by your logic, if I say "Calculus isn't difficult", I'm saying that calculus is factually easy since I did not put the phrase "in my opinion" in my sentence. One doesn't need to put that phrase in as any rational thinking person would know how to differentiate between opinions and facts.

You have to keep in mind that Ninja Theory isn't talking as just one person, it has a certain status to it; it's a game developer for God's sake, so a developer saying ''what was cool then isn't cool now'' really comes off as a researched view, not just as an opinion. Tameem was the one who said it, but he's also the head of a corporation. Of course we know it's an opinion, but you can't just pretend your opinion has more value than anyone else's.

 

[BLACKSWIPE]

I'm going to offer my unbiased opinion here. DmC was a very good game in terms of the Hack n' Slash department. Its enjoyable to play and it gives you a nice variety of things to play with. Combat is as deep as you want it to be, meaning it can be almost deep as the other games if you want it to be. Though at the end of the day DmC still lacks in the department of a greater variety that DMC4 had. DMC4 gave you a skill list that could be used in nearly every way, any way you wanted. Its unbelievably fun to launch your enemy up into the air, then blast their face off with a lazer from pandora. It was fast, it was fun and there was an insane amount of things to do. But DmC partially lives up to that combat, it still gives you a wide variety of things to work with. In the visual department, DmC was a beautiful game and never ceased to capture my imagination. However the game lacked just a few elements of story that I would have liked to see, but I'll take this over DMC4 anyday.

Just because its mildly easy doesn't make it that much of a bad game. I'd rather have fun then get my ass beat into the ground every eight seconds, and have to restart the level over for the 7,000th time. (Keep in mind that I still enjoy a good challenge, its just that I'll take a fun experience over that any day.) Its still a very good game that deserves some credit for still being a Devil May Cry game. They worked very hard on this and you can seriously tell though every painstaking little detail.

Ninja theory is still a very new studio. The do not have the same experience as team little devil or the guys over at Capcom JP. They are still correcting their flaws and still trying to discover who they really are. Give them a break, you can't obviously expect for a studio with only two games under its belt to make your devil may cry dream game. Give them time to improve on themselves and their skills, and I can guarantee you that DmC2 will be one of the best damn Devil May Cry games yet.

 

[Rayl]

Don't have a problem with most of that except a few little tidbits:

DmC isn't as deep as you want it to be because each weapon only has so many moves, it can't be anywhere near the depth of the other games because your play style changes in accordance with each style, DmC limits itself not on the amount of moves each weapon has but by limiting how many ways you can approach the same situation, guns only have so many uses without gunslinger and i can't even bring royal guard to the party because it's not there, battles can be fought in several interesting ways even with the same weapon loadout as the last but with a different style going in, let alone being able to actually change the style mid fight.

One moment i can be zipping around into a better tactical position using trickster and then i can decide where to go from there, do i use gunslinger and unleash a few volleys of rain storm before switching to swordmaster, crashing down and unleashing a few combos in the middle of the crowd? Or do i fly past them all and prepare to unleash the stock of royal guard power i have?

In essence, DmC's variety with it's combos isn't THAT limited however with the lack of additional play style options the choices ARE cut dramatically.

As for cutting NT a break, i'll grant the Vergil gameplay seems to be an improvement over what they originally brought to the table but at the same time being a new studio doesn't excuse them the moment they accepted such a big responsibility, i don't envy taking it on so kudos to them having the balls to do it, they did take more then they gave back and there's no real excuse for it. I just hope they learn from it and if they're chosen to make another DMC game then i hope that it shows.