This is the only attempt you make to even pretend to address a point I raised in that earlier post
Because it's a trivial matter where ultimately it's very subjective. You wish there was fighting during the credits, I do too. There wasn't. It doesn't mean the game is anything less than what it is for not having that.
You kept saying that "DmC is a hack 'n' slash, so I should have been able to kill demons during the credits!" Sure, why not? But that's not what happened, and it's like you're ignoring every other portion of the game you just played where you did
just that. A little extra random horde fighting would be fun, but it not being there didn't just reduce the value of the game.
It amounted to you just sounding like a little kid wanting more out of the game when the game's replayability through missions and the Bloody Palace give you exactly what you want, but no, you want to fight during the credits for some reason, as if it's inextricably important to the game's quality.
Then there's how you said that by taking a tour of the NT office and showing some development history for the game while the credits roll was some sort of egotistical and narcissistic trip on their part, which is just...so, so insultingly wrong.
How
dare Ninja Theory use their completely optional staff roll that has no bearing on the gameplay the way staff rolls used to be done for generations while showing us some of the stuff they did to make the thing we just played! What a bunch of
jerks!
I went to great lengths to detail why I disagree with everything you just said here, in the post you are pretending to read and respond to. You can't just disregard a direct counter-statement because you don't agree with it, and continue talking on original statement as if it was never even challenged. That's not how a discussion works. If you disagree, address the point, and say why. Provide some evidence, examples are welcome too.
The problem with that is you started a completely different topic, either intentional or not, by tossing around comparisons to be HS or DMC. That wasn't my point, so why would I waste my time diverging into it? It's like you accidentally started a strawman by getting me to talk about whether DmC has more in common with HS or DMC, instead of my actual topic of how DmC isn't some spiritual successor to HS because it only uses one mechanic while everything else about the actual combat is very much DMC, and any other similarities DmC shares with HS is something they do share with many other games.
It's like trying to say that Metroid is a spiritual successor to Mario because Nintendo gave both of them the same jumping and platforming mechanics.
And what are the names of those games?
I'm willing to bet that out of all the games you name, none of them will have all the mechanics I listed presented in the same manner and combination as DmC and heavenly sword have. If you think a different game is more like one or the other, feel free to name it, and explain why you think so.
Wait, so...because games can use any number of mechanics or game designs in any number of ways and combinations, you'll discount whatever I say because it has to adhere to your randomly strict regulation of DmC being more like some
other game? When that
still wasn't what I was talking about?
It's not that DmC is more like another game than it is HS, it's that most of the mechanics or certain design philosophies DmC and HS share are shared by them and
other games, which denotes it's not something exclusive to HS that makes DmC supposedly a successor to it.
Kingdom Hearts games had two levels of parrying, one where you stagger the enemy and keep attacking, and one where you both stagger. Enemies that can only be freely attacked after becoming tired or by luring them to charge into walls are seen throughout Legend of Zelda, in Shadow of the Colossus, and again Kingdom Hearts, among others that I can't remember off the top of my head. Dragon's Dogma, inFAMOUS, and Kingdom Hearts all love to do slow-motion points in attacks. Enslaved, Max Payne 3, and Kingdom Hearts (for bosses) end their battles with slow-motion finales. Kingdom Hearts, Okami, Legend of Zelda and God of War have gigantic and/or stationary bosses. Even Devil May Cry 3 had the Leviathan Core. Friggin' Kirby had the giant tree.
This is all just stuff I can randomly remember off the top of my head, anyway :/ Take a peek around some place like TVTropes, and you'll come across pretty much all the games that share some of these designs because they're easy on the player, or they're just tried-and-true things.
And I do not understand how having a character with emotions like getting angry makes it a successor to another game that also had a character who had similar emotions.
This all comes back to you making the whole "DmC is more like HS than DMC," when that, again,
isn't the point. Looking at a random mook fight, DmC still largely plays so much like a DMC game because of that exact gameplay focus the development
had.
You were not the one to begin this topic. If I follow the train of replies all the way up, here's the first post from either of us that talks about this issue:
are you telling me you misinterpreted what I was talking about? If you made a mistake earlier and don't actually want to talk about this, feel free to stop. Accidents happen, I wouldn't hold it against you.
I was the first in this here thread to disagree with the idea that DmC is a spiritual successor to HS, based on your comment. Misinterpretation? I dunno, but you're the one who replied.back with all that stuff about it being closer to HS than DMC, even though in the end, a spiritual successor pretty much
NEEDS to carry over many design philosophies and the feel of the predecessor in order to actually feel like one. To me, DmC feels a helluva lot like a DMC game because of how combat is handled and played out - probably because it was made to
be a DMC game. The fact that it uses a key hold like Heavenly Sword instead of key tap like DMC to switch weapons means nothing more than Ninja Theory figured this would work rather well for the game's on-the-fly weapon swapping, and it did.
Overall, DmC shares way too many key similarities with DMC to be thought of as some spiritual successor to Heavenly Sword. Just because it uses a handful of minute penchants like Heavenly Sword does has not much impact when they are things that are used often all throughout the game industry for certain games in any number of combinations. All it shows is that Ninja Theory likes these little things, and wanted to add them to DmC to make a more enjoyable game.
Heavenly Sword is an action game where you use three different stances to attack enemies, using inputs formed in a dial-a-combo sense where different attacks are performed with alternating key inputs. If you remain stationary, you can block attacks based on yours and their stances, and counter right after blocking by pushing a button. A precision counter will instantly kill the enemy. By continuing to attack without being hit, you can gain access to an instant kill ability to use with Circle. You get rewards like new combos and behind-the-scenes stuff by maintaining a killstreak without being hit. It also has Quick Time Events.
And now that I think about it, I don't remember Heavenly Sword having an "attack as they do" parry system at all...the only thing I remember was attacking them with a stance different than the one they're blocking in, which is just the same blocking mechanic Nariko employs in the game. No actual "attack as just as they do" thing like in DmC though, just the Counter and Block Break moves.
At its core, DmC is an action game where you use ranged and melee weapons, switching back and forth between different ones to create free-form combos. Your attack patterns are based around inputs that can vary on pauses. You use launches, juggles, and rushes, and other unique attacks from different weapons on you to keep an enemy or enemies caught in combos. You can use cancels and set-ups for more advanced combo potential. Some enemies require you to use certain weapons, challenging you to do more with less. You can also attack enemies just as they attack to stagger them with a parry. You try to avoid damage and vary your attacks to increase a bonus meter which in turn increases the amount of currency (Orbs) you receive when enemies die. Then you use that currency to upgrade your character with new skills, making your combo potential even more varied. That sounds a helluva lot like a DMC-type game.
The key tenants of Heavenly Sword and DmC are really different. That both use a similar "stance mechanic" for some different attacks is all they have in common, along with the cinematic flare that's so prevalent in a lot of gaming these days. It's a flimsy argument to build that that one weapon-swap mechanic links them in any significant way other than it was used in two different games.
And on-topic to that, those "key tenants" are what are most important to what I recognize as a DMC game, and even though DmC isn't exactly like the classics, it's so close that if it didn't have the same name or elements from a DMC it would be a DMC rip-off the way Dante's Inferno rips-off God of War.
Also - don't compare me to Alchemist. Yes, I saw your message last night, but I was off to hang with friends. His passion gets the better of him more often than not, but he means well. Give the guy a f#cking break. I try to curb my own passion as much as possible, but sometimes it's impossible for me to ignore some just blatantly silly or even asinine comments. I've had to deal with sh!t like that for
three years by just trying to find enjoyable discourse about a game I like, but I'm given nearly no quarter. Even on this very forum we have people who have nothing better to do than come
here to this DmC side of things and just bring everyone down, bogging down discussions with undesired vitriol or thinly veiled negativity.
DmC fans here are gunshy, to say the least, and happy to find a place to chat about the game openly, but some people are content to try and turn it into another GameFAQs, which is ironically so full of the people who hate the game that I can't f#cking understand it. I'd rather have passionate people here to talk to than a bunch of dead fish who just flop around and take whatever bullshit someone tries to feed into discussions.
But hey, I'm just one guy, and I'm not a moderator. Although I can't believe
I'm thought of as some stain on the DmC fan community just because I staunchly try to keep bullshit from spreading.
I'm done with this. I've said what I wanted to say and I'm tired of repeating myself.
those are some of the things which make it.
