That's where you and I disagree. Again you make good points, but with what DMC in general tries to accomplish in terms of platforming, it falls flat. DmC does it very well. The level traversal is just as fun as the combat. Even though Hack n' Slash games make that the status quo, doesn't mean us, as gamers, should agree with it. Especially when it's repetitive and lazy game design. To say that DmC level design is recycled is also incorrect, due to the changing nature of each stage. Enemy placement, enemy types, and traversal type in each mission are very well thought out in the re-imagining of DmC.
What I'm trying to convey (and perhaps not doing a very good job) about the game reviews, is that DMC4, with the addition of three new characters, isn't enough to garner it stellar ratings. Averaging of 7.5 isn't bad, but it's not what a game like DMC, with better platforming and the robust combat system it currently has, should be rated at. I believe there is another thread with a DMC5 wishlist that has some very good ideas that I believe would rocket the series into the upper rated echelons.
Why is platforming suddenly the topic? Weren't we talking about backtracking? Anyway, DmC had pretty boring monotonous platforming, IMO. Bayonetta did it better, and managed to often incorporate it into battles too. In DmC, it was mostly just 'press this button over and over until you get out of this enemy-less area, and progress plot-wise'. It often took you out of the flow, and into something that felt more like being stuck in traffic. IMO, DmC's platforming often served as nothing more than padding. DmC also has a lot of recycled level sections, it's just obscured slightly because of the fact that levels morph, like you said. Many levels in DmC look very similar, while it has less backtracking than previous DMC games. DMC on the other hand is pretty much the opposite: it often asked you to go back to certain areas, but didn't recycle that much. There are plenty of games that have much better platforming than DmC. I saw no problem with enemy placement in the DMC games either, it's good in DmC as well as DMC.
I'm not sure if by the second 'DMC' you mentioned you mean 'DmC', but I wouldn't rate DmC higher than a 7/10. Its gameplay (and combat) really isn't on a par with DMC3, or even DMC4. Even if you could argue that it had better platforming (which I'm not sure about), that's not enough to give it a score close to DMC3's score. But that's not the topic anyway, and I guess we should agree to disagree.
@Daimon Leon: Hold up. People are criticising the backtracking in DMC 4: SE, despite the fact that story and missions haven't been changed at all from DMC 4 - DMC 4:SE? That makes absolutely no sense at all.
Yeah, pretty much. The Gamespot review of DMC4 SE consisted mostly of the reviewer complaining about how much he disliked the backtracking (which is not a feature of the SE, it's a feature of original DMC4). It was literally 1/3 of his review, and he didn't review DMC4's story, gameplay, graphics, or anything else. So... if he was trying to review DMC4, not just the SE, he didn't really do a good job.
I can understand that the backtracking (Dante's levels) gets more annoying if you have two extra characters you need to backtrack with, but it just seems like such a pointless criticism to me. I mean, everyone who bought DMC4 SE knows that it has backtracking, they took that fact for granted. Aside from that, the backtracking is not something new. So they're essentially lowering the score of the SE for the original game's flaws... and I don't know if that's fair. If you're going to review the SE, you need to review what was added to the original game.
Don't get me wrong, it's fine if reviewers criticize DMC4 for its backtracking... but is it a good reason to suddenly give DMC4 SE a 6/10 instead of the original game's 8.5/10? The backtracking didn't need to be fixed -- it would be nice if it were, but yeah. What's more, it
couldn't be fixed... not unless they remade the entire game and gave Dante his own campaign. In that case, it wouldn't be a Special Edition, it would be a remake.
I guess maybe Capcom should've added new levels for Trish and Lady at least. But that would mean there'd be extra paths to the levels' destination, and that would mean that the game is essentially again a remake. No matter what they add, if it changes the game, it basically makes it a remake. What I'm saying is, it's not fair to review a game based on one's own expectations and hopes... you need to review what's there, not what you want there to be. I never expected more out of this game, because it was marketed as a special edition.
