Legit though, DMC4 sucked.

[DisappointedSparda]

Excuse me? DmC people like me? Who said i prefer DmC over any of the regular ones? Try not to assume anything about me. Obviously i wasn't trying to generalize. But the forums i go to tend to use DMC 4 as a red herring in a way to justify their sudden appreciation for the gameplay (or so they say).

All this backpedaling for the sudden appreciation almost sounds insincere.

 

[ToCool74]

Excuse me? DmC people like me? Who said i prefer DmC over any of the regular ones? Try not to assume anything about me. Obviously i wasn't trying to generalize. But the forums i go to tend to use DMC 4 as a red herring in a way to justify their sudden appreciation for the gameplay (or so they say).
All this backpedaling for the sudden appreciation almost sounds insincere.

Read my comment more carefully, because it is you who is assuming here, or more likely just misread my post. I did not say "DmC people you" I said "people like you" no where did I imply that you prefered DmC over any of the other games, but I guess you just kinda glared over this part otherwise you would not have taken it that way since I said that the " liked the gameplay better than DmC" and then afterwards I put the "people like you" part, you seem to have lumped DmC with the "people like you" part for some reason...
But anyway, you would not think it so insincere if you had actually been around this forum back before DmC was released, people where still taking dumps on the DMC4 game overall but still gave praise to the gameplay.
That still has not changed, but now with the release of DmC some people may have gained some more appreciation of the gameplay of DMC4 in comparison to what DmC gave us which isn't all the surprising.

 

[Rebel Dynasty]

or or, maybe DmC just made those fans who hated DMC4 before appreciate its gameplay which is the main point people bring up when they say good things about DMC4 nowadays.

I still don't see many people praising all the aspects of DMC4, just the gameplay in comparison to DmC.

Not to mention those of us who genuinely did like DMC4 before DmC came out. :/ I wasn't one of the people who turned hypocrite about it, and of those people, I can't fault them, either. People are allowed to change their opinions of things, after all, and shouldn't be raked over the coals for it.

But, I agree with you ToCool74; a lot of them did come to appreciate certain aspects of the game after the fact.

@DisappointedSparda Isn't it kind of a gross generalization to assume everyone who hates DmC previously hated DMC4, and then changed their minds? Of course some did, but to make it sound like every one of them did is a bit of a stretch. Just sayin'.

 

[Enigma]

I really loved DMC4 when it came out. Seems to me that there are a lot of people who just want to justify the change in the series by saying that ''what came before it was SO bad they had to change the series''. Nope, I don't believe that for one second. DMC4 had a decent plot, and the main reason it's considered bad (by some) is because it had a lot of backtracking. I don't know, it didn't bother me the first time I played it. At all. In fact, to me it seemed like DMC4 had more levels than DMC3. Whereas in DMC3 you're constantly running around backpedaling in singular areas (Temen-Ni-Gru, etc), DMC4 gives you more areas which are also larger. Maybe that helps make it seem like DMC4 has a lot more backtracking than DMC3. I'm not so sure it does. That said, its type of backtracking was more annoying to me than DMC3's. Also, there is nothing wrong with DMC4's version of Dante. So he doesn't conform to your standards. So he doesn't act exactly like DMC1 Dante. Big deal. You liked DMC3 Dante, and yet you dislike DMC4 Dante? ...Aight then. :tongue: It was a good game, and it got good grades from pretty much everyone. To say that it sucked regardless doesn't make sense.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

Backtracking is the name of the game in DMC, really, but that's because in DMC1 and 3 there was legitimate exploration to it. You were literally exploring a castle and a tower, and you were expected to remember curiosities in the world that might later be integral to your progress. DMC4's Dante segment was the simplest form of backtracking - going backwards just because. He also had no unique enemies to fight, as nearly everything was catered to the new guy's moveset (and I didn't much like the design of the mooks in DMC4).

However, the bigger problem that people have is that Dante's skillset was diluted and forced into a clunky control scheme, and you shouldn't have to master something that clunky just to make it shine. Then, there's Nero, the new character who had half a moveset. DMC2 for the PS2 gave us two different characters, with their own stories, arsenals, and skillsets, and DMC4 on a more powerful system couldn't?

We got a very pretty game with a half-completed character and another with clunky, half-refined controls; a story revolving around a new character that just begs you not to ask questions; and a game flow that moves in a line one way, and then forces you literally right back to where you started.

Then of course the characters were unrefined messes; Nero requires a lot more backstory than what we were told (which was pretty much nothing at all), and Dante turned into a very shallow and boring character because by now he's so powerful you never really fear for his safety. The antagonists' plans were interesting, but in regular DMC fair, there's not a whole lot to it in the end. The problem is that while this is standard for DMC, the others (barring DMC2) were carried by interesting characters. In DMC4 it's like everyone is just...going through the motions.

That's if I put my harsh critique glasses on. The problem overall that I have is that whatever I like has a "but" to it; I like that it allowed me to changed Styles on the fly (but with really clunky controls). I like that it gave me access to Dante's entire arsenal (but I don't like scrolling through, and I actually hate Lucifer and Pandora, so I could totally do without them). I like that Nero's control scheme was more intuitive (but he didn't have a lot else to him). I like that they removed some of the rapid jamming on Crazy Combos (but they also got rid of some of the Styles' best moves).

Normally, it's easy to look past "buts" because you like something, but the ones I found with DMC4 were hard to ignore, because they were antithetical to what I ended up liking about the series in the first place.

It was a good game, and it got good grades from pretty much everyone. To say that it sucked regardless doesn't make sense.

The same can be said of DmC However, my main point is that grades do not make a game good. There's plenty of cult classics and diamonds in the rough that didn't get shining reviews, just as there are a lot of games that aren't nearly as good as their scores would suggest. Not to mention that the industry's grading system is so skewed it's unbelievable.

 

[Enigma]

- Backtracking is the name of the game in DMC, really, but that's because in DMC1 and 3 there was legitimate exploration to it. You were literally exploring a castle and a tower, and you were expected to remember curiosities in the world that might later be integral to your progress. DMC4's Dante segment was the simplest form of backtracking - going backwards just because.

- However, the bigger problem that people have is that Dante's skillset was diluted and forced into a clunky control scheme, and you shouldn't have to master something that clunky just to make it shine. Then, there's Nero, the new character who had half a moveset. DMC2 for the PS2 gave us two different characters, with their own stories, arsenals, and skillsets, and DMC4 on a more powerful system couldn't?

- a new character that just begs you not to ask questions.

- Dante turned into a very shallow and boring character because by now he's so powerful you never really fear for his safety. The antagonists' plans were interesting, but in regular DMC fair, there's not a whole lot to it in the end. The problem is that while this is standard for DMC, the others (barring DMC2) were carried by interesting characters. In DMC4 it's like everyone is just...going through the motions.

- I like that it allowed me to changed Styles on the fly (but with really clunky controls). I like that it gave me access to Dante's entire arsenal (but I don't like scrolling through.

- Going backwards is going backwards regardless. I didn't find DMC3's backtracking less annoying than DMC4's. In DMC3, Dante had to go back to get certain pieces of the puzzle to advance, whereas in DMC4 Dante goes back to clean up Nero's mess and beat the bosses once and for all. I see the difference, but it doesn't seem important. Both include backtracking 'just because'. There didn't need to be any backtracking in the DMCs - it has no value. Not even when you have to go back and get pieces of the puzzle. But it's there anyway.

- I'll agree that Nero didn't have nearly enough moves, but how is Dante's moveset diluted? Pretty sure it's the same as in DMC3, only this time you can switch styles on the fly, which helps with creating diverse combos.
DMC2 is not a standard to which we should hold DMC4. DMC1 had only one story too - the story itself, not about Dante or anyone in particular. DMC4 has one story in the same way. DMC2 could permit two stories because it didn't need to establish a new character (as we already knew Dante). The most we needed was a bit more background on him. DMC4, in contrast, decided to focus on the plot alone, really. It was more about the story itself than it was about Nero or Dante.

- Yes, Nero is still a bit of a problem. He has no background. Nevertheless, saying Nero 'required a lot more backstory' is not necessarily true. Maybe they wanted him to remain a vague character, for DMC4 at least. Maybe they were planning to flesh him out in DMC5. Capcom was not obligated to make him a concrete character.

- Did we fear for Dante's safety in previous DMCs? I didn't. He was going to get the job done. If he wasn't, there wouldn't be any story to tell. Besides, there's no prerequisite for characters to be vulnerable. This is about your preferences, and you can't judge games based on preferences alone. You know, you have to strike a balance between your opinion and objective positive points and negatives.
Moreover, DMC4 was about Nero, and he was vulnerable. There was a moment when he could've died. Dante is just there to help him (and he's not always available). He's not the protagonist. So... I don't really see why Dante is the main focus for you.
And how boring he is is subjective. I thought he was the most interesting Dante so far, mainly because of his attitude. 'Boring' cannot be used as a word to objectively evaluate characters, because it is by its very nature a subjective word. And a lot of what you said is your opinion. To me, DMC2 had characters who went 'through the motions'. DMC4... decent enough.

- What clunky controls? Pressing a button on the d-pad? I thought DMC4's controls worked well, just like most Japanese games' controls. Bayonetta too. For some reason, DmC's controls get really messy with the Angel Lift and Demon Pull together with the other moves. Add to that the lack of lock-on and you've got yourself a party... the wrong type of party :tongue:.* Also, you'll have to cycle through. If they put every weapon under a different button, or asked you to use all kinds of button combinations, that's when stuff would get chaotic. You'd need like ten different buttons on the controller, or use button combinations that would take up as much time (and memory) as scrolling does.

*But that's in my case. So I guess controls is a subjective matter too. In the end, it's all pretty much subjective.

''The same can be said of DmC ''. Well, DmC is not a bad game. The people who say it is are usually trolls who don't want to admit DmC is good. It is. That's why it gets good grades from most official reviewers. Similarly, DMC4 gets good grades from most reviewers - because it's good. Besides, everybody places a different 'minus value' on backtracking. You found it terrible, I found it tedious but not game-breaking. Not to the point that I could say DMC4 sucks.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

- Going backwards is going backwards regardless. I didn't find DMC3's backtracking any less annoying than DMC4's. In DMC3, Dante had to go back to get certain pieces of the puzzle to advance, whereas in DMC4 Dante needs to go back to clean up Nero's mess and beat the bosses once and for all. I see the difference, but I just don't care either way. Both include backtracking 'just because'. There didn't need to be any backtracking in DMC3 or DMC4 - it has no real value. Not even when you have to go back and get pieces of the puzzle. But it's there anyway.

I'd beg to differ. Temen-Ni-Gru might have been a trek upwards (and then upwards again after facing Vergil the first time), but the point is that Temen-Ni-Gru was filled with things, it was very characteristic and was, like I said, meant to be to remind you of points of interest that would be integral to progress later. You actually felt like you were navigating the area yourself. You were responsible for your progress through the tower. The same cannot be said about DMC4, where you find a key item at one end of "hallway" and then the lock at the other end. Then, you play as Dante, and then you immediately go in reverse, taking a key item out of a lock in the process.

The closest we got to what DMC used to do was Fortuna Castle, but it was short-lived.

- I'll agree that Nero didn't have nearly enough moves, but how is Dante's moveset diluted? Pretty sure it's the same as in DMC3, only this time you could switch styles on the fly, which helped with creating good combos.

Dante lost quite a bit of skills from Styles, especially from Gunslinger (my preferred Style), which was already a vaguely useless Style in DMC3 Wild Stomp was removed, and even stuff that Dante could normally do regardless of his Style, like Body Surf, was taken out, and that complimented Gunslinger well. We got Honeycomb, but...what the hell was the point of it...it was another rapid fire that you could already easily do...

They gave you access to everything and in so doing they removed certain features that are missed. I can sorta understand it, since some moves in some Styles were meant to be analogues to each other, to give access to a function, but I never like seeing things removed for no reason.

DMC2 is not some kind of standard to which we should hold DMC4. DMC1 had only one story too - Dante's. DMC4 has one story because it is focused on Nero. DMC2 didn't need to establish a new character, as we already knew Dante. The most we needed was a bit more background on him. DMC4, in contrast, needed to establish Nero as a character and make him work with Dante.

DMC2 is not a standard, sure, but I'm surprised at the similarity between them. DMC4 could have been something as grand as DMC2 had been with all the content it had. Instead, we had one sole, boring story, and two characters that together pretty much make a whole. DMC4 had the potential to be an amazing concept like what DMC2 was, but ends up being half of what DMC2 was (insert ironic math joke here).

DMC4 could have been us learning everything about Nero in his own story as he pursued Dante and then went off to save Kyrie, while Dante's would give way more backstory on other things. Maybe more history on Sparda and the Order of the Sword. They could have some of their own unique enemies and bosses to fight, and it would all culminate into something much more awesome.

- Come on. Did we fear for Dante's safety in previous DMCs? I know I didn't. He was going to get the job done. If he wasn't, there wouldn't be any story to tell. Besides, there's no requirement for characters to be vulnerable. Moreover, DMC4 was about Nero, and he was vulnerable at many moments. There was a moment when he could've died. Dante is just there to help him out (and he's not always available). He's not the protagonist. So... I don't really see why Dante is the main focus for you.

They made Dante the focus by making him a playable character for half of the game. If he had in no way been playable, I would totally be fine with it, but by making him playable they forcibly changed the scope of the story. This comes back to how they should have split the campaigns in two a la DMC2 and focused heavily on who the f#ck Nero actually is. Sure DMC4 was about Nero, but it didn't actually tell us anything about Nero. We played as him in an adventure, but most of all, the target for much of the game was to get Dante. We as players were made to question what the hell is up with Dante and why he shot the pope in the face. They intentionally made him seem like the antagonist for half the story, and then when we find out that Dante isn't the bad guy, now it's a "save the girl, stop the bad guy" plot that focuses more on Sparda Sparda Sparda Sparda Sparda. Again.

DMC4 actually isn't so much a story about Nero. It's a story about Dante and Sparda's legacies, told from Nero's perspective.

And how boring he is is completely subjective. I thought he was the most interesting Dante so far, mainly because of his wit. 'Boring' cannot be used as a word to objectively evaluate the game. And a lot of what you said in that paragraph is your opinion. To me, DMC2 appeared to have a lot of characters who just went 'through the motions'. DMC4... decent enough.

They made Dante intriguing in this one, but once we knew he was no longer the antagonist his entrance would have us believe, he's just that fun uncle type and it was just sorta...old hat. He used to the champion of humanity, and suddenly he was more goofball than hero. Funny, yeah, but...

And I guess what I mean when I say "fearing for Dante", it's the fact that there was very little done to make up for the fact that Dante was near-indestructible. Usually when that happens, they find other ways for us to be concerned about how things will transpire.

It's just that overall, DMC4 could have been so much better than it was :S

What clunky controls? Pressing a directional button on the d-pad? I thought DMC4's controls worked wonderfully, just like most Japanese games' controls.

It's rather clunky to have so many directional inputs required for skills using the left analog stick, and then have other functions also require the use of the D-Pad. To do half the high-level sh!t that people love seeing in DMC4 requires quite a bit of dexterity, or an extra left thumb.

Plus, there's still just the silliness of them making a uniformed control system for Nero (ground and aerial combos on Triangle), and then not using that for Dante as well, for what? Some sort of nostalgia? They actually sacrificed smoother controls for familiarity with DMC3, when ironically we got extremely familiar with the controls playing as Nero for half the game

Bayonetta worked well too. For some reason, DmC's controls get really messy with the Angel Lift and Demon Pull together with the other moves. Add to that the lack of lock-on and you've got yourself a party... the wrong type of party :tongue:.* Also, you'll have to scroll through. If they put every weapon under a different button, or asked you to use all kinds of button combinations, that's when stuff would get chaotic. You'd need like ten different buttons on the controller, or use button combinations that would take up as much time as scrolling does.[/QUOTE]

Ironically, I previously had talked about how amazing DmC was for being able to give the player access to every weapon, but without ever having to scroll or cycle through anything. You have access to a three weapons with Triangle, L2+Triangle, and R2+Triangle, and then two more by tapping a d-pad button to switch what is accessed with the triggers, which are still accessed with L2 and R2. The thing is that the game depends very little on directional inputs, which allows you to use every single weapon with very little time spent selecting them.

DmC took the best of DMC3's weapon hot-swapping, and put it together with the concept of a full arsenal from DMC4, and while the controls themselves take time to master, it's all very simplistic in its execution.

 

[Stylish Nero]

However, in one of your arguments you remarked that DMC4 offered less than DMC3 by taking away certain style moves as one argument of DMC4 being lesser than DMC3 but DmC in its effort to do what DMC4 did offered less than what DMC4 Dante could do by removing more style based moves than DMC4.

So is the price to create a more streamlined control scheme to have access to a full moveset is just dwindling down the amount of moves and functions you can do?

I do recall having to cycle through the guns by pressing up on the D-pad the same way of having to cycle through 3 devil arms or 3 guns in DMC4.

Don't see much of a difference...well much of a which is more useful or beneficial.

DmC has the benefit of being able to effectively cycle through your 5 melee weapons a lot easier than DMC4 but guns are about the same.

As for Style Switching, you're not cycling or scrolling through anything each style is mapped to its own button (and the 5th style is basically press the same style button again) and its not like you have to consecutively hold a style button like you need to hold a mode button in DmC to use said style.

Please stop saying DMC4 is lesser than DMC2. DMC2 may had a lot of content but it sacrificed quality to do so (some pretty crap boss fights and extremely generic enemy types).................and DMC4 was rushed. Granted you still can't forgive the state the game was in regardless. The major fact that in DMC2 Dante and Lucia only had 1 melee weapon and 2 other versions of the same melee weapon that only had speed and damage value changed whereas DMC4 gave Dante more firearms and Nero's mechanics weren't cheap (outside all of his moves, the Exceed system moves that have varying effects and animations based on the level so one attack can have 3 versions of it, and every Buster animation not just being the land ones, aerial ones, the DT ones, and then mix those together nor the fact that each buster animation isn't just a simple enemy execution like in God of War, NG, or Bayonetta but real time attack animations that have varying effects on the battlefield and are rendered and done in real time). The quality of Nero's moveset can't easily be measured by numbers of his moveset for when it comes to combat depth and potentially his is the deepest out of the entire series when it comes to how his overall moveset and abilities are incorporated into the Outside wall running and acrobatics Nero has way more going for him rather than either Lucia or Dante (as well as Trish) and those 2/3 played exactly the same in terms of playstyle (same DT, same mechanics) whereas in DMC4 Dante and Nero played mostly different and had their own things going for them. Although Dante and Lucia had separate campaigns they went through most of the same levels and fought most of the same bosses. Recycled the

Plus you completely missed the point of the intentions. Dante was PURPOSELY designed for the skill players or vets who played and/or mastered DMC3 while Nero was meant for newcomers. Either blame them for not making Nero as complete as Dante or not having the funds to give each their own campaign.

Itsuno and his team wanted to do a big game for DMC4 but budget was cut short or they exceeded their budget and the finance department didn't want to give them more.

As for enemies being more designed for Nero than Dante that is not the case. I find some enemies far more easier to handle with Dante like the Faust and Mephisto being able to remove their cloak far quicker with a DT Pandora Air than Nero or inflicting damage on the Blitz when he is in his lightning armor state is far easier with Dante (although killing him when its off is easier with Nero). Nero can kill most enemies quicker and easier due to his Devil Bringer shaving health off much quicker (although you can do the same with Dante...Distorted Real Impact) and if so Dante is meant to be harder/more challenging to be played with. Its like the X and Zero situation in the MegaMan X games, the game is far easier with X than Zero because X is the classic MegaMan run and shoot formula and the stages and enemies/bosses are designed around that whereas its more with Zero not following that formula and preferring close range combat making it rather rough playing as Zero and being careful when it comes to timing your attacks or not getting too close...basically you'll have to play the game almost differently with Zero and require a lot more skill with Zero. Plus Zero lacked mobility compared to X who can fly, air dash, hover, walk on ceilings, etc so those platforms and levels that were tough getting through as X...**** would be massacre fest with Zero. They're hard and intense with Zero but beatable. Hell even beating Iris in X4, the only boss unique to Zero, would've been a lot easier with X. I guess it has something to do with Zero/Dante being the more skilled and experienced character compared to X/Nero that playing the game with them seems more tough to make the player feel like a skilled hunter when they beat it....although I have to yet to beat Zero's campaign in X4 and always preferred using X over Zero in all other X games because well I sucked using Zero....and fighting the Shadow Devil as Zero was a f*cking nightmare in X5. Same can apply to MegaMan & Bass, where they played the same stages, bosses, and etc but Bass felt a lot easier to use because his mechanics were more advanced than MegaMan's (like on X level) and MM&B was still a Classic MegaMan game in terms of design and difficulty so it was challenging with MegaMan (as it was meant to be) whereas with Bass almost a breeze because his mechanics were too advanced for the game.

Different strokes for different blokes.

 

[Enigma]

Dante lost quite a bit of skills from Styles, especially from Gunslinger (my preferred Style), which was already a vaguely useless Style in DMC3 Wild Stomp was removed, and even stuff that Dante could normally do regardless of his Style, like Body Surf, was taken out, and that complimented Gunslinger well. We got Honeycomb, but...what the hell was the point of it...it was another rapid fire that you could already easily do...
They gave you access to everything and in so doing they removed certain features that are missed. I can sorta understand it, since some moves in some Styles were meant to be analogues to each other, to give access to a function, but I never like seeing things removed for no reason.

They made Dante the focus by making him a playable character for half of the game. If he had in no way been playable, I would totally be fine with it, but by making him playable they forcibly changed the scope of the story. This comes back to how they should have split the campaigns in two a la DMC2 and focused heavily on who the f#ck Nero actually is.

DMC4 actually isn't so much a story about Nero. It's a story about Dante and Sparda's legacies, told from Nero's perspective.

They made Dante intriguing in this one, but once we knew he was no longer the antagonist his entrance would have us believe, he's just that fun uncle type and it was just sorta...old hat. He used to the champion of humanity, and suddenly he was more goofball than hero. Funny, yeah, but...

It's just that overall, DMC4 could have been so much better than it was :S

Ironically, I ... selecting them.

DmC took the best of DMC3's weapon hot-swapping, and put it together with the concept of a full arsenal from DMC4, and while the controls themselves take time to master, it's all very simplistic in its execution.

That doesn't make it diluted, just changed.

They don't need to have done anything. Just because you want to see the story go a certain way does not mean it should. Also, I said you seem to think Dante is the *main* focus. He is not. I didn't say there wasn't any focus on him.

Yes, that's pretty much what I said. DMC4 is not necessarily about Nero, it's about the story itself. Dante and Nero are just there to help it play out. Call that bad storytelling if you wish, but that's subjective as well.

But... what? Not the way you envision Dante, is that it? Again, subjective. I happen to like Dante in DMC4 the most. I don't think he's a 'fun uncle type' at all. He doesn't act like an uncle, he doesn't do anything in that regard. He's somebody who helps Nero out at key points, and he does it stylishly and with humor. I couldn't ask for more, really, since this game does not revolve around him.

DMC4 could've been better than it was, I think we can all agree on that. But to say it sucked, like this thread's title says, is just a big step too far. There's way too many subjective arguments brought forth so far, not necessarily by you, but by previous posters. I think DMC4 achieved what Capcom wanted it to do, and it told a good story. Nero was underdeveloped, yes, but that's no argument against the game. He could've intentionally been kept underdeveloped, and could've been explained more in DMC5. It would sort of make sense for him to evolve as a character over the course of several games, rather than over the course of one game. Same goes for his background; pieces of the puzzle with each game. The backtracking was IMO about as bad as DMC3's. Dante's playthrough adds more of a challenge and gives you puzzles such as the sun dial thingy. It wasn't great, but it was good enough for me.

DmC's controls didn't really work for me. I spent hours upon hours trying to get the hang of it, but no dice. All the demon and angel stuff (weapons) combined with the need to incorporate the Angel Lift and Demon Pull into combos... it was amazingly chaotic for me. All the LT and RT stuff, and then the RB and LB with it to evade... nope. I found it terrible, just as weird as deciding to make the Stinger attack 'press LS in the desired direction twice'. Twice? Dafuq? Yeah, that doesn't feel weird at all. But hey, I'm aware that there are people who have no problems with all the RB/RT and LB/LT stuff, so I guess that's just me. Just like you have issues with cycling through weapons or pressing a d-pad button when some don't.

So I'm going to have to stick to my opinion on DMC4 being a good game. It certainly does not suck, not because of how much somebody dislikes DMC4 Dante or Nero or whomever. Not because it's got some backtracking either. Could it have been better? Yes. But that's not the title of this thread.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

However, in one of your arguments you remarked that DMC4 offered less than DMC3 by taking away certain style moves as one argument of DMC4 being lesser than DMC3 but DmC in its effort to do what DMC4 did offered less than what DMC4 Dante could do by removing more style based moves than DMC4.

So is the price to create a more streamlined control scheme to have access to a full moveset is just dwindling down the amount of moves and functions you can do?

Yeah, DmC could have done more, too, and I'm sad that it didn't, but it still sucks that DMC4 got rid of things that, given that it tried to have the exact some control scheme, could have totally been included. Maybe I'm bitter that Wild Stomp and Body Surf don't exist in DMC4, but really, what possible reason could their have been to get rid of them? It just boggles my mind, is all.

I do recall having to cycle through the guns by pressing up on the D-pad the same way of having to cycle through 3 devil arms or 3 guns in DMC4.

Don't see much of a difference...well much of a which is more useful or beneficial.

DmC has the benefit of being able to effectively cycle through your 5 melee weapons a lot easier than DMC4 but guns are about the same.

Firearms in DmC were thrown in the back seat to make a lot of room for melee combat, sadly, so using more than one in a fight never really seemed like a viable option. Plus, even then, it was still on the d-pad and accessible with your thumb with a lot more ease.

As for Style Switching, you're not cycling or scrolling through anything each style is mapped to its own button (and the 5th style is basically press the same style button again) and its not like you have to consecutively hold a style button like you need to hold a mode button in DmC to use said style.

And yet during a fight you constantly have to make sure you're keeping track of your position, and even how you tilt the left stick to perform moves. My hands were a pretzel around my controller just trying to do a Mustang to Rain Storm combo that I wanted to do. In the end, I gave up on trying to do all the zany cross-Style combos, and just stuck with changing Styles when I knew I had a free second to switch. Then, it made me more upset at the fact that they got rid of all those skills that I actually liked doing.

Please stop saying DMC4 is lesser than DMC2.

I'm not >.> I'm saying that they had the potential to take what its predecessor did (in DMC2) and make an even greater game, we ended up with a vaguely lackluster, "rushed" game. It doesn't really matter one lick if they ran out of time or budget, the fact that they shipped it the way the did is the problem, with half of what they wanted it to be. The game feels very unfinished, and overall it's just odd that they would release it that way.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

That doesn't make it diluted, just changed.

Changed into something less than it was. Dilution. Why get rid of those things? All they did was give us more "stylish options" for killing enemies, which is the entire point of Devil May Cry.

They don't need to have done anything. Just because you want to see the story go a certain way does not mean it should.

I didn't want the story to go "a certain way", I wanted it to go ANY way. We were dropped into Nero's life with absolutely zero knowledge of who is was or why we should care about him. F#ck, even DMC1 had the presence of mind to give Dante some backstory, as shallow and simple as it was. It got the point across, and was moved further by us learning more about Dante and his family as he fought back against Mundus and his army, who were very closely related to his family. Nero, on the other hand, is some duder we're playing as, and most of the story has little to actually do with him. His cause is personal, but so cliche that we don't get anything out of it other than "Well, I guess he really loves Kyrie", and the overall conflict is so far over his head because he was just a means to an end, and it had little do who he was, and even though he's supposedly somehow a Son of Sparda - we got nothing! Nero is a gigantic walking question mark in the story. They could have done so so much to make his story interesting. It could have been DMC3 all over again, but sh!t just starts happening when Dante shows up, things get out of control, the day is saved, and then Dante leaves.

It took the shaky canonicity of a Japanese-only novelization for us to learn important things about Nero, and it was still vague about his origins and his relationship to Sparda.

Yes, that's pretty much what I said. DMC4 is not necessarily about Nero, it's about the story itself. Dante and Nero are just there to help it play out. Call that bad storytelling if you wish, but that's subjective as well.

That's not subjective at all >.< It is totally bad storytelling to make someone the focal point of a story, vaguely mention why they're important to events, and then never actually elaborate on it at all. That's not storytelling, that's a giant cocktease. The worst part of playing DMC4 for the first time is anticipating that incredible payout on Nero's origins and how he fit into everything, and then not getting anything. It was fun to tag along with him on his ride of taking down the Order of the Sword, but holy sh!t, we got nothing but more questions.

That's why so many people were ****ed about DmC's existence, actually, because they were anticipating a DMC5 actually explaining things. I just sorta consigned myself to the fact that we wouldn't, that way I could be pleasantly surprised if it ever happened

But... what? Not the way you envision Dante, is that it? Again, subjective.

No, I had no expectations, but just seeing him turn into a parody of himself was a little sad. He wasn't an organic evolution of DMC1 Dante, who was a jokester yet understood the weight of situations. DMC4 Dante tried to emulate the frat boy personality of DMC3, because people liked it, but we forget that by the end of DMC3 he had grown out of it, and turned into DMC1 Dante. Even the anime Dante was closer in line with that personality evolution.

So I'm going to have to stick to my opinion on DMC4 being a good game. It certainly does not suck, not because of how much somebody dislikes DMC4 Dante or Nero or whomever. Not because it's got some backtracking either. Could it have been better? Yes. But that's not the title of this thread.

I don't really think "it sucks" either. I reserve that for things like Vampire Rain and Ride to Hell. I believe Devil May Cry 4 takes second place behind Devil May Cry 2 in the "Could have been better" Olympics. DMC4 had a lot of potential, and what sucks is that it fell so short of it.

 

[Chancey289]

What the hell are "Japanese controls"?

 

[Stylish Nero]

Yeah, DmC could have done more, too, and I'm sad that it didn't, but it still sucks that DMC4 got rid of things that, given that it tried to have the exact some control scheme, could have totally been included. Maybe I'm bitter that Wild Stomp and Body Surf don't exist in DMC4, but really, what possible reason could their have been to get rid of them? It just boggles my mind, is all.



Firearms in DmC were thrown in the back seat to make a lot of room for melee combat, sadly, so using more than one in a fight never really seemed like a viable option. Plus, even then, it was still on the d-pad and accessible with your thumb with a lot more ease.



And yet during a fight you constantly have to make sure you're keeping track of your position, and even how you tilt the left stick to perform moves. My hands were a pretzel around my controller just trying to do a Mustang to Rain Storm combo that I wanted to do. In the end, I gave up on trying to do all the zany cross-Style combos, and just stuck with changing Styles when I knew I had a free second to switch. Then, it made me more upset at the fact that they got rid of all those skills that I actually liked doing.



I'm not >.> I'm saying that they had the potential to take what its predecessor did (in DMC2) and make an even greater game, we ended up with a vaguely lackluster, "rushed" game. It doesn't really matter one lick if they ran out of time or budget, the fact that they shipped it the way the did is the problem, with half of what they wanted it to be. The game feels very unfinished, and overall it's just odd that they would release it that way.

It was either that or cancelled the game and Capcom would lose money and that is the last thing Capcom would want to do.

I take a Game Design that emphasizes on the various aspects of the Game Industry from the roles of each member to the economics of it and thing I learned is when a game in development exceeds budge they either rush it or cancel it and most publishers choose rush it so they can still release it and still get money off of it (well unless the game is not very far in development like still in the early phases then they can't release it but some devs still do).

They would lose money if they cancelled it due to all the resources and money spent on it and DMC4 wasn't cheap to make compared to DmC. Rather make some money than NO money (or better yet lose A LOT of money) and look DMC4 was the highest selling DMC game. If Capcom missed that opportunity this franchise would've been in a lot of hot water. DMC4 sold well despite its issues and Itsuno and his team was able to further lament on their mistakes and see something needed to be done which is why they outsourced and rebooted the franchise because outsourcing is cheaper than developing internally.

Its a tough fact but game design is a business nowadays. It TRUELY is with money, time, and resource management. If you want such a big and creative game you'll need a large budget or be more careful with your budget and scale back the scope of the game or find cheap and quick alternatives to get things done (backtracking, boss rushes, enemy palette swaps, etc) and still be cost efficient. Being ambitious is nice and all but being smart and planning ahead and whatnot is how to survive in this industry.

DMC4 is still one of the better rushed games I had to play..........

This game could've did what DMC4 did and cut corners and focus on its core aspects rather than throw in 1000 different pointless side missions and 12 different play styles (more than half are broken or terrible) when the game only said you'll be playing as Sonic, Shadow, and Silver. Sonic Team situation is different. They knew of their limited time to get the game out yet still tried to make the game as big as possible. That is just pure lunacy. Games like Sonic Generations (and that was made within a similar time frame of Sonic06 development time but most Sonic games don't have long development times...I guess that is why they tend to feel small to me) which have far less content than Sonic06 is better because at its core its far more polished and well done.

 

[Stylish Nero]

Changed into something less than it was. Dilution. Why get rid of those things? All they did was give us more "stylish options" for killing enemies, which is the entire point of Devil May Cry.



I didn't want the story to go "a certain way", I wanted it to go ANY way. We were dropped into Nero's life with absolutely zero knowledge of who is was or why we should care about him. F#ck, even DMC1 had the presence of mind to give Dante some backstory, as shallow and simple as it was. It got the point across, and was moved further by us learning more about Dante and his family as he fought back against Mundus and his army, who were very closely related to his family. Nero, on the other hand, is some duder we're playing as, and most of the story has little to actually do with him. His cause is personal, but so cliche that we don't get anything out of it other than "Well, I guess he really loves Kyrie", and the overall conflict is so far over his head because he was just a means to an end, and it had little do who he was, and even though he's supposedly somehow a Son of Sparda - we got nothing! Nero is a gigantic walking question mark in the story. They could have done so so much to make his story interesting. It could have been DMC3 all over again, but sh!t just starts happening when Dante shows up, things get out of control, the day is saved, and then Dante leaves.

It took the shaky canonicity of a Japanese-only novelization for us to learn important things about Nero, and it was still vague about his origins and his relationship to Sparda.



That's not subjective at all >.< It is totally bad storytelling to make someone the focal point of a story, vaguely mention why they're important to events, and then never actually elaborate on it at all. That's not storytelling, that's a giant cocktease. The worst part of playing DMC4 for the first time is anticipating that incredible payout on Nero's origins and how he fit into everything, and then not getting anything. It was fun to tag along with him on his ride of taking down the Order of the Sword, but holy sh!t, we got nothing but more questions.

That's why so many people were ****ed about DmC's existence, actually, because they were anticipating a DMC5 actually explaining things. I just sorta consigned myself to the fact that we wouldn't, that way I could be pleasantly surprised if it ever happened



No, I had no expectations, but just seeing him turn into a parody of himself was a little sad. He wasn't an organic evolution of DMC1 Dante, who was a jokester yet understood the weight of situations. DMC4 Dante tried to emulate the frat boy personality of DMC3, because people liked it, but we forget that by the end of DMC3 he had grown out of it, and turned into DMC1 Dante. Even the anime Dante was closer in line with that personality evolution.



I don't really think "it sucks" either. I reserve that for things like Vampire Rain and Ride to Hell. I believe Devil May Cry 4 takes second place behind Devil May Cry 2 in the "Could have been better" Olympics. DMC4 had a lot of potential, and what sucks is that it fell so short of it.

Then DmC takes away more things....but moving on...to the story.

As for not explaining Nero's background or origins in the first. Its not poor storytelling. Well its not very good either. We do know details about Nero and his life (well from the guidebook and in game info and more from the Japanese only book but that just went into more details about it) we learned that he was an orphan taken in by the Order of the Sword and raised within Kyrie and Credo's family and developed a sister/love relationship with Nero and trained by Credo so his backstory isn't a mystery. Its his origins and the INTENTIONAL questions they left behind about Nero. The difference between DMC1 Dante and Nero was the fact that everything we learned about Dante, Dante already knows who is and his full origins is known to him and it played a big part in DMC1's plot for Dante needed to know it was Mundus who killed his mother and brother due to a beef with Sparda for the whole revenge plot to take place and even Trish. Nero and every other character know nothing about who Nero is not even Nero know who or what he is and is parts of his origins is left a mystery intentionally....such as like a lot of aspects of Sparda are unknown to everyone even Dante says there is a lot of mystery surrounding his father and Sparda is a character who been in this series in for like the beginning yet the lingering mysteries behind him as yet to be solved.

We know sh*t about Nero we just don't know the sh*t that NOT even Nero knows or well anyone in this series.....that is still alive.

I've seen a lot of stories don't answer or reveal the answers right away but wait a long time or when its right. Take Naruto, it took them like 400 hundred chapters (and like...lets see 22o + like 160) and like 400 episodes I guess to finally explain who is father was and why he sealed the Nine Tails inside him and 100 chapters more to explain his mom and his origins and to now to explain he is the reincarnation of one of Ninja Jesus's son although they left subtle hints throughout the series. So it took the story over 10 years to fully explain what the main character really was and answer questions about his backstory that was left from day one. Bleach did the exact same thing with their main character and much more. A lot of ongoing stories do that and wait to answer questions rather than answer them right away. Even to this day in Resident Evil story they have to yet explain just who the hell is Neo Umbrella and what they're after and unlike Nero they have been around in the story for a long time now rather than just one game.

Its only an issue if the series actually ENDED with us not getting the answers. DMC4 wasn't the finale nor its been confirmed they'll drop the series or the originals.

They can still fully explain his origins in a DMC5, or DMC6 or DMC7 or DMC8 or DMC69.

If DMC4 left you wanted more for DMC5 then it did what Capcom wanted it to. Even Itsuno during a dev diary they intentionally ended the game with questions and an open ended to see where to go from there.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

As for not explaining Nero's background or origins in the first. Its not poor storytelling. Well its not very good either. We do know details about Nero and his life (well from the guidebook and in game info and more from the Japanese only book but that just went into more details about it) we learned that he was an orphan taken in by the Order of the Sword and raised within Kyrie and Credo's family and developed a sister/love relationship with Nero and trained by Credo so his backstory isn't a mystery. Its his origins and the INTENTIONAL questions they left behind about Nero. The difference between DMC1 Dante and Nero was the fact that everything we learned about Dante, Dante already knows who is and his full origins is known to him and it played a big part in DMC1's plot for Dante needed to know it was Mundus who killed his mother and brother due to a beef with Sparda for the whole revenge plot to take place and even Trish. Nero and every other character know nothing about who Nero is not even Nero know who or what he is and is parts of his origins is left a mystery intentionally....such as like a lot of aspects of Sparda are unknown to everyone even Dante says there is a lot of mystery surrounding his father and Sparda is a character who been in this series in for like the beginning yet the lingering mysteries behind him as yet to be solved.

They did a p!ss-poor job. The only thing the game's manual tells us is that Nero was an orphan taken in by Credo's family, and that a demon attack injured his shoulder and busted the Red Queen. In the game, any prevalent information we want to know about Nero, like where he came from and how he was related to Sparda, is never told.

It's not even that they "leave us questions" it's that they created a character and built a story around him without considering how to actually work him into it beyond his use to the villain's plan. They crafted a bad story that wouldn't allow us to learn anything about the character they forced onto the player.

I know what there is to know about Nero, but it doesn't change the fact that they didn't do a good job at all explaining pretty much all of that. Something like 80% of everything we know about Nero didn't come from the game - that's a horrible way to set up a character.

I've seen a lot of stories don't answer or reveal the answers right away but wait a long time or when its right.

The problem is Nero's not some mysterious, Racer X-like character. He was supposed to be the main character of the game, and nothing substantial was learned about his connection to Sparda, other than "Yeah...somehow he's related to him." Yes, it's good to answer questions with answers that raise more questions, but it was done so poorly in DMC4, and they barely answered the burning question of "who the hell is this guy and why should I care about him?". I liked Nero but sh!t did they do a really bad job at integrating him into the world and its history.

If DMC4 left you wanted more for DMC5 then it did what Capcom wanted it to.

For me to want more, DMC4 would have had to have given me something in the first place >.< Finding nearly everything out about Nero from outside sources, eg things that aren't the game, is bad. I'm glad I got to learn what information there was to give, but holy crap, it was without like any help from the game itself.

Keep in mind, I am not saying that DMC4 sucks, but it did several things rather poorly, and it could have been so much better, and that saddens me.

 

[Chancey289]

You just can't defend Nero. The developers seriously put no thought in to him whatsoever. I wouldn't doubt that he was probably just some afterthought.

Plus, it's just really lazy to link Nero with Sparda. It's shorthand "destiny" writing to have your characters link right out of the gate instead of actually developing them. Sparda isn't a character, he's a plot device.

That just goes to show how sh!tty the writers have been all along on the DMC team.

Plus, why DOES everything have to link with Sparda's family tree? It doesn't do the DMC universe any favors because it just makes it smaller. Sparda needs to just stop being mentioned in f@cking general. They should explore other things in the Devil May Cry world. I mean, this whole new city and culture had its inception in DMC 4 but, it all still revolves around Sparda and so does basically every goddamn character.

YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO GO ANYWHERE!

 

[Stylish Nero]

They did a p!ss-poor job. The only thing the game's manual tells us is that Nero was an orphan taken in by Credo's family, and that a demon attack injured his shoulder and busted the Red Queen. In the game, any prevalent information we want to know about Nero, like where he came from and how he was related to Sparda, is never told.

It's not even that they "leave us questions" it's that they created a character and built a story around him without considering how to actually work him into it beyond his use to the villain's plan. They crafted a bad story that wouldn't allow us to learn anything about the character they forced onto the player.

I know what there is to know about Nero, but it doesn't change the fact that they didn't do a good job at all explaining pretty much all of that. Something like 80% of everything we know about Nero didn't come from the game - that's a horrible way to set up a character.



The problem is Nero's not some mysterious, Racer X-like character. He was supposed to be the main character of the game, and nothing substantial was learned about his connection to Sparda, other than "Yeah...somehow he's related to him." Yes, it's good to answer questions with answers that raise more questions, but it was done so poorly in DMC4, and they barely answered the burning question of "who the hell is this guy and why should I care about him?". I liked Nero but sh!t did they do a really bad job at integrating him into the world and its history.


For me to want more, DMC4 would have had to have given me something in the first place >.< Finding nearly everything out about Nero from outside sources, eg things that aren't the game, is bad. I'm glad I got to learn what information there was to give, but holy crap, it was without like any help from the game itself.

Keep in mind, I am not saying that DMC4 sucks, but it did several things rather poorly, and it could have been so much better, and that saddens me.

That is because they have to yet integrate him into the overall lore.

He isn't some mystery character like Racer-X he is a character whose true origins are unknown to HIM as well as the entire cast (who were present in DMC4) thus making his origins purposely left out. Santcus didn't know who he was, Credo didn't know who he was, Agnus didn't know who he was, Kyrie didn't who he was, nor did Dante have much of a clue and he is most likely assuming at this point. So how would the audience or Nero learn who he truely is and how he is connected to Sparda if NOONE in the goddamn game knows jack sh*t about Nero and this is an issue that due to how its set up DMC4 couldn't resolve properly (unless the spirit inside Yamato/his arm started talking and told Nero the full info) or can only be resolved in another game if set up properly (like a character who does know something or a plot device introduced in the story that can help Nero or the audience learn it). The main villains didn't know, all they knew he coincidentally had Sparda's blood in him and used that to their favor. If they knew who he was they wouldn't need Dante from the beginning.

Details like Nero being an orphan and what not is in the game.....or the disk in the files menu in the character data section.

Even the DMC4 novel, which is said by Bingo (DMC4's writer), to be the full version of the script/story he intended before it got rushed out due to budget whatever. Although it added more details to Nero's backstory it still never gave an answer of who he truely was just a lot more hints and these hints relates quite well and connect very well to the game and in game cutscenes. Meaning it was of original intention to leave Nero's full story blank til LATER to you know leave the fanbase wanting answers and wanting another DMC for those answers. The story like a lot of aspects of the game was cut short due to being rushed. Bingo thought the story out through like he did DMC3.......sort of.....he only half wrote DMC3, a lot of it was just scrapped due to something out of his control (having the writer's script and story brought to life is the cinematics department job). Another thing I learned from my Game Design class is the risks of having a separate writer and one risk is having a part of the writer's script cut or removed due to technical aspects of the game designer/programmers side.

I mean both DMC3/DmC left out important details from their games to only be mentioned in a manga/comic such as what did Dante mean he and Vergil met a year ago and why are they fighting each other (not just within the context of DMC3's plot that Vergil wants to activate Temen-ni-Gru and Dante doesn't want but the fact the 2 brothers seem to have hated each other even before the events of DMC3), how is Vergil alive, why does he wants Sparda powers, and how did he activate Temen-ni-Gru (in the original version of DMC3 they never explained how Vergil met Arkham).................read the manga if you want to know. That sh*t isn't explained in the game but in a book.....not part of the game. Lets not forget the fact its only revealed why Vergil did what he did at the end of DMC3 within a book rather than mention it in the game. Capcom and a lot of (Japanese) companies do practices like this. They tend to do this because they tend to have a lot of ideas for the story that couldn't fit within the game due to time constraints or well money (they earn a profit of said other resources).

There are tons of other games who do the exact the same thing like the MegaMan franchise would release rather important details about the game's plot in a drama CD............that westerners or anyone not in Japan can't buy. Thought DMC was bad with one novel (DMC4) and a DramaCD for the anime no there are other Japanese series with tons of Drama CDs and books that haven't been released outside Japan that contains stuff the fans really want.

 

[Enigma]

I'm not even going to reply - this stuff consists totally of opinions. Capcom is not obligated to do anything. They didn't have to explain everything about Nero before you could play as him. It has nothing to do with bad writing - how can you call a lack of unnecessary writing 'bad writing'? There's nothing there for us to call bad. It's just a choice they made. If they didn't want to focus completely on Nero at this time, that's their prerogative. DMC4 does not pretend to want to explain who Nero is, it only wants to tell a story of his defeat of Sanctus. His backstory of how he was born, where, who his parents were and such are irrelevant to the story at this point. Maybe if DMC5 explained more, no prob. But it doesn't even have to - I suppose it's enough to know that he was raised alongside Kyrie and Credo, and that he hunts demons. End of story.

 

[Demi-fiend]

dmc4 was so good i loved it when it first came out and haven't changed my mind since

 

[Awake]

I can't believe why people are arguing about this....DMC 4 is not a bad game...there were some faults here and there but over all it is one of the best by the thing it does best...its gameplay... no game is perfect and wont be perfect...some games just thrive on the one thing its good at.... people get redundant and look for every single freaking flaw in the game... and thats fine no game should go unturned...its funny cause there was a demo out...video feed, and video commentary on DMC 4...people knew what they were getting and still bought the game...you can't blame the developers on this...