DMC made pretty much iconic characters. People emphasis and like them. It happened with DMC1 and it repeated with DMC3. IT's not only gameplay. Otherwise it died after DMC2. But people wanted to see more of universe and characters. That's why it survived for so long. And i not going to start on DmC.
Problem is that in MG1 and 2 he was portrayed as complete evil. Kojima just couldn't know how universe grows. While Peacewalker, Portabl Ops, etc portrayed his actions as attempt to change something and make things right, even if in the end what he did was wrong. MGS is great franchise, but not perfect example of consistent, logical writing.
Only because it became a genre defining hack n slash fluke. Just imagine if DMC didn't have it's great gameplay back when it first came out. No one would have even given a sh!t. It was a lucky break for Capcom tossing out a game made on another's foundation that surprisingly broke in to a franchise with a sequel that sucked. Why? I would compare it a little to Iron Man 2. Marvel didn't expect Iron Man to become a huge mainstream hero. So they tossed out a sequel as fast as possible and it clearly didn't live up to the predecessor because they just wanted to cash in on something without full grasp on how to actually make it work. It's why they also were so quick to drop Kamiya and move on with or without him.
byeAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
I'm sorry...that's...that's completely stupid. How can any new information about anything be revealed if it all has to call back to previously mentioned? How does that previously mentioned information get to exist? New information does not expressly need to have been mentioned before, but it should have some sort of connection to the story at hand, otherwise it's just pointless filler.
Case in point, Birth By Sleep shows us what happened to keyblade masters and why the worlds were engulfed by Heartless in the first place. Despite the constant rehashes in levels, every Kingdom Hearts installment gave us new information about the whole of the universe, or...what, you're "global meaning".
Yes, they were considered mystical because there was no other information given at the time. Funny thin about consideration, though - it relies solely on the information given at hand. Once we were told Vamp's immortality was because of nanomachines son the new information changes what we considered his abilities to be; either mystical or technological.
Also - Otacon explains that Vamp's ability to move and sit on water, and run up walls is because of Van der Waals technology in MGS2. So even in the very game he first appears in, we know about two of his three abilities; Van der Waals tech for not sinking in water and running on vertical surfaces, and hypnosis and psychological suggestion for his Kagenui. All that was left to explain was his mystical immortality, which was explained in MGS4.
It totally explains why he doesn't use them! If something is impervious to bullets are you going to keep shooting it with bullets? Come the f#ck on man.
They didn't cut anything out! And they explained the one thing left unexplained - his immortality. Was it a lazy explanation? YES! IT TOTALLY WAS! But it was not in any way, shape, or form an inconsistency in Metal Gear Solid's overall plot.
Yes, there is way more to characterization than they're backstory, but if their actions in the present are aren't noteworthy in any significant way, they are lacking in characterization. If they have no backstory, then much more emphasis is placed on their present actions, and if those actions aren't significant in shaping the character, then they are still lacking in any development and remain a one-dimensional character. Vergil in DMC1 has neither a backstory nor actions in the present to flesh him out, and even Nelo Angelo, who takes his backstory from Vergil (which is to say: no f#cking backstory at all), has present actions that make him an extremely shallow and one-dimensional character. He is literally nothing more than an antagonist who shows up and fights, chuckling every once in a while. His connection to Dante isn't his, it's Dante's. All of what little Vergil and Nelo Angelo are is entirely dependent on the main character because they have absolutely nothing of their own.
In DMC1, what is Vergil? Dante's dead twin brother. That's it. We have no personality or unique, standout characteristics for him whatsoever.
In DMC1, what is Nelo Angelo? Mundus' servant who fights Dante. Turns out to be Vergil, see above.
Nelo Angelo is a one-dimensional character, and Vergil was just completely dimensionless. Neither were truly pathetic enough at the time for the scene to hold lasting significance on a deeper level.
Okay, this is it, because I'm tired of talking to you and running around in circles. An inconsistency is a break in logic, where something contradicts something else. It is not based on feelings or personal perception, it is based on stone cold fact. If a dude has his arm cut off in one scene and then it's back for no reason for the rest of the story with no explanation, that is an inconsistency. New information that changes audience perception is not.
Now, go back to f#cking school.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm out!
Not that you provided anything besides your attempt to display you opinion as ultimate truth
Thing is, we are still missing pieces that is coming in The Phantom Pain. The Phantom Pain clearly is going to be that missing puzzle piece of Big Boss's transition in to a complete villain. He's pushed to that point. Hell, just look at the difference between the formation of Mother Base and the formation of Outer Heaven.
Being iconic has nothing to do with writing. Even more 90% of iconic characters are not good written characters. You can't say Zelda, Mario, or characters like those good written. They just need to "tick" with people. Bashing of original Dante started with DmC, just like now there is new trend is to say how terrible Solid Snake was. I have pretty of legit reasons to dislike DmC, starting with it's ripped-off writing and ending with it simplified, Dynasty warriors like combat, but you probably belong to those who thinks that this is ideal game and it has not flaws. So i not going to debate on it.
MGS has some plot holes here and there. But you can't really avoid them, since you can't really expect Kojima written whole story when making MG1. IT's not small story, where you can keep track of things. Besides MGS doesn't tries to cover them. It's just makes you accept whole franchise for what it is. With all strange things that could happen only because it's a game
Oh, so you just share the same f#cking opinions as all the other people who condemned it out the gate. Let me guess, when saying "ripped-off" writing you're gonna mention John Carpenter's They Live which you also probably never seen. You don't even wanna debate Carpenter with me, I'm an avid horror fan and one of my favorite horror movies is John Carpenter's The Thing. DmC is not as similar to They Live as you think. I would know, I only f#cking have like every Carpenter film.
Not only They Live. There are far more material it ripped off. As for how it looks, i don't care how it looks. I know how it plays. After mashing same button for each difficulty, without thinking about timing and still getting SSS i felt really bored, and by third playthrough i saw no reasons to play it other than trophies. To me it can't hold a candle to DMC4
So somebody disagree with you = stupid. ok. You guys are sad.I'm tired of dealing with stupid. I'm out too.
Sorry, you can drop whole education thing, since i kinda older than you
I also think exploration was kinda let down in DMC4, but tbh, i think enemies in DMC3 were worse than in 4 (canon fodder i mean) Most of them were far to repetitive and predictable. Problem is that most of DMC3 enemies shared same attack patterns. I liked that in DMC4 they returned to DMC1 enemies as well, such as frosts
For a writer, you surely need to learn on your manners
Using online doesn't justify acting like an underaged jerk. I really start to get feeling that on this site there is only one opinion allowed, otherwise you gonna be made scape goat, because apparently some people think whole world spins around them.
For a writer, you surely need to learn on your manners
It reminds me of the argument that ''Dante is an ass'' just because he lets Nero get absorbed by the Savior. The point is, that was the plan. He tries to help Nero by shooting the Yamato to him. He even says ''if the exterior's solid, then you gotta take it out from the inside.'' Pay attention to the script, people.
Whether DMC4 sucks or not is all but subjective. There are legit pros and cons in there just as much as DmC had but can be countered. This must be why I have mixed feels for both DMC4 and DmC.Dude, if your opinion is based on half-truths, falsehoods, and blatant nonsense, people are going to get annoyed. Especially when you insult them by not listening to their side of the story. For example, TWOxACROSS explained that Vamp did not have mystical powers in MGS2: his powers simply were not explained. The explanation mainly came in MGS4. You ignored that completely and reiterated that his powers were mystical (which isn't true), and without even explaining. I suggest you replay those games and pay more attention to games in the future. Even I, who hasn't played all MGSes (only 2, 3 and Peace Walker), know that most if not all of the things you said are not true. Sorry, but you'll have to accept that.
Forums also exist to show you when you're wrong; they're not just for your amusement. You are correct that some valid opinions here get bashed, which is a shame, but you shouldn't be surprised that people try to refute your false ideas.
Anyway, can this thread please move on? You know my stance: DMC4 did not suck, but it was indeed the second worst DMC. Too much backtracking, people didn't like Dante much (though I found him about as likable as DMC3 Dante), Nero's gameplay wasn't too great, etc etc. However, many of the OP's (Bazilican) comments were completely subjective and not even based on arguments. Nero is annoying... opinion. Dante is an ass and no fun... opinion. The styles are now a 'clusterfuck', while DMC3's system was great? Really? DMC4's system is the same as DMC3's, only now you can switch between styles on the fly. All you have to do is press one directional button and you're set. Clusterfuck... what nonsense. He didn't like the dice game... nobody cares. The dice game is not important in DMC4 - it only features in like two levels. Also, the whole idea of Nero is that he still needs to find his place in DMC's world, and that he has a bit of growing up to do. Nero is not meant to be some kind of Superman character who can do no wrong. Dante even says ''what a punk''. Don't you think he might've said that intentionally?
Anyway, back to actual valid arguments, hopefully.