I didnt know it had dldc
and i agree with the bosses being harder in ng2 idk about the move set being bigger idk i like razors edge a lot but i will admitt i enjoyed the storyline more with ng2
Legit though, DMC4 sucked.
- Thread starter Bazilican
- Start date
- Status
I didnt know it had dldc
and i agree with the bosses being harder in ng2 idk about the move set being bigger idk i like razors edge a lot but i will admitt i enjoyed the storyline more with ng2
I checked the novelist dude ng2 has way more moves per weapon and it has 2 ultimates for the true dragon sword the regular one and the true dragon gleam
Master ninja on ng2 puts ultimate on ng3re t shame too anyway back on topic dmc4 could have been better with more time but its great for a rushed game imo
The flying swallow is better too but again thats just my opinion
It all boils down to opinion; frankly, I don't see the need for people to get so up in arms about differing opinions.
That being said, I also dislike it when people try to sell their opinion as fact. It is not fact; it is opinion. It's up to the individual to decide if DMC4 is good or bad themselves, based on their own experiences with the game.
Yes, there are certainly areas where DMC4 lacks-which can be said about every videogame made since the very first one came into existence decades ago. Personally though, I adore the game. It's one of my absolute favourites, along with DMC3, DMC1, Tales of Symphonia, and various other games that captivated me over the years. What captivates one person is not necessarily going to captivate another; that's why a variety exists in the first place.
That being said, I also dislike it when people try to sell their opinion as fact. It is not fact; it is opinion. It's up to the individual to decide if DMC4 is good or bad themselves, based on their own experiences with the game.
Yes, there are certainly areas where DMC4 lacks-which can be said about every videogame made since the very first one came into existence decades ago. Personally though, I adore the game. It's one of my absolute favourites, along with DMC3, DMC1, Tales of Symphonia, and various other games that captivated me over the years. What captivates one person is not necessarily going to captivate another; that's why a variety exists in the first place.
Completely agree with that lol i remember decapitating whole waves of enemies with that move in ng2
I know, I was simply adding to that statement.
That is also not as arguable as we'd like to claim it is. If the game is bad we know it's bad, there are people who are very articulate and can tell you why something is bad and they get paid to put it into words. In DMC4's case the argument is that there are people who can play the game in a certain way that few others can so it's a good game to some, that somehow seems to translate to the quality of the game is arguable. No, it's not. If a game is good it is good, if it's bad it's bad, whether someone likes it or not doesn't change the quality of the game.
Of course you didn't say it, no one says it, we just act like it. I've used that reasoning to defend the game myself but it's rubbish, to act like it's a better game because it was meant to be a better game comes from the want to defend it but in the interest of real fairness it's not a liable attitude.
Capcom will never put the staff of the game back together and finish it, it's just not going to happen unless some one wants to finance that endeavour and that's about 2 to 10 mill, from an uneducated guess, so not ganna hold my breath, personally.
But they aren't dangerous, not like 1's enemies.
I don't like bloody palace, I think the addition of a time limit is bulls#!t. That should've been optional.
DMC4 is not a good game, but it certainly is not a bad game, it's an average game with some major flaws that has found a audience with the people who mastered the nuances they created in DMC3. That is as fair a statement I can make. All the complains that seem unfair and uncalled for or that people always disagree on are born from judging it as been the next game after DMC3 and so it's all born from DMC3 been the ruler it is been judged by. It's a game I like and dislike at the same time. You will often see me change my stance on whether or not I like this game simply dependent on what part of it is been discussed, be it game play or story or design, etc. That's just me, though.
DMC4 was an incomplete game in many terms, but i have to agree with some things Caiden said. Most of your dissappointement is just like, your opinion. I don't really get why some people can dislike so much DMC4 Dante, i don't even remember people saying that kind of thing when the game was released; the main complaint in that aspect was about Nero, everyone disliked Nero at a first glance.
But, btw, i'm not going to type some wall of text here, i think too that DMC4 was an incomplete game and the sad part is that it had the potential to be the one greatest DMC game out there when you look at all the rumors. But gameplay is definetly something that they get right and could even develop from there (even more when we talk about Nero that was pretty "raw" in DMC4 and still holds a cool branch of possibilities), Dante's gameplay is a clear evolution from what DMC3 was, it's not nearly a mess, it's very organized, you just have to take your time to learn because there's a lot of things to get the hang off. When we come to this point, even the first DMC was a much more enjoyable experience once you learned to use Dante's arsenal to its fullest extent and some techs that were boring to learn and incorporate to your playstyle (like sword-cancel and dt-cancel), even the first game had some skill celling to be appreciated in a better way, even if was much less than the subsequent games in terms of execution.
EDIT:
About DMC4 enemies that berto was talking about, i think that they were a large development from DMC3 enemies. I mean, if you look at DMC3, JC (enemy step, in reality) was a core mechanic that was first encouraged and taught to the player in some of the secret missions that later more expert players developed and make it be what it is for DMC players now. But they dit not work the lesser enemies to deal with aerial combat too much (the only one "basic" enemy that is a real pain in the ass when it comes to knock you off the air, and basically only in DMD or Very Hard are the Lusts). DMC4 enemies, even the more basic ones, had attacks to deal with you when you took one of his friends to the air, you feel much more threatened in the air in DMC4 than you did in DMC3 in a lot of cases. The enemies movesets in DMC4 are larger too, kinda revolved to its roots in DMC where even marionettes had a good list of attacks.
But, btw, i'm not going to type some wall of text here, i think too that DMC4 was an incomplete game and the sad part is that it had the potential to be the one greatest DMC game out there when you look at all the rumors. But gameplay is definetly something that they get right and could even develop from there (even more when we talk about Nero that was pretty "raw" in DMC4 and still holds a cool branch of possibilities), Dante's gameplay is a clear evolution from what DMC3 was, it's not nearly a mess, it's very organized, you just have to take your time to learn because there's a lot of things to get the hang off. When we come to this point, even the first DMC was a much more enjoyable experience once you learned to use Dante's arsenal to its fullest extent and some techs that were boring to learn and incorporate to your playstyle (like sword-cancel and dt-cancel), even the first game had some skill celling to be appreciated in a better way, even if was much less than the subsequent games in terms of execution.
EDIT:
About DMC4 enemies that berto was talking about, i think that they were a large development from DMC3 enemies. I mean, if you look at DMC3, JC (enemy step, in reality) was a core mechanic that was first encouraged and taught to the player in some of the secret missions that later more expert players developed and make it be what it is for DMC players now. But they dit not work the lesser enemies to deal with aerial combat too much (the only one "basic" enemy that is a real pain in the ass when it comes to knock you off the air, and basically only in DMD or Very Hard are the Lusts). DMC4 enemies, even the more basic ones, had attacks to deal with you when you took one of his friends to the air, you feel much more threatened in the air in DMC4 than you did in DMC3 in a lot of cases. The enemies movesets in DMC4 are larger too, kinda revolved to its roots in DMC where even marionettes had a good list of attacks.
Last edited:
Because the majority of people who didn't like DMC4 Dante was small in comparison to other complaints or praise.
[]
But, btw, i'm not going to type some wall of text here, i think too that DMC4 was an incomplete game and the sad part is that it had the potential to be the one greatest DMC game out there when you look at all the rumors. But gameplay is definetly something that they get right and could even develop from there (even more when we talk about Nero that was pretty "raw" in DMC4 and still holds a cool branch of possibilities), Dante's gameplay is a clear evolution from what DMC3 was, it's not nearly a mess, it's very organized, you just have to take your time to learn because there's a lot of things to get the hang off. When we come to this point, even the first DMC was a much more enjoyable experience once you learned to use Dante's arsenal to its fullest extent and some techs that were boring to learn and incorporate to your playstyle (like sword-cancel and dt-cancel), even the first game had some skill celling to be appreciated in a better way, even if was much less than the subsequent games in terms of execution.
[]
I'm aware of DMC1's style. My problem with DMC4 is that it wasn't all that organized. I have to cycle through a whole bunch of weapons just to get the right combination of weapons I want and then there's the annoyance of style switching all the time. The buttons are there for a reason, but yet I find myself not even bothering with them because they have no importance. I can literally get through the entire game with just Rebellion and Ebony & Ivory with no problem at all. That makes the game, in my opinion, one big parade of mechanics and attacks that have no purpose there and are just there for show with unnecessary results. With DMC3, you had a personal assortment of attacks for that particular style and with that could build your styles individually. With DMC4, it's just a goddamn clusterfuck of mechanics that I suddenly need to learn. Since when did DMC4 become homework? DMC3 was a bit more simpler to learn, but DMC4 is just a crying shame.
[]
About DMC4 enemies that berto was talking about, i think that they were a large development from DMC3 enemies. I mean, if you look at DMC3, JC (enemy step, in reality) was a core mechanic that was first encouraged and taught to the player in some of the secret missions that later more expert players developed and make it be what it is for DMC players now. But they dit not work the lesser enemies to deal with aerial combat too much (the only one "basic" enemy that is a real pain in the ass when it comes to knock you off the air, and basically only in DMD or Very Hard are the Lusts). DMC4 enemies, even the more basic ones, had attacks to deal with you when you took one of his friends to the air, you feel much more threatened in the air in DMC4 than you did in DMC3 in a lot of cases. The enemies movesets in DMC4 are larger too, kinda revolved to its roots in DMC where even marionettes had a good list of attacks.[]
I'd like to test that, but as I said before, DMC4 just holds no interest for me to go back and have to play through it all over again.
You can finish all the games with just Reb/FE and E&I; hack'n'slashs in general are much more about what you're willing to do and test than what they force you to go through. If you play some game like Ninja Gaiden Sigma or Sigma 2 it's even more apparent, you can literaly use your Dragon Sword the whole game, i think that in some parts you'll only be kinda "forced" to change your projectile weapons as some enemies are distant and shurikens doesn't really work on them. The cool thing about H'n'S is that they don't force you to get hang of all the game is about (but a lot of them do want you to use what they've teached you, fundamentals like dodging, blocking and finding patterns), but you can stick to what you like, or you can dive in the game mechanic if you love it.
DmC begs to differ.
But back then hack n slashing was about having fun doing just that; hacking and slashing. But with each DMC game, presumably DMC4, it feels like it's less about hacking and slashing and more about useless puzzle solving and looking around then just slashing.
And that's what I mean; actual use for other weapons then just using the same weapons the whole game. With NG2, they don't push a whole bunch of styles and weapons on you, overwelming you to try and master all these things like DMC4 does.
And that's what I like about H&S games. Killer is Dead does this well by not trying to slam a whole bunch of mechanics in my face and uses less in order to do more. With DMC4, there's a ****-ton of things that you need to memorize to do combos and that can get annoying.
DMC 4 is the worst game in the franchise to me because it's a game that had so much potential and could have been freaking awesome but like I said, it just spits in the faces of fans and let's everyone down. Yes, I seriously consider DMC 2 to be better because even though it failed hard, it failed because it was trying stuff and went about it the wrong way. DMC 4 fails hard because of just laziness and intentional f#ck ups that should have easily been avoided. It's like they don't even care about the franchise.
I honestly don't see where the sudden appreciation for 4 comes from. Back then the overall consensus was that DMC 4 sucked.
I was one of those people that was excited for 4. I bought like in the first week all excited to revisit Devil May Cry once again. Then I got this piece of sh!t. F#ck DMC 4 and f@ck the lazy people behind it.
I honestly don't see where the sudden appreciation for 4 comes from. Back then the overall consensus was that DMC 4 sucked.
I was one of those people that was excited for 4. I bought like in the first week all excited to revisit Devil May Cry once again. Then I got this piece of sh!t. F#ck DMC 4 and f@ck the lazy people behind it.
DmC forces you to cycle through angel and devil modes with some arguably bad mechanics like color-coding, and it does this in plataforming sections too. It forces you, it not "begs".
DMC1 had a lot of "running around", i believe it's pretty equal to DMC4, hell, even DmC has a lot of running around and plataforming: examples are that mission when they are storming the order base and the one after the trade where Vergil kills Lilith. And DMC3 has more puzzles than DMC4, DMC3 has that light and mirror game, turning the tower around, choosing the right boss fights to make the quickier path (M19, i guess), choosing the right doors in the Artemis mission, and even a whole challenge that revolves around plataforming (that area with some cubes floating).
NGS2 gives you something around 10 weapons to work with (including the Howling Cannon), which is a number a little above most DMC games (including firearms for both). Neither do DMC4, man, you've said just a moment back that you've finished the game only with E&I and Reb, how they forced you to master something there? I don't really know what's the point here. How DMC4 forces you to master the game and other hack'n'slashs don't do this?
I've never played this game, people talked about it a lot to me because of that guy Suda, i've seen some gameplay and it looked like a pretty simple hack'n'slash. If that's what you like and enjoy, i don't know what attracted you to DMC at all, you compared DMC4 with DmC here as example of some simplicity, and even DmC is a complex hack'n'slash when we compare with other games in this genre like GoW, Heavenly Sword and so on.
But it made it so that every weapon had a purpose, unlike DMC4 were I can streamlight through the entire game with nothing but a sword and two guns, when there's a bunch of weapons that I don't even need.
True, but with DMC3, the puzzles were bearable and not tedious. And there were plenty of demons to fight as you continued on to make things more interesting. With DmC, there was running around, but there was also demons to fight as you go and it didn't slow you down with puzzles but rather things that you had to buttom mash through just to keep going. DMC4 slows you down by going forward, but then going sideways, and then suddenly going backwards just to go forward again.
With NG 2 there are weapons but they don't jumble them all at you within your button layout. You have to go to a sort of pause menu to switch weapons and there are the need of different weapons for some challenges. I said DMC4 has all these other mechanics that are completely unnecessary to the game and yet you can just get through with two guns and a sword. What's the point of developing a technique of weapons and styles when you can get through the entire game with just one style, the default weapons and button mashing?
I just wished that DMC4 actually had usage for the other weapons you can use instead of putting it onto my controller like a pretty pink bow.
DMC1 attracted me because it had a simply layout of hack n' slash. You couldn't beat some enemies with the same weapons and needed to use others to get by. That was the fun of DMC1. But with DMC4, they give Dante all these weapons, all these styles, and all this stuff that I should be using to "have fun" and I can literally ignore all that and just button mash rebellion just to get through?
That's just my issues with DMC4.
TWOxACROSS
Hot-blooded God of Guns
I think the problem with DMC4 overall is the dilution of so much of what Devil May Cry is. Dante's character was a shallow interpretation of his fun-loving self in DMC3, "exploration" was nothing compared to DMC1 or 3 because any semblence of finding and using key items was simply taking the item from one place to another. Then there's the very shallow, basic anime-like story.
Dante was a mess because they wanted to give us access to everything but still wanted to adhere to the system that Dante started with, whereas Nero was a template for a different kind version of the classic system (more directional inputs, and properly mapped keys (ground and air combos on the same button)). Something had to have happened in that game's development and it just threw so much out of whack :/
Dante was a mess because they wanted to give us access to everything but still wanted to adhere to the system that Dante started with, whereas Nero was a template for a different kind version of the classic system (more directional inputs, and properly mapped keys (ground and air combos on the same button)). Something had to have happened in that game's development and it just threw so much out of whack :/
TWOxACROSS
Hot-blooded God of Guns
I would greatly disagree with this, because DMC1 had true exploration. DMC4 had mostly linear take key A to lock B mulling about. Fortuna Castle was the only short-lived nostalgia we get from that.
I think you may be confusing why Bazi is upset with DMC4's running around, because it really is simply running around for much of the game. DmC by comparison breaks up that monotony with platforming segments, and even DMC1's was acceptable because it was legitimate exploration.
DMC4 did not have vast amounts of exploration, it really did just have running around. And then running back :facepalm:
While i can agree DMC had a more "true" exploration, even if it's not that much, i do not really think that plataforming breaks the monotony (even more pretty simple plataforming). But DMC4 really has some empty running around in some places in Fortuna Castle and the Forest level (where it really gets annoying, i love and hate that forest levels for a couple of reasons).
This.
Like when that bridge was covered with vines and I couldn't get through at all unless I go this other way. Then I had to run all around the castle, fight these demons, wrap my head around what to do next or where to go, get annoyed by those stupid lazers, find the science demon nerd, lose the girl, cry like a baby, and then all of a sudden Nero punches the floor with vines on it and we see a cutscene of a bridge go down and then I'm like "Oh yeah! That's right. I had a bridge to lower."
It's like there's too much going on that you tend to forget your original objectives and end up getting so lost. That was my issue with mission 3 through at least 7.
Also at least DmC's platforming sections and stuff were functional and fun.
- Status