Devil May Cry 1 and 2 aren’t really the subject of much debate when locked into a comparison with more recent entries in the series, for the sole reason that, well….they’re barely action games. Yes, the original DMC was and is a monument to the action genre, but the emphasis of that game was mainly progression. I often refer to the first game as the first, real, 3D Symphony of the Night. There was a lot of emphasis on exploring the castle, placing certain objects in specific places, and countering bosses with newfound abilities, like the Devil Trigger. The actual combat in the game is simplistic and primitive in nature. There’s not a lot in the way of combos, and the Style Ranking only depends on how many times you can hit the enemy, rather than grading your efficiency when varying moves. In essence, DMC1 and DMC2 can be fairly ranked as arcady button-mashers (2 moreso than 1, mind you. You still at least had to dodge in the first game). So when people compare the DmC to the original Devil May Cry series, I can assure you that they aren’t comparing it to DMC1 and DMC2. In fact, most people---including the ignorant fanbots that emerged in the wave of mindless rage following DmC’s initial announcement---find themselves heralding DMC3 as the series’ high point and sole standard, and the game every DMC game should strive to be.
And that’s where the problem begins…
Devil May Cry 3 will always go down in history to me as the game that could’ve been the perfect DMC game (excusing whatever questionable story elements were in the game). From a combat perspective, it had the right balance of weapons, styles, enemy AI, input requirement and challenge to be the stellar prodigy of the hack-n’-slash genre. Unfortunately, the game made itself virtually outdated upon release, by keeping the same problems that plagued DMC1 and DMC2: The stiff movement and clunky controls, and the insufferable camera. I can forgive DMC1 for having those issues, because it kept its combat simple and as a sole means to kill enemies and progress with the level…but DMC3 tries to push itself as a legitimate hack-n’-slash game, with more combat options, style rankings, and harder enemies. The most integral aspect of any action game is to SEE what you’re fighting, and have RESPONSIVE CONTROLS that act FAST ENOUGH against the hordes of enemy AI. DMC3 demolished both of those aspects, and that’s what makes it a chore to play. I hear a lot of people praise DMC3 for its difficulty, but they fail to see the reason it’s difficult isn’t because of any actual in-game challenge. It’s because of the game’s refusal to adapt to evolution and retooling. DMC3 isn’t difficult….you know what is? Ninja Gaiden, and there’s a reason why: The controls and camera DO NOT get in the way, and yet the game is STILL a relentless challenge of wits and combat variety. The enemy AI is what makes game like Ninja Gaiden hard…and it’s not like DMC3’s enemies are easy by any stretch. The problem is, they should be the only obstacle of the game. And by the end of the day, DMC3’s ultimate obstacle isn’t the enemy AI, or mastering the styles or conquering the bosses…it’s the player’s vain attempt to adjust themselves to the irritating controls and disorienting camera. If you honestly don’t believe that it’s THAT big of a problem, just flash back to your first encounter with the game, the first time you picked up and played it. Did you find yourself perfectly adjusted to the controls and camera on your first playthrough? Better yet, introduce someone else to the game. Hand a random stranger the controller the next time you play the game, a gamer who’s never experienced Devil May Cry…and see how he/she “picks up and plays” the game. That is, of course, before they shatter your TV by throwing your controller upon meeting the game’s first boss.
Thankfully, these problems were fixed upon the Devil May Cry series’ transition over to the MT Framework engine with DMC4, and the Unreal Engine with DmC. In both games, the controls, movement, camera options and centering were a massive improvement. They played much more fluently, and allowed for a more versatile set of movement and combat. Oh, and you can see what you’re fighting…that definitely helps.
DmC’s combat functioned with a prominent emphasis on diving in and out of enemy ranks…almost like you were in Trickster all the time. The Angel Pull and the Demon Whip proved to be essential
People often criticize the game for not having a lock-on…but the fact is, not a single one of Ninja Theory’s past action games---playing similarly to DmC right down to being made on the Unreal Engine---utilized a lock-on either. What makes DmC superior to those games in terms of combat is the addition of the Demon Pull/Angel Whip. What made it a stand-out Devil May Cry game was the way it handled its weapons. An issue I’ve had in nearly all the past DMC games is that some of the weapons are borderline useless. What made them ineffective in the heat of combat was that most of the movesets dedicated to each weapon seemed to be there just for the sake of looking cool, rather than being useful. This a problem prominent in both Ninja Gaiden and God of War, so DMC is far from the only offender in this category. But almost every single melee weapon in DmC is packed with moves that prove highly effective in combat. I can’t remember a single move I bought with my XP that didn’t end up saving me in higher difficulties.
However, I think DmC’s best implementation of combat is through the Demon and Angel weapons…and yes, I’m talking about the “color-coded enemies” everyone bitches about. For one, these enemies actually revived something present in the old DMC games. Certain enemies reacted differently depending on which weapons you used. You could hack the Seven Hells to ribbons with Rebellion, but it would prove fruitless against the Arachnids a few levels later. You had to experiment with Cerberus, Agni and Rudra, Beowulf, and other weapons to see what did damage and what didn’t….and you had to do it in the heat of battle, against DMC3’s relentless enemy AI. But DmC brings that back by having Demonic and Angelic enemies, each susceptible to either angelic or demonic weapons. It’s a lot like Ikaruga with its Light and Dark enemies...it’s simple on a conceptual level, yes, but it works extremely well in-game. And just because it’s simple, people assumed that this was “dumbing down the combat.” It’s funny I brought up Ikaruga, because despite its simplistic Light/Dark system…the game is hard as ****. What makes DmC hard, even painful for some people, is that it relies on the player to use just the two angel/demon weapons they have equipped, and only use those to defeat the enemy. In essence, you have to rack up combos and Style Points with just one weapon type. That’s not a problem…that just encourages you to increase your knowledge of the moveset set of each weapon. Trying to get an SSS on Son of Sparda difficulty in a room full of angel enemies? Well, you have to get acquainted with all of Osiris and Aquila’s moves, and you better know how to chain them effectively. In other words, the game encourages you to play around with each weapon, and develop skill with both the Angel/Demon weapons. That’s why there’s only four alternate weapons to Rebellion in the game: the combat requires to strategically improve with your own choice of weapons, and determine whether or not the Angel/Demonic essence of each weapon will be damaging and effective against the enemies. It’s the first DMC game that requires you to become an expert with every melee weapon in the game, and that is what makes the combat so much fun to play. It depends less on being flashy or performing cool-looking moves, and relies more on being effective and delivering sufficient damage...and you still look and feel badass while doing it. Whether or not it holds up against past DMC games is ultimately up to you…but on its own, the game holds up really well in the combat department.
In terms of the original series, DMC4 really holds the place as the game with the best combat. It essentially took everything DMC3 introduced with its Style System and Weapon Switching, and smoothened the creases with a better camera and control. You had access to all your weapons all the time, and could switch styles on the fly. The amount of strategy that added was incalculable...you could switch between Royal Guard's defense and Sword Master's offense, all while employing Trickster and Gunslinger to enemies who required evasion and long-range attacks. Despite not having an equal variety in weapons, it had a great system of Refundable Combo Purchases, and was a little less stingy about its Style Ranking system when compared to 3. Nero’s combat was a good contradiction to Dante’s, since he wielded the Red Queen with one arm, thus making his attacks a bit slower. That required more strategy and damage-dealing as a result, complimented with the Devil Bringer being a superb way to finish combos. I will admit that he doesn't feel as powerful or devastating as Dante, but he has a much longer reach and versatile means of reaching enemies. So playing as Nero provided a fresh inclusion of challenge and reliance on effective knowledge of moves, making him a more challenging choice than Dante’s.
Overall, I’d say DMC4’s combat is my personal favorite (although nostalgia and having a lot more time to acquaint myself to the combat system might serve as unfair sweeteners to my natural bias towards the game), with DmC coming in on a slick, clean second. DMC1 and 2 weren't technically combat-heavy enough to be discussed in comparison, and DMC3 I utterly hated with a dismayed sense of shattered anguish at how much potential it held…but all the afore-mentioned problems it was plagued with.
