The weapons are tied to how the stance functions though. It's essentially heavy, medium and light stances. It's the exact same with DmC's weapons being divided like that.
Likelihood of a DmC Sequel?
- Thread starter ThorAxe911
- Start date
Dante Redgrave
Son of Sparda
Yeah, and a similar system was used by Dark Forces 2: jedi Knight for heavy medium and light styles with the lightsaber...HS was not the first and only game to use it.
Yes but it's very clearly not a Devil May Cry style game and far more closely resembles Ninja Theory's Heavenly Sword.
Well it's fine if you like it. I'm not personally trying to bash the system or even say it's bad. I'm only pointing out how it's not really Devil May Cry.
It is now. It's true it's not like the original series, but it is part of the system now. Just like Styles became a thing of the series when it got introduced in DMC3.
Dante Redgrave
Son of Sparda
It's still a Devil may Cry. It's got fire arms, combo style system, weapons that can switch on the fly, Devil triger, and fast paced combat. They hybridized the combat engine because the Stance mechanic is what worked best, especially since NT used an engine they were well familiar with, and didn't spend a year or more trying to learn Capcom's NT Framework that DMC4 used. Engines evolved, you're comparing to DMC3 and 4's combat engine, those are not how they were in DMC1 and 2. This is how Devil may Cry is NOW. It will probably evolve again for the next game
But every decent game in the genre has this and the Devil Trigger is absolutely nothing like the Devil Trigger of before. The firearms are completely useless and serve no real purpose and the style system is very different.
But styles worked infinitely better and provided much more opportunity for innovation and exploration as well as the depth of the combat.
Except DMC3 actually did evolve the combat as did DMC4, DmC watered it down.
Dante Redgrave
Son of Sparda
..You iknow, you'e just arguing down the game and repeating the same things over and over instead of accepting that things change and that this is a different style of gameplay. I'm done, it's like talking to a brick wall now.
TyIquan_DmC
Well-known Member
Well this is just ridiculous, Slacri.
The only thing you have connecting this to Heavenly Sword is that the weapon switch is more or less the same. Yet when folks rightfully point out that that's all they have in common due to HS not having a jump button, having a counter, having a throw, having QTE's, etc., you basically cover up your ears and say, "Nope, weapon switch is the same, Heavenly Sword 2 CONFIRMED!!"
Heavenly Sword's combat was nothing like this game, and this game is Devil May Cry, whether you choose to accept it or not. So they took away the style system. Big whoop. Does that mean DMC1/2 aren't proper DMC games anymore? Does that mean this game has no variety? So they changed the weapon switch up. Because you know, that hasn't ever happened before.
This is still very much a Devil May Cry game. Or can you give me another series based around ranged combat just as much as melee combat with as much depth, variety, and focus on being as stylish as possible as this game? If Bayonetta is all you can come up with, then I'm afraid you've lost at this point.
The only thing you have connecting this to Heavenly Sword is that the weapon switch is more or less the same. Yet when folks rightfully point out that that's all they have in common due to HS not having a jump button, having a counter, having a throw, having QTE's, etc., you basically cover up your ears and say, "Nope, weapon switch is the same, Heavenly Sword 2 CONFIRMED!!"
Heavenly Sword's combat was nothing like this game, and this game is Devil May Cry, whether you choose to accept it or not. So they took away the style system. Big whoop. Does that mean DMC1/2 aren't proper DMC games anymore? Does that mean this game has no variety? So they changed the weapon switch up. Because you know, that hasn't ever happened before.
This is still very much a Devil May Cry game. Or can you give me another series based around ranged combat just as much as melee combat with as much depth, variety, and focus on being as stylish as possible as this game? If Bayonetta is all you can come up with, then I'm afraid you've lost at this point.
Loopy
Devil hunter in training
Thinking about it, if a sequel does happen, who is going to be the antagonist? We've had Mundus and he's presumably totally dead. Vergil and Dante have started their rivalry (or whatever you want to call it).For me, brining Arius in would be pointless because new Mundus was like him (busniness man, demonic power, world control). And I'm not sure how Arkham would be written in. Would this new Vergil still need his help?
And I'm not sure I want a return of 'space pope' Sanctus just yet.
And I'm not sure I want a return of 'space pope' Sanctus just yet.
The stances are kind of a big deal though. It's the core way of how you switch up combat and try to give it more depth. Those other things aren't as important.
Now you're straw manning me.
Devil May Cry 2 was never considered a proper DMC game and is hated. DMC1 was good for its time and its sequels evolved and expanded its combat. The issue I have here is that DmC just changed it without evolving it, they didn't improve on it and watered it down.
See above. And it has variety, I never claimed otherwise. Just not in comparison to 3 or 4.
Well for one the game's ranged combat is hardly has as much depth as its melee combat. The guns are useless and don't really add anything and they've completely removed Gunslinger. You can't do anything like this in DmC.
I don't find it nearly as focused on being stylish. Considering how easy it is to get SSS now. The old games encouraged you to mix up and once you got SSS you had to keep up your style and mixing up of combat or else your style would drop like a rocket. DmC's style meter doesn't go down unless you get hit. Being stylish doesn't have nearly as much focus.
I think comparing the game's Devil Trigger kind of shows this. In DMC3 and 4 your Devil Trigger was used to speed up gameplay. It made all of Dante's attacks faster and it made it so when you got hit you didn't get stunned as easily to keep your combat fluid without interruption. It increased the game's pace. In DmC the Devil Trigger slows gameplay to a crawl with slow-motion and makes all the enemies fly up in the air and do nothing. It's no longer a turbo-button, it's just a "I don't want to die please" button.
I wasn't even going to bring Bayonetta up, but why does that mean I lose if I do? Because it proves you wrong?
TyIquan_DmC
Well-known Member
How are those things not important when they're what makes up the gameplay over anything?
I see people use this term a lot, and seemingly not know what it is. Kind of annoying. I'm not changing your argument at all. That's exactly what you've been saying.
And yet there's plenty of people willing to put this down in favor of DMC2 because it, "introduced the template for the styles!" How you feel on the combat here compared to the old games is subjective. While I can agree that there isn't as much depth, and it doesn't have as much variety as DMC4, there's still plenty of depth and this Dante has a lot more going for him at any given time than DMC3 Dante. The variety here craps on DMC3, imo of course. It's all in how you choose to look at it. You say it hasn't evolved, and yet there are some that'd argue that in giving Dante access to everything in a more streamlined matter it's been evolved. It isn't nearly as restricting as DMC3, nor is it as clumsy as DMC4. But again, there's no objective view on that. Bayonetta was watered down as well, and yet it's considered the best in the genre. It isn't automatically a bad thing.
The guns are useless...in your opinion. Guns still play a huge part in the combat, whether they have as many moves or not. DMC1 is still a Devil May Cry, and the guns had no special moves there, either.
Exactly.
Due to the demon dodge, right? Because that's the only possible way to get up to SSS, right? This game doesn't encourage you to switch up your attacks, right? DMC4 totally didn't have the same ranking system, right? People who are actually invested in these games actually give a damn about the style meter, right?
Yeah, because Dante was the only one with a DT, right? I mean, Nero totally sped up and tanked attacks, right? And I really wish people would stop comparing this DT to Quicksilver. TIME DOES NOT SLOW DOWN. If the enemies hit the ground, they go on just as they did before you activated DT. And that's all it was in the old games, as well. "I need help! It's morphin' time!!"
More like, "Proves my point." Because going by your logic, Bayonetta is just DMC5. It has a hell of a lot more in common with DMC/DmC than DmC does with HS.
Because they don't? The gameplay isn't entirely based upon Quicktime events to the extent of games like Heavy Rain or even God of War. It's not entirely based on finishers either. It is very based on stances.
And you're using a massive hyperbole to do it. If you want to quote my argument, quote it. Don't try to massively exaggerate what I'm saying to try to make yourself sound better.
That's not me, so I don't see how that's relevant. I don't think DMC2 was a proper DMC2 game.
Of course it's subjective, as is your own opinion on it.
There is depth but not on the level of its two predecessors which is my issue. It's a step down. It changed the gameplay without really making it better.
Well sure he has a lot more potential because he's a new character, I doubt Ninja Theory will follow through as they've demonstrated their writing ability and it's fallen flat.
How so? DMC3 offered you the choice between 5 different melee weapons and 5 different ranged. DmC has 3 melee weapons and 3 ranged. You might say it's better than 3 because it let you switch on the fly which I'd also disagree with because DMC3's weapon's were a lot more varied in their playstyles and what they offered. DmC's just has some straight overpowered weapons that trump the other. Even then, forcing you to have to switch to a specific type of weapon to kill enemies and forcing you to attack enemies from a specific angle is obnoxious and limiting. pquote]You say it hasn't evolved, and yet there are some that'd argue that in giving Dante access to everything in a more streamlined matter it's been evolved.[/quote] DMC4 Dante already had access to everything and Nero was already pretty streamlined.
Can you explain how DMC4 was clumsy?
How is Bayonetta watered down? I explained how DmC is but you just gave your statement without elaborating on it at all. Even if it was Bayonetta is it's own IP and isn't the continuation of a series.
Explain how the guns have depth or offer much. They do very little damage, the least they've ever done in a DMC guy and you're better off just grappling a guy towards you and hitting them. And the lack of lock on makes it incredibly annoying because you don't know who Dante will shoot at. You see I can accept that people have their own opinions, I just expect you to elaborate them and explain why you feel that way if you want to join in on the discussion. Not just state them without any warrant, backing or evidence. I linked a video showing how DMC3 guns could have depth with Gunslinger style if played right. Now it's your turn to provide some evidence rather than just saying opinions.
What, the fact that I don't know it? Explain to me how there's even a feasible way of doing it now that Gunslinger is removed and the guns barely do any damage other than rounding up a bunch of guys with Kablooey.
That's one way, yes.
Not nearly to the extent the previous games did.
It had the same ranking system in name only, it was handled very differently.
Well yes, It was pretty satisfying to get an SSS and keeping it up because of how rarely it happened.
Vergil's did the same thing.
But it did, it made your attacks do double the damage and quickened how much damage you did without slowing down the enemies at all. It didn't literally speed up Nero's actual attack speed but it surely as hell didn't make every enemy in the game suddenly do nothing now. It's not nearly as bad as it's handled in DmC.
Oh okay, it just makes the enemies do nothing to you without literally freezing time. That's so much better. Yes and it wasn't nearly as atrociously done and it made the gameplay more fluid. The old DT's didn't provide nearly as much of a health regen or damage boost either. Seriously, look at this and tell me it isn't broken.
Bayonetta was a new IP, it didn't have any obligation to try to be like its predecessors like DmC does. You asked this:
And Bayonetta does just that except better, because what you stated not with this game but with DMC 3 and 4. How does that prove your point at all?
AlchemistFromEden
Well-known Member
trust me without unreal engine the visuals and art wouldn't be nearly as good because MT framework is really starting to show its age while UE3 is just now hitting its peak with games like starwars 1313
I'd rather have pay the cost of decreased visuals for the reward of a faster paced game with more enemies on screen. The visuals in the levels are nice, but they ultimately have no affect on combat.
Also, it's not as if the graphics in this game are particularly noteworthy. The designs are nice but the technical graphics themselves? Eh. Just look at the buildings in the background at 2:23. That's some straight up PS2 stuff.
AlchemistFromEden
Well-known Member
a demo analysis is complete bullshit because the demo was an older build and NOT the final build so that video is irrelevant to anything period
Name the mechanics that he complained about the in the demo that haven't made it in the final game or been altered in some major way. The only thing I really disagree with him on is that the angel scythe lacks utility.
AlchemistFromEden
Well-known Member
i'd rather EVERYTHING in the game is great and not JUST the combat, that's not a great game if only one aspect of it is great, which is why dmc4 is not a great game, its good but not great,
DmC
-great graphics
-great story
-interesting characters
-great level design
-great AND accessible combat that has depth
-great atmosphere
-unique aesthetic
in other words, GREAT GAME
DMC4
-bland story
-bland characters
-bland environments
-frankly generic aesthetic
-great combat that has **** tons of depth
this is not a great game, its a good game but its not great
its 2013, and i'd rather they focus on EVERYTHING being top notch and not just how deep the combat can get
I feel the combat is one of the most important things in a combat title.
They're passable, they're nothing outstanding. Again the video I linked kind of shows how lazy the graphics get at points, and even the graphics when they're in the center are nothing jaw-dropping. It's not bad, it's just passable.
I've already made a thread where I explained how awful the story of DmC is.
My thread covers this too.
The asthetics of the levels have depth, the levels themselves? Eh, they're pretty linear and have too many long platforming sections. They're not bad but they're hardly great.
It's a huge step-down from previous titles. DMC4 had great combat with depth but didn't have to compromise on making it more accesible because they made a completely different character for that.
It's decent I agree.
This I agree on, some of the designs are just gorgeous.
in other words, GREAT GAME
DMC4
I don't really see how this has a huge bearing on it because it's supposed to be an action games. These are legitimate criticisms no doubt, but combat is the core.
Very much agreed.
I actually do agree with this. It's a good game, but the things you mentioned as well as some lackluster level design and bosses make the game fall short from being truly great. But I don't think DmC is great, or even good. It's not terrible, it's just okay.