Elijah Guerrero
Well-known Member
in the Devil May Cry 3 manga, didn't Vergil casually murder a gang of humans that wanted his sword. they posed NO threat to him, he could have knocked them out, but it showed him cutting through them as they died.
New Vergil or Devil May Cry 3 Vergil?
- Thread starter Vergillicious
- Start date
The Final Offer
Well-known Member
So glad you learned something. Your opinions are based off of the wrong information. We prove that to you in this very thread. You are wrong for knowing the information is wrong and keeping the opinion of it the same. You won't apply the facts to your opinion to make it less valid than what you thought it was. Because of your faults, you continue promoting what you know isn't the full truth as a fact. Intentionally misinforming potential fans.
Innsmouth
Sleeping DMC Fan
Well your reading comprehension is amazing.
The Final Offer
Well-known Member
That explains why you envy me so much.
Chancey289
Fake Geek Girl.
Exactly. I f#cking hate how people say opinions can't be right or wrong.
I believe opinions mean nothing UNLESS you back them up with something. Anything that makes it valid and actually useful to the conversation.
I mean, what if I sat here and think my friend Two here is a racist and homophobic psychopath that eats babies with ketchup. (Two, I know you a cool ass nig I'm just trying to make an example. No hard feelings friendo) That would be my opinion but it doesn't mean I'm right and it sure as hell makes me look like a total a$$. But it would be my opinion.
So, opinions can be wrong and they can be stupid, pretty much exactly what you said.
Last edited:
Chancey289
Fake Geek Girl.
Innsmouth
Sleeping DMC Fan
Just for people who don't know basics meaning of terminology:
Opinion- a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/opinion
If you voice your opinion based on something absolute, it's not opinion it's a fact.
Opinion- a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/opinion
If you voice your opinion based on something absolute, it's not opinion it's a fact.
TWOxACROSS
Hot-blooded God of Guns
Except that if an opinion is based upon misinformation or misunderstanding of facts, then it is very much wrong, and obviously misinformed. Opinions are not some infallible personal thing that no one has the right to scrutinize. Everyone, all over the 'net, looooves to hide behind "it's just my opinion" or refute discussion as "that's just your opinion", but opinions can very much be called into question depending on the elements responsible for the formation of said opinion.
Google definition of Opinion said:
While it's very true that some parts of opinion are formed from emotions and feelings (if not facts or knowledge like the definition states), which can't directly be considered wrong, that's when things like bias can enter the picture, which helps form opinions that sometimes fly in the face of conventional logic.
If I say DmC is boring, it's because I feel it's boring, because it doesn't stimulate me. No one can contest how I feel, that's just how it was for me. However, if I said DmC sucks because I heard you can get SSS by just mashing one button, that is misinformed, and my opinion is just plain wrong, because there are facts that prove that opinion wrong. If I said DmC sucks simply because it's different from what I know of the classic series, that's an opinion painted by bias, and it's not really any different than a misinformed opinion.
And this all gets worse when opinions get thrown around as facts, or as something that must be regarded despite facts on the contrary. No one is obligated to accept your opinion of something, and no opinion is exactly above scrutiny.
Yarp. Although the manga's validity within the canon is iffy given the contradictions it poses.
And yet...nothing you have said in all your arguments comes from a place of infallible fact. It's all been your (mis)interpretations of things. You yourself even just moments before defended your arguments by saying they were your opinions and couldn't be contested. We contested them because it was entirely within reason to do so, and now you seem to mean to say that your arguments were absolute - which they were not at all.
Chancey289
Fake Geek Girl.
Innsmouth
Sleeping DMC Fan
Well problem is it's 2-sided road. None of things I said are based on misinterpretations. They are based on personal reception of thing.
We all biased in one or another way. Difference is when you keep your bias to yourself or start pushing it's like a fact.
Every game that being published in certain franchises is up for a challenge to prove itself compared to other games. So it's common for people to compare games. And if some people dislike game for what it is, because it lacks something that made franchise appealing to them, it doesn't mean it's ultimately terrible game or something. It just means that for certain group of people game is unappealing for whatever reasons they have. Even nostalgia is aspect that need to be considered (hell, nintendo holds on nostalgia for whatever time and still doing fine). If you dismiss people's feeling on their like /dislike simply because they disagree with, is what makes you biased.
My main points doesn't contradict what game shown us. You provided no proof it does, otherwise I wouldn't have debated on it.
Well apparently you doesn't know what opinion is, so back to school with you, kiddo. Maybe they also teach you some basic manners (something you so desperately need)
TWOxACROSS
Hot-blooded God of Guns
No, a lot of what you've been going around saying is your interpretation, your formulation of things based on what's given, and in many instances, you've chosen the route that makes something sound the most negative.
But there's a difference between pushing bias-laden opinions as fact, and actually talking about discernible facts.
Well yeah, obviously, but when, like in DmC's case, the criticism sometimes mounts up to "this is different, so it sucks" with the refusal to accept that it's supposed to be different, and still expect something similar, it's just plain wrong. You cannot be told "This is gonna be different", still expect things to be the same, and then b!tch that it's different.
However, nothing is being dismissed but the misinterpretations.
This is a bold faced lie. I have consistently provided sh!t for you, and all you do is strawman it in a vain attempt to refute it. You exasperate, and drag things so far off track that I just get fed up and walk away, and you claim me walking away is conceding a point, when it's not, it's walking away from your bullsh!t. The original point always still stands, but you drag us so far away from it that it can no longer be seen.
You really shouldn't be jabbering about school and manners when you can barely write a correct sentence, consistently strawman debates into oblivion, ignore context and definitions, and often respond to people with passive aggressive bullsh!t meant to stir people up.
Seriously, I implore you - just stop it with the passive aggressive jabs. ****ing people off gets things nowhere.
Innsmouth
Sleeping DMC Fan
Even if I choose this road, it doesn't mean it's a) absolute b)wrong. All things can be seen in 2 lights: positive or negative. And usually depending what we like or dislike we choose one of them which doesn't makes any of them wrong.
It's true, but problem is that I don't try to push my opinions as facts.
Problem is that if somebody says "we change tone of the franchise", it doesn't mean everyone will like new tone even if it's same franchise. My close friend refuse to watch Expendables 3 because it's directed to wider audience. Is he wrong? no. He just don't likes new tone, that's all.
When I asked to provide facts or videos you usually went down the road "I don't have to look it for you" or "I don't have to explain myself". When you explained situation with Mundus and his kid, it was clear fact, so I didn't debated on it. When you try to show me i misinterpreted facts, you need to show those facts. If those are only assumptions, we are back into the land of opinions where nothing is certain.
If somebody runs after me on each topic swearing like a barn-raised kid, sooner or later he gets corresponding response. On several occasion I asked him to keep off my back, to not stir pointless insults or arguments, which he pretty much ignored. So don't expect me to consider his feelings or his opinions after that.
Chancey289
Fake Geek Girl.
"you doesn't know what opinion is" < Yea, I'm the stupid one. :meh: You can't even write a proper sentence.
Innsmouth
Sleeping DMC Fan
If you have problem with me, I said on numerous occasion to add me on ignore, so it will keep your inner annoyance in check or just get off my back. If you refuse to do it, than you WANT this conflict, which, yeah. Makes you stupid.
TWOxACROSS
Hot-blooded God of Guns
Interpretations can be wrong. Opinions can also be wrong when based on misinterpretation. Like or dislike, positive or negative, are feelings - but that is not the part that can be wrong.
No, you just disagree with what someone says and then steadfastly refuse to concede when you're proven wrong and strawman into exasperation.
That is not at all what I'm saying. It's not a matter of people liking it if the "tone" is different. I'm talking about having an expectation that you have no right to believe given the statement of "it's gonna be different", and then being upset about when that expectation is not met. The expectation formed by ignorance is the problem.
Half the time you never listen! And if you do you pick it apart, or you refuse to acknowledge that the very first thing said to counter your position has everything necessary to prove the point.
A lot of the times, you saunter into a discussion and pull your passive aggressive sh!t first. Oftentimes, Chancey comes in exasperated from how you're treating the discussion with others. The fact remains, you, as well as Chance, could do well to tone down the aggression, passive or otherwise.
Chancey289
Fake Geek Girl.
I am Groot.
Innsmouth
Sleeping DMC Fan
Actually interpretations can't be wrong, because you can interpret only something that isn't clear. once it's clear it's a fact, that doesn't need debating or interpretations.
I only disagree when I'm provided only with basic opinion or statement, that isn't backed up by facts. Or when I think I have clear proof that my opinion based on something.
Look, I understand what you mean. But if somebody for example says "it's gonna be gritty now", it's completely fine for somebody to answer " I don't like gritty tone " and dislike it based on personal preferences.
I already said, if we talk about assumption, I think it's fine if I make my own based on what I've seen. If we talking about missing pieces of info, than it's already half-assumption. I don't try to take away your interpretation, because it's fiction, and it's exist to be interpreted. But if we talk about steadyproof facts, that I haven't seen, I just want to see them, before I acknowledge them
I don't try to insult anyone, unless somebody continue to systematically stalk and insult me. Even than I prefer mostly to ignore them. But sooner or later it gets out of hand.
I am with whoever earlier stated the mods need to get involved. The two most obvious culprits have de-railed the conversation multiple times to argue at each other in an incredibly unproductive way.
I will say, no matter the circumstance, most of the discussion in this stems from opinion. Even if we are talking on a literary skill level, it will be based on opinion. That is how art is judged.
My entire argument that the new Vergil is a considerably weak and limited character based on his status in the story and the depth of his development attempts to use the writing, in which one can apply evidential basis. It is incredibly two dimensional compared to a cast of 3 dimensional characters. But judging a plot and character himself is almost entirely opinion. I am attempting to critique the skill and simplicity at which it was written. But relying on the story, specifically who the character is, will dilute into opinions that can neither be wrong or right.
When an opinion contradicts something that can be evidently proven a fact, that is about the only case that it can be incorrect. Given what we are judging is based on art, something generally impossible to clarify of what is best and not, it is very difficult to argue that someone's opinion is wrong.
For example, I can say factually, and not on opinion, Twilight is absolutely awfully written with the most base of grammatical ability. But it is my opinion that the plot is dumb and so are sparkly vampires.
I would ask that people at least consider that point. If you prefer the new Vergil because he is written to be a more straight forward villain, that is all well and cool, but you will need to understand your argument immediately becomes all opinion and must be willing to consider others opinion. The same goes for OG Vergil; if you like who he is based on how you perceive his character and that he is more an anti-hero, that will also be more opinion.
As I stated QUITE a few times now that has not been responded to; it is almost absurdly pointless to argue who the old Vergil was as we don't have enough facts. Multiple things are implied in the game and how you interpret them as individuals, just as EVERY DMC character, is going to vary. It is why this thread for the last ten pages, ignoring the bickering, revolves around the OGs initial personality and figuring out where he fit. So stop trying to argue and convince others something that was NEVER stated to us in the story.
DmC, as I also earlier stated, clearly paints out who Vergil is supposed to be with interpretations and opinions on how we consider morality. Ignoring those moral opinions, he is clearly an antagonistic character that is written in such a way you consider him to be so. The DLC, in every way, solidifies a more devious and vile character.
MY argument of why I prefer the OG is because of how he fits into the story, and that his characterization fits the DMC world. I believe he is overall a better written character that the writer is able to accomplish their desired affect.
While it is my opinion that I do not like basic villains, I also generally found the writing and design of his character to be out of Place, sporadic, and almost entirely damages the story.
On my opinion, the intentions of how the writer makes you want to feel (not perceive/classify him) about Vergil are so amazingly unclear, that after the game and DLC, I really just didn't care for him anymore.
Edit; To clarify my previous statement, I will use the Far Cry 3 villain Vaas as an example. Vaas was a character DESIGNED to be someone you liked. Funny, charismatic, etc. But he also was CLEARLY a sociopath who was hell bent on murdering you, and anyone who got close to the island. He WAS a bad guy, you knew he was a bad guy, but he was a bad guy you find interesting. You ended up wanting to kill him, but you feel bad about having to do it, as that means you don't have interactions with him anymore. The OG gave me that same feeling, written in a near similar manner, but at the same time I was just as confused as Dante likely was. I didn't know WHY I had to fight Vergil, we just knew we had to. The Neo-Vergil, I just really didn't care. It just felt like a way to get to 20 missions.I only wanted to play as him to see his moveset. I was so beyond bored with who he was, that any further character development didn't matter to me. In fact, the further character development just made it unbearably worse.
I will say, no matter the circumstance, most of the discussion in this stems from opinion. Even if we are talking on a literary skill level, it will be based on opinion. That is how art is judged.
My entire argument that the new Vergil is a considerably weak and limited character based on his status in the story and the depth of his development attempts to use the writing, in which one can apply evidential basis. It is incredibly two dimensional compared to a cast of 3 dimensional characters. But judging a plot and character himself is almost entirely opinion. I am attempting to critique the skill and simplicity at which it was written. But relying on the story, specifically who the character is, will dilute into opinions that can neither be wrong or right.
When an opinion contradicts something that can be evidently proven a fact, that is about the only case that it can be incorrect. Given what we are judging is based on art, something generally impossible to clarify of what is best and not, it is very difficult to argue that someone's opinion is wrong.
For example, I can say factually, and not on opinion, Twilight is absolutely awfully written with the most base of grammatical ability. But it is my opinion that the plot is dumb and so are sparkly vampires.
I would ask that people at least consider that point. If you prefer the new Vergil because he is written to be a more straight forward villain, that is all well and cool, but you will need to understand your argument immediately becomes all opinion and must be willing to consider others opinion. The same goes for OG Vergil; if you like who he is based on how you perceive his character and that he is more an anti-hero, that will also be more opinion.
As I stated QUITE a few times now that has not been responded to; it is almost absurdly pointless to argue who the old Vergil was as we don't have enough facts. Multiple things are implied in the game and how you interpret them as individuals, just as EVERY DMC character, is going to vary. It is why this thread for the last ten pages, ignoring the bickering, revolves around the OGs initial personality and figuring out where he fit. So stop trying to argue and convince others something that was NEVER stated to us in the story.
DmC, as I also earlier stated, clearly paints out who Vergil is supposed to be with interpretations and opinions on how we consider morality. Ignoring those moral opinions, he is clearly an antagonistic character that is written in such a way you consider him to be so. The DLC, in every way, solidifies a more devious and vile character.
MY argument of why I prefer the OG is because of how he fits into the story, and that his characterization fits the DMC world. I believe he is overall a better written character that the writer is able to accomplish their desired affect.
While it is my opinion that I do not like basic villains, I also generally found the writing and design of his character to be out of Place, sporadic, and almost entirely damages the story.
On my opinion, the intentions of how the writer makes you want to feel (not perceive/classify him) about Vergil are so amazingly unclear, that after the game and DLC, I really just didn't care for him anymore.
Edit; To clarify my previous statement, I will use the Far Cry 3 villain Vaas as an example. Vaas was a character DESIGNED to be someone you liked. Funny, charismatic, etc. But he also was CLEARLY a sociopath who was hell bent on murdering you, and anyone who got close to the island. He WAS a bad guy, you knew he was a bad guy, but he was a bad guy you find interesting. You ended up wanting to kill him, but you feel bad about having to do it, as that means you don't have interactions with him anymore. The OG gave me that same feeling, written in a near similar manner, but at the same time I was just as confused as Dante likely was. I didn't know WHY I had to fight Vergil, we just knew we had to. The Neo-Vergil, I just really didn't care. It just felt like a way to get to 20 missions.I only wanted to play as him to see his moveset. I was so beyond bored with who he was, that any further character development didn't matter to me. In fact, the further character development just made it unbearably worse.
Last edited:
Demi-fiend
Metempsychosis
better 'posh' than 'princess' like dmc3 vergil.
"FABULOUS."