No Lock-On Is Actually Better Than Outdated Lock-On
- Thread starter Goldsickle
- Start date
You seem to have missed the point on that one. I said it wasn't referencing what you, or anyone have said already. It wasn't intended to make further arguments, rather it was put there to prevent them. Which hasn't worked seemingly because you saw reason to single the comment out without linking it across the entirety of my post.
I can argue DMC is more functional without toggle as I can easily let go when It's not needed and quickly hold/tap once when it is, making effective use of all the inputs without hindrance of movement speed; and also argue that the movement speed is there to prevent moves that use directional input from moving you away from where you wanted to perform the move.
Ok maybe bashing was a harsh term to use, but it does not change the fact you've brought up how you look when locked on in the argument, I've replied to that point, and now all the sudden it's irrelevant because it's all about function.
Look up "Genre vs Style" and you'll find most people use the terms as I have, so it does apply to general consensus. Also almost any topic can become self-contradictory if dragged on for so long, which is why I said it's unnecessary. I should have stated that more clearly though I guess.
They do quite a bit, but lock-on was hardly maintained due to nostalgia, rather the the fact it worked so well.
Yeah, pioneers.
The only DMC game Kamiya worked on was the very first, still rough and unpolished.
Any other improvements seen in 3, 4 & even 2 were done without his involvement.
Air combos, quick weapon change, grapple moves and so on.
Hideki Kamiya admits that he played half of DMC4 as reference while developing Bayonetta.
He even acknowledges that his original DMC isn't up to date and didn't use it as reference.
And seeing how Bayonetta cheapens itself with overly-scripted boss battles, context-sensitive action abuse and over-abundance of Quick Time Events, I'm glad that the DMC series is not in his hands anymore.
If you're talking about 9 & 10, there was nothing "fresh" about those.
The bastard ruined the games by removing the charged shot & slide.
Even the sound effects was reverted to what they sounded back in Mega Man 2.
Who the f*** was he trying to pander to?
35-40 year old veteran Mega Man fans who have probably moved on from gaming?
I noticed that Capcom stopped pandering to nostalgia and grew the f*** up.
Capcom's moving the right direction now.
I had fun with DmC. Most of the hate is biased and unjustified.
If Mega Man wants to get back to his feet, he needs to learn to shoot upwards.
If by "horror roots", you mean "bad camera and controls", then the Resident Evil franchise is better off without those.
I don't see any other reason for mentioning that other than to defend the unnecessary slowed down movement.
"Running while strafing is stupid, therefore slowed down movement during lock-on should be preserved" is how I summarized that point.
Please explain how it meant something else.
Not as effective as having one finger free.
Also, takes away some stress off a finger and makes it less cumbersome to input other actions.
It goes more than "how you look".
As mentioned many times, the "lock-on" back then was a "draw gun" button.
In the very first Devil May Cry, you can't fire your guns unless you draw your firearms and lock-on to an enemy with R1.
This is an exception when jumping.
But even though subsequent games made it so you can just fire with the Square/X button, they preserved the unnecessary "walk with guns drawn" stance during lock-on.
I repeat, this sounds more like a personal interpretation than a generally accepted definition.
I looked up "Genre vs Style" and all I get are mostly music-related sites, even when I specified "video games".
If you want to convince me that this is a generally acknowledged concept, I'd like to ask you to provide sources with notability.
Otherwise, this is just something shapeless and subjective.
You're entitled to your own personal opinions but such shouldn't be used as a rebuttal.
It didn't work so well compared with other games released during the time the DMC series is being released, plus I have explained in detail about how it's an unnecessary remnant of DMC's origin as a "survival horror" beta.
I agree that having to hold it could get irritating, you're acting as if you'd use your index finger for any other actions other than R1 or R2, and you don't use R2 for anything. Even if you did you have your middle finger for it.
Forcing you to walk with lock-on was due to precision. Because so many directional input was used if you messed up the combo or pressed forward first Dante would run around. Even ignoring that it's still a non-issue because you're never supposed to walk towards your enemies in DMC anyway. You use stinger or trickster. If you're so keen on running at them, it's not as if you can't just unlock and run at them and then lock back on once you get to them. Walking is such a non-issue I don't see the big deal.
The only real complaint I can see against it is you walk and you need to hold it down. I've already explained how walking is a non-issue and while holding it down I agree is irritating, you're not using the finger for anything else anyway. You play with your thumbs. The only time this isn't the case is when you use your left hand for Nero's revving.
I actually feel more comfortable pressing R2 with my index.
Maintaining my lock-on while switching Devil Arms required a little finger yoga back in DMC3.
Even though it's not physically impossible, the option to toggle is still best.
That's more like the developer's fault for not making sure that locking-on to the enemy also centers the camera to them and the fact that most of the signature moves are lock-on-dependent.
Freeing the signature moves from lock-on-dependency was actually a step forward.
"Forced walk for precision" sounds like they're trying to fix one flaw by applying another flaw.
It's a bad design decision if you're forced to work around the developer's illogical restrictions.
Which I have explained in my original post.
I do run and then lock-on but I can't always get the enemy I wanted and switching lock-on in the thick of battle is troublesome.
If they'd let me lock-on to the enemy from afar and allowed me to run and jump around as I please while closing in, that would be a different story.
I hope you're not gonna try and tell me "Devil May Cry isn't supposed to be played that way" and make up some convention or rule about how it must be played.
All you're doing right now is just downplaying the problem.
I've played other games that didn't cut down my speed when I'm locked-on to an enemy and I find that it's more functional.
I've also mentioned that the forced walk was due to the game being a beta of Resident Evil 4, where R1 is actually the "draw gun" button.
You don't need to draw gun first before shooting, so it was stupid to maintain the slow walk.
Vergil never wielded guns, so forcing him to walk and he's locked-on was also another stupid decision.
But your middle finger perfectly fits on the R2 button while you hold R1. I'm not denying that, but it's not such a huge issue.
These also means less combos because they have less buttons to work with.
How?
I see where you're coming from here but there are tons of moves that circumvent you having to physically run towards the enemies.
What reason could you even have for wanting to run towards the enemies instead of using a faster way? It's like me complaining that going through the entire game using nothing but guns is tedious and saying that I can play any way I want to when you tell me that's not what you're supposed to do.
What's the actual issue here? I get that making you walk is pointless but you never actually run or walk towards the enemies either way.
It's in no way worse than no-lock on where the enemies get off screen forcing you to stop and adjust your camera in the middle of what's supposed to be a fluid battle and having to guess at what you're hitting like you're saying.
Why did you think DmC had 2 dodge buttons, so that you can alternate between the indexes when one of the triggers are held?
Just speculating but from testing, the feedback they received is probably that most players prefer pressing the shoulder buttons with their indexes and not everyone uses their middle finger.
But the fault probably lies in the controller design where the further shoulder buttons are shaped like triggers.
However, as stated, not requiring to keep a button held down is still best.
The Angel/Devil trigger system could potentially lead to more moves.
In the previous games, holding lock-on changes what a button does (like how Buster changes to Snatch).
But in this case, we now have two mode change buttons that doesn't just change what one button does but almost every button.
There are less moves here, probably because this is the first collaboration between NT & Capcom.
If they could make a sequel using codes from the current game as headstart, they could create more weapons and probably erase redundancy (like replacing the Demon Dodge with a guard instead).
What if I Stinger or Dash towards the enemy but find that I'm rushing towards an area attack?
I wouldn't be able to move out of the way.
Being able to run while locked-on is still more flexible. I could jump away in time.
Read my first post... I do run towards the enemy.
Another poster also shares my problems, where he feels that changing lock-on while surrounded is too troublesome.
Enemies don't attack when they're off-camera, so it's not that much of a big deal.
Some of my (cheesy) strategies actually involve turning the camera away from them while I charge up a move, like Round Trip.
Furthermore, I've been playing a lot of games with flexible camera and no lock-on (or no dependency on lock-on), such as Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker.
I don't really find lock-on that important.
One reason why lock-on existed in the first place was most likely due to how manual, flexible camera controls aren't standard during the late 90's and early 00's.
Also, due to how a lot of games (especially Resident Evil-inspired ones, like Dino Crisis and Onimusha) had fixed camera, including most of the DMC games.
You needed something to keep track of enemies who keep jumping in and out of awkward angles you have no control over.
As a reminder: I would love lock-on but not how it was implemented in DMC1-4.
If they change the system to have:
Angel/Demon mode as "set" meaning that once you press Angel/Demon mode you can let go of the button and stay within that mode until you press it again to go into neutral or demon, it means we'd be able to have a target system. Not only that but targeting in DMC4 also displayed the enemies health which was very useful!
Angel/Demon mode as "set" meaning that once you press Angel/Demon mode you can let go of the button and stay within that mode until you press it again to go into neutral or demon, it means we'd be able to have a target system. Not only that but targeting in DMC4 also displayed the enemies health which was very useful!
I agree that lock-on being a toggle would be better.
Styles already did this and you're complaining about lock on when you have to hold down a trigger to keep a certain weapon our instead of making it a toggle?
That's because you change weapons when you change stances.
Ninja Theory has 4 games including other games of the genre to look back on. This is no excuse.
Stinger and dash are faster than enemy attacks and jumping and you're able to cancel out of them I believe. I'm not completely sure on that though. There's no way you could be rushing into an enemy attack without seeing it before and even if it was fast enough to do this there's no way you'd be able to jump in time to avoid it.
What enemies in DMC3 or 4 even have area attacks that stay on the ground like the baby bombs do?
This is even more curious because you can dash in the air with trickster or just do a double jump, not to mention a teleport.
I don't understand why.
I already replied to him.
Yes but if I want to attack the enemy off camera it is. And yes they do, the babies in the air were chucking bombs at me from beyond the camera angle.
It's not important at first but upon reaching the higher skill ceiling it is as precision and knowing what you're going to hit is important.
I never said this wasn't the case and this doesn't really have much to do with what you quoted.
I prefer the No Lock-On and haven't had a problem yet due to Dante's more sweeping attacks. Also, in terms of not having as many attacks, there are still a lot and you can really mix it up anyway via changing weapons mid combo etc.
That's sadly how my arguments end with my pals. One of them really believes that it will be the DMC they want...
I want the game, but after playing the demo I know that DmC, DMC and MGR are their own thing. So my conversation with her was pretty damn pointless.
That is what worries me, boycotting DmC in favor for MGR is one thing but expecting that it is "More DMC than DmC" is pretty retarded.
Styles is a cluttered mess.
The Angel/Devil trigger actually works best for muscle memory.
If you want the lock-on to be more functional, then you'll have to hold it down a lot longer.
In games like Zone Of The Enders, the lock-on is maintained for long periods without the need to keep one finger occupied.
In DmC, holding triggers is only briefly, for certain moves.
When performing long moves, like Tornado or Shredder, you can actually release the trigger while the move still lasts and it won't cancel it.
And since the moves aren't lock-on dependent, there are less problems about making sure you press towards or away the enemy.
Less moves than DMC3 maybe but there are still a good amount of variety when compared to DMC1, 2 & maybe even 4.
I'm pretty sure there are always one of those situations where an attack you didn't notice hits you.
Using Stinger or Dash almost exclusively to approach an enemy increase the chances of getting hit.
Some enemies not only don't flinch with a Stinger but they auto-parry.
And then there are enemies that hurt you if you hit them, like the Blitz or enemies that hurts you by just being next to you, like the Chimeras.
While the Stinger is made to close the gap, it shouldn't be used too often or you'll be more likely to get hit.
In DMC3, you don't always have Trickster. In DMC4, Nero doesn't have the option to begin.
Why not?
I want the luxury of being able to move freely while the enemy is locked-on.
I repeat, the forced walk is just a remnant of the old Resident Evil 4 beta gameplay and isn't relevant for a game where you don't need to draw your gun first before shooting.
I have no idea why you need to defend it when it's no longer necessary.
I don't wanna pick a fight but I've seen this pattern repeat itself several times.
Even though a feature is unnecessary and irrelevant, people defend it anyway for nostalgia but won't admit it.
Instead, a whole bunch of reasons are made up instead of just admitting being influenced by nostalgia.
If an enemy initiates an attack on-screen, they finish their attacks even if you turn the camera away.
That's why enemies like Frosts and Mephistos from DMC4 seemingly attack from off-screen.
The start-up for their most troublesome attacks begins with them dashing backwards.
It's the same thing with DmC.
Haters always complain that the enemies have a slow start-up for their attacks but that actually increases the chances of off-screen hits, since you might have turned the camera away while they're charging up a slash or a ramming attack.
It feels like the other way around, really.
I grew up on games with lock-on, due to poor camera controls in the past.
But as aiming & camera gets more manual, I feel that manual aiming is a lot better, due to how you can do things like hitting specific parts or lead.
I'm pointing out how lock-on is becoming less relevant.
When control technology becomes improved (something that is far more efficient than dual analog or mouse + keyboard), the need to lock-on might become unnecessary.
Elaborate.
It's hardly brief. What if I prefer using a demon axe? Then I have to hold down the trigger for my entire playthrough. Every weapon but the guns and Rebellion require this too. Don't pretend like it's any better.
Compared to DMC1 and 2 yes, decade old games. And not compared to 4.
If you didn't notice it, it would hit you regardless of if you were running or not. It's not as if enemies attack five yards in front of you in preparation for your stinger path either, so you'll never really get hit. How does it increase the chances of getting hit while running there doesn't?
So? It still gets you to them quickly.
You're supposed to use guns or royal guard on these enemies. Running at them wouldn't help and Blitz's teleport all over the place and very rarely in your stinger path.
No it doesn't, and it sounds like you're trying to come up with the most convoluted possible situations that aren't even true to get to this conclusion.
Yes, but you still have stinger and Nero can pull enemies towards him.
Your acts move free as ever and combat is unchanged unless you walk towards your enemies which as I've already explained makes no sense.
The only thing not necessary about it is the walking, other then that it only adds to the game with directional input and keeping enemies in your focus.
I'm not defending it based on nostalgia, I'm defending it because it adds to the gameplay. If anything you're the one trying to base your points off some odd bias because you're trying to create the most convoluted situations possible for stinger not being an effective gap closer.
Yes, and I can't very well attack them if they're in an awkward angle far behind me off-screen without me having to pause and reconfigure the camera.
You just gave another reason why long and telegraphed attacks are bad.
You do know that the game has a lock-on, it's just a soft-lock and the point is still the same. You just don't have nearly as much control of it.
But it's not.
It's not less relevant because it adds to the gameplay and it has nothing to lose by keeping it. It makes you know who you're targeting and focuses your camera around them. Making it precise rather than guesswork and it also increases the amount of combos they can make due to directional inputs.
And is still considered the best one.
So? What makes you think he wouldn't have done that if he continued working on DMC?
But he used his other works such as Viewtiful Joe as inspiration for Bayonetta's punch- kick based combos. (You do realize I'm referring to all of his works, right? Not just DMC.)
And with all that, Bayonetta is considered one of the best action games around.
Oh, of course. Let's completely forget the X series, Zero series, ZX series, and Legends.
You do realize that there are people who have played modern Megaman games and never touched the classics, right?
That is highly arguable statement.
MGR will be the Ninja Gaiden 3 (and Vanquish 2, why not?) that we deserved.