No Lock-On Is Actually Better Than Outdated Lock-On

[Ether0]

MGR will be the Ninja Gaiden 3 (and Vanquish 2, why not?) that we deserved.

I do read a more Ninja Gaiden feel than a DMC feel from MGR, but that could just be all the blood and limbs flying and the whole ninja part lol. But I really think people expecting DMC will be disappointed because it's simply not DMC and I doubt Kamiya wants to just make the same game over and over again.

 

[Gbraga]

Speaking of, here is a video explaining some of the hidden moves in the demo.

Yeah, I know them @___________@

I watched so many videos for the demo that I'm actually a little bit afraid that I won't like it that much when it comes out on PSN today, just because I may have got bored of that level.

I do read a more Ninja Gaiden feel than a DMC feel from MGR, but that could just be all the blood and limbs flying and the whole ninja part lol. But I really think people expecting DMC will be disappointed because it's simply not DMC and I doubt Kamiya wants to just make the same game over and over again.

It's not a Kamiya game though >_<

Let's give props to Saito, he's doing a great job and needs to be recognized for it.

I'm sure Kamiya's The Wonderful 101 will be amazing as well.

 

[MedicoreR]

There's only one positive thing about NO LOCK ON
Its your ONE FINGER is free and can use it for more combos

 

[Ether0]

Yeah, I know them @___________@

I watched so many videos for the demo that I'm actually a little bit afraid that I won't like it that much when it comes out on PSN today, just because I may have got bored of that level.


It's not a Kamiya game though >_<

Let's give props to Saito, he's doing a great job and needs to be recognized for it.

I'm sure Kamiya's The Wonderful 101 will be amazing as well.

Okay I did not know that, then i will indeed give props because the game looks awesome and I am itching to play the demo!

I'll do better than just give my props, i'll give him my money lol!

 

[Shin Muramasa]

MGR will be the Ninja Gaiden 3 (and Vanquish 2, why not?) that we deserved.

But it's not the - nevermind it wouldn't make that much sense. And personally, nothing will be Vanquish 2 unless it's the actual sequel or spiritual successor. Also, has everyone forgotten about Yaiba: Ninja Gaiden Z? It was teased with some pictures and a little info. Looks interesting and refreshing with its art style.

 

[Gbraga]

But it's not the - nevermind it wouldn't make that much sense. And personally, nothing will be Vanquish 2 unless it's the actual sequel or spiritual successor. Also, has everyone forgotten about Yaiba: Ninja Gaiden Z? It was teased with some pictures and a little info. Looks interesting and refreshing with its art style.

Should I remind you that Yaiba is a collaboration between the dudes who made Ninja Gaiden 3 and the dudes who made Legendary?

Yeah...

 

[LeoXCV]

Just played the MGR demo, pretty sweet although me being me I managed to get the end boss stuck inside a wall :/ it was when you cut him up so it didn't matter too much but still. (Glitches just seem to find me when I play any new game lately)

 

[Shin Muramasa]

Should I remind you that Yaiba is a collaboration between the dudes who made Ninja Gaiden 3 and the dudes who made Legendary?

Yeah...

All I heard and seen was a teaser, the intro of the story, some images, that Capcom is the publisher, involves Ninja Gaiden and Ryu Hayabusa for a weird reason ("You chopped off my arm! Now I keel you!"), involves zombies/undead, is comic book styled in graphics, and that's pretty much it. Oh, and cyborg ninjas. "New" news on it either never made it to the gaming websites I visit or I just missed it completely. And thanks for the info. Ninja Gaiden 3 failed in the whole morality and feels like cuttin' aspect. If those two were removed, it'd basically be a decent Ninja Gaiden game and not a bad one. Legendary, one of the most obscure games you have ever mentioned . . . I remember the name and its existence. Everything else: nope.

 

[Gbraga]

All I heard and seen was a teaser, the intro of the story, some images, that Capcom is the publisher, involves Ninja Gaiden and Ryu Hayabusa for a weird reason ("You chopped off my arm! Now I keel you!"), involves zombies/undead, is comic book styled in graphics, and that's pretty much it. Oh, and cyborg ninjas. "New" news on it either never made it to the gaming websites I visit or I just missed it completely. And thanks for the info. Ninja Gaiden 3 failed in the whole morality and feels like cuttin' aspect. If those two were removed, it'd basically be a decent Ninja Gaiden game and not a bad one. Legendary, one of the most obscure games you have ever mentioned . . . I remember the name and its existence. Everything else: nope.

Well, it does have Inafune so we'll see, but not expecting much is for the best

 

[Goldsickle]

Elaborate.

Styles was nothing more than a method to regulate Dante's large, large arsenal.
It made sense in DMC3, probably due to the PS2's memory limitations but in DMC4, it just felt cluttered.

Nero had a bunch of moves in his arsenal, without the need to change Styles.

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.

If that's the case, the blame goes to NT for not making the system available on toggle.

I have an amputee friend who plays DMC. If they had the Angel/Devil trigger on toggle, then it would be accessible to him.
Previously, he's dependent Automatic mode to assist him for the fingers he doesn't have.

Compared to DMC1 and 2 yes, decade old games. And not compared to 4.

Still a good amount of moves.
You don't need that many moves to make the game enjoyable to begin. I had more fun playing as Nero in DMC4 and he has less moves than Dante.

If you didn't notice it, it would hit you regardless of if you were running or not.

Like I said, being in the middle of an attack increases the chances of being hit.
If you're running, then you have more chances to escape.

So? It still gets you to them quickly.

Yes, but you still have stinger and Nero can pull enemies towards him.

What if I just want to run while locked on?
That's the problem with arguing with nostalgia-lovers who want old mechanics to be preserved no matter what.

Like if I want flexible camera in Resident Evil so I can see ahead of me, people say "you're supposed to hear the noises from off-camera to determine whether the enemy is dead or not", when it's better to be able to make confirmation visually, by being able to see right in front of you.

I want to be able to run while locking on to the enemy. Is that so damn difficult to understand?

Please stop telling me what I'm "supposed" to do.
The forced walk is flawed, for the reasons I have stated (Resident Evil beta, etc.) and the alternatives you suggested are makeshift.

I'm not defending it based on nostalgia, I'm defending it because it adds to the gameplay.

It doesn't add anything to the gameplay.
It's a useless feature they forgot to remove after all these years, no different than tank controls in Resident Evil.

I can tell you're defending based on nostalgia of wanting things to stay the same.
The "solutions" you suggested are makeshift and doesn't really help the situation.
Like I said, I've seen the pattern repeat itself over and over again.

People defending things that didn't need defending, like overhead view + stop to look in first person from MGS, Mega Man being unable to shoot upwards, tank controls and being unable to shoot while moving in Resident Evil.

People who defend these schemes always tell me I'm "supposed" to be playing this way or that way, when other games/companies didn't pull such bull**** and just updated their controls.

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.

"Pause & reconfigure"?
Sounds like you're just not accustomed to using both thumbs to move & pan.
I had the same problems with it at first but after a few 1st/3rd person shooters, I got better at move while panning.

The dual analog system is the most functional one for movement in a 3D environment.

You just gave another reason why long and telegraphed attacks are bad.

I also find them bad because I am less likely to get the timing right for counters/parry/dodging if the enemy has a long delay before swinging (regardless of game).

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.

I don't consider that lock-on.
There are a bunch of games that didn't have lock-on but included some sort of auto-aim function or ability.
Dante merely attacks/shoots the nearest enemy.

But it's not.

It is.
Long time franchises like Silent Hill and Resident Evil ditched lock-on shooting.
Metal Gear Solid encourages manual aiming, due to how hitting specific parts, like the head, does more damage.

This is also an era where shooters are popular, so we're seeing a birth of a generation that's going to be very accustomed to manually moving, panning and aiming, hitting specific parts or leading.

Personally, if it was up to me, I'd have Dante shoot his guns with over-the-shoulder aiming (with a cross hair), with some auto-aim maneuvers to not slow down the action too much.

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.

I personally would like lock-on but I'm not sure if the general consensus is crazy about it.

I remember playing Phantom Menace with my bro and was surprised that there was no lock-on function.
When I asked him about it, he asked "what's a lock-on?" and wasn't bothered about it's absence.

Even back then, not everyone considers lock-on compulsory.

 

[Goldsickle]

And is still considered the best one.

And with all that, Bayonetta is considered one of the best action games around.

By who?

You'd better not be using weasel words, like claiming it's "considered the best by the majority" or "everyone says so".
If you wanna convince me about the general consensus, I will need sources.

So? What makes you think he wouldn't have done that if he continued working on DMC?

What makes you think he wouldn't?

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.)

Purely aesthetics.
He still didn't use the gameplay of his old works as reference.

Oh, of course. Let's completely forget the X series, Zero series, ZX series, and Legends.

And where are they now? If they're so awesome, how come there are no further sequels?
Especially Legends.

You do realize that there are people who have played modern Megaman games and never touched the classics, right?

Doesn't change that 9 & 10 appears to be pandering to old school players, who may not be playing games anymore.

That is highly arguable statement.

Which I do not see any counterarguments.

 

[Shin Muramasa]

Well, it does have Inafune so we'll see, but not expecting much is for the best

I've been doing that since Final Fantasy XIII, almost every game I've played so far has been enjoyable. Except for Burnout: Paradise; great songs, but shows its age compared to Need for Speed: Most Wanted (2012), Battlefield 3; sort of, got boring after a while, 3D Dot Game Heroes; I am terrible at games like these (like the original The Legend of Zelda), and Demon's Souls; do not, I repeat: DO NOT GRIND TOO MUCH, makes the game so freaking boring. Demon's Souls went from tedious, play cautiously, twisted game to boring, annoying, twisted ,and tedious game.

 

[- The True Nephilim -]

I kind of agree in some ways. To me I felt the combat flowed better without having to center my abilities on just one opponent at a time, this game now, I don't have to hold down R1 for basically 70% of combat

 

[Zato-OW]

I don't understand how a game like this doesn't have a lock on system. It needs one badly. If you are fighting a lot of enemies and you have those stupid flying enemies it gets VERY annoying trying to hit them and you keep auto targeting to something else every time. This was a lot of peoples main gripe about this game besides some other things.

 

[ChaserTech]

I kind of agree in some ways. To me I felt the combat flowed better without having to center my abilities on just one opponent at a time, this game now, I don't have to hold down R1 for basically 70% of combat

Technically, you have hold down the trigger buttons while switching weapons. So I'm not sure why manual Lock On would be a problem.

Personally, I like manual lock on. With it, you gain access to A LOT of moves simply by locking onto the enemy. I never found it to be much of a problem when I first played DMC3 (which was my first DMC game). I could also switch targets while locking on without having to manually attack enemies and end up attacking the wrong target (like using stinger and accidentally hitting an Ice/Fire enemy). It's much better in my opinion. Unless DmC2 will have more directional inputs, I will continue to think that the Lock-On feature is much better in DMC3/DMC4.

Also I find the title in this thread extremely forced upon people who think otherwise. It should be titled differently, imo.

Styles was nothing more than a method to regulate Dante's large, large arsenal.
It made sense in DMC3, probably due to the PS2's memory limitations but in DMC4, it just felt cluttered.

Nero had a bunch of moves in his arsenal, without the need to change Styles.

Nero didn't have that many moves compared to Dante. Not to mention he utilized a lot of direction inputs (mainly forward and back) for most of his moves. He also had a lot of pause combos, charged attacks, holding attacks, and a combination of buttons to press for his control scheme. Although, if he was given more weapons to choose from, he would be an amazing character to play as.

Also, I'm not entirely sure how Dante's style system could be executed otherwise. I thought it was fine as it is. The only major problem I had was switching in and out of Darkslayer when I first played since I wasn't used to it.

It doesn't add anything to the gameplay.
It's a useless feature they forgot to remove after all these years, no different than tank controls in Resident Evil.

I can tell you're defending based on nostalgia of wanting things to stay the same.
The "solutions" you suggested are makeshift and doesn't really help the situation.
Like I said, I've seen the pattern repeat itself over and over again.

People defending things that didn't need defending, like overhead view + stop to look in first person from MGS, Mega Man being unable to shoot upwards, tank controls and being unable to shoot while moving in Resident Evil.

People who defend these schemes always tell me I'm "supposed" to be playing this way or that way, when other games/companies didn't pull such bull**** and just updated their controls.

As I stated before, Lock - On adds another set of moves in which you can pull off successfully compared to DmC, which movelist was drastically limited. It really didn't have much in terms of directional input at all. Probably because if you do a Back > Forward/Forward > Back motion on the control stick, you're more than likely going to be either attacking in the wrong direction or attacking at the wrong enemy. (Which has happened to me many times in DmC without hard Lock - On) The Lock - On feature in DMC ensured that you would not veer off the wrong way while inputting complex controls. And as well as this, you could easily target flying enemies that presented to be a major problems such as Harpies or Pathos/Bathos. Since those enemies are suspended in the air, as opposed to the other demons that are on the ground, it becomes even harder to dispose of them. That's why it's incredibly vital in DMC as an appropriate mechanic to the series.

 

[Goldsickle]

Nero didn't have that many moves compared to Dante. Not to mention he utilized a lot of direction inputs (mainly forward and back) for most of his moves. He also had a lot of pause combos, charged attacks, holding attacks, and a combination of buttons to press for his control scheme. Although, if he was given more weapons to choose from, he would be an amazing character to play as.

Nero still wound up being more fun to play than Dante, despite the smaller arsenal.

Sometimes, it's not how big your moves list is but if you have moves that you like.
Some of Dante's moves, like Round Trip could have been executed better.

As I stated before, Lock - On adds another set of moves in which you can pull off successfully compared to DmC, which movelist was drastically limited. It really didn't have much in terms of directional input at all.

As I stated before, the Angel/Devil triggers can potentially add more sets of moves.

While lock-on changes the way how some moves work (like how Buster changes to Snatch), we have two 'mode change' buttons that changes what almost every button does.

If they added a Back > Forward input, the arsenal will grow even bigger.

Also, DmC seems to have "less" moves because they combined a few moves together, like how they merged Beast Uppercut, Rising Dragon, Divine Dragon and Real Impact into Uppercut (for Eryx).
Was it necessary to have two types of rising uppercut attacks?
And it felt cheating that different levels of charges are considered different moves.

Probably because if you do a Back > Forward/Forward > Back motion on the control stick, you're more than likely going to be either attacking in the wrong direction or attacking at the wrong enemy.

Totally not.

That's exactly what I did for some of Bayonetta's moves.
Back > Forward + Punch/Kick without any lock-on and they work perfectly and I don't ever remember missing the enemy.

Back > Forward is probably more easier than Forward > Forward.

And as well as this, you could easily target flying enemies that presented to be a major problems such as Harpies or Pathos/Bathos.

That's what L3 is for. You can switch who you're shooting at with that button.

 

[Downfall]

snip

I agree with the fact that it's good to find new ways to merge moves together.

As for running with lock-on, I believe a compromise can be found. Why not have the strafe maneuvers be a lot faster, like it is in Zelda (or even the last Legacy of Kain title)? I for one, don't see a problem with that. It lets you continue to face the enemy, and allows for faster movement around the battlefield.

Of course, if you disagree, then that's fine too. I haven't played ZOE, so I have nothing to base my opinion on, in that case.

 

[ChaserTech]

Nero still wound up being more fun to play than Dante, despite the smaller arsenal.

That's based on preference. I find a lot of people who prefer to play as Dante instead of Nero.

Sometimes, it's not how big your moves list is but if you have moves that you like.
Some of Dante's moves, like Round Trip could have been executed better.

I believe you mean: "Sometimes, it's not how big your moves list is but how useful your moves are." I don't use moves because I "like" them. I use moves that I find useful in my current situation.

As I stated before, the Angel/Devil triggers can potentially add more sets of moves.

While lock-on changes the way how some moves work (like how Buster changes to Snatch), we have two 'mode change' buttons that changes what almost every button does.

If they added a Back > Forward input, the arsenal will grow even bigger.

Also, DmC seems to have "less" moves because they combined a few moves together, like how they merged Beast Uppercut, Rising Dragon, Divine Dragon and Real Impact into Uppercut (for Eryx).
Was it necessary to have two types of rising uppercut attacks?
And it felt cheating that different levels of charges are considered different moves.

The same could be said about styles in DMC4. If Dante had a Back > Forward input for moves in different styles, his movelist would be expanded greatly, as well as possibly giving him even more useful moves.

Totally not.

That's exactly what I did for some of Bayonetta's moves.
Back > Forward + Punch/Kick without any lock-on and they work perfectly and I don't ever remember missing the enemy.

Back > Forward is probably more easier than Forward > Forward.

If DmC's auto lock on worked as good as it did for Bayonetta, maybe it could work. However I had problems just using Stinger or latching onto a certain enemy with Ophion since a lot of enemies are stationed in midair, above regular enemies. So it presents a problem if you're trying to target certain enemies that are in the air.

That's what L3 is for. You can switch who you're shooting at with that button.

That's the problem, I don't want to have to shoot an enemy in order to figure out what I'm targeting to. I simply just want to attack the enemy in midair that is causing the most problems on the battlefield. I shouldn't be forced to come up a certain way to get the auto lock on to work for me.

 

[Paexie]

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.

That's exactly what went through my mind.

 

[Goldsickle]

That's based on preference. I find a lot of people who prefer to play as Dante instead of Nero.

No difference than how people who prefer to play as Dante being also a personal preference.

If you're headed to the "there are more people who play as Dante, so more moves is better than less" direction, you'd have to actually prove to me that most people prefer playing as Dante more than Nero in DMC4.

But even so, it won't ultimately prove that "larger arsenal is better", since people might like Dante/dislike Nero for other reasons.

I believe you mean: "Sometimes, it's not how big your moves list is but how useful your moves are." I don't use moves because I "like" them. I use moves that I find useful in my current situation.

Well, in a lot of cases, I find Nero's Devil Bringer very useful.

But from my experience, a lot of people's "like" overrides usefulness, due to biased nostalgia.
Like people who continue to support tank controls or bad camera while making up a lot of half-baked justifications to defend old, outdated mechanics.

Good thing these people are mostly minority, based on the direction games are taking today.

The same could be said about styles in DMC4. If Dante had a Back > Forward input for moves in different styles, his movelist would be expanded greatly, as well as possibly giving him even more useful moves.

Does it ever occur to you that the Angel/Devil system is similar to Styles?
Both regulates Dante's large arsenal but the Angel/Devil system seems to work best for muscle memory and feels more efficient.

If DmC's auto lock on worked as good as it did for Bayonetta, maybe it could work. However I had problems just using Stinger or latching onto a certain enemy with Ophion since a lot of enemies are stationed in midair, above regular enemies. So it presents a problem if you're trying to target certain enemies that are in the air.

The same "targeting the wrong enemy" problem also occurs in past DMC games.
You run within range of the enemies, hold R1, lo and behold, you got the wrong enemy. If you were targeting the enemy in front of you for a quick Stinger but the game locks on to the enemy behind you, you perform a High Time instead.
Sure, you could switch lock-on but who's got time for that when you're in the thick of battle?
Maybe that's why they just got rid of lock-on, while making the moves not lock-on dependent.

Lock-on dependency is becoming less and less in recent video games.
The only reason lock-on was important in the first place was due to how older games have bad camera and clunky movement mechanics, like tank controls.
We have better movement and camera nowadays, so lock-on is becoming less relevant.

That's the problem, I don't want to have to shoot an enemy in order to figure out what I'm targeting to. I simply just want to attack the enemy in midair that is causing the most problems on the battlefield. I shouldn't be forced to come up a certain way to get the auto lock on to work for me.

For the record, I'd like lock-on too but not the way old DMC does it.
As my topic says, no lock-on is better than outdated lock-on.

There are some inconveniences but I can make do, especially after playing a lot of games that strayed away from lock-on dependency.