Something I don't quite understand.

[berto]

1)Says who?

Says who what?

1)2)That was not even remotely my only reason. And your only reason seems to be because you don't SEE anymore than Phineas and Sparda despite the fact that almost every single revolves around intentionally seeking out the bad ones.

Yeah? And what are the other reasons? Because what you've presented as evidence is not concrete enough to pass as a convincing argument. Of the hundreds and hundreds of demons you encounter in the game you think two count as as a rule or form of evidence? I saw a tiger at the zoo the other day, the city must be littered with them but since I don't go looking for them doesn't mean they aren't there.

And what "potential" are you talking about? And as you should know there is difference between willing and able.

With that logic even the evil ones are good just because they are able to do it, just not willing, what's the difference, then.

Also not "seeing" something is not even remotely proof that it can't or hasn't happened.

You know what else 'not seeing' also isn't? Proof that it can or has. Until you see a man fly claiming that just because you've never seen him do it isn't proof that he hasn't is a baseless argument.


I am done. this is leading nowhere.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

Well **** that lady.

Anyways, if you are correct and it is a hierarchy then I apologize. But if it is then wouldn't it have made more sense to have born into the role? Because in most hierarchies I know of you are born into your role and you can't simply "Raise through the ranks."

No, "royalty" does not necessarily require a bloodline. Even then a royal bloodline has to start somewhere. "King" is just another term for "numbnuts in charge", and in this DmC's case "Demon King" just means "numbnuts in charge of demons".

Where did you hear/read this?

It was a small expo-dump in the Chronicles of Vergil comic.

 

[Loopy]

No, "royalty" does not necessarily require a bloodline. Even then a royal bloodline has to start somewhere. "King" is just another term for "numbnuts in charge", and in this DmC's case "Demon King" just means "numbnuts in charge of demons".

For me, it makes more sense that Mundus had to fight and kill his way to the top to become demon king. It shows how determined and vicious Mundus is.

Besides, I imagined demon society in DmC being like Dothraki people in Game of Thrones. There's the Khal, who is like a king, then he has blood brothers who he chooses as second in command. But to remain Khal, the leader has to be strong and vicious or else he will be challenged for leadership and killed by someone else who wants to be Khal.

It's like Mundus choosing Sparda to be his blood brother and taking on the former demon king together. It's a kind of medieval society where, sure, there could be birth right to the throne, but it can easily be taken away by force like Mundus did.

 

[Sunaka Marién]

1)No? Anyways I said that demons were like humans in that they were not inherently good or evil not because have the same morals.
2)Okay let me be more clear.
"Good" people from raised in violent environments tend to be more like Dante. They are kind of rough around the edges, but not because they were simply "born that way." And the "bad" people tend to be like some of the bosses we face in the game: cruel and sadistic.
3)Well you asked me how Dante was similar to the Demons like Mundus and I gave you one. He is extremely violent, impulsive, and derives enjoyment in killing his enemies. BUT I do think for the most part he is justified in his actions.

1) Um, ok? So maybe you should clearify what you think it is that makes us human (except for biological stuff, of course)? And I think demons were concepted as inherently evil, there are exeptions, yes, but exeptions prove the rule, y'know?
Edit: Wait a sec, why are we even discussing whether demons are born to be evil or not? Like, it's not really important in order to answer the initial question, which was what they meant by Vergil loosing his humanity, because I think we can agree on that there is more to being human than being either 'good' or 'evil', a concept that is so abstract it cannot even be fully understood.
2) 'k. Sorta.
3) So he has one thing in common with demons. That still doesn't mean he's quite like the demons. He doesn't just kill anybody because "YOLO, killing is fun, lolz", but because they keep attacking him. He doesn't oppress or use anybody, or feels better than humans simply because he's a supernatural being.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

For me, it makes more sense that Mundus had to fight and kill his way to the top to become demon king. It shows how determined and vicious Mundus is.

Pretty much exactly this. It's like there was a civil war in Hell, and Mundus, with Sparda's help, came out on top.

------------​

Let's be perfectly clear on all this stuff, though.

Devil May Cry at its core has always been about the challenge of archetypal evil, and the clear virtue of moral ambiguity. "Devil May Cry" was a way to sum up that despite demons being seen as wholly evil, they had the capacity for empathy and care. On the flipside of that same coin, you have the focus on human villains, who are as devious as any devil is "supposed to be."

The point is that in the entire franchise it's never a clearly stated fact that "demons are evil", but the fact that they lived in a hellish landscape in a dog-eat-dog society for centuries has pushed a very volatile and aggressive social construct to the forefront of the demonic hordes. Sparda was the exception because he was able to transcend that social ideal and felt that everyone was equal, and so humans should not be oppressed.

Dante continues that trend in his own adventures, but comes to expand on his father's ideals learning that as demons and humans are clearly equal, they have things that set them apart, which can account for their virtues as much as their wickedness.

Race doesn't make one evil, personality does.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

WHOOPS DOUBLE-POST! Looks like I do everything in twos! From shooting pistols to posting comments!

 

[Exejpgwmv]

Says who what?


Yeah? And what are the other reasons? Because what you've presented as evidence is not concrete enough to pass as a convincing argument. Of the hundreds and hundreds of demons you encounter in the game you think two count as as a rule or form of evidence? I saw a tiger at the zoo the other day, the city must be littered with them but since I don't go looking for them doesn't mean they aren't there.


With that logic even the evil ones are good just because they are able to do it, just not willing, what's the difference, then.


You know what else 'not seeing' also isn't? Proof that it can or has. Until you see a man fly claiming that just because you've never seen him do it isn't proof that he hasn't is a baseless argument.


I am done. this is leading nowhere.

1)Who says that it has to be absolutely clear whether or not demons have free will of morality.

2)Well theres Phineas saying it is incorrect to assume he is evil just because he is a demon (which implies that being a demon doesn't make automatically bad).
3)Like I said there is difference between willing and able. And in DmC's world I'd think most of them are not able.
4)Hey, we have seen good demons. And one of them flat out says not to judge me just because I am one. Your only one here who's theory relies on what they can't see.

 

[Exejpgwmv]

1) Um, ok? So maybe you should clearify what you think it is that makes us human (except for biological stuff, of course)? And I think demons were concepted as inherently evil, there are exeptions, yes, but exeptions prove the rule, y'know?
Edit: Wait a sec, why are we even discussing whether demons are born to be evil or not? Like, it's not really important in order to answer the initial question, which was what they meant by Vergil loosing his humanity, because I think we can agree on that there is more to being human than being either 'good' or 'evil', a concept that is so abstract it cannot even be fully understood.
2) 'k. Sorta.
3) So he has one thing in common with demons. That still doesn't mean he's quite like the demons. He doesn't just kill anybody because "YOLO, killing is fun, lolz", but because they keep attacking him. He doesn't oppress or use anybody, or feels better than humans simply because he's a supernatural being.

1)Umm.. you are human only because of biological things. Your morals do not affect your DNA.
3)Hey you asked how he was similar to them (I don't know why since I was comparing them to the good ones like Spardanad Phineas.) and I gave you a few reasons. What's the problem?

 

[Exejpgwmv]

Pretty much exactly this. It's like there was a civil war in Hell, and Mundus, with Sparda's help, came out on top.

------------​

Let's be perfectly clear on all this stuff, though.

Devil May Cry at its core has always been about the challenge of archetypal evil, and the clear virtue of moral ambiguity. "Devil May Cry" was a way to sum up that despite demons being seen as wholly evil, they had the capacity for empathy and care. On the flipside of that same coin, you have the focus on human villains, who are as devious as any devil is "supposed to be."

The point is that in the entire franchise it's never a clearly stated fact that "demons are evil", but the fact that they lived in a hellish landscape in a dog-eat-dog society for centuries has pushed a very volatile and aggressive social construct to the forefront of the demonic hordes. Sparda was the exception because he was able to transcend that social ideal and felt that everyone was equal, and so humans should not be oppressed.

Dante continues that trend in his own adventures, but comes to expand on his father's ideals learning that as demons and humans are clearly equal, they have things that set them apart, which can account for their virtues as much as their wickedness.

Race doesn't make one evil, personality does.

Um I think you just posted the same comment twice.

 

[Sunaka Marién]

1)Umm.. you are human only because of biological things. Your morals do not affect your DNA.
3)Hey you asked how he was similar to them (I don't know why since I was comparing them to the good ones like Spardanad Phineas.) and I gave you a few reasons. What's the problem?

1) No, there are two sides to being human. One is the obvious, the biological side, whereas the other is a more philosophical concept; that's also the reason something like torture is considered to be 'inhumane', and it is that exact concept that was meant when Vergil said he's loose his 'human side', because otherwise he wouldn't have one, as biologically, he is not human.
3) I didn't ask how he resembels demons, what I said was "he ain't quite like the demons", which implies that, yes, he might have things in common with them, BUT he isn't exactly like them. But since you seem to think that there isn't anything else to being human than being born as one, it isn't surprising that you don't understand what I'm talking about :/

 

[MigsRZXAStylish]

I meant during the cutscene, he had his cropped hair and then suddenly, boom! Longer hair.

It actually wasn't the first game someone with a demon within caused his hair to grow longer (and turned white):

I had to upload the complete covers, now did I?

 

[Exejpgwmv]

1) No, there are two sides to being human. One is the obvious, the biological side, whereas the other is a more philosophical concept; that's also the reason something like torture is considered to be 'inhumane', and it is that exact concept that was meant when Vergil said he's loose his 'human side', because otherwise he wouldn't have one, as biologically, he is not human.
3) I didn't ask how he resembels demons, what I said was "he ain't quite like the demons", which implies that, yes, he might have things in common with them, BUT he isn't exactly like them. But since you seem to think that there isn't anything else to being human than being born as one, it isn't surprising that you don't understand what I'm talking about :/

1)I'm pretty sure humans invented the concept of torture on their own. So why is considered inhumane?
2)But I never said he was exactly like them.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

I dunno...the term "torture" is a construct of people, but wanting to hurt others for our own gain is something that any self-aware thing can achieve.

 

[Exejpgwmv]

I dunno...the term "torture" is a construct of people, but wanting to hurt others for our own gain is something that any self-aware thing can achieve.

I can get behind calling torture cruel or unnecessarily brutal. But calling it inhumane seems kinda stupid since out of all the animals on the planet, we do it the most. Both physicaly and mentaly.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

"Humane" is about compassion and being nice. "Inhumane" is the opposite. It's not explicitly derived from "human-like".