• Welcome to the Devil May Cry Community Forum!

    We're a group of fans who are passionate about the Devil May Cry series and video gaming.

    Register Log in

Sparda still alive??!!!

When exactly do they say that he is alive but just vanished? I don't recall anyone saying he that he ain't dead or that he dissapeared in any of the sequels.
It's only DMC2 Dante who speculated that Sparda went into another realm(or something like that). I think Matier was thinking about something else about his fate, but I do not remember exactly that event.
 
It's only DMC2 Dante who speculated that Sparda went into another realm(or something like that). I think Matier was thinking about something else about his fate, but I do not remember exactly that event.
That story was of back when he fought with Matier ages ago. She is apparently quite ancient do to her demonic blood. The events of that story took place hundreds of years prior.
 
Maybe Matier was an adorable little lady back then and Sparda broke her heart. T3T

"Hey Dante, want me to tell you a story about your father, Sparda? ;)"
"Ahem... well, maybe after I save the world?"
"Yes, of course... save mankind with those chiseled gluts."
"Did you say something?"
"Who, me?"
 
And yet the rest of the series goes about talking about him only having disappeared. You can't cherry-pick what you want to believe about the entire series :/

I love how you bring up the subject of "you can't cherry-pick what you want to believe about the entire series" when you yourself did just that by believing the later versions of details over the original.

Astonishing logic you have there.

 
^ You have the worst signature ever by the way.
lovely opinion you have there sir.:troll:

I take it your a DmC fan?

I made this sig after the very first trailer was revealed and my shock at the time was still raw.

Since then my stance on the game has softened but i still find the sig amusing and thus kept it.
 
I love how you bring up the subject of "you can't cherry-pick what you want to believe about the entire series" when you yourself did just that by believing the later versions of details over the original.

Astonishing logic you have there.

Dude...I wasn't cherry-picking, I was following the established information that was given as the series continued. You're the one who said "I'm only taking DMC1's story into consideration." That's cherry-picking, because you're ignoring what the rest of the series told you afterwards in favor of earlier elements that have been proven differently...

It's like trying to deny that Vader is Luke's father, because you only want to believe that Episode IV told you right when Vader killed Luke's father, ignoring the res of the trilogy that tells us differently :/
 
Dude...I wasn't cherry-picking, I was following the established information that was given as the series continued. You're the one who said "I'm only taking DMC1's story into consideration." That's cherry-picking, because you're ignoring what the rest of the series told you afterwards in favor of earlier elements that have been proven differently...

It's like trying to deny that Vader is Luke's father, because you only want to believe that Episode IV told you right when Vader killed Luke's father, ignoring the res of the trilogy that tells us differently :/

Sorry, not a big star wars fan, so I don't get your comparison.

And I never said or implied that I was going to "ignore" what was said in later games.

I merely said that based on DMC1 being the original title for the DMC series and it being made by the original creator of the series that I would take what was said in the intro game over what was hinted at in later games.

As someone else pointed out, that was pretty much the intro to the series of DMC as a whole, it was the beginning of everything that was layed out by Kamiya himself to establish the groundwork for the series.

So I don't think its something that should not be taken into a higher consideration than when it was only "hinted" at in later games that he only disappeared.

But to the contrary, in the intro of DMC1 it was flat out stated that he died.


And this all boils down to your correction of my initial post being wrong when you said it was never said he died.

Can you in the very least have the decency to admit your mistake?

I've yet to see you do that...
 
It says that he died, but never when. It's telling us the legend, but the rest of the series only details all of these other exploits of his, and at his general absence, and sorta goes out of its way to avoid saying he's dead, probably so they could try to leave a "return" as a possibility in later games :/

As it seems, DMC continues to have an inconsistent narrative, so it's sorta difficult to say who would be right or wrong; the series has told us differently.
 
As it seems, DMC continues to have an inconsistent narrative, so it's sorta difficult to say who would be right or wrong; the series has told us differently.

While it may be true that his fate has caused "confusion" thanks to Capcom's lackluster storytelling, the fact remains that its obvious who is right in this given situation here at the moment.

You said this

Sparda was never proven dead in the classics. He disappeared, and that's all anyone ever knew of his fate, but he was never, ever officially stated to be dead. Just...gone.

Notice the bolded part, I was asking you to have the decency to admit that you where wrong here since I provided evidence to prove otherwise.

And instead you still have not...

What a ego you must have mister.^_^
 
Oh em jee~ sooooo sorry for disregarding the rest of the series telling me otherwise~

Lol, that ego is going to cause trouble in the future lol.

I'm not asking you to believe what was said over what was said later on.

I'm asking you to admit your mistake when you said that it was never stated that he died when it in fact was stated.

Do you get it now?

or do I have to spell it out even further?(not sure how I could make it any clearer though...)
 
Sparda was something of a diety or legendary figure to everyone but Dante and Vergil in DMC 2, 3, and 4. Naturally, as with most of these figures, people don't refer to their death because their story has immediate significance in its symbolism.

You don't usually talk about how Saint Nicholas died, for instance. Just like the Order in DMC 4 worship Sparda and try to personify him as 'the Savior' using his sword, they knew they couldn't just bring Sparda back. It just seems like there are more 'hints' at his being dead than otherwise throughout the series. So if we're not going from concrete dialog, I'd say it's a fairly nebulous issue anyway.

So, if you're faced with an equal amount of uncertainty when it comes to Sparda's story told by others, why not trust the only voice that stated it explicitly one way or the other, that of the omniscient narrator? Of course, this has little relevance for DmC : Devil May Cry- all bets are off.
 
Or...you could let it go...like I did. I'm just f*cking with you, dude. So I was wrong and forgot the very first thing ever said in the series, which is easy enough to forget when the rest of series keeps telling me differently.

And seriously, calling me out on an ego is silly because that implies that I give a damn what people think of me.
 
Or...you could let it go...like I did. I'm just f*cking with you, dude. So I was wrong and forgot the very first thing ever said in the series, which is easy enough to forget when the rest of series keeps telling me differently.

And seriously, calling me out on an ego is silly because that implies that I give a damn what people think of me.

Thats all I wanted, was to see some form of decency in a fellow poster.:)

Admitting your wrong can be a hard thing to do sometimes.


And its nice that you don't give a damn what people think of you.

That type of thing can hinder and hold back your words.

I'm actually the same way.

So, if you're faced with an equal amount of uncertainty when it comes to Sparda's story told by others, why not trust the only voice that stated it explicitly one way or the other, that of the omniscient narrator?

exactly,

His fate as stated in other games where through people who had only heard of his legend, his exact fate was left ambiguous through their words.

But we have a flat out statement from the narrator who was most likely directed by Kamiya's writing itself that stated that he died.

It seems pretty obvious to me which one to believe.

But if you want to hold on to the hope of his survival than I guess believing the words of people who knew of Sparda's legend would be appropriate/understandable...
 
That isn't to say that one statement from the beginning of a series can wholly justify saying we know it was the intention of the entire canon after 7 years. That is just as extreme as disregarding it, but we all knew that already. :)
 
Dude...I wasn't cherry-picking, I was following the established information that was given as the series continued. You're the one who said "I'm only taking DMC1's story into consideration." That's cherry-picking, because you're ignoring what the rest of the series told you afterwards in favor of earlier elements that have been proven differently...

It's like trying to deny that Vader is Luke's father, because you only want to believe that Episode IV told you right when Vader killed Luke's father, ignoring the res of the trilogy that tells us differently :/
Wait a minute, wait. That's entirely different. Luke learned hat Vader was his father is something that has been made very clear and through out there was constand re-enforcemnet of that fact from Joda, Obi-Wan's ghost, and then the prequels and it is a solid statement of fact, not impressions that people give when they talk about Vader making it seem like he was Luke's father. There is no evidence to Saparda been alive anywhere in DMC.

The statement was that he died in the DMC1 intro and that's what we're saying and it is our evidence but the only evidence you've brought is how people talk about him 'like' he had dissapeared, not exactly concrete. No one has ever said 'He is alive, somewhere' or even hinted at such possibility.
 
Forget previous games, we're talking now about DmC.

They said that Mundus killed Dante's mother and imprisioned Sparda. That was a long time ago and we don't know what happened after that. The boys did grow up and took different ways.

So, Sparda may be alive or not, but I believe he is. The tricky thing is that he probably got out of his hell prision, probably assuming a disguise. He is weak and can't fight back. He can't even show himself, because Mundus forces are looking for him. That means he probably is kept hidden or he really wants to be kept that way...

So, that's where we have that Phineas guy. My theory is that he is Sparda using a disguise. He keeps giving instructions to Dante, about killing Mundus child and so on. Why a demon would help Dante?

So, once Dante gives back his face, Phineas will reveal himself as being Sparda, and Dante will absorb his powers to fight Mundus, just like in DMC 1. It's gonna be a epic battle, it has to be!
 
Forget previous games, we're talking now about DmC.

They said that Mundus killed Dante's mother and imprisioned Sparda. That was a long time ago and we don't know what happened after that. The boys did grow up and took different ways.

So, Sparda may be alive or not, but I believe he is. The tricky thing is that he probably got out of his hell prision, probably assuming a disguise. He is weak and can't fight back. He can't even show himself, because Mundus forces are looking for him. That means he probably is kept hidden or he really wants to be kept that way...

So, that's where we have that Phineas guy. My theory is that he is Sparda using a disguise. He keeps giving instructions to Dante, about killing Mundus child and so on. Why a demon would help Dante?

So, once Dante gives back is face, Phineas will reveal himself as being Sparda, and Dante will absorb his powers to fight Mundus, just like in DMC 1. It's gonna be a epic battle, it has to be!
but dante never "absorbed" sparda in DMC1 or are you talking about something else
 
Back
Top Bottom