The Fine Line of Change

[Railazel]

I just wanted to say this while people are calming down and less biased opinions are starting to surface.

Basically, the biggest pet- peeve that I've had with the fanbase on either side of the spectrum was their view on change. One side said it was good while the other side acted like it was a complete crime and it ticked me off because it seemed like no one really knew what they were talking about.

With that said, here's my opinion on the matter, and I hope that this helps out when stuff like this happens again. There exists good changes and bad changes. We all should know that. There exists necessary changes and unnecessary changes. We all should know that. The changes they made to DMC in the reboot were just as bad as they were good, so to act like it was all great or all bad is just... dumb.

Take Dante's background change, was this change good in anyway? Who's to say? It was kind of needed since this is a reboot and helped streamline the combat but it really didn't do much for the story (you could've easily excluded that aspect of the story and it would still be just as good) neither did it make Dante particularly special amongst the long list of hybrids that exist in pretty much every universe ever made.

So what does constitute a "good" change, or even a "bad" one for that matter? Well, what changes did we love? Did we not like how Dante manipulated the enviroment around him? Did we not like how the enviroment manipulated itself? Those were great changes! Bad ones? That depends really on what you dislike about the story. I didn't like Vergil's corruption in his Downfall, so to me that was a bad change.

But am I going to make the argument that the game was bad simply because it had a few things I thought were bad changes? No. Which is why I want to say this to everybody: Every game is going to change. There will be changes that people dislike and some people like. Just respect that and stop making it seem like "change" determines how bad or good a game is. Even more so, respect a person for having so much love for a character that they don't want to see them change or for having such an open mind that they don't mind said changes. Those are the kind of things that make a game evolve and grow, for what is a game without the people who love it? And how will it grow without the people who want to see something new?

 

[TWOxACROSS]

The problem is we've reached a point in gaming communities where I think people are exceedingly resistant to change that they don't think of, or is similar to it. We're at a point now where gaming is comprised of as many old timers from back in the NES days as it is the new kids on the block who started with Playstation and N64. Hell, kids who started with PS2 and Xbox are older now. It's breeding this feeling of entitlement, that since we grew up with the most recent generations of games that we know exactly what we want, and if it's not given to us, we go to extremes with "this is sh!t" and such. People do it to Call of Duty all the time, which I admit, the games are cool, but...it's just...tired.

Granted, this isn't strictly a game industry problem - it's an overall consumer problem, but it's different with games, in a way, just as it's different with other products. Changes are great when it's exactly what one person wants, and the more people who want that change, the more it's accepted as what "everyone" wants.

With DmC, I look at it less from a "change" aspect, and more of a just..."different" aspect. Things are different about DmC that the rest of the franchise, and differences aren't good or bad, sorta like what you said about changes. The game has a lot of fun and interesting ideas, and it would be nice if people could actually see the merits in those ideas, instead of tearing them apart because they're different.

Not to mention, we need change every once and a while. Things get incredibly stale and boring, or tired, a la Call of Duty. That's a larger problem with the industry today too. Most publishers want safe products with which they can make lots of money off of and milk it to death, and innovation sometimes comes in smaller doses, but not as many people notice them because they're stuck in tired old games. It's like they often bury the innovation under the tired stuff that gets advertised a lot, because they feel they need it to sell on what people know, and not what's knew :/

With DmC, one of my favorite things is how they kept that crazy awesome combat system and created entirely new control mechanics for it. I love the mode triggers, and how they work for combat and traversal. There are plenty of things they could to do expand it, like a Target Lock and more inputs for more moves, but it's a great head-start. This is change that I think was great, and I would have liked to see it happen in other games and be seen as a viable mechanic alongside the existing hack 'n' slash mechanics of light and heavy attacks, or weapon to button. There's some kinks to work out, but it's a good system. Think what the Capcom DMC team could do with that DmC system! I think it could be awesome!

Bleh, sorry for the tangent there :x

 

[Dusk Stalker]

Well im with you on that, I don't like what they did to Dante nor Vergil's corruption, it seems his corruption seemed to be sped up and rushed. And as for combat(Am going to be flamed the F*** out of this)...I didn't feel the flow I got from the past 3(or 4) games, I just felt the flow was blandish more on Vergils Downfall.

Change is a good or bad thing, but in my opinion on the badside a bit, not a lot, but a tiny bit.

 

[LysseC]

I admit I had been resistant to change at first, but then curiosity got the better of me and I learned the lesson.
Now I understand it was stupid of me to disregard DmC just because it was different, because it made me blind to all the good changes DmC apported.
Once I accepted the challenge of seeing a different Dante without simply shouting in my head this isn't Dante!!, well, I started to recognize that there were many good things about the reboot, and was finally able to appreciate them.
Now, I look back at my DmC-hater days and laugh at my foolishness. I learned the lesson: open-mindedness is a great thing.
Whether you come to like or dislike the direction change went in, at least you will see for yourself and judge it without prejudice.

 

[MultiBro]

I didn't like the changes to the combat since it got dumbed down but I do appreciate Ninja Theorys effort to bring a more story driven game and visually appealing to the franchise (even though the story was kinda average on the quality side).

I can understand the whole "Changes must be made" at times for certain series both for videogames and other media but really, there wasn't much needed to fix after DMC4. One mediocre game after the great DMC3 doesn't make the whole serie stale. 2-3 average games that doesn't bring anything new to a franchise is stale.

 

[TWOxACROSS]

People felt the series was stale because it was the same overall package for most of the franchise; over-top-moves, nonsensical demon hunting story, and pretty much the same protagonist all throughout, even when we got a new character in Nero, he ended up being a no-nonsense cool guy too similar to Dante. the gameplay didn't change enough between 3 and 4 either, other than Nero. It was stale because it ended up being too much of the same for some people between 3 and 4, not to mention with 4's seemingly half-assedness. I know I felt that way. I woulda rather then not try to supplant Dante into the game how they did, and expand more on Nero, give him more weapons and moves and whatnot, instead of making retread his path as Dante, fighting enemies that weren't designed for him.

It was sorta clear Capcom was running out of DMC ideas when they brought out a new character to replace yet be just like the new hero, and even made him mysteriously be someone's son, even though most of the franchise's canon doesn't allow for it.

 

[Chancey289]

My favorite things about DmC are the combat mechanics, overall control scheme, and the level design aesthetics. DmC STILL has a combat system that has a lot of depth and variety. More so than a lot of hack n slashers. The style system was always forced more than anything and DmC brought that over the top combat system over WITHOUT having to restrict you to a certain set of moves at a time. It could use some work and it needs to get rid of the color coded enemies but, it is a VERY encouraging foundation on what to do with the series from here on out when it comes to combat.

It's a shame really so many stubborn fans really hated it from day 1 and DmC got way more flack than it deserved. I'm also a fan of the old series but it doesn't take a genius to see DMC was at a creative dead end and was killing itself. Ambition shows you have soul and a creative edge and that's deserves more props especially when the video game industry is a creative industry that is also sure has hell lacking that this day and age.

Even if the original series was to make a return it should take notes and pointers from DmC. Of course the fans against it will probably not agree because to them DmC did everything wrong. Whatever man. I just hope DmC at least gets one more shot because they are sitting on something really good. Work out the kinks and you have the recipe for the best Devil May Cry to date.

 

[Loopy]

Honestly, I liked what they did with DmC. I thought they took what was good about DMC and just changed it up a bit. Sure, I'll admit my first reaction to the 2010 trailer of dark haired Dante was really negative, but he grew on me during the fying through the air naked+pizza over junk trailer. That's when I figured it was over the top like the classic DMC and started to like it. I even found Mundus being changed into a banker to be a bit odd at first, but it all fits with what NT wanted to do, and now I find him a better antagonist than the classic Mundus- who was pretty boring. At least this Mundus gets more scene time and some kind of personality and motivation.
I will say though, I would really have flipped my sh!t if they made Lilith into the rebooted Trish. When I saw images of Lilith at first with no explaination, I thought that's what they did considering that she's with Mundus, and her hair and large chest. >_<

As for the gameplay, in some ways I prefer the new DmC controls, and in other ways the classic ones. I think a mixture of both would be perfect for me.Just get rid of the coloured enemies though. They were a pain.

What NT have done- in my opinion- have set some good foundation to build on and improve.

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

With DmC controversy i was told i was afraid of change. That is just petty arguments.
Change that is natural. DmC was not.

They didnt change DMC or build upon it to make it better.
they scratched DmC and used it as template.

if this change is justified: then a reboot of DmC in 2 years.can be too

I never buy a game sequal thats the same az previous one in serie.
Therefor i welcome change.

But people twist change as if they are god.

Not all changes made was unecessary but the decision to reboot instead of building DMC was not good or justified. Capcom did it for money anyway.

 

[Chancey289]

With DmC controversy i was told i was afraid of change. That is just petty arguments.
Change that is natural. DmC was not.

They didnt change DMC or build upon it to make it better.
they scratched DmC and used it as template.

if this change is justified: then a reboot of DmC in 2 years.can be too

I never buy a game sequal thats the same az previous one in serie.
Therefor i welcome change.

But people twist change as if they are god.

Not all changes made was unecessary but the decision to reboot instead of building DMC was not good or justified. Capcom did it for money anyway.

Every company aims to make a profit. It's not as nefarious as it sounds.

But case in point to my earlier post. You act like DmC did nothing right where it's clear it did good things to be judged on its own merit and even comparing it to the previous games it did surpass the original in aspects. Not in all but some. The creative influence and foundation to build the best Devil May Cry yet is there. It just needs to work out the kinks. Your personal fanfiction not being made is not enough to say it adds nothing to the franchise or fails at everything. That's just total bias fanboy bullcrap.

The change to Resident Evil is bad, the change in Dead Space is bad, DmC however still kept the Devil May Cry DNA to a point where even though it looks a little different I honestly can't call it anything else besides a Devil May Cry game. If anything that concept art of an earlier DmC looks extremely different and is a more jarring change from than original than what it is now. And I have a feeling fan reaction to that biker Dante would usher in the same response. The way people talk it sounds to me as if you seriously just want a carbon copy of the original games. I wouldn't mind the white hair anime Dante to stick around but you need to have a fairly decent game along with it. DMC was at a creative dead end and screwed up majorly twice. Yea, move aside DMC because Capcom obviously doesn't really give two sh!ts about you. I pretty much hate Capcom at this point.

 

[aoshi]

People felt the series was stale because it was the same overall package for most of the franchise; over-top-moves, nonsensical demon hunting story

Wow, i wonder wat made resident evil have 6 games(along with a lot of other non-canonical games) and still capcom did not find it stale but DMC has 4 games and its stale??????? I know RE 6 was not a success but still games like revelations still has hope for resident evil. When it is fine with resident evil, why is stagnancy an issue with DMC. Street fighter has been for years and capcom does not find it stale and ryu and most other characters still have old move set and added moves. It did not need a reboot saying , "oh its out of market today". I think the reason for the reboot is team that worked on previous games is no longer in capcom.

and pretty much the same protagonist all throughout, even when we got a new character in Nero, he ended up being a no-nonsense cool guy too similar to Dante. the gameplay didn't change enough between 3 and 4 either, other than Nero.

That's an understatement. Nero is a full-fledged gameplay character with unique moves. And we have dante who has the most complex combat system with 5 styles on the fly. To this day, i am still exploring his combat system. Saying that DMC 3 and 4 are the same is not acceptable. Nero's gameplay is totally different from dante. Anyone who plays dante still will find it difficult to play as nero cuz nero is brute force and less technical. Adding one full-fledged gameplay character is fairly enough to give a new game since the new character is protagonist himself.

It was stale because it ended up being too much of the same for some people between 3 and 4, not to mention with 4's seemingly half-assedness. I know I felt that way. I woulda rather then not try to supplant Dante into the game how they did, and expand more on Nero, give him more weapons and moves and whatnot, instead of making retread his path as Dante, fighting enemies that weren't designed for him.

As a hack n slash game, DMC 4 is satisfying. Jus cuz you don't like the feel of the game does not mean its "half-assed". DMC 4 was to appeal to anime fans. If you don't understand animes , you might as well stop criticizing DMC 4 cuz its not your cup of tea. And DMC is about gameplay, lets stop with the retardedness of how the story gets the characters played.

It was sorta clear Capcom was running out of DMC ideas

Again, if resident evil and street fighter can have new ideas with old characters not undergoing drastic changes , i think its possible with DMC.

 

[IncarnatedDemon]

Every company aims to make a profit. It's not as nefarious as it sounds.

...but not every company are greedy like Capcom or have greedy practices:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/08/09/witcher-dev-dlc-should-be-a-free-service

By saying "every company aims to make a profit" your trivilizing my point. There is a clear difference between rebooting a game for money, and rebooting a game because it's necessary. And like i said it's clear Capcom did it for money.

Just because every company aims to make a profit does not mean they all will reboot a game for profit. Capcom aims at profit through rebooting.
Others are risky and daring who ACTUALLY take a chance, and make new ips instead of being safe with reboot practice.

But case in point to my earlier post. You act like DmC did nothing right where it's clear it did good things to be judged on its own merit and even comparing it to the previous games it did surpass the original in aspects. Not in all but some. The creative influence and foundation to build the best Devil May Cry yet is there. It just needs to work out the kinks. Your personal fanfiction not being made is not enough to say it adds nothing to the franchise or fails at everything. That's just total bias fanboy bullcrap.

DmC did good things yeah. I am not denying it. But the game is not a success.
And yes DmC has foundation to be great. DmC 2 for all we know could be the greatest hack and slash in it's time. But fact is...DmC is not a great game when you take the past DMC games into consideration.

"Judging by it's own merit" is a excuse. If you and Capcom wanted us fans to judge a game by it's own merits, it would be a new ip who uses DMC as template but not to sell. DmC has used everything it can from DMC. From character, to weapons, to story parts.
EVEN SCENES. So judging it by it's own merit is just a excuse for not judging a game as you should.

The change to Resident Evil is bad, the change in Dead Space is bad, DmC however still kept the Devil May Cry DNA to a point where even though it looks a little different I honestly can't call it anything else besides a Devil May Cry game. If anything that concept art of an earlier DmC looks extremely different and is a more jarring change from than original than what it is now. And I have a feeling fan reaction to that biker Dante would usher in the same response. The way people talk it sounds to me as if you seriously just want a carbon copy of the original games. I wouldn't mind the white hair anime Dante to stick around but you need to have a fairly decent game along with it. DMC was at a creative dead end and screwed up majorly twice. Yea, move aside DMC because Capcom obviously doesn't really give two sh!ts about you. I pretty much hate Capcom at this point.

Some would argue DMC DNA includes:

- 60 fps
- Taunt
- Dante
- Turbomode
- Reliable gameplay mechanics

Like i said DmC was not a success saleswise or from a innovative perspective as a whole.
Did it do things that were awesome? Yes. But so does all games to a small or big degree. Take Darksiders 1:
If you evade a enemy (dashing) and grapple - your get close to them like Devilbringer
If you grapple when you havent evaded you will drag the monsters towards you.
And all that functionality uses 1 button. The system registers when you've evaded and sends you towards enemy, and when you dont evade u get enemy sent to u.

What i noticed by DmC that stands out the most is the levels. Especially the one where Phineas is at. DmC also included enviromental kills.
But considering DmC sacrificed 60 fps for more dynamic graphics (beautiful stages) - you cant help but ask "Is that worth it in a game like DMC?".

 

[CheeseKao]

I think the reason for the reboot is team that worked on previous games is no longer in capcom. - 1.



And we have dante who has the most complex combat system with 5 styles on the fly. To this day, i am still exploring his combat system. - 2.



As a hack n slash game, DMC 4 is satisfying. Jus cuz you don't like the feel of the game does not mean its "half-assed". DMC 4 was to appeal to anime fans. If you don't understand animes , you might as well stop criticizing DMC 4 cuz its not your cup of tea. And DMC is about gameplay, lets stop with the retardedness of how the story gets the characters played. - 3.

1. Itsuno's team is still at Capcom so nope.

2. You're looking at it from a 'pro player' point of view because there is no way in hell the average player can utilize all 5 styles at once. Only a small fraction of DMC players fully appreciate its depth. Most players I see just use whatever is most effective so it can be argued that DMC4 Dante's playstyle is rather similar to that of DMC3's Dante depending on which angle you're looking from.

3. I believe it was most certainly half-assed considering many of the enemies in DMC4 are extremely similar to enemies from DMC1,that bloody backtracking and having to fight the same bloody bosses two to three times. Also, some games may be primarily focused on game play but that does not mean we can't criticize its story. DMC is about game play but its story elements isn't magically exempted from reviews just because of that. You may not care but some do. Also, it doesn't matter if the story is supposed to appeal to anime fans. If a story is bad, it's bad and vice-versa regardless of the demographic it is targeted towards.

 

[Chancey289]

...but not every company are greedy like Capcom or have greedy practices:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/08/09/witcher-dev-dlc-should-be-a-free-service

By saying "every company aims to make a profit" your trivilizing my point. There is a clear difference between rebooting a game for money, and rebooting a game because it's necessary. And like i said it's clear Capcom did it for money.

Just because every company aims to make a profit does not mean they all will reboot a game for profit. Capcom aims at profit through rebooting.
Others are risky and daring who ACTUALLY take a chance, and make new ips instead of being safe with reboot practice.



DmC did good things yeah. I am not denying it. But the game is not a success.
And yes DmC has foundation to be great. DmC 2 for all we know could be the greatest hack and slash in it's time. But fact is...DmC is not a great game when you take the past DMC games into consideration.

"Judging by it's own merit" is a excuse. If you and Capcom wanted us fans to judge a game by it's own merits, it would be a new ip who uses DMC as template but not to sell. DmC has used everything it can from DMC. From character, to weapons, to story parts.
EVEN SCENES. So judging it by it's own merit is just a excuse for not judging a game as you should.



Some would argue DMC DNA includes:

- 60 fps
- Taunt
- Dante
- Turbomode
- Reliable gameplay mechanics

Like i said DmC was not a success saleswise or from a innovative perspective as a whole.
Did it do things that were awesome? Yes. But so does all games to a small or big degree. Take Darksiders 1:
If you evade a enemy (dashing) and grapple - your get close to them like Devilbringer
If you grapple when you havent evaded you will drag the monsters towards you.
And all that functionality uses 1 button. The system registers when you've evaded and sends you towards enemy, and when you dont evade u get enemy sent to u.

What i noticed by DmC that stands out the most is the levels. Especially the one where Phineas is at. DmC also included enviromental kills.
But considering DmC sacrificed 60 fps for more dynamic graphics (beautiful stages) - you cant help but ask "Is that worth it in a game like DMC?".

Capcom might be stupid but I don't think they're like EA. Lots of companies use DLC, even your precious P* games. Capcom looks like they may be learning though. Bloody Palace was free and I think the RE scenario maybe gave them a good slap in the face. That article is talking about a completely different developer and says Capcom is thinking about their mistakes in like 1 sentence of that whole article. Weak attempt at proving your point that Capcom is evil but I can tell you Capcom is evil. THEY KILLED MY MEGAMAN!!!! Evil bastards killed my little blue bomber.

And do you seriously think DmC was some cash grab? Where does that even come from? It's quite obvious DmC is a risk more so than anything else and also you can't seem to see beyond your fanboyism for a moment to see why even a reboot was made in the first place. I read an article in GameInformer a while back about Capcom's current state of affairs, a reboot to DMC was not a decision that is made overnight and multiple factors came in to play.

Also DmC wasn't accepted as soon as they saw Dante's haircut and they have yet to get over themselves lol. I seriously think it'a a bunch of betrayed weeaboos who made this game suffer simply out of spite. This is a total cash grab right? If fans are gonna be big babies about it then just making a DMC 5 would be like sticking a pacifier in their mouth. I think it's a shame really. So many AAA games do absolutely nothing innovative or good for that matter and sell like hot cakes. DmC which is severely underrated by the fanatical crowd who for the most part never even played the damn thing really just seems to discourage any sort of creative integrity that the gaming industry so desperately needs. Especially in the AAA department. This is why I play Indie games and my older games from back in the day more than anything. I find myself taking lots of STEAM baths.

And about your DMC DNA argument I still think what's vital to Devil May Cry as a video game is here.
-Over the top absurdity DMC is known for, check
-Dante still being virtually the same. check
-slashing and shooting demons. check
-weak plots and dumb characters, check:troll:
-fun, check, that's why I play video games.

your argument:
taunt- seriously? does this really matter and is some game breaking deal? I don't think I ever used this much because it's just Dante saying something stupid and I'd rather talk with my Rebellion and guns in a hack n slash game. Talk is cheap to a demon who's ready to light another devastating fart my way.

60fps- I remember reading something that had Kamiya saying the combat didn't need 60 to function and I can't tell the goddamn difference anyway. I don't care. Dante's animations in DmC look better than ever and that you can't argue. It looks good and still is pretty fast and furious. What I expect from a Devil May Cry.

Dante- The dude is virtually the same. You need to understand how "deep" Dante was to begin with. He has to be one of the most generic and unimaginative video game characters in history. Has about as much depth as a coloring book and was like he was designed entirely by a dude who never leaves his house to interact with another human being watching anime and action movies all day. Could argue the entire cast of Devil May Cry is like this. They were never nothing to write home about.

reliable mechanics- Screw the style system first of all and also I remember the system having a rather clumsy mechanic to when it came to switching them. DmC is very reliable and also very comfortable. Mapping different tactics by simply getting you to hold a button just feels good. I'm still able to do all my favorite Devil May Cry moves and now with comfort and ease. Saying any different makes me think you've never even played the game. It just feels comfortable in my hand. For example the prop shredder can be done by holding L2 and pressing circle instead of switching to that move set just to do it. I don't have to waste any time changing up my tactics, I just have to hold a button. And once you memorize the weapon layout on the d-pad then switching that also becomes a breeze and DmC has the best combat mechanics seen yet and is giving me what I wanted out of DMC 3's combat. I really hate that style system though. It's why DMC 1 is still my personal favorite.

And the level design is really cool. I really dig the art direction and it is way more interesting to look at than the bland level design of the previous games which looked like it just stole levels from a Castlevania game. Makes DmC the most unique and distinct Devil May Cry out of the bunch.

DmC to me is like Marvel's Ultimates. The modern contemporary update to DMC's "Earth 616."

 

[Chancey289]

Wow, i wonder wat made resident evil have 6 games(along with a lot of other non-canonical games) and still capcom did not find it stale but DMC has 4 games and its stale??????? I know RE 6 was not a success but still games like revelations still has hope for resident evil. When it is fine with resident evil, why is stagnancy an issue with DMC. Street fighter has been for years and capcom does not find it stale and ryu and most other characters still have old move set and added moves. It did not need a reboot saying , "oh its out of market today". I think the reason for the reboot is team that worked on previous games is no longer in capcom.



That's an understatement. Nero is a full-fledged gameplay character with unique moves. And we have dante who has the most complex combat system with 5 styles on the fly. To this day, i am still exploring his combat system. Saying that DMC 3 and 4 are the same is not acceptable. Nero's gameplay is totally different from dante. Anyone who plays dante still will find it difficult to play as nero cuz nero is brute force and less technical. Adding one full-fledged gameplay character is fairly enough to give a new game since the new character is protagonist himself.



As a hack n slash game, DMC 4 is satisfying. Jus cuz you don't like the feel of the game does not mean its "half-assed". DMC 4 was to appeal to anime fans. If you don't understand animes , you might as well stop criticizing DMC 4 cuz its not your cup of tea. And DMC is about gameplay, lets stop with the retardedness of how the story gets the characters played.



Again, if resident evil and street fighter can have new ideas with old characters not undergoing drastic changes , i think its possible with DMC.

I'm an anime fan but don't generalize the rest of us for your appreciation for weak story telling prowess. Is your perception of anime fans really some different breed and everyone else just doesn't get them? DMC always sucked at storytelling and there's no if ands or buts about it. I don't think you even need to be an anime fan to see anything different. Unless you really are that narrow minded weeaboo who shoves pocky and ramen noodles in their mouth every 5 minutes shouting "f*ck everything that isn't from japan"and acts like the east is some undisputed champ in entertainment or anything for that matter. There are shows out there with great stories and characters. DMC is not one of those things and it it seriously wants to make a serious attempt at telling one and doesn't even try then give me a reason why I should give it some special pass and just acknowledge the writers own lack of faith in their creative ability as if it's ok and shouldn't be up for criticism? Hell the people against DmC so much obviously suddenly give a crap about the story because they want to b!tch about it. What's with the weird double standard? I thought Devil May Cry was never about story guys?

 

[aoshi]

I believe it was most certainly half-assed considering many of the enemies in DMC4 are extremely similar to enemies from DMC1,that bloody backtracking and having to fight the same bloody bosses two to three times.

Well, its a sequel and having nostalgic elements from previous games is not a con. Thats the point of a sequel. Why call it devil may cry if nothing from previous devil may cry games does not make any connection to the sequels.

Again dante and nero combat mechanics are very different. The game is about getting stylish s ranks with nero and dante. If playing same bosses with dante is considered back tracking, we might as well remove higher difficulty modes such as son of sparda, DMD cuz you are only backtracking the same missions we played on devil hunter. You are totally ignoring the fact that it is played as dante who is a completely different gameplay character to nero.

Also, some games may be primarily focused on game play but that does not mean we can't criticize its story. DMC is about game play but its story elements isn't magically exempted from reviews just because of that. You may not care but some do. Also, it doesn't matter if the story is supposed to appeal to anime fans. If a story is bad, it's bad and vice-versa regardless of the demographic it is targeted towards.

I am not defending DMC 4's story. I don't see the emphasis on story on a gameplay-driven game. If you find it a con, you are playing it wrong. I have said this before, if you are looking for fiction, play resident evil or assassins creed. DMC is not about story but has been about gameplay.

 

[CheeseKao]

Well, its a sequel and having nostalgic elements from previous games is not a con. Thats the point of a sequel. Why call it devil may cry if nothing from previous devil may cry games does not make any connection to the sequels.

Again dante and nero combat mechanics are very different. The game is about getting stylish s ranks with nero and dante. If playing same bosses with dante is considered back tracking, we might as well remove higher difficulty modes such as son of sparda, DMD cuz you are only backtracking the same missions we played on devil hunter. You are totally ignoring the fact that it is played as dante who is a completely different gameplay character to nero.



I am not defending DMC 4's story. I don't see the emphasis on story on a gameplay-driven game. If you find it a con, you are playing it wrong. I have said this before, if you are looking for fiction, play resident evil or assassins creed. DMC is not about story but has been about gameplay.

1. DMC2 and 3 had plenty of enemies not from the previous games.DMC2 had the blade demon from DMC1 and DMC3 had that explodey thing from DMC2 and that's about it. Why did DMC4 take so much from DMC1 when DMC2/3 hardly did?

2. That, my dear forumite, is where you are wrong. Some people simply enjoy playing games for the fun of it. I sure as hell don't care about getting S ranks outside of breaking those statues. Also, you are FORCED to backtrack in DMC4 in order to proceed. I am not forced to play the game again at a higher difficulty setting.

3. I'm not saying you are. All I'm saying is that just because you don't care about it, other people can't.

 

[aoshi]

1. DMC2 and 3 had plenty of enemies not from the first previous.DMC2 had the blade demon and DMC3 had that explodey thing and that's about it. The fact that DMC4 took so much from DMC1 just reeks of laziness.

Well, they did give a new gameplay character compared to DMC 1 and DMC 1 did not have style system of DMC 4. So technically, DMC 4 did offer variety in fighting with new protagonist and new mechanics compared to DMC 1 and preserved nostalgia. Can't agree that devs were lazy when they gave a new gameplay character and maxed out dante's skills which totally are'nt at the same as DMC 1. Try analyzing the game better next time.

2. That, my dear forumite, is where you are wrong. Some people simply enjoy playing games for the fun of it. I sure as hell don't care about getting S ranks outside of breaking those statues. Also, you are FORCED to backtrack in DMC4 in order to proceed. I am not forced to play the game again at a higher difficulty setting.

Well, there are a lot of other casual games you can play and have fun but spare DMC your logic of "fun". Also you are not forced to back track in DMC 4 as any of the higher difficulty modes. Nobody is. That's how the game is to be played.

 

[CheeseKao]

Well, they did give a new gameplay character compared to DMC 1 and DMC 1 did not have style system of DMC 4. So technically, DMC 4 did offer variety in fighting with new protagonist and new mechanics compared to DMC 1 and preserved nostalgia. Can't agree that devs were lazy when they gave a new gameplay character and maxed out dante's skills which totally are'nt at the same as DMC 1. Try analyzing the game better next time.



Well, there are a lot of other casual games you can play and have fun but spare DMC your logic of "fun". Also you are not forced to back track in DMC 4 as any of the higher difficulty modes. Nobody is. That's how the game is to be played.

1. When they decide to rip-off not one, not two, but FOUR enemy types from DMC1 but didn't do so with DMC2 and 3. That is lazy. Nero only had two bloody weapons and the extra moves don't make up for the lack of extra weapons. That is lazy. Capcom couldn't be bothered to create brand new areas for Dante to go through. That is lazy.

2. How about you stop spewing elitist nonsense. I'm a casual now just because I don't play the game YOU think it's supposed to be played? I suppose DMC4 is a casual game now since I can get several S ranks without even trying =_=

The only reason I suffered through so many god damned playthroughs is because I wanted to get the super costumes and screw around with them.

Also, I am forced to backtrack in DMC4 if I wanted to reach the ending. When I play at higher difficulties, I choose to do so on my own whim.

 

[VineBigBoss]

Mechanics talks by itself, they don't need opinions to be validated in the real world. I mean: or mechanics have depth or not, it's a simple matter to analyse and give objective answers different than some aspects of stories, characters and things like that. Making a game more acessible like DmC had done is not a bad thing in a first glance, but in order to do this you have to sacrifice some depthness for the game to be balanced and don't overcharge too much the aimed players, to make things acessible is to reduce options by definition. But saying that "pro" players are elitists like i already see people saying here on this forum is just nonsense, the same way some people "play for fun" the "pro" players have their fun by exploring the mechanics, improving and traning themselves. So, sacrificing depthness is a bad thing for itself because it secludes one portion of players and reduces the value of the game by itself, i mean: difficult settings exists just to make things more viable to casual players to enjoy the game and to put real challenges for players who like to play a lot and test their skills on the same game, and yet the casuals still have the chance to go in-depth to the game if they feel like doing so, i think that sacrificing depth to make the "presentation" better and make the player "feel like a pro" just by one or two months can be a good move to sell one title but not to create a faithful fanbase like DMC old series had done. I mean, talking about a hack'n'slash game that the main point is to give you a depth combat to work out, other genres and "types" of games have their own merits like Assassin's Creed who has ****ty mechanics and gameplay but give the player sensations and a depth plot to go on.

About story and things like that, i think that NT did his homework althought i dislike all the setting, characters and the message the game pass on to the players. But still, i recognize they put a lot of work on that besides Capcom pressure to do what they wanted to see.

I don't think the main problem is change by itself, but radical change can be tough if it needs to dispose of good things. And i think that NT learned a lot from Capcom, DmC is an above average hack'n'slash for sure and they have the potential to make DmC2 a very interesting game very far from what DmC has done in terms of gameplay, but they NEED to dispose of this philosophy of "casualizing" the game, i think that they have some creativity and can make new whole mechanics and a unique high-quality hack'n'slash. I sure would like to see NT carrying own this knowledge they acquired from Capcom and making a spiritual sucessor to DmC after they finish DmC, but until then i'll not support the game because it replaced a series i loved and want to, at least, see a decent end for it.