• 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

Was anyone else disappointed with how the story went for DMC5?

berto

I Saw the Devil
Moderator
The series is not built on anything but the climax of the installment expressing itself via the principal characters fighting and one of them having the bigger dick—er, the better transformation/more power.
Not really. I think that's an issue with 5 alone. In 3 the progress was more natural. In 3 Dante loses and gains a power, sure, but in the second fight the situation is far more even. In the final fight he wins. There is a progression. A loss, a tie and a victory. Dante gets better, he struggles for that victory. It's not just handed over to him. In 4 Nero also has to get better to beat his opponent. In DmC he was just better than everyone from the start so, yeah, not the same since it's not that he gets a power that lets him win, it's just that he was always awesome. But 5 is definitely so. Not because it's only true here but because it does it so blatantly that it puts a spotlight on the whole motif.

It's also not built on giving villains second chances unless the villain is Vergil, because the games arbitrarily decide who's capable of changing their morals (who is redeemable) and who isn't, and it's not based at all on actual characterization but instead who can get money for Capcom. The plot for 5 contrived itself to save Vergil long before he had his true self restored.
Well, yeah, but they sure as hell couldn't do it with the other villains. Aries, Sanctus and Mundus in DmC are comically villinious. DMC1 Mundus is just as stock but more digestible and Arkham is a bit more nuanced, though still not what you'd call the greatest villains in the land of fiction. When you read the prossess of thought behind the creation of Vergil as an antagonist he really is the peak villians in the franchise. The other villains really are all just too cartoonishly evil for that kind of depth. Hell, Sanctus doesn't understand why people act out of love! 'Love?' he says, confused. Doesn't get more silly evil than that.

Vergil is the only one with any depth so if there was one villain they'd pull this for it's him. I'm not going to pretend that the whole redemption thing isn't just because he's popular but, honestly, it'd only work if it was him. I'm also not going to pretend that it worked for me but that's... Yeah, no. I'm, straight up saying it, they budge it. Stuffing DmC motivations (no pun intended) on to him and going with that route was uninspired and nonsensical for the context of DMC. This could've worked. It really could've, if they'd gone with the son route or the mother's voice, as with Dante, or something but, instead, it was a 'let's fight' and it was just... unsatisfactory. Can't think of any other word. I was underwhelmed at the whole thing: The redemption, the reunion, the father/son encounter, the partings. In a lot of ways the drama here was safe. It was all fanservice and no depth and people swallowed it up, hook, line and fisherman. The whole middle finger up in the air had me giving up on taking the game seriously.

He restored the Yamato because he's a violent, power-hungry man like his father, he just has a girlfriend as the main point of difference and all his morals are stored inside of her.
In an interview one of the makers of DMC4 mentioned that if Kyrie wasn't around or died Nero would just go down to hell and live there. He has zero attachment to the human realm and humans in general outside of Kyrie. There are a lot of things said about his development, from sophisticated to hunter type but this description sticks with me the most. This makes him a sociopath and the only reason he does anything good is for Kyrie or for rage. He and her take care of orphans but he only does it for her. They give him these noble actions that are negated by this prospect and it doesn't make him look like a good person. Ok. This is deep diving, right? This is the stuff that only fans go looking for. The average player couldn't care less, they already moved on to another game. Yeah? Even then, even if you only play the game once and never cared to look into how the makers designed the characters, Nero is still an obsessives a'hole who only does things for his girlfriend and if she wasn't there he could care less if people died in front of him. He only attacked Dante because he walked up her. They just don't seem to know how to interpret heroism.

We're multiple games too late for "real form of conflict resolution" on a series built on "batter the mindless enemies left to right and front to back and look good doing it".
Again... Well, yeah. You'd want Dante to talk his issues out with the devil? The root of all evil? Even if that wasn't so, do you think it's unreasonable to not try to talk out your grievances with the thing that killed your mother and brother? That applies to Mary, too. What kind of conversation can solve what her father's done? Murdered her mother, manipulated her into being a sacrifice, tried to kill her to use her blood and he wasn't even sorry when they put a gun to his head, just mad no one would let him get away with it. Yeah, I get that you'd want more nuence to your narrative but there are things you can't resolve with reasoning with one another, specially when the villains are so mustache twirlingly evil that one of them scuffs at people who actually get the whole love thing.

Same source has the "Vergil inspired by the villain in Blind Fury" bit.
Yeah. I know the one. It's the translation I posted from the Umbrella fansite. I read that and I can honestly say I really don't remember that part. Weird... You'd think that stick out a bit.

Thanks, I hate it.
Why wouldn't you? It's so dumb I think it gave me an aneurysm. They were way too eager to make everythings canon as the ultimate form of fanservice that they went and stepped on it. Yeah, I get that they were trying to reward people who'd been with the series long but was a very short term benefit. In the long run it just makes things convoluted. This is a perfect example. They came up with the dumbest thing to accommodate this LN into canon, which barely fit with DMC1 to begging with, and try to slap it even before the manga of DMC3. That explanation alone is already more complicated than it need be, why not just let it go?

More money.
I know I can be very critical of this whole thing but you really do top everyone off. I know you recent them for it but they are a business and like any other business they are in the business of making money. Yeah, the moral behaviour of any company is important, especially one whose consumer is the public. That being said, DMC is not Monster Hunter or RE or SF. DMC might be on the top 5 of their franchises but it doesn't bring in the kind of capital that would warrant big money on re-releases and the extra effort. Any re-release that they've had with HD collections and next gen ports barely make 1/3 of what the originals did. That's not enough to justify big budgets on those re-releases. DMC5 is the first time they've hit that 5mil mark they've been aiming for since the PS3/360 era and, frankly, I think the threat of more DmC had a huge influx as to why. You might be expecting too much from one of the least successful of the most successful.

Truth be told dante should be more seasoned by now in terms of maturity
Ironically, that was the whole idea of 3. He was young and immature and it showed and it was supposed to stay in 3 but then it but because it got popular they stuck with it and now he comes off like a ninja turtle, and I'm not talking about Leonardo.
 
Last edited:

V's patron

be loyal to what matters
DMC5 is promoted as the end of Sons of Sparda Saga. So some of its failings are hard to see as being its own. The Sons of Sparda designation is retroactively applied but I wished it was brought in more intentionally. Having all the entries really explore that idea in a more cohesive way would've been ideal.

The post 3 era is mostly half-baked and confused. The anime, 4, and the reboot all have interesting ideas but something offscreen appealed to me more. 5 is the same way as dealing with Vergil's adult years would've been better. There's a huge disconnestion between Dante and Vergil's childish squabbles and 3/5's plots.

Originally i didn't mind the end but I wished the journey was better. I still feel the same way but it sums up my feelings on the series so far.

DMC5 is still the best of this era but the bar is pretty low.

@berto
I wished your description of Nero was better showcased in 4. Nero with sociopathic obsession with keeping Kyrie would've been a stronger USP for the character than what we currently have.

In the IDW TMNT comics, the core squad got to really mature in a honest way. It's also a good case study for a reboot and I hope we could something similar for DMC in the future.
 

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Not really. I think that's an issue with 5 alone. In 3 the progress was more natural. In 3 Dante loses and gains a power, sure, but in the second fight the situation is far more even. In the final fight he wins. There is a progression. A loss, a tie and a victory. Dante gets better, he struggles for that victory. It's not just handed over to him.
Natural? Dante goes through the same sequence with his Vergil fights in 3 as he did with the Nelo fights in 1 but with one tweak in the second fight. In both games, he loses the first time but wins soundly the third time. The difference lies in the second fight, where Nelo gets laid flat on his back because Dante got stronger through his journey around Mallet, compared to his bout with Vergil in 3 ending in "an even fight" that's interrupted by a third party because Vergil isn't a strong enough character to carry the entire game with himself as the sole villain (Capcom has proved this two times now), and everyone including him had to be dumbed down to justify it.

This is like claiming a story is complete solely because it has a beginning, middle, and end and a sequence of events in between it. I'm telling you the story is incomplete and poor quality because the dialogue is tripe and the motivations are bogus. Dante wins in the end against Vergil despite him only having had his DT for about a weekend at most, while Vergil had 10 years to figure out his powers and be more experienced with its use (and he could have had a much bigger arsenal of weapons to show for it and suggest he actually traveled the world and bested other devils as part of his quest for power—what the hell else was he doing for 10-11 years?). Dante wins because he not only fought a bunch (and what, Vergil never did?), he believed in himself really, really hard and got into his righteous feelings 4/5ths of the way through the game. Suggesting that Vergil didn't want what he wanted hard enough and lacked conviction, or at best his existing conviction paled compared to Dante's own.

But like I said, he threw a tantrum when he was asked a legitimate question of his goals at the end of 3, so the former is truer than the latter and he lacked conviction. If they didn't want him to be perceived as a tantruming baby, they shouldn't have written one.

Of course this doesn't matter by DMC5, and it doesn't make sense in its own game, because if we're already shelving narrative consistency and character strength in favor of conventions such as "the hero always gets the upper hand on the villain eventually" and "the hero gains power via convictions", Dante should've lost twice to Vergil and not just once, and Lady had all of the conviction needed to be relevant in the final fight the way Beryl was in the 2nd novel. Instead, Lady was shelved because she's a side character and the game isn't about her despite her narrating it. Her boss fight in Mission 16 is because the game is constructed for almost every mission to end in a boss battle, so she was there to fill a quota. Her bequeathing the Kalina Ann to Dante is her equivalent of "defeated devil gives Dante their soul, he has new Devil Arm", same as Cerberus, Agni and Rudra, Nevan, etc. Her scene with Arkham in Mission 20 is an afterthought; for all intents and purposes, her arc and relevance in the game ends when she entrusts Dante to "please, free my father".

In 4 Nero also has to get better to beat his opponent.
Same DMC4 where Nero doesn't kill any Hellgate devil he encounters except for Bael (replaced by Dagon because he's that worthless), so that Dante can pass by and defeat them all himself and acquire fresh Devil Arms. Nero also gets overpowered by some lesser demons in Agnus's lab, loses Kyrie twice, gets bested by Dante who had "been playing me from the beginning", then his outclassed ass is still allowed to continue his journey because Dante had the infinite wisdom to treat an end of the world scenario with as little seriousness as possible, only for Nero to get caught by Sanctus because, um, Sanctus holding Kyrie hostage was going to end well for everyone, somehow. That DMC4?

That all happens because Nero has to share spotlight with Dante and his part of the game wasn't built for him to gain or use Devil Arms, and they needed justification for Dante's reverse traversal of the same locales without having diverse bosses (see also: the dice game within the Savior). Therefore, Nero is barely competent and couldn't destroy the Gates, and Dante is so wise and powerful that instead of handling everything himself despite how powerful the narrative wanks him as, he lets the inexperienced hotheaded teenage protagonist get in over his head and wind up caught in the Savior, which ends up helping the villain, making the situation worse, and getting more innocent people killed than before. Nero was one big loss away from just being genderbent Viola, but I think him being a dude bailed him out.

If you entertain the idea that Dante in 3 was learning of his priorities and coming into his heroism, starting to care about Lady and her safety as the story went on, thus he only fought her to protect her as the rest of the journey into Hell would be too perilous, it means he has even less reason to let Nero go ahead with his journey to rescue Kyrie given the increased stakes (innocent life in Fortuna) and Dante's added years and experience/perspective on the matter (he didn't motivate Lady to keep going and finish her fight for the sake of her closure and offer to cover for her, he just took her weapon and left her to sit there!), but he does anyway because in a Doylist sense, we wouldn't have a plot beyond that point if Dante were a competent hero, and in a Watsonian sense, he's stupid.

In DmC he was just better than everyone from the start so, yeah, not the same since it's not that he gets a power that lets him win, it's just that he was always awesome.
That's ignoring that DmC goes through the same gameplay loop of "defeat boss, get weapon" that Dante could build himself up with, but you're also skipping the part where Dante had to recover memories of his past, build a relationship with Kat, and also received a post-mortem heart to heart with his mother talking straight to the camera and presenting the moral that power isn't just having the physical strength to kill things, but the agency to dictate the trajectory of one's own life, otherwise one has no real freedom. It's not subtle in the least bit.

The same as DmC Vergil making it clear that he's a self-aggrandizing control freak and a "black hat hacker" who only exploits vulnerabilities to sell himself as the solution to his own problem and place himself in a position of power rather than actually help victims of an oppressive system, thus his "turn" in the end doesn't come out of nowhere, it's who he's always been throughout the game. And he shows you who he is!

Well, yeah, but they sure as hell couldn't do it with the other villains. Arius, Sanctus and Mundus in DmC are comically villinious. DMC1 Mundus is just as stock but more digestible and Arkham is a bit more nuanced, though still not what you'd call the greatest villains in the land of fiction. When you read the prossess of thought behind the creation of Vergil as an antagonist he really is the peak villians in the franchise. The other villains really are all just too cartoonishly evil for that kind of depth. Hell, Sanctus doesn't understand why people act out of love! 'Love?' he says, confused. Doesn't get more silly evil than that.
It's hard to take "Vergil has more depth" seriously when he acts the exact same as all those other villains and shows you who he is, but you ignore it because...?

In 3 alone he fatally attacked three entities he perceived as beneath him and were in no position to actually fight him. A post-defeat Hell Vanguard in the middle of groveling to him, Arkham in the middle of a sentence, and an already blinded Beowulf who was defeated by Dante just a few missions prior.

Killing your own like they were nothing? Mundus did that. Dante explicitly calls that out as heinous. But his morals weren't installed yet in 3, I suppose.

Sanctus doesn't understand why people act out of love? Whoa, good thing we didn't have Vergil monologue about Arkham still harboring fatherly emotions for Lady and sparing her life, right?

"Why didn't you kill her? Perhaps because she is your daughter? Did some pesky fatherly love get in your way? [...] To further your study of the black arts, you sacrificed your loving wife, to become a devil as well. Knowing this, I thought you'd be more useful to me, but I was wrong. No wonder your attainment of power is incomplete."

Oh sh*t! Well well well, if it isn't Vergil telling Arkham AND the audience that he believes your willingness to sacrifice your loved ones shows your commitment to power and that love for your own blood makes you weak.

Wow, exactly like Sanctus said one game later—Vergil expressed the idea first! Who'd have thought? The guy that doesn't care that a man murdered his own wife and wholly expects him to murder his daughter isn't a great guy!

Vergil discounted the value of humanity and consistently underestimated its power like Mundus did, killed his subordinates like Mundus and Sanctus did, and betrayed his flesh and blood like Sanctus wanted Credo to do. Both villains said straight to the impaled character's face they didn't see the value in acting out of love for family. The parallel couldn't be any more obvious if it were side by side on a YouTube video.

Vergil wasn't lying there to put on an act and hide his own intentions. He didn't know Arkham was deceiving him/didn't truly love his daughter. Nero wasn't invented yet, so he wasn't saying all that to protect his kid either. The game is not a documentary of alternate universe events that are immutable. He wasn't posturing. He said all that because someone wrote it and thought it reflected his character, and the kind of man he is, and that the writers wanted to write, was one that would kill his remaining family if it'd give him a power-up yet a bunch of contrivances and his own stupidity and inefficiency stop him. Again, it's not subtle.

Arkham's counter to the assertion that he still loves Lady enough to spare her isn't to bring up that Vergil spared Dante in Mission 7 and thus has brotherly love, making them the same—because Arkham was the one that ordered Vergil to leave him be in order to further his own plans and Vergil was none the wiser. The sole counterargument that Arkham brings as an "F You" to Vergil is bringing up Vergil's blood purity; he has no love for Dante remaining, or not enough that is worth Arkham bringing up.

Vergil didn't kill Dante in Mission 7 or Arkham in Mission 10 because in a Doylist sense, we wouldn't have a plot beyond either point if he were a competent villain, and in a Watsonian sense, he's stupid. He's exactly as cartoonishly evil and idiotic as previous and future villains in the series (including himself in the form of Urizen), but his sole benefit or redeeming factor is that he's hot and mysterious and he looks cool and his gameplay is sick, so people give him more allowances and perceive depth where there is none, as he clearly only acts to further the plot of the game at the expense of his consistency as a character and basic intelligence. Then they idolize him with memes.

This is why he can kill the Hell Vanguard so cleanly in the start of Mission 3, but doesn't kill-confirm on either Dante or Arkham or even Lady (where his "cuts through anything" katana gets blocked by a human weapon): Hell Vanguard is no longer useful to the narrative so it's expendable, but Dante and Arkham (and also Lady) still need to exist so the game lasts longer, meaning Vergil has to be completely ineffectual at harming them but also totally badass, you guys, please make gigachad memes. But he'll also pull sick kicks on a corpse after quadrisecting its head, so it's not like he respects bodily integrity post-mortem. Once you introduce that a character has no compunction for beheading an opponent and beating their corpse, you have to wonder why he's not constantly doing it even when it makes sense for him to do it.

The same plot armor affects everyone in Mission 13, as Arkham injures Lady and later threatens to kill her instead of killing her while she's down the first time around since she doesn't need to remain alive (and he clearly is familiar with murdering women to become a legend, etc), and he monologues like a James Bond villain to give the trio time to recover. But, you know, the story can't happen if the bad guys are competent, but also the heroes aren't that competent either.

In an interview one of the makers of DMC4 mentioned that if Kyrie wasn't around or died Nero would just go down to hell and live there. He has zero attachment to the human realm and humans in general outside of Kyrie. There are a lot of things said about his development, from sophisticated to hunter type but this description sticks with me the most. This makes him a sociopath and the only reason he does anything good is for Kyrie or for rage. He and her take care of orphans but he only does it for her. They give him these noble actions that are negated by this prospect and it doesn't make him look like a good person. Ok. This is deep diving, right? This is the stuff that only fans go looking for. The average player couldn't care less, they already moved on to another game. Yeah? Even then, even if you only play the game once and never cared to look into how the makers designed the characters, Nero is still an obsessives a'hole who only does things for his girlfriend and if she wasn't there he could care less if people died in front of him. He only attacked Dante because he walked up her. They just don't seem to know how to interpret heroism.
Well, yeah. You're bringing this up like it's something new. I'm telling you that the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree here. Nero is a sociopath because Vergil is a sociopath. They modeled Nero after Vergil specifically except for one detail. Vergil's character, intentions, and actions came before Nero was even a thought in their heads. They can't interpret heroism, and they also can't interpret villainy either. Why? Because after all of this, after Vergil lost his moral compass in the absence/death of his mother, after he tarnished his father's and mother's legacy by endangering innocent life, after he expressed his views that love for family makes one weak, after he went down to Hell and showed no attachment to the human world just because "[Hell] was our father's home" totally ignoring that Sparda abandoned that home for 2000 years thus his progeny would never be welcome there in 2000 years more, and then he came back in 5 and did the second point one more time and likely subjected thousands if not millions to the same trauma he went through, and he also never brings up the mother of his child, the writers think all of that still ultimately made him redeemable in 5 because he felt a little bad and Mommy didn't love him, look at how sad he is.

Again... Well, yeah. You'd want Dante to talk his issues out with the devil? The root of all evil? Even if that wasn't so, do you think it's unreasonable to not try to talk out your grievances with the thing that killed your mother and brother?
That would've been funny, but the first game wasn't about it and for all intents and purposes it didn't need to be. Dante did exactly what he set out to do, as he was a fully-realized character who serves as the pivot to Trish's development into a better person. I'm asking you why you're expecting Nero not to be a sociopath given his sociopathic gene donor and equally psycho uncle are the blueprints credited for his characterization and not a single one of them care about innocent life caught in the crossfire. Nero barely reacted to people being impaled by Qliphoth roots at the start of the game, remember? And yet he's trying to whine his grievances to a total stranger who happens to be his dad, despite the fact that the dad is a murderer who also took his arm and abandoned him as a baby, but he wants super hard for that same man to respect his existence and power because of his own manufactured inferiority complex.

That applies to Mary, too. What kind of conversation can solve what her father's done? Murdered her mother, manipulated her into being a sacrifice, tried to kill her to use her blood and he wasn't even sorry when they put a gun to his head, just mad no one would let him get away with it. Yeah, I get that you'd want more nuance to your narrative but there are things you can't resolve with reasoning with one another, specially when the villains are so mustache twirlingly evil that one of them scoffs at people who actually get the whole love thing.
Don't ask me, I'm not the one that wrote Lady in 5 to be part of the Vergil Defense Squad as a motivator to Nero becoming "the adult in the room" to stop Dante from putting Vergil down like the entitled rabid dog he's been. No one can pretend Vergil didn't express the same exact sentiment about "the whole love thing"; I posted his exact line about it. He just never gets to truly act on his lack of love for his family because he's an idiot and a weakling within the verse he's written in. Given that he didn't recognize Nero as his son at the beginning of the game, he had no reason to let him live, but very conveniently he happens to be weakened to the point of crumbling so he can't do fatal damage to Nero from frame one. He can't be seen doing anything "too bad" to the heroes so that his eventual redemption is easier to swallow, but everyone else he kills on the way there is expendable. I didn't invent this. I'm pointing out the trend.

Like I said, the series was not built on "real conflict resolution", but despite how bad 5 is, you were still tricked by the slop of a story into thinking that "real conflict resolution" is a genuine point the game is trying to make, when again, the series isn't about that, and this "violence isn't the answer" thing only came up in 5 and 5 only just to save Vergil and nothing else. This is blatant. The hypocrisy of Nero saying this is there for a reason, because it's only there to save Vergil. No character genuinely believes in it, because the plot then refuses to interrogate what it means for Lady to say what she said to Nero given that she had to kill Arkham and saw no other way out of it, and reasoning with him would've been ridiculous. She mourned after she shot him because she knew him once as a good and loving man. Her dialogue describing Arkham in 3 affords him more personhood and stronger familial bond than she ever gives Kalina Ann who she's supposed to care about enough to avenge and name her trusted weapon after. And she certainly didn't act like she was still psychologically traumatized over killing Arkham in all her other appearances post-3. This literally only comes up in 5, in Morrison's files of the characters and Lady slipping up about "cutting ties that bind".

And also, it's f*cking Lady. The same Lady who spent the third game being perfectly willing to commit murder twice on a man she had no idea had demonic blood in his veins until the second murder attempt via bullet to the head, and the first attempt was when she fired a missile at him without even looking in his direction. She did both things to a perceived normal human man then figured out he could survive it. She did both things for no reason that makes sense for her as a character and was entirely so Dante could flex his reflexes and his regenerative capabilities for cheap "drama" later. The game did not bother exploring how wildly belligerent she was because it didn't matter and they knew it didn't, but now suddenly she has a heart, enough to talk about "trauma" and "regret" like that means anything. It's a joke.

The writers give no real theory of mind to the characters, therefore the characters behave erratically and in ways only justifiable by "this'll make perfect sense later" and "we already know this won't affect the characters very deeply, thus the characters know not to be affected and will behave with no caution". That's literally all this is. It's bad writing, where all the characters are pawns to the plot to pad the game out to be 20+ missions full of stylish combat.

5 hinges on V and Dante refusing to say Vergil's name out loud to anyone until he actually appears, solely to surprise the fans. Dante should have no reason to hide the name Vergil from Trish and Lady . Them knowing beforehand that Urizen is potentially Vergil would've allowed them to take that mission more seriously instead of going on ahead to get their butts kicked, and Nero has never even heard the name because Dante never told him about his dad for six whole years, thus he'd have no reaction or recognition of that name as his father.

Everyone in the cast then turning around and blathering about how Nero shouldn't kill or hate Vergil simply because that's his father and it being presented as an attempt to protect Nero's mental health from the trauma of patricide is a joke in the same vein, given he's designed to be a sociopath, his dad is one too, and neither of them knew the other existed for over two decades. Nero had no opportunity to know or love his dad at all until that very game, and even if he did, half of the series post-3 is supposed to be based on the notion that two people can cope with the same traumatic event differently. No two people are the same. That's part of what makes them distinct characters. It's why Vergil becomes a mass murderer even though he gained the power to defeat demons at age 8, and Dante is presented as relatively well-adjusted despite either seeing his mother die right before his eyes or being within listening distance of her final moments and having to run in fear for his life since then.

The additional joke in this is that they're all entertaining the idea that Nero can even kill Vergil at all instead of the other way around given that Vergil is supposed to be extremely powerful by this point and enough to rival Dante. That's because his power and lethality are irrelevant now as they always have been, and the game is telling you right to your face that that's the case. Nero will overcome it because of course he will, or they expect Dante to do it as he's done before because the plot can't go any other way. Like, they could've at least appealed to Nero by bringing up "If you die, Kyrie will be left alone," but no one cares about Kyrie either, so the angle is that Nero's mental health is in danger from killing a stranger, so we have to reveal that he's family, even though this doesn't explain why that family started the game ripping off his arm and leaving him bleeding out in a garage.

Nero starts the game more or less being "kinda upset" about losing his arm and bouncing back with a magitech prosthetic but then blowing his lid about being called a mean name and later makes jokes about "Dante jerky" when the world is in peril, I'm sure he can handle a bit of patricide. But the game also pivots from the notion that "Vergil and Dante coped differently with the same circumstance of losing their mother" and presents that "having to kill one's father traumatizes everyone in the same way, consistently, all the time, no matter who they are and how different their circumstances leading up to it". Everyone being the same level of fragile is completely stupid and makes them all seem interchangeable, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's just because the writing values fatherhood over motherhood that much.

If DMC6 gets constructed with the same "care" as 5, we'll be hearing Trish go on about how Mundus wasn't that bad and that unsealing him is the right thing to do, because putting down your evil family is wrong and traumatizing even though it's morally correct and they have no other options. And whenever Lucia gets to appear, she'll be a sobbing mess about Arius too. Give me a damn break.

I know I can be very critical of this whole thing but you really do top everyone off. I know you recent them for it but they are a business and like any other business they are in the business of making money.
Well yeah, they're not running a charity. But the entire point of that text was that the fans reward Capcom with money for making silly decisions that crap on the characters and putting little effort to delivering a complete game, so none of us should be surprised that they're crapping on the characters and following fandom memes. The fandom has "voted with their wallet" and Capcom is following the money, where having a cohesive grasp of the characters is irrelevant as long as it gets them the green precisely because fandom loves that type of thing. Vergil is such a gigachad child support dodger tax evader, he's so cool even though his ideology was supposed to be proven wrong by combat multiple times. Media literacy is dead.
 
Last edited:

Benny

Active Member
Not anymore, it seems. According to the new light novel (Before the Nightmare) Gilver was, basically, a shadow clone of Vergil.
Someone on 4chan who read BtN novel debunked this information. They said Gilver was never specifically confirmed in that novel to be clone of Dante or Vergil. It was said that Mundus sent a lot of demons after the brothers and made angelos based on battle data he gathered from Sparda, Vergil and Dante. No mention of clone stuff nor Gilver.
 

berto

I Saw the Devil
Moderator
They said Gilver was never specifically confirmed in that novel to be clone of Dante or Vergil. It was said that Mundus sent a lot of demons after the brothers and made angelos based on battle data he gathered from Sparda
When I said clone it was a generic term for a copy. Call it a clone, homunculus or an angelo, the point is that they've retconned the fact that Gilver was Vergil in a weird way so that they can keep both canons as is. Bottom line, they really stretched it too far just to accommodate both. In the LN it clearly states that Gilver looked like Dante, had his face, to be exact, the same amulet and used a katana and clarified that Dante remembered his brother. If that's not Vergil. I haven't read the other novel but I know that that youtuber has and I tend to take his word for it. I might read the novel, I don't know. I have a copy but I just can't find the energy to get passed it when I try. It's a LN so it's not exactly hard reading, but when I try to get passed some parts, like anything with Dante, who's been degrigated to being a nimrod. It's like I feel my eyes rolling to the back of my head and it hurts. Cheese is one thing, I love cheese... I like cheese, but this is something different.

@Morgan
I actually did have a response but because I had to work and left it for more than a day the system whipped my draft and I'm not going to bother doing all that again. Sufficient to say I don't agree, at all. It's not even the points you bring up, it's the extremes you've taken things to. You can hate the characters all you want, and clearly you do, but I'm not going to agree to those points when there so much exaggerations or colorful dehumanizing name calling. It's a few steps too far. I'm not one to give others lip about writing walls of text or not to hold to their opinions, even if it's not in accordance with everyone else, but reading that, that level of antagonizing, was not fun, to put it mildly, so I'm just going to step away from it.

The only thing I don't get, that I absolutely don't see why people keep throwing fits about, is the whole Beowulf thing. Yeah, he killed him and slapped his body around. So what? It was a demon, not a baby giraffe. These things are the root all evil. It didn't go there asking for directions to the hospital, it went there to kill. Even if it hadn't thrown the first punch if it had won it would've done just as much, and worse, to the other one.
 
Last edited:

Cosmefulanito94

Well-known Member
When I said clone it was a generic term for a copy. Call it a clone, homunculus or an angelo, the point is that they've retconned the fact that Gilver was Vergil in a weird way so that they can keep both canons as is. Bottom line, they really stretched it too far just to accommodate both. In the LN it clearly states that Gilver looked like Dante, had his face, to be exact, the same amulet and used a katana and clarified that Dante remembered his brother. If that's not Vergil. I haven't read the other novel but I know that that youtuber has and I tend to take his word for it. I might read the novel, I don't know. I have a copy but I just can't find the energy to get passed it when I try. It's a LN so it's not exactly hard reading, but when I try to get passed some parts, like anything with Dante, who's been degrigated to being a nimrod. It's like I feel my eyes rolling to the back of my head and it hurts. Cheese is one thing, I love cheese... I like cheese, but this is something different.
Yeah, Gilver is another problem with the new retcon by DMC5. I mean, in DMC5 and its novel, have some reference about Gilver´s actions (Grue, Nell,bounty hunters at Bobby´s Cellar and Jessica´ s deaths) but never does a reference about a bandage-man,masked man, Gilver nor anything like that.

On chapter 13 of BtN, talked how Mundus sent his minions to kill a man called Tony Redgrave thinking that maybe he was the second seed of Sparda.
A day along Machiavelli, they created a line of black angels based in the Sparda´ s fighting style but was a failure. Tony stomped them. Quickly assumed that it will imposible defeat him, he need a powerful demon and when he saw brothers fighting, had the idea to use Vergil like a core for a new armor and it was a success: Nelo Angelo, his most powerful demon.
But never was send to HW, so Gilver isnt a proto-Nelo Angelo nor Vergil corrupted before the Nelo transform.

The problem with make the first novel canon beside the problem itself with DMC3, is that Gilver was Vergil(in the DMC1 novel), but does not have any logic with the actual facts/lore.
The clone thing is a theory by the fandom to put logic, like the depressed Dante from DMC2, but in the end of day is big plot hole. Because Mundus never sent a powerfull demon to chase Tony Redgrave based on Vergil (because Gilver has the same face, the same hair). He only sent some black angels (maybe scudo angelos?), his only mighty demon thanks to those experiment was Nelo Angelo.
 

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
I actually did have a response but because I had to work and left it for more than a day the system whipped my draft and I'm not going to bother doing all that again. Sufficient to say I don't agree, at all. It's not even the points you bring up, it's the extremes you've taken things to. You can hate the characters all you want, and clearly you do, but I'm not going to agree to those points when there so much exaggerations or colorful dehumanizing name calling. It's a few steps too far. I'm not one to give others lip about writing walls of text or not to hold to their opinions, even if it's not in accordance with everyone else, but reading that, that level of antagonizing, was not fun, to put it mildly, so I'm just going to step away from it.

The only thing I don't get, that I absolutely don't see why people keep throwing fits about, is the whole Beowulf thing. Yeah, he killed him and slapped his body around. So what? It was a demon, not a baby giraffe. These things are the root all evil. It didn't go there asking for directions to the hospital, it went there to kill. Even if it hadn't thrown the first punch if it had won it would've done just as much, and worse, to the other one.
Okay so...
Dante can be acknowledged as a nimrod in modern DMC storytelling with a two-digit IQ, Nero going "violence isn't the answer" makes him a whiny brat prone to moaning and demanding things, but calling Vergil an ineffectual sociopath who Nero is deliberately modeled after (with varying success) because Vergil himself is a nimrod and whiny brat who resorts to moaning and violence ("WHY ISN'T THIS WORKING!?", "I'll just use more of [your blood] to undo daddy's little spell", "YOU'RE WASTING TIME!") is a shade too far. I get it? But no, I don't accept that, because being mad that Vergil is being called out is not the hill anyone should die on. Take it up with the literal script I'm quoting and the scenes that are present in the game.

Pointing out that Vergil has moments of wanton cruelty (the Beowulf and Hell Vanguard thing) but doesn't exercise it fully in instances where it'd make him a smarter, more capable antagonist/villain to the story is somehow considered anathema to the conversation, even though I'm pointing out that since Vergil is capable of killing things and slapping their corpses, he should be doing it more often and it makes no sense for him not to when he has the opportunity, because that's part of his character. If someone else is pearl-clutching about how Beowulf somehow didn't deserve it, take it up with them. I'm saying it's inconsistent and makes him look dumb for not doing it to characters that matter.

He wanted Lady dead? He should've killed her.

He thinks holding familial love and sparing your blood's life makes you weak? He should've killed Dante. And Arkham. And Nero in 5. Why was he even listening to Arkham in sparing Dante's life? He already believes Arkham is beneath him and Dante is no longer useful to the plans as far as Vergil is aware. But the writers didn't give him intelligence beyond what was needed to get the story going, and that's a fact.

It's like if Dante carries around his guns but never fires them at Vergil or at Jester or any main antagonist ever, but he has a cutscene where he riddles a Gigapede with his entire arsenal and it only happens one time in the entirety of 3, just to flex, or he's otherwise pulling his entire repertoire of flashy moves at lesser demons.

But I get it, Vergil fans are super invested in him "having depth" and "being honorable" and not any of the bad traits that he clearly has that the series has blatantly showed, like being an ineffectual sociopath, a mass murderer twice over, a deadbeat who doesn't bring up the mother of his child or have any memories of her that we know of, and a whiny tantrum-thrower who hangs on to a beef from when he was 8 years old because Dante beat him too hard a bunch of times. He has to maintain marketability.
 

V's patron

be loyal to what matters
@Cosmefulanito94
The "everything happened" approach could work for DMC, it would just need stories to build off each other. Up until 5, the series has been standalone adventures.

I don't mind tieing the novels to the game's but having Vergil deal with the consequences of his action as Gilver would've helped make the case for Nero sparing him at the end.

I'm fine with 5 treating the novels as seperate but I rather the new continuity be more seperate and explored. After 3 the series has had a wishy washy approach to what ties together. Atleast the reboot made it more clear visually how different they were.

I would've been fine if more of Vergil's life outside of his childhood and his presence was explored. Hell if Nero has to be the one to spare him, than exploring his parentage or why he was left in Fortuna would help make the case.
 
Last edited:

berto

I Saw the Devil
Moderator
The problem with make the first novel canon beside the problem itself with DMC3, is that Gilver was Vergil(in the DMC1 novel)
The whole ordeal comes with the need to make everything canon even when nothing fits. The problem with DMC came with the change of hands and the inconsistencies the people making it now keep producing. Rather than rewriting the novel they are trying to keep it in and it's not doing the story any favors. It's a weird situation where they're willing to change things long standing, like the chronological order of the games, but insist on keeping things that are long left behind, like this LN, just for a bit of fanservice.

Vergil is being called out is not the hill anyone should die on
You're making it sound like this is something I'd fight to the death over. I told you, you have the right to your opinion and your disdain, I won't tell you to change your mind on it, I simply find your takes far too extreme and won't be partaking on it anymore. It's not just a shade too much, it's whole lot of shades of gray passed that. Reading your post, there is no wiggle room for anything but hate and that's fine, you do you, but you also expect me to agree to the same level of rage over this because you worded things in a condescending manner but I don't see any of this as you do. Vergil isn't just some sociopath. Did he do evil things? Yes, he did, but he didn't do them out of some form of psychosis but acknowledging that would be admitting to some depth and we can't have that, now, can we?

Dante can be acknowledged as a nimrod in modern DMC storytelling with a two-digit IQ, Nero going "violence isn't the answer" makes him a whiny brat prone to moaning and demanding things
Do you really think that me saying this is at the level as the things you've said? I didn't say this because I resent them, I said it because this is what I observed. Do I get frustrated with them? You betcha, but I most definitely don't take that frustration to the same degree.

But I get it, Vergil fans are super invested in him "having depth" and "being honorable" and not any of the bad traits
And you're on the exact opposite extreme of that. To you he has no good traits and may not have them, either. Not as a character in a narrative or as person in that world. You refuse to admit to any depth in his writing because it would be seen as a positive, you use every opportunity to use condescending language to describe him, such as not calling him a father but a DNA donor, and you take extreme exception to anything good said about him, true or not, such as how we don't know his situation with Nero's mother so you immidiatly label him a deadbeat, not because it's true but because you hate him and want nothing but ugly associations placed on him. While his fans refuse to admit to any bad traits you refuse to any good and that's just as much of an extreme. Cleary this is a topic you get very angry, just reading your posts again is clear evidence, and you may go on with it, but I don't care for it so, like I said, I'm tapping out on that.

He wanted Lady dead? He should've killed her.
Ok. This is the only thing I'll comment on because I can see where this point is coming from.

He doesn't want her dead. At no point that he ever hint that he cared enough. It was Arkham who kept going at her. The whole thing was that Vergil saw that Arkham's commitment was half assed and, as Arkham predicted, Vergil saw that as weakness and so he struck. If he's not committed he's not needed.
 

Lain

Earthbound Immortal
Premium
It's probably not something that bothered other people, but as I was playing through 5 I couldn't help experiencing a sense of dissonance when it came to the sense of scale. On the one hand, the Qlit tree has seemingly brought about a mini-apocalypse in the human world...and yet outside of a bunch of faceless soldiers getting slaughtered in one of the early chapters and the occasional reference to the wider world, you really don't feel it as the game focuses so heavily on the Sparda family drama yet again. Like there's supposed to be a funny scene where Morrison tells Trish and Lady that as the deed-holder to the DMC shop, he now effectively runs the place - and sure on the surface it's amusing but then I stopped and thought about it and I was like, "do property rights even matter right now when an unknown percentage of humanity has been wiped out?" But I guess like in DMC3 they'll just respawn back in when the next game rolls around.

Just food for thought. :unsure:
 

Benny

Active Member
Guys this thread is for talking about your opinion on dmc5 overall, not focusing on Vergil specifically. Ah screw it. It's not like you care anymore.

Vergil almost fits the description of "creator's pet" on TV tropes... almost. The absurdities happened in dmc5 and Vergil's character could turn dmc5 into a dark comedy with Vergil served as laughing stock. That unironically might make the game better. I still don't forget the part in VoV when Vergil "unintentionally" abandoned Dante in the burning house without going inside to check (I know Dante could and did escape by himself later but I'm talking about Vergil). Almost no one mentioned this writing error, and VoV is still highly praised in dmc community in general.

Uh, should I say something else? I hate Vergil too but I just can't find anything else to care about him since his character writing is laughably bad, so is the whole franchise.
 

V's patron

be loyal to what matters
Despite being mixed about the game's story, it didn't ruin my love for DMC as the anime did that already.

It just wasn't enough to reignite it. Maybe the upcoming animated series will succeed where 5 and the reboot failed?

I'm hoping a potential DMC6 is a fresh start for the series with a new cast/dilemmas beyond the Sparda family drama.
 

windleopard

Well-known Member
Even taking story focus into account, nero is 24 in devil may cry 5. He has his own demon hunting gig and is living with kyrie.

Yet he still acts like a teenage brat with an attitude problem for most of the game.

His personality is poorly written, which is a shame as if he was mentored by dante and vergil and matured a bit he could be a great protagonist.
If Nero is going to become more mature, it won't be from Dante and Vergil mentoring him. If anything, he's more mature than either of them were at his age.
 

ef9dante_oSsshea

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Omni 2020
When i said mentored i meant in the aspects of combat and using his powers, dante is too playful and not serious enough to help nero stop being such a whiny manchild. Vergil does not care enough and is not in touch enough with his own emotions either.

The writers need to step in here.
 

berto

I Saw the Devil
Moderator
Where was this stated?
So, there's this book for DMC1 called Devil May Cry: Graphic Edition. In that book Shinji Mikami has an interview where he talks about the influences for the character. Well, either there on on the first DVD Book they released. In the GE Mikami talks about how demons are highly intelligent and super strong, far more than any human, and that's why Dante, who is part demon, has superhuman strength and intelligence. I posted the translation for that here ages ago but the original source, from projectumbrella, who translated it out its connection to RE, is now dead.

If you want to gander through that you might find the passage. It's a bit of a read.

I'll check the other source in case it's that other book.
 

V's patron

be loyal to what matters
So, there's this book for DMC1 called Devil May Cry: Graphic Edition. In that book Shinji Mikami has an interview where he talks about the influences for the character. Well, either there on on the first DVD Book they released. In the GE Mikami talks about how demons are highly intelligent and super strong, far more than any human, and that's why Dante, who is part demon, has superhuman strength and intelligence. I posted the translation for that here ages ago but the original source, from projectumbrella, who translated it out its connection to RE, is now dead.

If you want to gander through that you might find the passage. It's a bit of a read.

I'll check the other source in case it's that other book.
It makes sense but I'm not sure they ever pulled it off.
 

berto

I Saw the Devil
Moderator
It makes sense but I'm not sure they ever pulled it off.
That's true. You could make an argument for either one way or the other in DMC1. You could argue that there was no evidence that this was the case and I could equality say that there was nothing to contradict that statement. At least that was once the case; now, with every iteration of the character there is no room for doubt. They've made him dumb as a brick and as sharp as a pound of liver.
 

Benny

Active Member
Another pet peeve of mine, remember Dante's love and respect for his mother he clearly showed in dmc1? It vanished ever since dmc3. Dante never seen in game talking about Eva by himself again. The rare times she was mentioned, Vergil had to be there.
"So... my mother's amulet is the key that unlocks the door to the demon world. Good plan, pop."
"Yup, this is where it all started. The day mother saved me and... left you behind. The thing you don't know is, she tried to save you, too. She kept searching and searching... Until it killed her."
"Well lemme jog your memory. A little Vergil, crying in the corner because mommy got mad."
Didn't Dante have anything else to say about his own mother for himself? Why Eva was allowed to be spoken of only when Vergil was there?

I'm... mad.
 
Top Bottom