To me, yes and no. Like I said many times, I was part of the hate camp, but after playing DMC4 during the DmC announcements, I see why they did it, however, like some said, they could've easily fixed all of the major problems in a DMC5, or they could've just make it the same nonsense like how they do it in Sengoku Basara and Mario. The sales would've been the same or drop. They could've done all that, but...nope, they chose not to go that route, and to me, that's a good thing, cuz I'm one of the fans out there who don't WANT a DMC5 unless they're really into the project and not doing it for the Gs. Now I don't care about the story, but I at least find DmC's story, characters, and universe more better and interesting than DMC4. I mean, "Donte" only acted like a child and scream fvck you in
one scene while Nero on the other hand cries Kyrie and swore to protect her every 3 to 4 missions. It ain't a hyperbole.
In fact....
i don't know. i enjoy it. but to be honest, i don't believe anything after DMC3 was necessary. that wrapped up the story. it was full circle. if anything, DMC4 is just as superfluous as DmC. both are things that are experimenting with new concepts. is that bad? no. were they well received? no...and yes. both have their own fan bases. and both exposed people to devil may cry in some way. so...i guess my final answer is yes. DmC was necessary.
Exactly. Took the words outta my mouth. At this point, I'm gonna pretend DMC4 didn't exist because of how dumb the game was(aside from gameplay of course). IMO, the DmC series could've been the current gen, at least DmC1&2 and then go out with a bang with DmC3 for the next gen consoles.