Which characters you taking side in ?

  • 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

Which characters you taking side in ?

  • Total voters
    41
Ranvionist

Ranvionist

Well-known Member
Feb 19, 2013
13
5
185
28
Somewhere where sky is blue and land is corrupting
As title say, which you taking side in ? Dante or Vergil ?

Mine was both. Because what Vergil say is half true about human. They need protection even from themselves. But at the same time, about how he calling humans subject making me less agree with him to be the ruler. Dante however have a point too, Humans need to be free to unlock their own potential not because they are slaved or something. My brother say he gotta agree with Vergil though.

So, your opinions ?

(my English suck, i know it)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Angelo Moreira, Onecrazymonkey1 and Loopy
I'm voting 'other'. I undertsand why the characters say and do what they do, but at the end of the game I don't know which side to pick.

Dante wants humans to have the free will to rule themselves, but that's not enough for me. Plus when humans rule themselves we see what happens in the real world. Humans do and say terrible things if there are no rules or someone to lead them.

Vergil thinks he's better than everyone and that humans are like children who are dangerous even to themselves and need him as a greater being to rule them. He's being no different from Mundus by saying that.
While I agree that humans as a species can do some atrocious things to each other and the world, there should be a balance between total human control by a higher power and humans ruling themselves.

Then again, in the real world, do we truly have free choice or will? Like, if we go to a restraunt, we can choose from a menu, but we can only choose what is on the menu and nothing else. It's like that with other aspects from life from clothes to TV channels and politics. We can only choose from the options we are given.

So I guess what I mean is as far as DmC is concerned, I would take both Dante and Vergil's side. Something likeDante letting humans have choice, but Vergil setting what the options for choice are si that humans don't act on their base and selfish instincts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dante's Stalker, Ranvionist and Onecrazymonkey1
I don't really know whose side I agree with. I tend to believe that people need to be able to learn on their own, and they can't do that if they're being forced into a certain direction. It's like with an unruly child or teen. Sometimes you have to let them find out on their own in order for them to see what's needed. I also tend to think that if people destroy themselves with so much freedom, then it's their own fault. Though that's mostly from being annoyed with stupidity.

Even though people are destructive, they do pull back and try to change things for the better. That can only happen when they can see for themselves and make the change on their own.

I guess I'm on Dante's side.

And, Loopy, after seeing your example of ordering in a restaurant, I couldn't help but think of how you can also ask for variances in what you order. You can always ask for something to be added or excluded, so you kind of do have more options than what's on the menu. That also depends on if it's available or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Onecrazymonkey1
EllDawn said:
And, Loopy, after seeing your example of ordering in a restaurant, I couldn't help but think of how you can also ask for variances in what you order. You can always ask for something to be added or excluded, so you kind of do have more options than what's on the menu. That also depends on if it's available or not.
Click to expand...
Good point. Also, it would depend what part of the world the restraunt is in. In some places it is frowned upon and very bad manners to ask for something to be changed on the menu because it causes inconvenience to the chef. Other countries are fine for people to ask.

It's like with an unruly child or teen. Sometimes you have to let them find out on their own in order for them to see what's needed.
Click to expand...
Very true, but I also think of the worst that can happen. I was a teen once and I saw the terrible mistakes that can be made. Yes, lessons are learned, but sometimes I think it would be better for them not to have gone through that, especially if it damages them mentally or physically for a long time. I know I'm thinking of a worst case scenario, but for me it is better to save people from that kind of trauma.
As for DmC, humans should have free will, but with basic rules in place so that the few who would murder and steal and do other terrible crimes could be punished for the benefit of the others. There shouldn't be autocracy where one person can rule unchallenged and with no sanctions in place to stop them passing unfair laws. It just wouldn't be right to me.
Yes I think at times humans need to be protected from themselves, but also freedom. But this is a hard line to walk without leaning one way or the other.There will always be humans who abuse the freedom given.
Maybe something more libertarian in nature would be a good balance? :/

I'm still sitting on the fence with this:P
 
  • Like
Reactions: EllDawn
For the time being I'm going to have side with Vergil only because I don't feel that the humans at this particular moment are capable of taking care of themselves yet alone set up a proper form of government. I just think it will be nothing but pure anarchy for a while or at least until the people start growing their brain cells back. Sometimes I feel that people need to learn on their own and learn the hard way but there are also times when that could destroy the lives of a lot of innocents. Dante may be able to help people from behind the scenes from demons and what not but he can't help everyone. I can only imagine the murders, thefts, rapes etc. increasing without someone there to pull in the reins. They could have at least talked it out before having a giant showdown. I could also be fooled, they could make a DmC2 and the human population could have managed just fine but personally I would like some consequences.

Maybe Vergil thinks he's better than everyone else but honestly who really cares as long as he gets the job done, the economy back in shape and the people kept safe? Plus I thought that if Vergil ever got out of hand then Dante could have beat him back in-line lol.

I would much rather have something to choose on a menu and maybe fiddle around with the options then starve and have nothing at all because some ass down the street beat me up and stole my money. With no law in place to stop the thugs it would just be chaos; Governments and Laws are not perfect but I personally think anarchy is a little bit overrated.

Just my two cents though...
 
I think Dante is right.

We were given the right to choose our own fate, to carve our own destiny on the rock of eternity.
Those who seek to deprive us of that right deserve nothing but blood and steel
 
TerrorA said:
I think Dante is right.

We were given the right to choose our own fate, to carve our own destiny on the rock of eternity.
Those who seek to deprive us of that right deserve nothing but blood and steel
Click to expand...

You're right though but without the rules, Humans can do kill,rape, or etc without hesistation because its their freedom. Rules was basicly created to control humans so they didn't abuse their freedom to others.
 
Loopy said:
Good point. Also, it would depend what part of the world the restraunt is in. In some places it is frowned upon and very bad manners to ask for something to be changed on the menu because it causes inconvenience to the chef. Other countries are fine for people to ask.


Very true, but I also think of the worst that can happen. I was a teen once and I saw the terrible mistakes that can be made. Yes, lessons are learned, but sometimes I think it would be better for them not to have gone through that, especially if it damages them mentally or physically for a long time. I know I'm thinking of a worst case scenario, but for me it is better to save people from that kind of trauma.
As for DmC, humans should have free will, but with basic rules in place so that the few who would murder and steal and do other terrible crimes could be punished for the benefit of the others. There shouldn't be autocracy where one person can rule unchallenged and with no sanctions in place to stop them passing unfair laws. It just wouldn't be right to me.
Yes I think at times humans need to be protected from themselves, but also freedom. But this is a hard line to walk without leaning one way or the other.There will always be humans who abuse the freedom given.
Maybe something more libertarian in nature would be a good balance? :/

I'm still sitting on the fence with this:P
Click to expand...
I don't think I'd do very well in a restaurant like that. Or people with food allergies.

I tend to think of the worst-case-scenario, too. It's just I also think of how people will fight back once they realize there's another way. There have been dark times in the past, and people decided to make a change. They decided on the rules, which is what I think the people in DmC should get the chance to do. There's always going to be murder, theft and various other crimes. I'm sure there still were in the game, though they were probably committed by demons because the humans were so drugged they couldn't think for themselves.

The Appleseed movies kind of talk about this, too. Some humans believed they were being controlled and wanted to destroy the clones so they couldn't control them any more. So they tried destroying them. Another group believed humans were doomed anyway, and wanted to ensure their extinction. Dunan basically said that the people needed to choose for themselves, make their own future.

Unfortunately it takes a crisis to get people to act, but at least then they're seeing the results rather than being told.

I do agree with you, though. People do need rules. There's just the question of whether they'll follow them. People always have the choice to disobey or not.
 
I didn't vote for anyone. History has proven that prosperity reigns when people are allowed to govern themselves.

However, I still like Vergil more, even though he wanted me to be his subject. So, in the end, I'm conflicted.

Edit: I'm actually surprised Vergil is gaining the most votes. I thought he would've come in last place since everyone seems to hate him. ^_^

I'm sorry, not hate, but dislike him in accordance to their tastes.
 
I think there should have been a compromise. Humans needed a leader to look to just until all power vacuum caused by the removal of the demons was at least somewhat filled by humans experienced with demons, and I think Dante could have controlled Vergil as co-leader and taken him out of the picture if his behavior got out of hand. It was Dante and Vergil's responsibility to take on the burden of the chaos and destruction they created by violently removing Mundus from power without consulting any human leaders on all the harm that would cause. So Dante is kind of hypocrite to turn around and say humans should make their own choices after making so many choices FOR humans in the first place. Maybe humans don't need to be babysat, but what Dante essentially did was throw us to the wolves. I can't get on board with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Demi-fiend
Unknown said:
I didn't vote for anyone. History has proven that prosperity reigns when people are allowed to govern themselves.

However, I still like Vergil more, even though he wanted me to be his subject. So, in the end, I'm conflicted.

Edit: I'm actually surprised Vergil is gaining the most votes. I thought he would've come in last place since everyone seems to hate him. ^_^

I'm sorry, not hate, but dislike him in accordance to their tastes.
Click to expand...
I didn't vote for anyone either, pretty much for the same reason. So you're not the only one that disagrees with Vergil, but is still a fan of his.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Demi-fiend
I've bee searching this forum all evening to find the reference of 2 philosophers (I guess) who oppose themselve like Dante and Vergil on this Subject. I'd really like to have the name of these people. I'm pretty sure someone mention it on this forum but I was unable to search the right keywords to get to the related thread. I hope someone can help me out. My information seem too vague to google it too..

Thank a lot.
 
I voted for Phineas on the basis that he would probably end up as the wise old demon to slap both nephilim in the head. I really thought if they talked it out then the showdown ho down wouldn't have had to happen.

I partly agree with Vergil and I partly agree with Dante. Yes, I'd love to have my freedom and yes humans should have freedom and the right to solve our own problems. However, even though Mundus is gone we still have an economy issue, we have a justice system issue, we have people probably still a little brainwashed from Virility and broken governments all over the world. Not to mention a world wide demon pest problem. Agreeing with Darkmanifest, at the start maybe Vergil and Dante could help get humanity back on it's feet. Theres no doubt that Vergil could probably think up of a lot of good solutions for some of the problems post- Mundus. And theres no doubt that Dante would stop Vergil if things got out of hand and Vergil wanted to really rule the whole world. After a while, once we're back on our feet our nephilim friends can start to gradually step back from the reigns and give us more freedom and responsibility.

If Vergil really wanted to still protect humans from whatever then maybe he can turn "The Order" into the new "Justice League" or "True Cross".

And on another note, even Vergil's plan is flawed. It's going to just be even more chaotic to try to unified the whole world under one big umbrella. We have wars over views and religion and skin colour etc... theres no way he can turn us all into just "one" unified group of beings. Impossible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Onecrazymonkey1
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom