The Official Devil May Cry Thread

[Tron Bonne]

DMC 2 maybe. I have my issues with DMC3, but they are streets better from a story and character stand point. Melancholy, does not equal better writing.

Character maybe, but the story is utter nonsense. At least DmC had coherency, and some interesting ideas even if they weren't realized at the end. I love the older DMC games but, just like with the Bayonetta games or the Ninja Gaiden franchise, I'm not going to pretend their stories are worth anything outside some cool moments or quick laughs or a way to set up neat set pieces.

 

[Victarion]

Mallet Island is still my favorite DMC setting.

 

[Nathan]

The stories in DMC never were master pieces. DMC1 barely had any, DMC2... the less said the better, but DMC 3 and 4 were just fun. Cheesy one liners, crazy action, a protagonist who never takes anything seriously, it was just fun. Just like Metal Gear Rising doesn't have the best story, it's really flat out silly when you think about it, but it's just fun. "Nanomachines son" says it all.

DmC snubbed the hardcore fans, the makers pretended the series was never really anything special in the first place, and produced some dreck edgy story, which was supposed to be intelligent, but was just nonsense because it took itself too seriously.

 

[Havok83]

DMC1? I guess as a setting it was fine, but I felt the level design in that was terrible and I wasnt a fan of all that backtracking.

The stories in DMC never were master pieces. DMC1 barely had any, DMC2... the less said the better, but DMC 3 and 4 were just fun. Cheesy one liners, crazy action, a protagonist who never takes anything seriously, it was just fun. Just like Metal Gear Rising doesn't have the best story, it's really flat out silly when you think about it, but it's just fun. "Nanomachines son" says it all.

DmC snubbed the hardcore fans, the makers pretended the series was never really anything special in the first place, and produced some dreck edgy story, which was supposed to be intelligent, but was just nonsense because it took itself too seriously.

IA about 1 and 2, but not 3. I thought the story was great. They actually tried and it worked well

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Character maybe, but the story is utter nonsense. At least DmC had coherency, and some interesting ideas even if they weren't realized at the end. I love the older DMC games but, just like with the Bayonetta games or the Ninja Gaiden franchise, I'm not going to pretend their stories are worth anything outside some cool moments or quick laughs or a way to set up neat set pieces.

What exactly is nonsense about the first story? Dante is a half breed demon hunter, who father was a legendary warrior who saved the planet. He is summoned to face the returning evil his father sealed away a long time ago. Mundus uses the vision of his mother to summon him, and sends Dante's long lost twin brother to try and stop Dante. The first game is actually quite subtle outside of, "fill your heart with light". Just look at how they handle the Vergil stuff.

I am not the biggest fan of how they handled Dante in the third game, but the game is clearly coherent and builds the relationship between the two brothers beautifully imo.

And you really, really lost me with the Bayonetta criticism. They are brilliantly written satire, that mocks socially acceptable views of women, while producing a very powerful and proud female protagonist.

 

[Havok83]

What exactly is nonsense about the first story? Dante is a half breed demon hunter, who father was a legendary warrior who saved the planet. He is summoned to face the returning evil his father sealed away a long time ago. Mundus uses the vision of his mother to summon him, and sends Dante's long lost twin brother to try and stop Dante. The first game is actually quite subtle outside of, "fill your heart with light". Just look at how they handle the Vergil stuff.

there was barely a semblance of a story in 1. The presentation of it was awful and many characters lacked depth and proper characterization. I remember beating it and feeling the "story" felt very hollow. The difference between 1 and 3 is outstanding. 3 put 1 to shame

 

[Tron Bonne]

What exactly is nonsense about the first story? Dante is a half breed demon hunter, who father was a legendary warrior who saved the planet. He is summoned to face the returning evil his father sealed away a long time ago. Mundus uses the vision of his mother to summon him, and sends Dante's long lost twin brother to try and stop Dante. The first game is actually quite subtle outside of, "fill your heart with light". Just look at how they handle the Vergil stuff.

Yeah, with a description like that...

I mean, to be fair, it's been a long time since I've replayed it, but I was never particularly impressed by it.

And you really, really lost me with the Bayonetta criticism. They are brilliantly written satire, that mocks socially acceptable views of women, while producing a very powerful and proud female protagonist.

Well, it's easy to get lost when you're on the wrong path. I never said anything about that. I'm talking about the actual story, which is utter nonsense in both games. The style and characterization is fine, it's ace even, much like DMC.

I'm not going to go on and on about it. If you think the actual stories of these games are good, then we'll just have to agree to disagree, I guess, because I've always seen them as utter nonsense that's mostly designed to get you from one point to another logically (and sometimes not even that logically). The only character action game that I think ever had a truly good story was the first God of War, though the sequels had stories that somehow got worse and worse.

 

[Nathan]

One of the biggest offenses in DmC, imo, is that they turned two of the biggest badasses in the series into chumps.

They turned Sparda, one of the biggest, badass Demon Generals, who sealed the demon realm, into Mundus' b**ch. And Vergil is basically always hiding, and has Dante do most of the work. Those story directions alone turned me off big time.

 

[Tron Bonne]

It was a different continuity, so I had no problems with those changes. We never really saw Sparda, so we have no idea what kind of a "badass" we was or wasn't, and I actually liked how they did Vergil. He was a pretty interesting character in DmC, I thought, even if he didn't get fleshed out as well as I would've liked.

 

[Havok83]

Vergill was easily one of the best part of DmC

 

[Tron Bonne]

Agreed. I never did play the DLC with him, but I heard it was disappointing story-wise so I never got it.

 

[Jick]

I think he could've been better. I liked him but Vergil in DMC3 is so badass that this one feels weak in comparison. His soft voice kinda puts me off as well.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Not all characters are meant to be badass. I actually liked the dynamic more here, where you had the badass bother and the more subdued, laid back bother who focused on other things outside pure fighting.

 

[Havok83]

yeah it was the brother angle I loved, something which wasnt really done in the original series to this extent. I like that the relationship between he and Dante was a focal point that was explored. Seeing him as a good guy and working alongside Dante was an interesting take than them merely being at odds

 

[Jick]

Not saying everyone should be a badass. I felt that the gap between this Vergil and the classic one is bigger than the gap between the two Dantes. I wish he felt more imposing. His voice really didn't match it, for me. Dante's was spot on, though.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Yeah, honestly, I kind of wished it wouldn't have turned bad at the end. Or at least maybe not become an outright villain or something. Of course, it doesn't look like it matters much since we probably won't be getting a sequel, but still.

 

[Nathan]

I just preferred "I need more Power" Vergil's attitude. He would have taken charge and wouldn't have stayed hidden from Mundus. He would have taken the fight to him.

As for Sparda, sure, we didn't really get to see him in the original series. But the way everyone talks about him, you know he is a big deal. And you wouldn't have people trying to obtain Sparda's power, if he was some Demon schmuck. The original series didn't bother to really explore him, so it would have been the new continuity's chance to do just that. But nope, instead they turned him into a gimp.

 

[Jick]

IGN did a review on the remaster:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/10/dmc-devil-may-cry-definitive-edition-review

 

[Havok83]

easiest answer? These arent the same characters. I think people would just need to give up their pre-conceived notions of what the DmC characters should be and just go on for the ride of what the story is telling. Its basically an alternate reality tale. A "what if" of sorts. Who or what the originals did from the original series is irrelevant here and you are only setting yourself up for failure if you cant let that go and take it for what it is

 

[Jick]

Which is what I wish people had done. Maybe even turn this game into something other than Devil May Cry, but then people would just call it a rip-off. We'd probably already have a sequel, though.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

there was barely a semblance of a story in 1. The presentation of it was awful and many characters lacked depth and proper characterization. I remember beating it and feeling the "story" felt very hollow. The difference between 1 and 3 is outstanding. 3 put 1 to shame

The first has my favorite story. It is subtle, while still hitting all the notes. Dante is a badass, without making a deal of it. The moment with Dante and Virgil with the mirror is my favorite in the series.

 

[Nathan]

Then maybe it shouldn't have been called Devil May Cry, and used characters that people actually care about. You can't fault the people if you take some beloved lore, decide to scrap it all, and then be surprised if people don't like the changes. Instead of crapping all over the characters, maybe they should have focused on exploring things that the original series never did.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Yeah, with a description like that...

I mean, to be fair, it's been a long time since I've replayed it, but I was never particularly impressed by it.

What is hard to follow about that? It is quite simple.

Well, it's easy to get lost when you're on the wrong path. I never said anything about that. I'm talking about the actual story, which is utter nonsense in both games. The style and characterization is fine, it's ace even, much like DMC.

I'm not going to go on and on about it. If you think the actual stories of these games are good, then we'll just have to agree to disagree, I guess, because I've always seen them as utter nonsense that's mostly designed to get you from one point to another logically (and sometimes not even that logically). The only character action game that I think ever had a truly good story was the first God of War, though the sequels had stories that somehow got worse and worse.

That is like watching the Holy Grail and being like, "that has nothing to do with the story". That is the whole point.

And I am a big fan of the first two God of War stories, with the second being my favorite. I don't know what happened with 3 and Ascension was just not up to the task in anyway.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think he could've been better. I liked him but Vergil in DMC3 is so badass that this one feels weak in comparison. His soft voice kinda puts me off as well.

Don't forget that hat.

easiest answer? These arent the same characters. I think people would just need to give up their pre-conceived notions of what the DmC characters should be and just go on for the ride of what the story is telling. Its basically an alternate reality tale. A "what if" of sorts. Who or what the originals did from the original series is irrelevant here and you are only setting yourself up for failure if you cant let that go and take it for what it is

The biggest problem with this is they specifically used the characters and their traits, but then messed with them.

It is like watching an adaptation of Gone with the Wind, where you have Scarlett and Rhett acting like odd versions of themselves. If you don't want to make Gone with the Wind, don't make Gone with the Wind.

 

[Havok83]

The biggest problem with this is they specifically used the characters and their traits, but then messed with them.

It is like watching an adaptation of Gone with the Wind, where you have Scarlett and Rhett acting like odd versions of themselves. If you don't want to make Gone with the Wind, don't make Gone with the Wind.

but thats the point of it being a reboot. Its supposed to be an alternate take on a tale thats already been told. Theres no point in taking those characters and just treating them exactly the same. If thats the case then they should have just made DMC5.