Nah, more like DMC4 Dante is composed of downgraded parts of DMC3 Dante glued together and jammed into a game not designed around him. Styles in DMC4 are individually weak. I get a great amount of pleasure playing Royalguard in DMC3. I might as well not have any style selected when I press D-Pad Down in DMC4 as it's essentially been relegated to flying in high level play.
DMC3 DMD is much harder, enemies have a ton of health and when triggered their hp is higher than for bosses in dmc4 lol. When only 1 style is available of course it has to count becoming too op on lower difficulties btw. The problem is stuff gets repetitive very soon. Speaking of RG - to even make it viable they had to have roll and jump guard cancelable.
In DMC4 gilgamesh and lucifer can do considerable damage with any style, RG is the tool for advanced players and is used for tactical advantage, damage isn't that important. Considering 4.5 styles buffing RG would just break everything, there are plenty of options to destroy enemies regardless. Much more fun to have many viable options not using some of them because they are lame (pandora) or too complicated than to have close to 0 options (which is 1 style and 2 weak sauce weapons).
Let's assume for a second that what you are saying is true and there is no way you can have a more streamlined control scheme for Dante without sacrificing his depth.
So just to make sure that I understand you correctly. You want DMC4's Dante with DMC3's balance and overall combat design, true?
In other words you want Dante 2.0 from DMC4 who is already a 2.0 version of his DMC3 iteration. You do realize that you are basically asking for a reversion of a (by the time the game comes out) 12-13 years old character, right?
No disrespect man, but if that's what you want then you could just go play DMC3 with that style switching mode.
that you admit yourself that you did not continue playing MP is an explicit admission that you did ultimately did not care about the mechanics or the game. and yet, those design decisions were explicitly built with you in mind for the express idea of getting you into that actual game at the expense of almost everything appealing at a mechanical level. the 'game wasn't catered for casuals' is an exact example of what i'm talking about here- no matter what the mechanics were the ultimate thing that you were seeking has nothing to do with the mechanical aspects of the game.
No it's not. Outside of mobile most of the time I never play MP in my games. You got it backwards man. The fact that I stayed with SFV's MP for a couple of months after its release shows that I really liked its core gameplay. But I'm a SP player and I don't think there is anything wrong with that, so I switched to SP and found out that there is practically nothing there for me to enjoy. I did all the challenges with all characters, I practiced with some of the characters, I played (suffered through) Survival with every character but at the end the game just didn't had enough content for me to stick to it anymore. And no contrary to what a lot of "hardcores" think that end didn't came two weeks after the release. It was half a year later after I played and finished Cinematic Story mode or whatever it was called.
So yeah. Casuals do stay with games if the game provides what they want.
Also, let's go back to my other example. Another game that I'm pretty much a casual in its genre and yet I've stayed with it for over a year now and I still play it regularly. Driveclub. So, it's not like if I play a genre casually then I always abandon it after just a few weeks or months. Actually, after the amount of time that I've spent with this game I don't think I can call myself a casual Driveclub player since I know for a fact that've I gotten a LOT better in the course of the past year. So in other words Driveclub managed to do for me what SFV failed to
(and people blamed me for it !?)
. Turn me from a casual player into at LEAST an average racer. (Not to brag, but I think I'm quite better than average now.)
Lastly here is another one of your wrong assumptions in regards to casuals which I see in other parts of GAF as well. As a casual racing player, did I like Driveclub's gameplay and mechanics, like handling, physics, dynamic weather effects on tracks, penalties etc etc? Yeah, I absolutely LOVE these stuff in DC. But would have I played it as much as I have if it only had 10 cars and 5 tracks? No freaking way! What if it was the other way around, tons of contents but bad gameplay? Nope.
You see, SFV having really enjoyable mechanics and gameplay does counts a great deal to casuals like me, but it's not enough to keep us interested in the long run. If Capcom truly wanted to cater to casuals then they had to provide both an accessible gameplay and lots of contents to go with it.
Sorry if my tone seems a little harsh. I've had this casual vs hardcore discussion in regards to SFV many times in the past and it's beginning to become tiring.
P.S: Honestly I don't know how we even ended-up with this discussion. All I and a few others suggested was to make Dante a little bit more accessible in the same vein that Nero, Vergil, Bayonetta or many other action characters are and we somehow ended up with the Casual vs Hardcore discussion....?!
I literally haven't seen a single person (casual, first time gamer... anyone) even touch that mode.
--------------------------------
Just saw Dahbomb's post.
At the end of the day, even if they made the game more "accessible" the casuals won't actually care about the top end depth of the game. They didn't care for GoW, they didn't care for Bayonetta and they CERTAINLY didn't care for DmC. DmC's combat depth is FAR ABOVE the scope of the casual player, that should tell you right there that what we are suggesting here has little to do with aiming at the casuals (because DMC isn't a casual game). DMC overall is actually a very accessible game, most moves aren't that hard. You can mash and dodge your way through the game with easy without really learning anything along the way. I don't really care for Joe Nobody to be able to do fancy air combos at the drop of the hat. What matters is the INTERMEDIATE or ENTHUSIAST player be able to progress naturally from being an average play to an expert player. That's where DMC kinda struggles at because past a certain point you hit a steep wall and it's mostly related to execution and arcane mechanics. That curve needs to be smoothed out so people can start to slowly advance to that high level without just smacking into the wall and giving up. You don't want to be in a position where you see a combo video and be like "I can never do that ever'... the combat system should be such that you watch a video and say "I can't do that now but with solid practice I can get close enough". For that to happen, stuff has to make sense on a design, mechanics and visual level. You can't afford to have your game be dictated by unintended mechanics because you decided to throw everything and the kitchen sink at the game.
Dahbomb the DMC team themselves weren't even aware of all the stuff that's possible in DMC4 or 3 for that matter until a lot of videos popped up. The developers didn't deliberately made things the way they are in DMC4 so players can do flying guard, StarRave, stay in the air with all the switching, etc. They just put the system in place and let people go crazy and do their own thing.
That's why I never felt any way when I see combo videos because these players pull off stuff that the developers themselves didn't even think was possible. It's different with Bayonetta where you ABSOLUTELY have to know Dodge Offset because the game was designed around it.
You can't expect them to know everything about the games that they make. They only focus on the base level stuff and let people do their own thing and discover stuff on their own. That level of play is only achieved through playing the game a lot to the point where you don't care about playing the hottest thing on the block because everything you want is right here.
Just give characters a lot of weapons. Nero was criminally unequipped in DMC4.. In fact when I got yamato for the first time I was wondering how I switched to it (with the unused button)... :/
All characters should at least have as many move options as Vergil does with his weapons. I want variety, and bigger hitboxes... DMC3 weapons were the best...
Just give characters a lot of weapons. Nero was criminally unequipped in DMC4.. In fact when I got yamato for the first time I was wondering how I switched to it (with the unused button)... :/
Dahbomb the DMC team themselves weren't even aware of all the stuff that's possible in DMC4 or 3 for that matter until a lot of videos popped up. The developers didn't deliberately made things the way they are in DMC4 so players can do flying guard, StarRave, stay in the air with all the switching, etc. They just put the system in place and let people go crazy and do their own thing.
That's true and honestly this is what the legacy of DMC is founded upon.
Even Dante juggling enemies mid air with guns in DMC1 was based off of a glitch in Onimusha. Enemy step "combos" were unintended in DMC1 but were made into a feature in DMC3.
So now we have even crazier stuff and the team has to make the game with those mechanics in mind. They will probably make stuff like Flying Guard look less jank if they decide to keep it in. They probably have to keep inertia too but they might tweak it to look less jank in certain situations.
Hell they made DMC4SE and accidentally removed a couple of glitches that people used in combo videos. Expect some of these mechanics to be naturally removed in DMC5 and then someone will complain about Capcom removing stuff when they weren't features to begin with.
DMC5 will have new crazy unintended mechanics.. .and it SHOULD have them. That's what gives these games longevity. But I want new mechanics, not just old ones rehashed.
Well balance really wasn't the subject of the discussion here. Vergil is both accessible and have a lot of depth so I was using him as an example for saying that you can have both at the same time. Otherwise, yeah Vergil is pretty broken when it comes to balance so they definitely need to work on that.
While complexity isn't necessarily a bad thing, over complexity certainly is and to be fair that's what we were talking about. As I've said before, there are many things in DMC4 Dante that are complex due to his style system being too strict. I think loosening him up a little by adding stuff like air combos, different pause combos, back to forward motion etc to his normal controls could make him more accessible. At the same time, adding those stuff to his normal controls should make room for more/newer stuff to be incorporated into styles and as a result add more depth to his character.
But balance is intrinsically tied to complexity and accessibility in the overall function of the character. You can't say that Vergil is a good example of being accessible with depth when so many things about him are completely broken. And I'm not just talking about power level, I'm talking about how he actually breaks the functional rules on number of aerial actions and a number of other things. One of the biggest issues that people have with over-accessibility is creating a character that isn't properly balanced within the game world. But he's just one example, so it doesn't really matter.
I think an "overly" complex character only becomes a problem when he's the only choice, and feels restricted without using his complex mechanics. And I still maintain that a portion of why Dante felt restricted was tied to the enemy design in DMC4. I'm not necessarily against any of the things that you're suggesting, but the movement of damning complexity in favor of gaining accessibility is a slippery slope that is rarely climbed to fit the needs of both sides in a satisfactory way.
That's true and honestly this is what the legacy of DMC is founded upon.
Even Dante juggling enemies mid air with guns in DMC1 was based off of a glitch in Onimusha. Enemy step "combos" were unintended in DMC1 but were made into a feature in DMC3.
So now we have even crazier stuff and the team has to make the game with those mechanics in mind. They will probably make stuff like Flying Guard look less jank if they decide to keep it in. They probably have to keep inertia too but they might tweak it to look less jank in certain situations.
Hell they made DMC4SE and accidentally removed a couple of glitches that people used in combo videos. Expect some of these mechanics to be naturally removed in DMC5 and then someone will complain about Capcom removing stuff when they weren't features to begin with.
I honestly don't see the point in removing the stuff. You have to be pretty good to pull those moves off anyway. The only players who are aware of those moves are the people in this thread and those who watch videos online and that's years after the game's original release.
If new crazier stuff is found in DMC5 which will likely happen, then people can either practice it until they can pull it off or just ignore it and do their own thing. But to continue to look at every new unintended mechanic as something that everyone should pull off is just unhealthy.
I honestly don't see the point in removing the stuff. You have to be pretty good to pull those moves off anyway. The only players who are aware of those moves are the people in this thread and those who watch videos online and that's years after the game's original release.
If new crazier stuff is found in DMC5 which will likely happen, then people can either practice it until they can pull it off or just ignore it and do their own thing. But to continue to look at every new unintended mechanic as something that everyone should pull off is just unhealthy.
I am not saying they should remove them, I am saying that they get removed just because of new systems and engines. Sometimes they get made into actual features of the game but don't always count on it.
Essentially what I am saying is that most people especially pros will have to relearn the game. Rewire the muscle memory and undo some old habits.
Hell Capcom has removed ACTUAL features going from DMC3 to DMC4 like OTG attacks (Wild Stomp and Free Ride), Crazy Combos and any type of wall run mechanic.
I am not saying they should remove them, I am saying that they get removed just because of new systems and engines. Sometimes they get made into actual features of the game but don't always count on it.
Essentially what I am saying is that most people especially pros will have to relearn the game. Rewire the muscle memory and undo some old habits.
Hell Capcom has removed ACTUAL features going from DMC3 to DMC4 like OTG attacks (Wild Stomp and Free Ride), Crazy Combos and any type of wall run mechanic.
Nah I know you didn't say they should remove it, I'm just pointing it out that it's pointless especially years after the original release. I was kinda upset when I couldn't use Royal Guard and Full House on Blitz like in the original lol.
I think an "overly" complex character only becomes a problem when he's the only choice, and feels restricted without using his complex mechanics. And I still maintain that a portion of why Dante felt restricted was tied to the enemy design in DMC4. I'm not necessarily against any of the things that you're suggesting, but the movement of damning complexity in favor of gaining accessibility is a slippery slope that is rarely climbed to fit the needs of both sides in a satisfactory way.
Well obviously it's not an easy task to create characters who are accessible, have depth and are balanced as well. But as I said, other games have managed to achieve this before and I'm confident that Itsuno and Co can pull this off as well.
Well obviously it's not an easy task to create characters who are accessible, have depth and are balanced as well. But as I said, other games have managed to achieve this before and I'm confident that Itsuno and Co can pull this off as well.
I'm just wary of what is being asked when people want 'accessibility', because it's often a short-sighted request that doesn't consider the ramifications or loss otherwise. None of the other examples you or others have listed touch anything close to DMC4 Dante in terms of depth, and it's no accident that this was in part due to his level of inherent complexity.
I've always subscribed to the idea that you should make basic functions natural, organic, intuitive, and fun because those are the things that every kind of player will need. Beyond that, it's not only acceptable but expected that you're going to have complexity beyond the grasp of a casual player, especially if you have a roster of characters available.
I've always subscribed to the idea that you should make basic functions natural, organic, intuitive, and fun because those are the things that every kind of player will need. Beyond that, it's not only acceptable but expected that you're going to have complexity beyond the grasp of a casual player, especially if you have a roster of characters available.
There is nothing natural, organic or intuitive about DMC4 Dante especially at the basic functionality level. Can't do aerial combos without switching to a style, can't dash without switching, can't parry without switching, need to swap twice to get to a particular weapon etc.
And honest that's exactly what people are asking here. That the basic stuff be easy to access but the top end be really top end.
Essentially, lower the skill floor but raise the skill ceiling.
I'm just wary of what is being asked when people want 'accessibility', because it's often a short-sighted request that doesn't consider the ramifications or loss otherwise. None of the other examples you or others have listed touch anything close to DMC4 Dante in terms of depth, and it's no accident that this was in part due to his level of inherent complexity.
I've always subscribed to the idea that you should make basic functions natural, organic, intuitive, and fun because those are the things that every kind of player will need. Beyond that, it's not only acceptable but expected that you're going to have complexity beyond the grasp of a casual player, especially if you have a roster of characters available.
I think many Bayonetta players would disagree with that sentiment but I'm not one of them so I agree.
Well, I did say that over complexity is my problem with Dante in DMC4. It's not that he is a complex character (let's be honest all DMC are complex to some degree) that bothers me, but some of the more basic stuff that I've in mentioned in my earlier posts (dodge, etc) just feel like they are needlessly complex. I have a problem with those sort of things. So when I say that Dante needs to more accessible that's what I'm referring to.
Actually now that we are talking about casual players again, I think all the boys in DMC4SE probably feel too complex to that crowd anyway. So as Dahbomb mentioned, when I speak of accessibility I have average DMC players in mind, who mostly range from okay to good but can't quite get to that amazing level. Like myself.
EDIT: And again yeah, I just saw Dah's post above and yes that's exactly what I'm talking about. Basic stuff like air combos, dodge, etc should be easy to access. The advanced techs that we see in crazy combos should remain high level. Actually seeing those stuff makes me more motivated to play better so that I can one day achieve that level of play. (which will probably never happen, but you gotta be optimistic right?)
There is nothing natural, organic or intuitive about DMC4 Dante especially at the basic functionality level. Can't do aerial combos without switching to a style, can't dash without switching, can't parry without switching, need to swap twice to get to a particular weapon etc.
And honest that's exactly what people are asking here. That the basic stuff be easy to access but the top end be really top end.
Essentially, lower the skill floor but raise the skill ceiling.
One could argue that from a basic level, Dante feels fine for casual players that will opt to stick with one style through the duration of their play through. And depending on how basic of a player we're talking about, that's suitable. Half of the players in DMC3 probably stuck with one style, and probably did the same in DMC4. There's a certain skill cost associated with having access to a dodge, parry, and aerial rave all at the same time. There's a cost for having access to 3 melee weapons at the same time.
That's not to say that they shouldn't try to incorporate and streamline certain actions, but I'm not necessarily convinced that styles should be neutered or removed in any way. If anything, they should be expanded upon so that sticking to one style doesn't feel limiting.
I think many Bayonetta players would disagree with that sentiment but I'm not one of them so I agree.
Well, I did say that over complexity is my problem with Dante in DMC4. It's not that he is a complex character (let's be honest all DMC are complex to some degree) that bothers me, but some of the more basic stuff that I've in mentioned in my earlier posts (dodge, etc) just feel like they are needlessly complex. I have a problem with those sort of things. So when I say that Dante needs to more accessible that's what I'm referring to.
Actually now that we are talking about casual players again, I think all the boys in DMC4SE probably feel too complex to that crowd anyway. So as Dahbomb mentioned, when I speak of accessibility I have average DMC players in mind, who mostly range from okay to good but can't quite get to that amazing level. Like myself.
EDIT: And again yeah, I just saw Dah's post above and yes that's exactly what I'm talking about. Basic stuff like air combos, dodge, etc should be easy to access. The advanced techs that we see in crazy combos should remain high level. Actually seeing those stuff makes me more motivated to play better so that I can one day achieve that level of play. (which will probably never happen, but you gotta be optimistic right?)
I'm personally not opposed to making certain functions extra-style accessible (the series has danced back and forth in making certain actions weapon-specific in the past. It wouldn't be unnatural for them to make certain style-specific techniques universal), but they should be doing so with the intent of freeing up options for more advanced functions.
I think that Dante should continue to feel like a swiss army knife. That's kind of the role and identity that he has assumed, and I don't want him to lose that.
Probably should start specifying casual versus enthusiast players in these discussions.
I think most people here on GAF are enthusiasts and certainly most every poster in this thread is an enthusiast. Enthusiasts follow news, media and community related information about the game. They play the games at least to completion, actually try to learn the game and try to progress to as high of a difficulty as possible. They also follow and enjoy watching high level plays.
Casual player wants A for awesome, presentation over substance, doesn't follow outside game media, community news or high level play. They don't care about beating the game past the first try if they can even be bothered to do that. They are probably going to buy DMC5 because it's the hit game to buy that week and then forget about it in a week when the next hit of the week comes along. These are also the people who think that new God of War game looks dope (shots fired but IDGAF).
I'm personally not opposed to making certain functions extra-style accessible (the series has danced back and forth in making certain actions weapon-specific in the past. It wouldn't be unnatural for them to make certain style-specific techniques universal), but they should be doing so with the intent of freeing up options for more advanced functions.
I think that Dante should continue to feel like a swiss army knife. That's kind of the role and identity that he has assumed, and I don't want him to lose that.
Oh adding new mechanics and moves that can be used in advanced plays in place of streamlined basic abilities, is a no-brainer imo. So I definitely agree with that.
Probably should start specifying casual versus enthusiast players in these discussions.
I think most people here on GAF are enthusiasts and certainly most every poster in this thread is an enthusiast. Enthusiasts follow news, media and community related information about the game. They play the games at least to completion, actually try to learn the game and try to progress to as high of a difficulty as possible. They also follow and enjoy watching high level plays.
Casual player wants A for awesome, presentation over substance, doesn't follow outside game media, community news or high level play. They don't care about beating the game past the first try if they can even be bothered to do that. They are probably going to buy DMC5 because it's the hit game to buy that week and then forget about it in a week when the next hit of the week comes along. These are also the people who think that new God of War game looks dope (shots fired but IDGAF).
I'll take a RPG inspired GoW over another GoW3 reskin any day of the week, thank you.
To be honest I'm pretty big on RPGs so my view is skewed when it comes to new GoW. But I feel like the combat system of God of War had already reached its full potential so it was time for something new.
The Xp system, aiming with the bow, the wide environments and positioning of the camera all were much closer to AAs and RPGs than traditional action games. That's why I'm excited to see more and know how deep the RPG inspiration goes.
I don't think we've seen enough of the combat to say if it would be bad or not for a RPG though. The position of the camera in particular didn't look too hot in the demo during combat so we have to see more.
The Xp system, aiming with the bow, the wide environments and positioning of the camera all were much closer to AAs and RPGs than traditional action games. That's why I'm excited to see more and know how deep its RPG inspired systems are.
I don't think we've seen enough of the combat to say if it's bad or not though. The position of the camera in particular didn't look good in the demo during combat so we have to see more.
Well, we've literally seen just one demo of it thus far so we need to wait and see more. But the xp system and how it mentions stuff like "Tracking" and "Archery" makes me believe that it'll be more in line with RPGs than AAs.
*I want DMC3 combat balance but with DMC4's inertia and style switch. Oh and expand Dark Slayer style too.
If they do that then that would be a really lazy DMC5. You are essentially setting the game up to fail if the rest of the game isn't top notch.
How are they even going to advertise the game if they don't have changes/additions they can even market?
Every single DMC game has been widely different from the previous one. New mechanics, new balancing, new gravity, new animations, new engine, new weapons, new moves etc. It was possible to market it as such and you got people excited for the new mechanics and game play additions.
i talk about their baseline should be those fundamental parts of what make dmc3/4 dante appealing when considering design goals and it's boiled down to "then play dmc3 with style switcher" like that's the gist of what i was saying? cmon man, i obviously can't imagine what their approach will be but at the very minimum i desire those things because i want the game to be a step forward while retaining the things that i love, not a step back for sake of 'accessibility'.
as for the argument of dpad vs. consolidation triangle we're ultimately just gonna have to agree to disagree here. i see a fundamental difference between dante's rebellion moveset and nero's RQ moveset in terms of their design that wildly changes how their weapons are. nero's air rave is definitely more streamlined but for the same purpose he has wildly different properties in terms of speed, hitbox and movement that would not work on rebellion's moves specifically because of the difference. RQ's moveset is consolidated into one button but it's not even close to the same as rebellion. this is what i mean when i say you're looking at things at too much of a macro level- there are very specific differences between nero's air rave/moveset and dante's air rave/moveset that exist due to the differences in what could be potentially inputted.
have you ever thought about why nero has such a slow swing or why he does small floaty bobs while he swings to float in place longer? it's because they anticipated that players would need extra time to input back/forward motions for his shit because it's all on one button instead of two. small shit like that are all mechanical considerations you have to make when making the claim that things wouldn't change too much or that it'd be inherently better rather than worse.
also as a stupid nitpick, you actually do have a few aerial input+dpad things as dante but it's not really designed that way because it's primarily for high level techniques that are kinda coincidentally there. it's something that requires practice and that definitely feels awkward but it's just another reason why that 'streamlining' shit wouldn't work with how dante is. guard flying and wavedashing are obvious examples of that kinda crap where you gotta hold a direction while also style switching and inputting something, haha. i'll say right now i still can't directional wavedash for shit and i seriously don't know how 2bepower does it for such long periods with a standard grip.
One could argue that from a basic level, Dante feels fine for casual players that will opt to stick with one style through the duration of their play through. And depending on how basic of a player we're talking about, that's suitable. Half of the players in DMC3 probably stuck with one style, and probably did the same in DMC4. There's a certain skill cost associated with having access to a dodge, parry, and aerial rave all at the same time. There's a cost for having access to 3 melee weapons at the same time.
That's not to say that they shouldn't try to incorporate and streamline certain actions, but I'm not necessarily convinced that styles should be neutered or removed in any way. If anything, they should be expanded upon so that sticking to one style doesn't feel limiting.
Hell they made DMC4SE and accidentally removed a couple of glitches that people used in combo videos. Expect some of these mechanics to be naturally removed in DMC5 and then someone will complain about Capcom removing stuff when they weren't features to begin with.
i'd honestly be pretty sad if they removed inertia because it is inherently an extremely cool mechanic but i'd imagine they'd keep it anyways as i recall itsuno during that web-interview/playthrough with gregaman at E3 specifically noting that intertia was a purposefully built mechanic, with guardflying just being a cool thing that happened because of the openness of the mechanic itself (which ties in with the base concept of dmc's moveset design seeking happy accidents/creativity)
i actually can't think of any other mechanic that would really fall under that category though because the glitch you're specifically talking about (lucifer glitch) is tied to a specific weapon and i don't think anyone really cares about distortion that much?
im serious as fuck about the jump height restriction thing though. i want shotgun surfing back! it is fucking fun
if by 0 frame summon swords you mean the dmc4 style ones where they immediately fire off superfast then i agree. it's weird how much cooler the 3 version is just because of that delay. it also makes blistering/shooty swords way cooler too, haha
a random thing i really want that's strictly aesthetic is if vergil's in 5 i want spiral swords to have the same summoning animation that they do in pxz2. the thing where they stack up and then fold out is ridiculously cool and i can't believe i'd never thought of that before.
see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFcHMzqf3OQ#t=37s
Can we just take a minute and appreciate how Lady is handled? She actually feels like Lady in DMC3. She wasn't playable in DMC3 but that's how I kind of imagined it.
Only thing I hate is her costume. Her Ex costume too. They should've put this costume from DMC3 in as Ex costume:
i talk about their baseline should be those fundamental parts of what make dmc3/4 dante appealing when considering design goals and it's boiled down to "then play dmc3 with style switcher" like that's the gist of what i was saying? cmon man, i obviously can't imagine what their approach will be but at the very minimum i desire those things because i want the game to be a step forward while retaining the things that i love, not a step back for sake of 'accessibility'.
What you are suggesting is them staying in the same spot. DMC4 mechanics with DMC3 balance is not them moving forward at all.
Which is probably fine for most DMC fans including myself especially if they nail the new weapons, bosses, level design, modes and presentation. But it's still not pushing the series further, it's just consolidating it to a comfort zone.
as for the argument of dpad vs. consolidation triangle we're ultimately just gonna have to agree to disagree here. i see a fundamental difference between dante's rebellion moveset and nero's RQ moveset in terms of their design that wildly changes how their weapons are. nero's air rave is definitely more streamlined but for the same purpose he has wildly different properties in terms of speed, hitbox and movement that would not work on rebellion's moves specifically because of the difference. RQ's moveset is consolidated into one button but it's not even close to the same as rebellion. this is what i mean when i say you're looking at things at too much of a macro level- there are very specific differences between nero's air rave/moveset and dante's air rave/moveset that exist due to the differences in what could be potentially inputted.
Nero has different speed and hitboxes on his Red Queen because he also has Rev versions of those attacks that are faster and have better hit boxes. They are there to differentiate the two. That's the main reason why it's different from Rebellion, not because one has to use aerial inputs and the other doesn't. That and you need the speed of the swings to time the Instant Revs. Without the Rev mechanic you don't have to worry about slowing down attack animation and making it more deliberate. Nero's sword swings also swing and flow better than Dante's and have more impact but that's more subjective and have less game play implications (but important nonetheless).
And looking at things from a macro level is more important at this stage simply because a crap ton of things at the micro level are going to change from game to game because that always happens. It's kinda pointless to worry about frames/hitboxes of individual moves when they are subject to change, sometimes drastically. It's better to focus on the overall picture and the philosophical ways that the game will be approached because then you can better predict what direction they will go with the game.
If and when DMC5 is announced and we start seeing stuff in action then we can start analyzing and extrapolating on the micro level and don't worry I will be front and center on that.
if by 0 frame summon swords you mean the dmc4 style ones where they immediately fire off superfast then i agree. it's weird how much cooler the 3 version is just because of that delay. it also makes blistering/shooty swords way cooler too, haha
It's terrible in both from a design perspective. The delay ultimately doesn't matter because you are still outputting free damage for no reason (and in some cases hit stun).
By 0 frame I mean you can be doing any other action and the move still comes out. It has 0 frame start up. Sure you can do cool stuff with it but if you care even slightly about a semblance of game design balance then it can't stay.
it's not just that though, it's using that as their base. springboard off that with whatever new mechanics they feel like but retain the soul of what makes the prior games appealing.
And looking at things from a macro level is more important at this stage simply because a crap ton of things at the micro level are going to change from game to game because that always happens. It's kinda pointless to worry about frames/hitboxes of individual moves when they are subject to change, sometimes drastically. It's better to focus on the overall picture and the philosophical ways that the game will be approached because then you can better predict what direction they will go with the game.
that's fair. i'm saying those macro-level changes will have some basis in prior micro-level stuff because those are like that for specific, logical reasons that most likely will carry over to match the macro changes and i happen to like and agree with how things are presently built.
and obviously rev is part of the consideration there but it's not the whole reasoning either- that's why i specifically mention the small bob as it's something that is insanely noticeable when you spend time with any other character's air rave vs. nero's.
the whole good part of design is making those micro things tie in together in a way that makes sense. it's why i focus on the micro part so much over the macro!
By 0 frame I mean you can be doing any other action and the move still comes out. It has 0 frame start up. Sure you can do cool stuff with it but if you care even slightly about a semblance of game design balance then it can't stay.
mmm...
yeah, i'd say so too but at the same time i also think that's why vergil is best relegated as a side character. i really enjoy the way he's designed in 3 with having a somewhat slow and limited moveset while also having swords being the ultimate freeform tool in the sense of having no commitment besides the delay on the sword shooting off/the delay on holding the button for formations.
i think the nero interpretation of that design is probably the most balanced it'll get as summon swords there are a function of DT and thus require resources alongside still having that delay in firing.
i also wanna see the dante interpretation of summon swords but mostly because i imagine it as dante actually grabbing the swords and just smashing them into enemies
Can we just take a minute and appreciate how Lady is handled? She actually feels like Lady in DMC3. She wasn't playable in DMC3 but that's how I kind of imagined it.
i just really wish she had air moves and smg moves, man. i wanna do the stupid spinny shooty thing she does in 3 alongside the zip shoot.
with inertia mechanics already in place could you imagine if she had an air grapple move (on enemies, maybe?) that swung her around shooting and built inertia?
since her moves already carry over inertia like crazy that kinda stuff would be fantastic
Can we just take a minute and appreciate how Lady is handled? She actually feels like Lady in DMC3. She wasn't playable in DMC3 but that's how I kind of imagined it.
Only thing I hate is her costume. Her Ex costume too. They should've put this costume from DMC3 in as Ex costume:
i really hope they will but also there's a massive challenge in designing everything else around that. not only from an enemy aspect but also a content aspect- if they exist as a bonus then its a lot of effort for a bonus but if theyre integrated into the campaign then hoo boy that is a nightmare to design
I swear the stuff Capcom does for RE I wished they did for DMC. Can you imagine DMC with a bunch of campaigns like RE6, but well done? Requires a huge budget so DMC5 will have to sell 60 billion copies to get that, but man that would be great.
If it were a thing that was ever put to a vote? My vote would definitely be multiple characters. Assuming that "Styles" are going to be a thing of the past, and we're just going to do more to build actual character movesets + tools, instead? Then I would be all the more for moving into the direction that I believe 4SE laid the ground work for.
Having "x number of unique characters to play as, each with their own playstyle!" would be a better bullet point that PR can use to help sell the game, on the same token.
More characters mean less options per character. That also means more generalized enemy/boss balancing and level designing.
I think I would be ok with two main characters in the story and then a few side characters as unlockables. I think more than 3 (unless you are aiming for some co-op system) main characters in the storyline is difficult to juggle and get right.
More characters mean less options per character. That also means more generalized enemy/boss balancing and level designing.
I think I would be ok with two main characters in the story and then a few side characters as unlockables. I think more than 3 (unless you are aiming for some co-op system) main characters in the storyline is difficult to juggle and get right.
I dunno about that, as long as the characters are fundamentally using the same basic mechanics. I'm fine with not all characters being as mechanically complex as each other, but I'd like to see Nero/Lady/Trish fleshed out a little further.
Also let's be real, Dante can clown on all of his in-game enemies anyway and so can every other character.
As for the big excellent discussion about the pros and cons of style switching: I'm generally in agreement with Seyavesh that DMC3 hitboxes/general strength of weapon and styles should come back, but in agreement without Dahbomb that air combos/dodging/gun charging need to be readily accessible at all times (and that double taps need to be optional instead of mandatory - if I want to only have two Devil Arms equipped instead of three, I should be allowed to do that).
HOWEVER: simply bringing back a DMC3-style bigger arsenal might fix the air combo issue (on which both sides bring excellent points), insofar as you could just have some swords that default to air combos and another that defaults to Helm Breaker. With the basic Rebellion aerial move set, you've got Helm Breaker, Aerial Rave, but also (via DMC4SE Vergil) the tantalizing prospect of aerial Stinger and of a rising aerial move; even with directional inputs in midair (which I think should be added, by the way, as well as directional inputs for guns), you'd still need to pick three out of those four.
Rhythm-based input could be a thing, I suppose (holding attack for Helm Breaker, tapping it for Aerial Rave) but that would introduce its own issues. There's no perfect way to do it all in one Devil Arm, which is why a bigger arsenal is the solution.
I wanna see Nero, Vergil and Dante in the next game so I'm hoping for these three to be playable. Though, I don't think they can build a fully realized campaign with 3 prominent playable characters so I wouldn't mind if one of them is there as an extra unlockable.
If the game has extra modes like Mission Mode and Bloody Palace then I guess they can give us the girls later on as DLC.
I wanna see Nero, Vergil and Dante in the next game so I'm hoping for these three to be playable. Though, I don't think they can build a fully realized campaign with 3 prominent playable characters so I wouldn't mind if one of them is there as an extra unlockable.
If the game has extra modes like Mission Mode and Bloody Palace then I guess they can give us the girls later on as DLC.
I think it's fine for Vergil to remain kinda broken as long as he's only unlocked postgame.
But I think the campaign structure of DMC4 (where given chapters force you to use specific characters, even on a replay) is a really bad idea and shouldn't happen again.
I don't have a problem with making it so you need to use Character X to beat Chapter Y the very first time (because cutscenes), but every subsequent playthrough of that chapter on an already-beaten difficulty level should let you use whatever character you damn well please.
One advantage of the shop-simulator mini-missions approach I evangelize about in this thread a lot is that you could actually have some character-specific subplots/sidequest missions without vastly increasing development costs, even if it's incredibly clear that e.g. Trish isn't one of the *main* characters of the game.
I think it's fine for Vergil to remain kinda broken as long as he's only unlocked postgame.
But I think the campaign structure of DMC4 (where given chapters force you to use specific characters, even on a replay) is a really bad idea and shouldn't happen again.
I don't have a problem with making it so you need to use Character X to beat Chapter Y the very first time (because cutscenes), but every subsequent playthrough of that chapter on an already-beaten difficulty level should let you use whatever character you damn well please.
One advantage of the shop-simulator mini-missions approach I evangelize about in this thread a lot is that you could actually have some character-specific subplots/sidequest missions without vastly increasing development costs, even if it's incredibly clear that e.g. Trish isn't one of the *main* characters of the game.
I think Yakuza 0's approach to the multiple campaign characters is a solid one. You play two meaty chapter with one character and then switch to other one. You do the same with new character then switch back to first character and so on and so forth.
Now this might not be possible with a 7-8 hours campaign, but I think they might be able to do something similar with DMC5 if they want to go with the multiple campaign route.
I agree with bolded part though. Also, I think your shop-simulator idea would be sound one for a new mode or maybe even DLC if they didn't incorporate it into the base game.
I think Yakuza 0's approach to the multiple campaign characters is a solid one. You play two meaty chapter with one character and then switch to other one. You do the same with new character then switch back to first character and so on and so forth.
Now this might not be possible with a 7-8 hours campaign, but I think they might be able to do something similar with DMC5 if they want to go with the multiple campaign route.
I agree with bolded part though. Also, I think your shop-simulator idea would be sound one for a new mode or maybe even DLC if they didn't incorporate it into the base game.
I still think it'd be a stronger vehicle for the main campaign, too. Sure it'd feel a little bit less serious, but a series of let's say 20 small-to-medium-sized utterly gorgeous arenas (and I'm thinking of geographically simple things with gorgeous production values, like the Father Balder fight from Bayonetta or Final Destination from Smash or basically any arena from a more competition-oriented fighting game) would be a much better use of level art/design budget than big laid-out places where you're still essentially just walking or shitty-platforming between arenas anyway, and if you could reuse those you'd get plenty of playtime out of them without it feeling like 'backtracking.' I'd honestly argue that DMC, as a series, has never really been helped much by its sense of geography (the only real exception I can think of is DMC3 M14, where you rapidly advance through like 70% of the remixed Temen-ni-gru in a single chapter, if I recall correctly) and has mainly been hurt by it (because of the bits where you retread your steps), and thus there's no real harm in doing away with it unless you really really like walking around and platforming.
I still think it'd be a stronger vehicle for the main campaign, too. Sure it'd feel a little bit less serious, but a series of let's say 20 small-to-medium-sized utterly gorgeous arenas (and I'm thinking of geographically simple things with gorgeous production values, like the Father Balder fight from Bayonetta or Final Destination from Smash or basically any arena from a more competition-oriented fighting game) would be a much better use of level art/design budget than big laid-out places where you're still essentially just walking or shitty-platforming between arenas anyway, and if you could reuse those you'd get plenty of playtime out of them without it feeling like 'backtracking.' I'd honestly argue that DMC, as a series, has never really been helped much by its sense of geography (the only real exception I can think of is DMC3 M14, where you rapidly advance through like 70% of the remixed Temen-ni-gru in a single chapter, if I recall correctly) and has mainly been hurt by it (because of the bits where you retread your steps), and thus there's no real harm in doing away with it unless you really really like walking around and platforming.
Idk man. I kinda like how the current structure makes you feel like you are actually traversing through a town/tower and not just fighting in few isolated arenas (even if that is what we are actually doing).
And speaking of platforming, I don't know if I've said this before but Rise of Tomb Raider actually proves that platforming can be fun. I know it's a different genre and all, but still for a game that its gameplay is a mainly focused on a shooting, its platforming being as much fun and varied as it is, was a very nice surprise.
the webm also shows a stupid way of getting up there if you somehow don't have high voltage or air hike but do have rolling thunder/lunar phase and the pandora forward+gun dartgun
Idk man. I kinda like how the current structure makes you feel like you are actually traversing through a town/tower and not just fighting in few isolated arenas (even if that is what we are actually doing).
And speaking of platforming, I don't know if I've said this before but Rise of Tomb Raider actually proves that platforming can be fun. I know it's a different genre and all, but still for a game that its gameplay is a mainly focused on a shooting, its platforming being as much fun and varied as it is, was a very nice surprise.
I do think the sense of a journey/geography is important to a lot of games and potentially to DMC and that it's hard to convey that if you're just teleporting to an arena. Pacing is also an important concern. But: I think DMC can work that out with different types of challenges *and* that for the most part it hasn't done those things very well. Obviously DMC4's extra-bad at that stuff and freshest in the memory, and DmC doesn't do a great job of it either (since for the most part chapters are bracketed with cutscenes that transport Dante to a totally new place by car or magical teleportation or whatever instead of starting him off in the same place where he ended his previous chapter), whereas DMC3 did a pretty passable job at it, and that's biasing my opinion somewhat.
As for what I mean about different types of challenges, I mean stuff like what we've seen in secret missions, more-unique challenges based on the nature of the arena (and here I'm thinking the mine cart in DMC3, the battle on those shattering glass panes in DmC, or the disappearing platforms in DMC4), the chapter of DMC3 where you're forced into DT but your health is draining the whole time, and so on, not to mention the use of boss battles as a pacing tool (which is much more effective than geography is, IMO). I can't really think of a portion of a DMC game that was genuinely made better by the presence of platforming or of obtaining a key/crystal/emblem/whatever and bringing it to the slot where you're supposed to put it.
I do think the sense of a journey/geography is important to a lot of games and potentially to DMC and that it's hard to convey that if you're just teleporting to an arena. Pacing is also an important concern. But: I think DMC can work that out with different types of challenges *and* that for the most part it hasn't done those things very well. Obviously DMC4's extra-bad at that stuff and freshest in the memory, and DmC doesn't do a great job of it either (since for the most part chapters are bracketed with cutscenes that transport Dante to a totally new place by car or magical teleportation or whatever instead of starting him off in the same place where he ended his previous chapter), whereas DMC3 did a pretty passable job at it, and that's biasing my opinion somewhat.
As for what I mean about different types of challenges, I mean stuff like what we've seen in secret missions, more-unique challenges based on the nature of the arena (and here I'm thinking the mine cart in DMC3, the battle on those shattering glass panes in DmC, or the disappearing platforms in DMC4), the chapter of DMC3 where you're forced into DT but your health is draining the whole time, and so on, not to mention the use of boss battles as a pacing tool (which is much more effective than geography is, IMO). I can't really think of a portion of a DMC game that was genuinely made better by the presence of platforming or of obtaining a key/crystal/emblem/whatever and bringing it to the slot where you're supposed to put it.
I see your point with DmC, but I felt both DMC3 and DMC4 (in some parts) did a fine job of making you feel like you are in a cohesive environment. DMC4 admittedly messed this up but it was still good in few parts, like from forest to Order's headquarters and then to Savior's alter or whatever it was called. They all felt connected.
Honestly I'm not completely oppose to what you are suggesting. I just fail to see how they can do separated arenas and still maintain the feeling that you are progressing through a connected world/environment. The only game that've played in the past that had sorta used this shop idea (which even had the challenges and stuff) was Killer is Dead and even there the levels were more of actual levels than arenas. And they still felt kinda disjointed.
I don't think it's possible to maintain that feeling with separated arenas, no. I just don't think that feeling is strictly necessary for DMC to work when the alternative of a drastically enhanced approach to the Bloody Palace/Bayonetta 2's Tag Climax missions might pay lots of dividends elsewhere (greater amount of playable content, lower development costs, easier expandability, sidequests, etc)
But also, if they *do* want to give a strong sense of geography/journey, then they need to abandon the chapters/missions and just give us a campaign world - and I think taking away the score attack part of the game would enhance the sense of journeying through the world, but it'd also badly hurt the core of what DMC is all about.
But also, if they *do* want to give a strong sense of geography/journey, then they need to abandon the chapters/missions and just give us a campaign world - and I think taking away the score attack part of the game would enhance the sense of journeying through the world, but it'd also badly hurt the core of what DMC is all about.
I feel like we've talked about this before. Someone mentioned a game (which I can't remember its name right now) that didn't have chapters and was fairly connected but still gave you an option to replay the encounters in the menu. I think that could work for DMC5 as well, if they do decide to approach it that way.
If I'm not mistaken, Rise of the Tomb Raider has this option as well and that game is a sandbox/OW.
