Reply to Raeng 2
>He's a professional game designer himself...
>Especially considering the 'related' part. Because that's what they are. The moves are related, serve similar functions, but have different detailing.
I have considered it could be a matter of different uses in different countries. But I have lived in 3 countries and generally speaking people use complex in the way I describe. It could still be different in countries where English is the official language (I have lived in Bulgaria, Spain and Germany). Ok. But yesterday precisely a friend from Scotland confirmed that he agrees with me.
No, it's not an appeal to authority just because his first language is English, unlike yours (or mine). I am explaining the whole reasoning and making observations.
As I said, the official definition is vague, so even trying to be as precise as possible, you could understand something different than what I understand from the official definition (even if I still maintain my stance on this because of all I have explained above).
But let's say it would irrefutably mean what you say. Again, DMC4's Dante move-set is composed by moves that have different and generally not superfluous functions related to the objective/core of the game.
>About the "meaningful" part, is this also not because you're too deep into the forest that you cannot see the trees? Every part of your discussion towards DMC4 is from being very deep into the personal challenge and meta, which is far beyond the original point of the title. As called out in the end, more depth and more complexity is there in any game when dived in deeper with personal challenges...
Each option in DMC has more roles to you in that personal challenge you seek, but for anyone just doing a regular SS DMD run, and playing the game 'as intended', that's not the case. The nuance of Stinger and Gunstinger isn't apparent (or even needed or present) and tech like inertia isn't required or even truly noticed until a player really sets that new **personal** benchmark for himself. Same regarding your statement concerning his 6 launcher to some regard.
He doesn't have the experience and level of mastery of other combo-makers, but he is doing well for this time and learning. Relatively new players already do their less advanced combo MADs or freestyle battles, and eventually they will catch up (unless they quit for whatever reason).
As I said, what's personal is how you use such mastery, but the mastery itself is universally useful for the core objectives of DMC in its main areas.
Additionally, higher mastery means a higher degree of freedom to express yourself. Like the analogy with the instrument. Which is why my example with the launchers is appropriate. And it's why learning inertial techs is important.
What melody you play is personal. The mastery you need to progressively improve isn't. That's why DMC tutorials exist, and that's why so many people are interested in them.
Appealing to the majority, understood as whoever bought/downloaded the game and opened it at least once, is obviously not very logical. Not when DMC4 is not precisely the most beginner-friendly game, lacks in-game info to properly instruct players about even something as simple as the different uses of Enemy Step, etc.
The majority maybe don't even understand why DMC doesn't have a dedicated dodge button, how jump has i-frames, why it has a lock-on system that you have to press all the time instead of just once (like in DS) or just an automatic lock-on... And the majority is probably right now hyped about Death Stranding or TLOU2.
Human beings psychobiologically tend to prefer quick and easy rewards than long-time and more complex ones. With proper stimulation and education this is different, but it's for now not the case of the majority.
This is why I take as sample people with a minimal potential, open minded and willing to learn and put at least some effort... Not just anybody who has ever opened a DMC4SE.exe file... And just in case it's not clear, this is also another factor as to why it's non-essential to talk about personal challenge. I reiterate that anybody who wants to be decent at freestyle or combo-making, has to learn things like the use of inertia. Additionally, they are definitely more than what you think (from what I have read from you).
>If the series hadn't had this little bar showing people "hey, don't be lame", we might indeed be facing high level play being the nightmare scenario shown in the article i.e. Holy Water and DRI abuse, or the current 'efficiency' seen in some DMC5 videos regarding Faust.
Because some get stuck in that reference instead of evolving. To the point they even brag about it like if it made them high level players per se. And maybe can't even JC ecstasy.
(I reply exclusively to this, without re-reading that part of the article, because obviously my time isn't infinite).
>That's what other games really lack.
> DMD
We had this discussion on Gamefaqs once before, and decided to do a DRI-only run on DMD with Dante. The game didn't stand a chance. As noted, efficient play is prevalent everywhere
>almost afraid to tarnish the title
>ones most tend to not see since they only heard stories or never dove in deep.
Your argument is wrong because what's personal is exactly how you use such mastery to express yourself, not the mastery itself. There are standards in the community and commonly understood objectives in the game.
Or implying I was defensive and triggered in your previous reply. We both know that you were referring to me subliminally, simply covered up speaking about people.
> Learning starraving, flying guard, ecstasy JC are not personal challenges, but some of the techs you should learn if you want to play at high level. Or even just at a decent one. And no, such techs are not just for combos.
That is absolutely wrong (see what I did there). Generally speaking none of those tactics are ever required, nor are some even developer intended. They are exactly what I consider to be part of that personal challenge as noted before. That thirst to improve in a goal set by a playerbase, not the game.
This so obvious, that it's clear the developers most likely kept inertia intentionally. Moreover, I had explained here how such techs influenced DMC5. Even if they messed up inertia in general. Which is possibly not even a decision from the developers themselves, but this is already speculation. The rest is evidence... Inertial Rainstorm, reversed backslide and how ecstasy works in 5 would be too much of a coincidence.
And don't forget that inertia or reversals weren't patched in SE. In essence, obviously developers do try to enhance freedom and didn't design this game with the main goal to simply kill stuff, but also how.
> God of War
It would probably not surprise you that I consider God of War to be a better action game overall than most DMC entries except DMC1 and 3.
>You didn't do Very Hard, and you certainly didn't do the equivalent of what you did for DMC i.e. high level play, which in God of War tends to be found through NUR and PAIN+ runs. Or in the case of GoWII, NUR General Kratos. You haven't toyed with the different juggle states as you did in DMC
Like this...
1) At no point I asked you for experience or precise knowledge about DMC because I value your arguments for themselves. Not for who you are or your exact experience. I don't even care (not belittling your achievements, but I really don't do it for the discussion itself) if you are considered, as you said, one of the best NG2 players or not. Like you shouldn't care about my reputation either.
2) In the very first 15 minutes of playing DMC3, which was my first DMC, I already knew the game is not merely about killing stuff. The game had a launcher and features that indicated in a pretty obvious way, even before unlocking all the moves, that it's a combo-friendly/style focused action game.
I didn't look at the style meter even from the beginning (at most to understand roughly its algorithms, but not as reference) and, as you can see, even a 25 % of people didn't do it from the beginning:
3) Do you really need to execute the previous combos to be able to see that the juggle properties in DMC4SE are more complex than anything you listed in GoW? Vergil has other nuances, but just to avoid falling like a sack of potatoes with Dante in DMC4SE you have to minimally understand how gravity and inertia work. Which you could see even spamming rave and with pretty simple experiments.
You don't need to know what's bullet magnetism to see how DMC as system is more complex than the most complex aspect of GoW.
And as I said, not even DMC is just about combos.
I don't need to play GoW on Very Hard to see why in its core it's much more simple for anything I could care about. At the very least currently or back then. I explained why it lacks options for structuring: the fewer variables you have to control and take into account, the more shallow is the design. Actually the concept of design is almost inexistent in the creative aspect. And as I said, if I were to play an action game because of its reactive aspect, I would rather play other games.
Optimization of damage can be interesting in an action game, but not when the core is way too simple for me to even care about the rest of the game. I don't need to play on Very Hard to see why a specific strategy of using grabs or magic isn't enough.
>Just don't make broad stroke conclusions like you're an authority on the game or genre as a whole. You're an authority on DMC(4), not God of War or action games as a whole.
This is hilarious, keeping in mind it's not me who is making an appeal to authority all the time.
>I doubt you'd be pleased by the opinions of a God of War veteran who notes "Yeah DMC is just combos, nothing to see there, I completed Normal but that's enough to see it's empty and for weeboos".
Yeah, because what I said is exactly on the level: Yeah DMC is just combos, nothing to see there, I completed Normal but that's enough to see it's empty and for weeboos.
You have an entire entry refuting this, but here is a small extract showing how disrespectful I was with GoW:
I don't need to test all the grabs and minor cancels on Super Mega Top Hard to know this, and why I am not interested. Not even to affirm that probably there isn't anything in GoW nearly as complex as the most complex aspects of DMC.
When I talk about cancels, I talk about something as meaningful as JC or cancels that exponentially increase the interactivity between elements.
I am also going to add that I have always been open minded to watch educational videos or high level videos of other games.
GoW's videos only re-affirmed all I have said and my impression about the game. Including yours.
How would you know... I could say the same...: How would you know if you don't replicate my combos? (Or do exactly what I want to accept your opinion...)... Nonsense. Obviously I don't need you to be a high level combo maker or freestyler to listen to your opinion about DMC and analyze it, counter argument, etc.
>If you want to be taken seriously as a player beyond DMC, that's my advice to you mostly. Be more openminded beyond just that one game you enjoy and respect that others can be as deep or complex or potato. Knack II can stand next to DMC5. You just have to be dedicated enough.
You start to sound exactly like the 2 guys who did those alt accounts to dislike my videos.
To be open-minded doesn't mean to play the games you like and I don't as you want me to play them, to even dare share my impressions about them, regardless of their consistency. Even when you asked me about them.
You don't need to be Usain Bolt to know that running 100 m isn't as complex as playing football. Yes, there are plenty of nuances in just running. A technique to merely start and optimize the acceleration, the position of arms and their movement, the inclination, and what not. But in football you need to be precise and accurate about many more variables.
You simply twist all this with the personal challenge that I already counter argumented endless times.
> lords of shadow seemed more polished
Emphasis on seemed haha. I wouldn't go into an action-gaming community with that sentence, you'll be butchered.
> top 5
I'm curious after all this talk, if you had to choose between 5 action games, which would you put in your top 5?
DMC4SE > DMC5CE, >> DMC3, >>>>>> NG2, > NG3RE.
ChaserTech, one of the best freestylers, enjoyed precisely Astral Chain.
Turtle Sensei, one of the best combo-makers, played deeply NUNS3 and other Naruto games and even did tutorials for them.
I do appreciate Ninja Gaiden, MGRR, Nioh and other games as well. Even if they are less interesting for me.
I understand what you try to do and, generally, I agree that people can be inclined to prejudge games. But it ends up being an artificial attempt to put games on the same level of potato/meaningful options/complexity, despite some being clearly inferior to others.
You can find nuances in backgamon, but chess is still clearly a more complex game.
You mentioned several times such nuances from other games, like if it was enough to bring them to the same level. But if we were to write an analysis of a fraction of high level freestyle, including explanations of techs, it would be pretty much about pages.
At some point one can get tired (and believe me, we get tired of DMC) and choose to play another game despite being less complex. Simply because the common objectives are different. I would rather focus on such approach to defend other games.
Even if DMC is more complex than NG, the latter offers things that DMC doesn't... And never will. There is no need to be the most complex one to be appreciated. As condescending as it sounds.
And as a final note: nobody has ever criticized DMC itself as much as we have (not just 5).
Other than that, if you reply again, I may read it, but I doubt I will answer. Unless I see something very drastic.
This takes too much of my time and it's obvious that it's getting more and more aggressive or irritating.
Despite all this, good luck with your magazine and projects.
I wouldn't mind this as additional info to reinforce your argument. But not as definitive argument or anything nearly close to it, as it would be an appeal to authority.
1) Game developers aren't precisely linguists.
2) I doubt quite a lot all game developers consider the concept of complex simply as the quantity of elements, regardless of the type of relation between them (interactions) and functions.
3) Even if they would, it would only mean that they use the terms in an inconsistent way compared to many people. (Not denying the meanings could be shifting).
From all the people with whom I have had minimally deep conversations that implied the concept of complexity, including all types of friends from the University (mathematicians and what not) ever since I was born, I have never ever met anybody that would consider equally complex a pile of car pieces put together in any away compared to a proper car where all the pieces are correctly connected and executing different and complementary functions to synergize.
I could give you many other examples:
- Whenever I have talked with people about a story (being a movie, book, etc.), and we mentioned how complex or simple it was, we never simply meant that it had more or fewer characters, pages, elements, etc. But we also (and actually mainly) referred to the type of relationship there was between them and the function of each character (etc.).
- When we say with sarcasm complex conversation when hearing, for example, superficial people talking about non transcendent topics and jumping from one to the other without any development, we (the people I have interacted with and I) definitely don't mean the quantity of topics regardless of their interactions.
- Excepting one person I read yesterday (and I am not quite sure how much he/she knows about chess), I have never ever seen someone saying that chess is not complex (with a minimal knowledge about it). And people definitely don't refer merely to the quantity of pieces and rules. But how intricate it gets when the pieces interact with each other, because of their function and roles in the game.
- When I have analyzed a type of move/technique in football with friends/people I have played with, and we have said X type of pass, control, etc., is more complex than another one... We precisely meant its function (and execution, which doesn't necessarily imply more moves). In this case it can just be 1 unit compared to another unit.
1) Game developers aren't precisely linguists.
2) I doubt quite a lot all game developers consider the concept of complex simply as the quantity of elements, regardless of the type of relation between them (interactions) and functions.
3) Even if they would, it would only mean that they use the terms in an inconsistent way compared to many people. (Not denying the meanings could be shifting).
From all the people with whom I have had minimally deep conversations that implied the concept of complexity, including all types of friends from the University (mathematicians and what not) ever since I was born, I have never ever met anybody that would consider equally complex a pile of car pieces put together in any away compared to a proper car where all the pieces are correctly connected and executing different and complementary functions to synergize.
I could give you many other examples:
- Whenever I have talked with people about a story (being a movie, book, etc.), and we mentioned how complex or simple it was, we never simply meant that it had more or fewer characters, pages, elements, etc. But we also (and actually mainly) referred to the type of relationship there was between them and the function of each character (etc.).
- When we say with sarcasm complex conversation when hearing, for example, superficial people talking about non transcendent topics and jumping from one to the other without any development, we (the people I have interacted with and I) definitely don't mean the quantity of topics regardless of their interactions.
- Excepting one person I read yesterday (and I am not quite sure how much he/she knows about chess), I have never ever seen someone saying that chess is not complex (with a minimal knowledge about it). And people definitely don't refer merely to the quantity of pieces and rules. But how intricate it gets when the pieces interact with each other, because of their function and roles in the game.
- When I have analyzed a type of move/technique in football with friends/people I have played with, and we have said X type of pass, control, etc., is more complex than another one... We precisely meant its function (and execution, which doesn't necessarily imply more moves). In this case it can just be 1 unit compared to another unit.
- When we say the brain is complex in psychology/psychobiology, we don't merely mean the quantity of neural circuits, neurons, lobes or any distinguishable part, regardless of their function. We also mean how they interact with each other to generate something as incredible as consciousness, for example.
Each neuron emits or doesn't action potential through its axones depending on the neurotransmitters released from other neurons and the contextual modulation (we could say it's a chemical processing, even if action potentials themselves are electric), thus it's able to integrate signals in a more complex way than a binary system, even if the AP itself is still binary.
What's truly unique is the quality of the design to makes us aware of ourselves and the environment to such levels. This chemical processing implies modulation: sensitization or inhibition in different ways to improve brain's neuroplasticity.
- Combos...
As example, Vergil's combos have evolved ever since DMC4SE was released. But in the beginning, the base was: many trick cancels, JCE cancels, rapid slash and trick down. People could use round trip and do several times rapid slash below the enemy while force edge kept it airborne. Later, however, trick cancels started being used in a much more subtle way, to either slow down the enemy's trajectory, or as cancels with special timings to keep Vergil on the ground/make him land depending on enemy's position. People integrated techs like end-dashing and rapid slash wasn't abused (generally). Techs based on his JdC glitches started being more frequently used, including the most demanding ones in terms of timings.
Reversed moves were also more regularly used than before, and not necessarily only long range moves like DT air Stinger and RS itself, but also upper slash 2 and rising high time. Or even normal air stinger, despite seeming meaningless superficially.
Combos weren't necessarily longer or with more moves, maybe some even shorter, but I think that the players I have interacted with would agree that they were more complex.
And there were more examples here.
Quantity is still related to complexity, of course: more quantity can potentially increase the complexity of a system. But not necessarily.
Each neuron emits or doesn't action potential through its axones depending on the neurotransmitters released from other neurons and the contextual modulation (we could say it's a chemical processing, even if action potentials themselves are electric), thus it's able to integrate signals in a more complex way than a binary system, even if the AP itself is still binary.
What's truly unique is the quality of the design to makes us aware of ourselves and the environment to such levels. This chemical processing implies modulation: sensitization or inhibition in different ways to improve brain's neuroplasticity.
- Combos...
As example, Vergil's combos have evolved ever since DMC4SE was released. But in the beginning, the base was: many trick cancels, JCE cancels, rapid slash and trick down. People could use round trip and do several times rapid slash below the enemy while force edge kept it airborne. Later, however, trick cancels started being used in a much more subtle way, to either slow down the enemy's trajectory, or as cancels with special timings to keep Vergil on the ground/make him land depending on enemy's position. People integrated techs like end-dashing and rapid slash wasn't abused (generally). Techs based on his JdC glitches started being more frequently used, including the most demanding ones in terms of timings.
Reversed moves were also more regularly used than before, and not necessarily only long range moves like DT air Stinger and RS itself, but also upper slash 2 and rising high time. Or even normal air stinger, despite seeming meaningless superficially.
Combos weren't necessarily longer or with more moves, maybe some even shorter, but I think that the players I have interacted with would agree that they were more complex.
And there were more examples here.
Quantity is still related to complexity, of course: more quantity can potentially increase the complexity of a system. But not necessarily.
>Especially considering the 'related' part. Because that's what they are. The moves are related, serve similar functions, but have different detailing.
Because of all I have been saying and the examples above, I consider related as connected and interacting in a concrete way. Not simply piled regardless of functions and interactions.
By that reasoning you could call 1 liter of water more complex than 1 glass of water. Being the same substance, with the same composition, molecules, etc. Currently I don't really know anybody who would agree on this.
Would you consider a bunch of domino pieces put together forming a simple line, even if they are 1 million, more complex than this one from this kid?
By that reasoning you could call 1 liter of water more complex than 1 glass of water. Being the same substance, with the same composition, molecules, etc. Currently I don't really know anybody who would agree on this.
Would you consider a bunch of domino pieces put together forming a simple line, even if they are 1 million, more complex than this one from this kid?
(You can skip to 0:27, more or less).
I chose this one not because of the title of the video, but because it has fewer pieces than the first videos of domino puzzles/rallies one easily finds.
I am pretty certain the most - if not all - the people I have interacted with would never say that a dumb 1 million pieces domino rally line is more complex than this one because it has more pieces with a similar function, even if this one is relatively simple compared to the Guinness ones and whatnot.
Same goes for complex numbers or complex words. While these are more specific examples, the components in a complex number have different roles: real part and imaginary part. Regarding complex words, we have morphemes and roots with clear different functions complementing each other. One could argue that compound words have 2 roots and are considered complex words (I think), but the function here is in the meaning of each root.
I chose this one not because of the title of the video, but because it has fewer pieces than the first videos of domino puzzles/rallies one easily finds.
I am pretty certain the most - if not all - the people I have interacted with would never say that a dumb 1 million pieces domino rally line is more complex than this one because it has more pieces with a similar function, even if this one is relatively simple compared to the Guinness ones and whatnot.
Same goes for complex numbers or complex words. While these are more specific examples, the components in a complex number have different roles: real part and imaginary part. Regarding complex words, we have morphemes and roots with clear different functions complementing each other. One could argue that compound words have 2 roots and are considered complex words (I think), but the function here is in the meaning of each root.
I have considered it could be a matter of different uses in different countries. But I have lived in 3 countries and generally speaking people use complex in the way I describe. It could still be different in countries where English is the official language (I have lived in Bulgaria, Spain and Germany). Ok. But yesterday precisely a friend from Scotland confirmed that he agrees with me.
No, it's not an appeal to authority just because his first language is English, unlike yours (or mine). I am explaining the whole reasoning and making observations.
As I said, the official definition is vague, so even trying to be as precise as possible, you could understand something different than what I understand from the official definition (even if I still maintain my stance on this because of all I have explained above).
But let's say it would irrefutably mean what you say. Again, DMC4's Dante move-set is composed by moves that have different and generally not superfluous functions related to the objective/core of the game.
Each option in DMC has more roles to you in that personal challenge you seek, but for anyone just doing a regular SS DMD run, and playing the game 'as intended', that's not the case. The nuance of Stinger and Gunstinger isn't apparent (or even needed or present) and tech like inertia isn't required or even truly noticed until a player really sets that new **personal** benchmark for himself. Same regarding your statement concerning his 6 launcher to some regard.
No.
You keep contradicting yourself.
I even repeated what's DMC about several times to establish a common ground, highlighting concepts like freedom, expression and creativity. Then you still said: preaching to the choir. I don't see why you're making these arguments if the exact same elements are noted in the piece.
I clarified once more in my last reply, and now you are back to the personal challenge: every part of your discussion towards DMC4 is from being very deep into the personal challenge and meta.
You either understand that DMC4's core is about expression, freedom and creativity, or you don't.You keep contradicting yourself.
I even repeated what's DMC about several times to establish a common ground, highlighting concepts like freedom, expression and creativity. Then you still said: preaching to the choir. I don't see why you're making these arguments if the exact same elements are noted in the piece.
I clarified once more in my last reply, and now you are back to the personal challenge: every part of your discussion towards DMC4 is from being very deep into the personal challenge and meta.
You can't be defending a stance where you imply what many players and I do is just a personal challenge with such connotation (like a nerd who doesn't get the main objective is much more simple), while at the same time implying you do understand the relevance of expression.
You can't be defending a stance where you say the main goal of DMC is just killing stuff (regardless of how) and at the same time claim that you already understand very well what I mean with freedom.
Not without convenient contradictions.
The main goal of developers wasn't to design so many moves just for you to spam stinger or cheese bosses with 1 pretty simple tech. It's the other way around. Most people want to do cool stuff (where each move is meaningful) when playing DMC, because that's what the game is about. And spamming a few moves or cheesing is what they do when they are still learning or have a concrete objective like speed running.
Not without convenient contradictions.
The main goal of developers wasn't to design so many moves just for you to spam stinger or cheese bosses with 1 pretty simple tech. It's the other way around. Most people want to do cool stuff (where each move is meaningful) when playing DMC, because that's what the game is about. And spamming a few moves or cheesing is what they do when they are still learning or have a concrete objective like speed running.
The Style Meter is there mainly as first reference when entering in contact with the series, but later most people who keep playing start ignoring it because they understand it's not sophisticated enough to dictate how well they have mastered the instrument to play a piece (combo, freestyle battle...).
As I said:
You can try to beat Dark Souls no-damage, with only one hand, upside down hanging from some rope. That doesn't make the game more complex or challenging regarding its core objectives/focus.
These games aren't equally deep (by your definition). There are common grounds, standards and core objectives. By your reasoning you could make a game consisting in just pressing 1 button whenever you want, but you could make it deep by establishing a sequence on your own with different rhythm.
You try to optimize its depth, but that doesn't change how simple (and idiotic) it is regarding its main objectives and compared to other games. I know you said to differing degrees, but this example still arguments why GoW and DMC aren't necessarily equally deep (again, your definition).
The mastery I explained in my previous reply isn't black or white. Many new players progressively decide what they want to focus on. Some focus on combos, others in freestyle or both.
Here is an example of a relatively new player who did his first combo MAD recently:
As I said:
You can try to beat Dark Souls no-damage, with only one hand, upside down hanging from some rope. That doesn't make the game more complex or challenging regarding its core objectives/focus.
These games aren't equally deep (by your definition). There are common grounds, standards and core objectives. By your reasoning you could make a game consisting in just pressing 1 button whenever you want, but you could make it deep by establishing a sequence on your own with different rhythm.
You try to optimize its depth, but that doesn't change how simple (and idiotic) it is regarding its main objectives and compared to other games. I know you said to differing degrees, but this example still arguments why GoW and DMC aren't necessarily equally deep (again, your definition).
The mastery I explained in my previous reply isn't black or white. Many new players progressively decide what they want to focus on. Some focus on combos, others in freestyle or both.
Here is an example of a relatively new player who did his first combo MAD recently:
He doesn't have the experience and level of mastery of other combo-makers, but he is doing well for this time and learning. Relatively new players already do their less advanced combo MADs or freestyle battles, and eventually they will catch up (unless they quit for whatever reason).
As I said, what's personal is how you use such mastery, but the mastery itself is universally useful for the core objectives of DMC in its main areas.
Additionally, higher mastery means a higher degree of freedom to express yourself. Like the analogy with the instrument. Which is why my example with the launchers is appropriate. And it's why learning inertial techs is important.
What melody you play is personal. The mastery you need to progressively improve isn't. That's why DMC tutorials exist, and that's why so many people are interested in them.
Appealing to the majority, understood as whoever bought/downloaded the game and opened it at least once, is obviously not very logical. Not when DMC4 is not precisely the most beginner-friendly game, lacks in-game info to properly instruct players about even something as simple as the different uses of Enemy Step, etc.
The majority maybe don't even understand why DMC doesn't have a dedicated dodge button, how jump has i-frames, why it has a lock-on system that you have to press all the time instead of just once (like in DS) or just an automatic lock-on... And the majority is probably right now hyped about Death Stranding or TLOU2.
Human beings psychobiologically tend to prefer quick and easy rewards than long-time and more complex ones. With proper stimulation and education this is different, but it's for now not the case of the majority.
This is why I take as sample people with a minimal potential, open minded and willing to learn and put at least some effort... Not just anybody who has ever opened a DMC4SE.exe file... And just in case it's not clear, this is also another factor as to why it's non-essential to talk about personal challenge. I reiterate that anybody who wants to be decent at freestyle or combo-making, has to learn things like the use of inertia. Additionally, they are definitely more than what you think (from what I have read from you).
As I said above, the Style Meter is merely a first reference. Later people tend to realize that its algorithms are too simple. Which doesn't imply at all that they would have never realized about this if the Style Meter never existed.
Moreover, some didn't even look at it seriously ever since they started (like me).
Implying that DMC would have not evolved as much as it has without the Style Meter is ridiculous. At most you can say that it makes players realize faster what's the game about, and we could still argue if its presence is actually even negative.
Because some get stuck in that reference instead of evolving. To the point they even brag about it like if it made them high level players per se. And maybe can't even JC ecstasy.
(I reply exclusively to this, without re-reading that part of the article, because obviously my time isn't infinite).
>That's what other games really lack.
A Style Meter in a game where its complexity is lacking or inferior, the algorithms would also be more simple. A Style Meter or features that don't really impact on the mechanics of the game... don't make it more complex or deeper. It's like the example with the one button game. Simply less extreme.
> DMD
We had this discussion on Gamefaqs once before, and decided to do a DRI-only run on DMD with Dante. The game didn't stand a chance. As noted, efficient play is prevalent everywhere
We can say that, no matter how creative you are, at some point you have to kill the enemies to progress (even though you can still freestyle with enemies with infinite health/in the void). Yet this still doesn't imply it's the main goal of DMC.
As for DMD, in that parenthesis I implied those moves would still have a role in the department of efficiency. Even if not as impacting as in expression. I didn't say it's impossible, as it's not impossible to beat other games with self-imposed limitations. (And I doubt you have beaten the entire DMD just using distortion and nothing else).
> Ninja Gaiden
One thing that's always interesting to me, a lot of DMC players (and also those of other fanbases) respect Ninja Gaiden, but they tend to not be able to really say why
As for DMD, in that parenthesis I implied those moves would still have a role in the department of efficiency. Even if not as impacting as in expression. I didn't say it's impossible, as it's not impossible to beat other games with self-imposed limitations. (And I doubt you have beaten the entire DMD just using distortion and nothing else).
> Ninja Gaiden
One thing that's always interesting to me, a lot of DMC players (and also those of other fanbases) respect Ninja Gaiden, but they tend to not be able to really say why
Here I laughed. This is what I said: I could talk about what I dislike, or why I don't play it nearly as much as DMC, but it's not relevant for this point.
As I said above, my time isn't infinite.
I don't like Ninja Gaiden enough to play it instead of DMC because even despite the more complex AI and rewarding quick adaptation, the game is still too monotonous (and simple) for me.
Even if the lack of weapon switch on the fly, poor aerial move-set, etc., are to keep the player restricted, I still don't like its simplicity in the creative department.
I don't like either the lack of cancels. I am aware and have used shuriken cancel or OT kicks -> shuriken. Also cicada surge from Razor's Edge (a mechanic I did like quite a lot).
Even if the lack of weapon switch on the fly, poor aerial move-set, etc., are to keep the player restricted, I still don't like its simplicity in the creative department.
I don't like either the lack of cancels. I am aware and have used shuriken cancel or OT kicks -> shuriken. Also cicada surge from Razor's Edge (a mechanic I did like quite a lot).
The system is still lacking in the departments I am interested in. And I definitely don't like how the move-set is organized, which is actually contradictory to the objective of the game. You are restricted, yet there are long strings that you would almost never use in crucial situations. Let alone how superfluous are many of them (ironically).
I love its fluidity and the movement, but it's not enough.
I love its fluidity and the movement, but it's not enough.
Not really. 😉
>ones most tend to not see since they only heard stories or never dove in deep.
Don't worry, I can think for myself...
Even if I heard stories, I would analyze the arguments in them and make my conclusions. Even if temporary.
>Coming from your talk, I have the feeling you played Ninja Gaiden about as much as you've played God of War.
And coming from all I have read from you, I don't think you have much experience in high level combo-making or freestyle in DMC4/SE. Yet I didn't need to mention it a single time to counter-argument anything. Not only to not turn this discussion in a Yamato contest, but because what mainly matters is the consistency of arguments independently from their author. Experience can be extremely necessary for specific topics. Like knowing how strict is the timing of a tech, or the exact timing to parry this or that. But not for the discussion of these systems.
Obviously I have invested much more time in Ninja Gaiden than in GoW because I did at least minimally like it in certain aspects.
For what I have argumented above regarding Ninja Gaiden, it's next to irrelevant if I have touched NGB Master Ninja or not. I only have PS3 and 4, so I played the Sigma versions.
Why is it irrelevant? Because the things that NG fails to provide for me are in its core.
> your argument is wrong
To you. You may be shaking your head at some of my comments, I am doing my best to stay polite in return while doing the same.
Even if I heard stories, I would analyze the arguments in them and make my conclusions. Even if temporary.
>Coming from your talk, I have the feeling you played Ninja Gaiden about as much as you've played God of War.
And coming from all I have read from you, I don't think you have much experience in high level combo-making or freestyle in DMC4/SE. Yet I didn't need to mention it a single time to counter-argument anything. Not only to not turn this discussion in a Yamato contest, but because what mainly matters is the consistency of arguments independently from their author. Experience can be extremely necessary for specific topics. Like knowing how strict is the timing of a tech, or the exact timing to parry this or that. But not for the discussion of these systems.
Obviously I have invested much more time in Ninja Gaiden than in GoW because I did at least minimally like it in certain aspects.
For what I have argumented above regarding Ninja Gaiden, it's next to irrelevant if I have touched NGB Master Ninja or not. I only have PS3 and 4, so I played the Sigma versions.
Why is it irrelevant? Because the things that NG fails to provide for me are in its core.
> your argument is wrong
To you. You may be shaking your head at some of my comments, I am doing my best to stay polite in return while doing the same.
This is what I said. Re-explained here again. When I have to explain something too many times while seeing how the counter part ignores it, the situation progressively drains my patience. Saying your argument is wrong because... is a bit raw, but definitely nothing out of this world, keeping in mind the because and what follows.
And definitely not compared to the condescending tone I had to tolerate without reacting proportionally, or the way you constantly make assumptions in the line of the mentioned: DMC players... tend to not be able to really say why...
And definitely not compared to the condescending tone I had to tolerate without reacting proportionally, or the way you constantly make assumptions in the line of the mentioned: DMC players... tend to not be able to really say why...
Or implying I was defensive and triggered in your previous reply. We both know that you were referring to me subliminally, simply covered up speaking about people.
Which obviously implies a generalization and more than obvious prejudices. Trying to observe tendencies in social groups and analyze them actively is something I constantly do. These, however, are clear attempts of simplifying the concrete arguments I say. They are actually light ad-hominems (and not the only ones you use).
I can tell you already that not a single high level player remains in the forums you mentioned, like gamefaqs or reddit. I was one of the few and don't step there since long ago. I am not even going to explain why, but in these forums people can be more interested in shallow lore topics and discussions or memes.
I can tell you already that not a single high level player remains in the forums you mentioned, like gamefaqs or reddit. I was one of the few and don't step there since long ago. I am not even going to explain why, but in these forums people can be more interested in shallow lore topics and discussions or memes.
There isn't a representative sample in any of them of people who actually care about the games mechanically.
Regarding the to you, I will simply repeat a sentence I use when people use such clichés:
We know already what I share is my
personal perspective, yours is yours, and my cat's perspective would
be my cat's perspective if I had a cat and my cat could have a
perspective about DMC4SE. Such defensive clichés don't bring up
anything positive to the discussion/debate, like "it's just your
opinion", etc.
It's about the consistency of our perspective and the evidence we can bring up to support it.
If you still want to appeal to subjectivity, I will simply link this.
> Learning starraving, flying guard, ecstasy JC are not personal challenges, but some of the techs you should learn if you want to play at high level. Or even just at a decent one. And no, such techs are not just for combos.
That is absolutely wrong (see what I did there). Generally speaking none of those tactics are ever required, nor are some even developer intended. They are exactly what I consider to be part of that personal challenge as noted before. That thirst to improve in a goal set by a playerbase, not the game.
Yeah, I saw it. You used passive-aggressively you are wrong with a condescending tone, like if you were being educational (yet ironically we are defensive), when in reality I wasn't even rude to you when I used it.
Not going to comment much on this because it has been debunked several times.
Again, you say you know the objective of DMC and then you act like you don't.
These techs are essential precisely for DMC's objective. Not for the equivalence of the guy beating DS with one hand upside down. And in DMC5 they are actually very lenient.
About the developers, even if they didn't intentionally create inertial techs, they definitely left them intentionally. Which is why we were disappointed when we realized JC in 5 stopped momentum.
Flying Guard isn't an obvious inertial tech for developers, and probably they didn't know about it. But something like Nero's charged shot -> Aerial Red Queen combo is way too obvious to miss it. There is no JC or anything minimally complex in it.
Same goes for this:
Not going to comment much on this because it has been debunked several times.
Again, you say you know the objective of DMC and then you act like you don't.
These techs are essential precisely for DMC's objective. Not for the equivalence of the guy beating DS with one hand upside down. And in DMC5 they are actually very lenient.
About the developers, even if they didn't intentionally create inertial techs, they definitely left them intentionally. Which is why we were disappointed when we realized JC in 5 stopped momentum.
Flying Guard isn't an obvious inertial tech for developers, and probably they didn't know about it. But something like Nero's charged shot -> Aerial Red Queen combo is way too obvious to miss it. There is no JC or anything minimally complex in it.
Same goes for this:
There is no JC here. Being in the air -> some attack -> sky star -> a move that can be executed with inertia. Very simple. And no, it's not exclusive to DT.
This so obvious, that it's clear the developers most likely kept inertia intentionally. Moreover, I had explained here how such techs influenced DMC5. Even if they messed up inertia in general. Which is possibly not even a decision from the developers themselves, but this is already speculation. The rest is evidence... Inertial Rainstorm, reversed backslide and how ecstasy works in 5 would be too much of a coincidence.
And don't forget that inertia or reversals weren't patched in SE. In essence, obviously developers do try to enhance freedom and didn't design this game with the main goal to simply kill stuff, but also how.
> God of War
It would probably not surprise you that I consider God of War to be a better action game overall than most DMC entries except DMC1 and 3.
No, but I definitely don't shake my head because of this per se. In any case I do it because of other things.
Like this...
1) At no point I asked you for experience or precise knowledge about DMC because I value your arguments for themselves. Not for who you are or your exact experience. I don't even care (not belittling your achievements, but I really don't do it for the discussion itself) if you are considered, as you said, one of the best NG2 players or not. Like you shouldn't care about my reputation either.
2) In the very first 15 minutes of playing DMC3, which was my first DMC, I already knew the game is not merely about killing stuff. The game had a launcher and features that indicated in a pretty obvious way, even before unlocking all the moves, that it's a combo-friendly/style focused action game.
I didn't look at the style meter even from the beginning (at most to understand roughly its algorithms, but not as reference) and, as you can see, even a 25 % of people didn't do it from the beginning:
The most of my arguments would be similar, and the reason why I prefer DMC over other action games. Of course I didn't know how meaningful each move was in the first 15 minutes, but this knowledge didn't instantly pop up after years. It was progressively build and one doesn't need to do this:
To understand why high time and prop shredder are both meaningful and both complement each other.
3) Do you really need to execute the previous combos to be able to see that the juggle properties in DMC4SE are more complex than anything you listed in GoW? Vergil has other nuances, but just to avoid falling like a sack of potatoes with Dante in DMC4SE you have to minimally understand how gravity and inertia work. Which you could see even spamming rave and with pretty simple experiments.
You don't need to know what's bullet magnetism to see how DMC as system is more complex than the most complex aspect of GoW.
And as I said, not even DMC is just about combos.
I don't need to play GoW on Very Hard to see why in its core it's much more simple for anything I could care about. At the very least currently or back then. I explained why it lacks options for structuring: the fewer variables you have to control and take into account, the more shallow is the design. Actually the concept of design is almost inexistent in the creative aspect. And as I said, if I were to play an action game because of its reactive aspect, I would rather play other games.
Optimization of damage can be interesting in an action game, but not when the core is way too simple for me to even care about the rest of the game. I don't need to play on Very Hard to see why a specific strategy of using grabs or magic isn't enough.
>And I think that's really the crux of it, you never gave it a shot. This is something I see a lot from players
Again generalizing and being condescending. I explained above why I did give it a shot. The aspects you mention aren't interesting for me.
>You haven't even dived into them as deep as I have gone into DMC, which is honestly quite a shame since there's much flavor to be found in playing something completely different.
Again generalizing and being condescending. I explained above why I did give it a shot. The aspects you mention aren't interesting for me.
>You haven't even dived into them as deep as I have gone into DMC, which is honestly quite a shame since there's much flavor to be found in playing something completely different.
This is an assumption. And it's not the same to dive into the ocean as to dive into a swimming pool or a river. Even if you indeed have more experience and knowledge in DMC compared to my knowledge in the games you like, the arguments regarding the systems still speak for themselves. As I said, experience is crucial for something as practical as being able to understand why a tech is as hard as it is, concrete timings or variables that would be really hard to simply put into words.
But generally we talk about the complexity of the systems and the aspects we care about. GoW's mechanics are just simpler.
But generally we talk about the complexity of the systems and the aspects we care about. GoW's mechanics are just simpler.
>You can become a high level player in more than one game. I'm proud in a geeky way that I'm considered the best in a few titles (Vanquish, TEW2, MGRR, perhaps NGII (I disagree on that one, but I've heard it said), but generally I aim for at least recognition
I don't care about my reputation even in DMC, only if something false is spread about me.
Look carefully the title and the dislikes ratio:
I don't care about my reputation even in DMC, only if something false is spread about me.
Look carefully the title and the dislikes ratio:
The dislikes are from precisely 2 dummies that we even memed because of statements as stupid as:
LoL a combo is just 10 seconds.
LoL a combo is just 10 seconds.
Without grasping the complexity and demanding execution in just these 10 seconds and implying some MGRR run has more merit because it takes longer...
And yes, I played MGRR on every difficulty and I have Gold Ranked all the VR missions, which is more than enough to know how complex the S run is compared to a high level DMC4SE combo.
And yes, I played MGRR on every difficulty and I have Gold Ranked all the VR missions, which is more than enough to know how complex the S run is compared to a high level DMC4SE combo.
I ridiculed their arguments and at some point they did a bunch of alt accounts to make this (there are even screenshots where they admit it). Do you think I really care? I care in the sense that it may affect YT algorithms in terms of suggestions and someone who could have learned at least something from my videos, will have a lower chance to even watch them. But I can't care less what people may think because of them.
(Yes, I did like my own video however, because that's one more account they had to make to compensate the likes... even if it's a bot).
I am not polished editing my videos either. Pretty straight forward. And definitely don't put MAD since long ago in anything.
Reputation per se is like the last thing that would motivate me to play any game. People who appreciate what I do in the game, who have supported me, who have complimented me... This is not irrelevant. I enjoy it. I made friends and met people whom I appreciate a lot. People who inspired me and people who have been inspired by me.
But I don't play for this. It's a bonus, an incentive. And I could have easily kept playing DMC5, which is obviously more mainstream.
(Yes, I did like my own video however, because that's one more account they had to make to compensate the likes... even if it's a bot).
I am not polished editing my videos either. Pretty straight forward. And definitely don't put MAD since long ago in anything.
Reputation per se is like the last thing that would motivate me to play any game. People who appreciate what I do in the game, who have supported me, who have complimented me... This is not irrelevant. I enjoy it. I made friends and met people whom I appreciate a lot. People who inspired me and people who have been inspired by me.
But I don't play for this. It's a bonus, an incentive. And I could have easily kept playing DMC5, which is obviously more mainstream.
>Just don't make broad stroke conclusions like you're an authority on the game or genre as a whole. You're an authority on DMC(4), not God of War or action games as a whole.
This is hilarious, keeping in mind it's not me who is making an appeal to authority all the time.
>I doubt you'd be pleased by the opinions of a God of War veteran who notes "Yeah DMC is just combos, nothing to see there, I completed Normal but that's enough to see it's empty and for weeboos".
Yeah, because what I said is exactly on the level: Yeah DMC is just combos, nothing to see there, I completed Normal but that's enough to see it's empty and for weeboos.
You have an entire entry refuting this, but here is a small extract showing how disrespectful I was with GoW:
It's really not even about the square, square, triangle combo or calling it button masher. I have no doubt there is probably some challenge in higher difficulties and one has to adapt in a more sophisticated way than spamming the same ground combo and dodging.
>So I can understand you don't like God of War, but that doesn't mean you can make broad assumptions like "its clunky" or note the lack of advanced tactics like cancels, which God of War has in spades, you just never found them. Same with "GoW isn't nearly as complex in any aspect compared to the most complex aspects of DMC", how would you know? You never played it on equal terms and investments.
Laughing again.
Watching animations and interpreting them is not something that requires assumptions. The animations aren't nearly as polished, precise or meaningful as DMCs or other AGs, the type of attacks are AoE focused, the demand for precision is almost inexistent.
>So I can understand you don't like God of War, but that doesn't mean you can make broad assumptions like "its clunky" or note the lack of advanced tactics like cancels, which God of War has in spades, you just never found them. Same with "GoW isn't nearly as complex in any aspect compared to the most complex aspects of DMC", how would you know? You never played it on equal terms and investments.
Laughing again.
Watching animations and interpreting them is not something that requires assumptions. The animations aren't nearly as polished, precise or meaningful as DMCs or other AGs, the type of attacks are AoE focused, the demand for precision is almost inexistent.
I don't need to test all the grabs and minor cancels on Super Mega Top Hard to know this, and why I am not interested. Not even to affirm that probably there isn't anything in GoW nearly as complex as the most complex aspects of DMC.
When I talk about cancels, I talk about something as meaningful as JC or cancels that exponentially increase the interactivity between elements.
I am also going to add that I have always been open minded to watch educational videos or high level videos of other games.
GoW's videos only re-affirmed all I have said and my impression about the game. Including yours.
How would you know... I could say the same...: How would you know if you don't replicate my combos? (Or do exactly what I want to accept your opinion...)... Nonsense. Obviously I don't need you to be a high level combo maker or freestyler to listen to your opinion about DMC and analyze it, counter argument, etc.
>If you want to be taken seriously as a player beyond DMC, that's my advice to you mostly. Be more openminded beyond just that one game you enjoy and respect that others can be as deep or complex or potato. Knack II can stand next to DMC5. You just have to be dedicated enough.
You start to sound exactly like the 2 guys who did those alt accounts to dislike my videos.
To be open-minded doesn't mean to play the games you like and I don't as you want me to play them, to even dare share my impressions about them, regardless of their consistency. Even when you asked me about them.
You don't need to be Usain Bolt to know that running 100 m isn't as complex as playing football. Yes, there are plenty of nuances in just running. A technique to merely start and optimize the acceleration, the position of arms and their movement, the inclination, and what not. But in football you need to be precise and accurate about many more variables.
You simply twist all this with the personal challenge that I already counter argumented endless times.
>But yeah, "play smarter, not harder". That's the appeal of God of War that you can find when diving into the title through a personal challenge, just as you've found more to be had in your own beloved games because yes, that's what it is: a personal challenge, you'll never convince me otherwise.
...
> lords of shadow seemed more polished
Emphasis on seemed haha. I wouldn't go into an action-gaming community with that sentence, you'll be butchered.
Good thing I don't go to other communities to say what anything seemed to me years ago unless someone asks me. And yes, it was related to your question regarding GoW.
I wonder if you noticed how many times I said seems like or feels like in all my arguments...
Lord of Shadows 1 and 2 themselves, despite having a GoWish system, seemed more polished than GoW for me (I say seemed because, to be fair, I played these games really long ago).
I wonder if you noticed how many times I said seems like or feels like in all my arguments...
Lord of Shadows 1 and 2 themselves, despite having a GoWish system, seemed more polished than GoW for me (I say seemed because, to be fair, I played these games really long ago).
> top 5
I'm curious after all this talk, if you had to choose between 5 action games, which would you put in your top 5?
DMC4SE > DMC5CE, >> DMC3, >>>>>> NG2, > NG3RE.
Next one would be MGRR.
But as you see, the preference for the first 2 is great.
>As a final note, I'll give the article a little read again sometime this week and see if I can tweak some of its elements based on our discussion where I find it necessary. You've made good points. I don't agree with all, but there's good notes. Cheers!
I am going to write a general conclusion because this is most probably my last reply:
But as you see, the preference for the first 2 is great.
>As a final note, I'll give the article a little read again sometime this week and see if I can tweak some of its elements based on our discussion where I find it necessary. You've made good points. I don't agree with all, but there's good notes. Cheers!
I am going to write a general conclusion because this is most probably my last reply:
I liked your article back then when I read it. I considered it wrong in some aspects or inaccurate, but I liked your intentions. I don't need to consider something totally right to appreciate it; in this case as a good attempt to operationalize variables in Action Games. I also saw how much work you put in it.
Currently, however, I am sorry to say that after seeing your attitude and patterns, condescending tone, appeal to authority, etc., my personal impression (and don't take this as argument ad-hominem, because the proper arguments are above and this is additional) is that you tried to tweak definitions in a way that fits your real objective: (try to) bring other action games to DMC's depth (your definition).
No matter what.
Currently, however, I am sorry to say that after seeing your attitude and patterns, condescending tone, appeal to authority, etc., my personal impression (and don't take this as argument ad-hominem, because the proper arguments are above and this is additional) is that you tried to tweak definitions in a way that fits your real objective: (try to) bring other action games to DMC's depth (your definition).
No matter what.
This is especially noticeable with your insistence in personal challenge, even if it brings you to the obvious contradiction of: I know DMC is about creativity/But learning tech is a personal challenge. Let alone with the you will never convince me otherwise.
As you have seen, I never mentioned Bayo. Because it's a game I haven't even touched (yet). And yes, I have heard plenty of opinions, that I could have easily regurgitated.
When I say something, I don't do it out of nowhere. I may lack knowledge about certain nuances in GoW or NG, but I know such nuances don't affect my overall observations of their systems. For example, you say GoW isn't about weapons. Ok... Variations of grabs don't compensate the lack of interesting elements I care about. And I will insist that, despite the elements you mentioned, GoW is still not as complex as the most complex areas of DMC in any aspect.
Clunky is something related to the animations, their recoveries, their pace, the points they can be cancelled, the visual feedback when you hit the hitbox of another enemy, etc., etc. I don't need to know perfectly GoW's grabs to tell you that it's more clunky than the games I listed. Like you don't need to perfectly know how lucifer glitches work, the best set-ups to apply them, to see, for example, that Style Switching enhances the interactivity of Dante's move-set.
I still consider even DMC5 clunky... Imagine.
As anecdote: yesterday a friend of mine who has played NG a lot (highest difficulties, all NGs, challenge runs like no UTs, etc.) precisely said without even asking him that there isn't anything in NG as complex as DMC4 Dante. And yes, he did try to play DMC4 at high level like 1 - 2 years ago. He even did again a joke about having nightmares with ecstasy JC...
No, it's not that hard and it depends on the position or set-ups more than raw speed. But imagine... Ecstasy JC is what would just be a small step in decent (not even high-level) freestyle or combos. Not only as system... DMC is also much more complex in terms of execution.
We would have to go to Fighting Games to actually find such levels of complexity, even though very differently focused.
The DMC players I know do like other games. They are just not their preference.
This is Millz, a high level combo-maker and freestyler in DMC5CE. MGRR is a game he likes a lot, to the point he did an advanced tutorial for it:
As you have seen, I never mentioned Bayo. Because it's a game I haven't even touched (yet). And yes, I have heard plenty of opinions, that I could have easily regurgitated.
When I say something, I don't do it out of nowhere. I may lack knowledge about certain nuances in GoW or NG, but I know such nuances don't affect my overall observations of their systems. For example, you say GoW isn't about weapons. Ok... Variations of grabs don't compensate the lack of interesting elements I care about. And I will insist that, despite the elements you mentioned, GoW is still not as complex as the most complex areas of DMC in any aspect.
Clunky is something related to the animations, their recoveries, their pace, the points they can be cancelled, the visual feedback when you hit the hitbox of another enemy, etc., etc. I don't need to know perfectly GoW's grabs to tell you that it's more clunky than the games I listed. Like you don't need to perfectly know how lucifer glitches work, the best set-ups to apply them, to see, for example, that Style Switching enhances the interactivity of Dante's move-set.
I still consider even DMC5 clunky... Imagine.
As anecdote: yesterday a friend of mine who has played NG a lot (highest difficulties, all NGs, challenge runs like no UTs, etc.) precisely said without even asking him that there isn't anything in NG as complex as DMC4 Dante. And yes, he did try to play DMC4 at high level like 1 - 2 years ago. He even did again a joke about having nightmares with ecstasy JC...
No, it's not that hard and it depends on the position or set-ups more than raw speed. But imagine... Ecstasy JC is what would just be a small step in decent (not even high-level) freestyle or combos. Not only as system... DMC is also much more complex in terms of execution.
We would have to go to Fighting Games to actually find such levels of complexity, even though very differently focused.
The DMC players I know do like other games. They are just not their preference.
This is Millz, a high level combo-maker and freestyler in DMC5CE. MGRR is a game he likes a lot, to the point he did an advanced tutorial for it:
ChaserTech, one of the best freestylers, enjoyed precisely Astral Chain.
Turtle Sensei, one of the best combo-makers, played deeply NUNS3 and other Naruto games and even did tutorials for them.
I do appreciate Ninja Gaiden, MGRR, Nioh and other games as well. Even if they are less interesting for me.
I understand what you try to do and, generally, I agree that people can be inclined to prejudge games. But it ends up being an artificial attempt to put games on the same level of potato/meaningful options/complexity, despite some being clearly inferior to others.
You can find nuances in backgamon, but chess is still clearly a more complex game.
You mentioned several times such nuances from other games, like if it was enough to bring them to the same level. But if we were to write an analysis of a fraction of high level freestyle, including explanations of techs, it would be pretty much about pages.
At some point one can get tired (and believe me, we get tired of DMC) and choose to play another game despite being less complex. Simply because the common objectives are different. I would rather focus on such approach to defend other games.
Even if DMC is more complex than NG, the latter offers things that DMC doesn't... And never will. There is no need to be the most complex one to be appreciated. As condescending as it sounds.
And as a final note: nobody has ever criticized DMC itself as much as we have (not just 5).
Other than that, if you reply again, I may read it, but I doubt I will answer. Unless I see something very drastic.
This takes too much of my time and it's obvious that it's getting more and more aggressive or irritating.
Despite all this, good luck with your magazine and projects.
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario