The Misunderstood Greatness of DMC.
Some weeks ago a tweet from Feyntan caught many people's attention:
While I can understand how such tweets may sound pretentious to some people and even upset them, it's still not a good excuse for condescending and nonsensical comments like this one:
What's actually wrong with this type of comments, besides the passive-aggressive tone and trying to discredit some people calling them weeb?
The mere fact that DMC and Platinum are somehow in the same or similar category spoils it to a certain degree in this case. Such people don't really understand what makes DMC great, and assume that it's only or mainly because of how it looks. But what really makes DMC good isn't just looking cool and the visuals. We don't play DMC for years just because of its flashiness. We could be perfectly just watching action movies or combo videos from FGs or other games. They are a big factor, but it's mainly the interaction between visuals and, more importantly, the dissection of actions.
The dissection of actions (and functions) implies complexity, which leads to a rewarding gameplay because:
1) It increases the potential for creativity;
2) Implies a pretty much infinitely high skill ceiling (analogous to mastering a language, an instrument, certain sports, etc.).
Even in terms of visuals, that dissection indirectly makes DMC more appealing because of key variables like variety (in other stylish games, even the good looking aspects are much more automatic, thus repetitive).
The term complexity is misused by some people who try to imply that DMC's systems (3/4/5 and DmC) are just unnecessarily convoluted and/or just have a bunch of superfluous options. This is another usual misconception not necessarily independent from the first one:
A shared property among many moves doesn't mean their function isn't complementary. And the comment above isn't far from saying that all the attacks in any game that deal damage overlap. In DMC4 (a system focused clearly on creativity and expression), gun shots from E&I have several functions, like adjusting relative height, giving small breaks in combination with Rebellion and Yamato rave, buffering reversals and more; besides the obvious one: juggling from distance for a fraction of a second before another move.
Jealousy with pandora may seem to have similar functions, but it has other complementary ones, like losing much more height at one time, contributing with 7 hits to the lucifer glitch threshold, juggling frosts from far away, giving a bigger break for weapon switches or moves like discipline/bondage and more.
Many options with certain overlapping aren't necessarily superfluous.
In a similar way, a jet doesn't have a bunch of options for the sake of it. Piloting it isn't harder than riding a tricycle for the sake of it. It's an indirect effect from a much more complex system with many more dissected options that allow for many more types of movement, speeds, etc.
DMC4's movement and positioning is incredibly dissected compared to other action games. Dante can move with very different speeds in different directions thanks to the natural dissection of actions such as sky star, air trick, trickster dash, helmbreaker, full house, etc.; boosted by techs like flying guard, inertial rain storm, inertial rave, gun-raves, guard-raves, bullet magnetism, reversed trick, etc.
Of course it's not just the movement. In a similar way to the example of gun shots/jealousy above, the most part of the attacks have specific and complementary functions regarding DMC's objective as well. As it's not the same to juggle with aerial rave compared to Yamato rave. The first has a very fast recovery, can be executed with inertia and has a hitbox in the form of a vertical arch. Yamato rave, on the other hand, stops it, has a slower recovery, longer reach, a more liner hitbox and is useful to lose quickly a bit of height.
Helmbreaker and shocking are 2 moves that travel downwards relatively fast and create a knock back at the end, but again, they are still complementary. As shocking doesn't hit until it reaches the ground and is much more suited as finisher, while helmbreaker has a knock down and faster recovery, which makes it really good to buffer a reversal from it.
This is very rough. There are more nuances and differences. The core of what I am saying is that DMC isn't about chaining moves in any order, because anything works. Languages have many words and one can combine them in many ways, but that doesn't mean putting them in any order creates an eloquent, interesting or creative message.
There are also more factors that increase complexity, like smaller and more varied hitboxes, dynamic stun values to juggle or different types of enemy displacement/stun depending on distance (see shotgun in DMC5). However, these aren't even common among all the DMC games.
In any case we don't need to make an in-depth analysis of the dissection and all the factors that increase DMC's complexity.
What matters is that DMC offers an incredible degree of freedom, but that freedom isn't for free. It couldn't even if we wanted, as it's derived naturally from the complexity of the systems (even if they aren't perfect). This is what makes DMC so great.
No, not every game with juggles is like DMC. Not every game that has remotely to do with visuals/appearing stylish is like DMC. No, I don't like DMC just because I like seeing Dante and Vergil flying around. It's also because of how I control and determine that movement.
Typical idiotic arguments from people with short-dick syndrome:
- Combos are dumb.
Nowadays many teenagers act like if they just discovered sarcasm and/or mockery (or maybe they did 🤷♂️).
But don't really grasp that:
1) It gets progressively devalued when you use it every few sentences;
2) It's not intrinsically good (mediocre sarcasm is actually the most common thing scrolling through twitter, in a festival of misrepresented opinions);
3) Its value as argument per se is 0. It's related to the form, not to the content of the message.
From DMC is just juggling vegetables to it just requires some finger gymnastics, all types of ignorant people try to ridicule the concept of combos as if the sarcasm itself or mockery were actual arguments. Talking like if something was absurd or dumb without addressing actual arguments doesn't make it absurd or dumb. Especially when it's the fucking opposite.
Anybody can do the same about anything. Ninja Gaiden is just beating more aggressive vegetables, but in a much more simple way. Football is just a bunch of guys running after a ball. Maths is just a bunch of formulas that you mostly don't even use after school. Chess is just a board game with some dumb pieces. The universe is just a bunch of atoms and stuff.
Nonsensical derogatory oversimplification isn't argumenting.
You only signal your short-dick syndrome attracting other people with similar (dumb) opinions for validation. But you don't prove your point only with sarcasm or plainly mocking, regardless of how badass that sarcasm sounded in your head.
DMC isn't just combos. High level freestyle with mobs and bosses or speedrunning require other types of skills (even if not totally independent) as well. If you don't know what I talk about, try to beat in an interesting and technical way 2 DMD frosts in DMC4 and let me know how it goes.
But even if it was... What's exactly wrong with combos? They require a refined learning process, mastering tech in the most complex system in action games, and let alone the creative process of designing a combo.
One thing is to dislike or not like as much as others the concept of a combo (which in most cases doesn't even sound genuine, keeping in mind the overall jealous tone of many of these people), and another one to mock it as if it was intrinsically stupid in an action game. The former is totally fine, assuming it's genuine; the latter is idiotic nonsense.
- Punching Bags.
I can consider valid criticism to ask for more aggressive enemies in DMC, while maintaining at least one type that would still remain relatively passive to allow players to execute the hardest set-ups and combos. This is however not the case of such comments.
What certain people mean with such expressions is that DMC lacks the component of challenge, which is beyond retarded (on top of this, this person above was calling actual complexity a mere RNG component in NG).
It shouldn't be needed to share the definition, but it's clear that challenge isn't necessarily related to an enemy or adversary. From climbing a mountain to playing a very difficult musical piece with an instrument, there are all kinds of challenges. And there is probably nothing in Action Games as challenging as reaching a high level in freestyle and/or combo making in DMC (especially 3 and 4).
Challenges like no-damage runs in other AGs aren't relevant when we discuss about the challenge of mastering a system, which is related to its complexity (yes, including the complexity of AI). And one could also suggest no-damage runs in DMC4 while performing high level freestyle, for example, which would be even harder.
DMC in this sense is unbeatable, to the point that I have to call mastery the current standards for high level play. Because they are still being pushed... Why? Because of the mentioned pretty much infinite ceiling. Freestylers could use more often pin explosions and rebounds, sky running in the air while juggling, side-raves from different angles, shotgun JC into ecstasy and not just jealousy, etc.; combo-makers could make longer combos, could use platforms and environment more often, could do interactive combos with 2 enemies using or not the key chamber with slow down, etc. Such things are so hard that only a few players use them. Or better said, have used them at some point.
DMC is the most challenging Action Game in terms of mastering its systems, and not merely finishing the game, which is clearly not the damn point of a creativity-oriented AG. If you still don't know why, it's most probably because you have never tried yourself to master these systems, like the ignorant author of the previous comment who talks gladly out of his ass, or you think mastery is just S ranking missions, because stylishness is subjective, thus combos and high level freestyle don't count. This is already countered here.
Finally, some people seem to also use the training dummy analogy implying that combos in fighting games are equally complex or hard, yet executed in a much more strict and demanding context. The first part is false.
1) Obviously it depends on the game, but most FG combos are focused on efficiency, which is why they can be replicated over and over, with certain variations depending on the relative position.
2) The difficulty of even exhibition combos is more related to speed, memorization and efficient motions (like using part of one move's motion for the next one), and not so much because of the complexity of the characters per se.
As pretentious as it sounds, I replicated some exhibition kof 2000 combos even in arcade rooms many years ago (later kof XIII on PC with keyboard). Same with Garou. Even if they probably weren't the absolutely hardest combos, I really can't say they are usually nearly as hard and complex as high level DMC4 combos. And even if they were equally hard, the type of difficulty is really different.
In DMC4 combos there are many more variables to manage because of the mentioned freedom and the price we pay for it. One may have to cut a flying guard with precision to make the rest of a combo work (not too early, not too late); one may have to JC ecstasy in a relatively small range of height to get lucifer glitch vs a frost (base variation, instantly launching without 16 hits), not too low, but not too high; one may have to JdC cancel star fall close to the ground, but not too high, to let Vergil land quicker and follow up with the next move... Etc.
In FG combos there are timings too. It's not always simply chaining moves asap, but things are much more sequential, intuitive and, overall, simpler.
In DMC there are just too many things that can go wrong from proper complexity alone, and on top of this there are one frame techs (or based on small frame windows) as well, even if we don't have 2xqcf motions and what not.
The current standards in DMC4 combos for duration are between 10-20 seconds for all these reasons. My friend TurtleSensei, one of the best combo makers, once said: I survive to my combos. This is his most recent one:
You can grab a FG and do a somewhat advanced combo in relatively short time if you are used to fast inputs from Action Games and other FGs. But I guarantee you that you need to develop very good fundamentals (probably months, at least) in DMC before even attempting to replicate half of the combo above (if you want to have a minimal chance of replicating it, and not simply breaking your hands for nothing).
Because of all this, you can't really call DMC a lesser variation of a FG that is basically just its practice room... Let alone how hard is freestyle in a real situation. Because even if people say lightly punching bags, trust me that it's another thing when you try to do technical and interesting stuff while DMD enemies like frosts do attack you.
In any case, good Fighting Games are still more complex than DMC overall because of the interactive component with a human adversary, but they are generally much simpler in terms of combos.
- Other Action Games are as complex as DMC, or even more complex, and/or stimulate creativity as well, but out of limitations instead of an opulence of options.
When I made the analogy with a tricycle and a jet, I wasn't even trying to ridicule other AGs. I have said many times that I have enjoyed MGRR and NG (especially 3RE).
However, despite all the nuances in MGRR or NG, they aren't close to DMC's complexity. Let alone Sekiros, Niohs, and what not. Still not mocking, but I really have to say it in such a raw way: if you really think Sekiro is technical, let alone more technical than DMC, you would really have an apoplexy trying to master DMC's systems. What many can't understand is that DMC isn't merely about finishing it.
And that's when one reads the finest and most ironic nonsense:
Regarding creativity, you could leave someone with just a notebook and a pencil in an empty room, and that would surely stimulate his creativity to try to entertain himself and not lose his sanity. Indeed.
But that doesn't mean such context has the same potential to develop and encourage creativity like a room with many more complementary tools and options.
People have done probably amazing tricks even with a tricycle... That doesn't mean much when comparing the potential for creativity.
No, you don't need necessarily anime flashy combos to make a satisfying combat system. But this doesn't mean a more aggressive AI and other factors automatically make other systems equally complex, let alone more complex. Again, currently there isn't anything that comes even close to the complexity of high level freestyle and combo-making in DMC because of the explained dissection of actions. You would need something analogous to a high Stockfish in Action Games to compensate it with the AI alone.
This is partly why Feyntan and other players said they can't really enjoy other AGs. It wasn't meant as insult, even if it sounds harsh.
There are other DMC players who have played NG, Bayo and what not. And yes, in the high difficulties (since that seems to be another usual cheap way to try to discredit DMC players).
When people are proficient at something complex, or at least knowledgeable, they will be prone to find it more satisfying. Complexity is universally relevant, and someone proficient in a complex system will prefer it before simpler ones in general. We can get sick from the complex one for a while, but we will go back to it eventually.
And no, it's obviously not a competition. I wish Action Game communities were more collaborative and I wouldn't have to write all this to counter argument nonsense from people who call combos dumb or DMC players section of weeb gaming Twitter.
But if you want to promote other Action Games and make people aware of how and why their combat systems are good or even great, despite not being that complex, maybe focus on explaining what makes them unique, instead of trying to pathetically mock DMC players and DMC.
Complexity is relevant, but it's not everything and it's totally understandable if some people don't want to invest so much in DMC games to become proficient in at least one of its areas. But maybe try to be also understandable with people who prefer DMC because of it without replying condescending nonsense and moronic assumptions.
Maybe keep an open mind to understand that many DMC players did give a chance to other games, and despite certain unique aspects that make us play them for a while, as I said, in the long term we will come back to DMC4/3, etc., for more meaningful reasons than flashy anime combos alone.
While I can understand how such tweets may sound pretentious to some people and even upset them, it's still not a good excuse for condescending and nonsensical comments like this one:
The mere fact that DMC and Platinum are somehow in the same or similar category spoils it to a certain degree in this case. Such people don't really understand what makes DMC great, and assume that it's only or mainly because of how it looks. But what really makes DMC good isn't just looking cool and the visuals. We don't play DMC for years just because of its flashiness. We could be perfectly just watching action movies or combo videos from FGs or other games. They are a big factor, but it's mainly the interaction between visuals and, more importantly, the dissection of actions.
The dissection of actions (and functions) implies complexity, which leads to a rewarding gameplay because:
1) It increases the potential for creativity;
2) Implies a pretty much infinitely high skill ceiling (analogous to mastering a language, an instrument, certain sports, etc.).
Even in terms of visuals, that dissection indirectly makes DMC more appealing because of key variables like variety (in other stylish games, even the good looking aspects are much more automatic, thus repetitive).
The term complexity is misused by some people who try to imply that DMC's systems (3/4/5 and DmC) are just unnecessarily convoluted and/or just have a bunch of superfluous options. This is another usual misconception not necessarily independent from the first one:
A shared property among many moves doesn't mean their function isn't complementary. And the comment above isn't far from saying that all the attacks in any game that deal damage overlap. In DMC4 (a system focused clearly on creativity and expression), gun shots from E&I have several functions, like adjusting relative height, giving small breaks in combination with Rebellion and Yamato rave, buffering reversals and more; besides the obvious one: juggling from distance for a fraction of a second before another move.
Jealousy with pandora may seem to have similar functions, but it has other complementary ones, like losing much more height at one time, contributing with 7 hits to the lucifer glitch threshold, juggling frosts from far away, giving a bigger break for weapon switches or moves like discipline/bondage and more.
Many options with certain overlapping aren't necessarily superfluous.
In a similar way, a jet doesn't have a bunch of options for the sake of it. Piloting it isn't harder than riding a tricycle for the sake of it. It's an indirect effect from a much more complex system with many more dissected options that allow for many more types of movement, speeds, etc.
DMC4's movement and positioning is incredibly dissected compared to other action games. Dante can move with very different speeds in different directions thanks to the natural dissection of actions such as sky star, air trick, trickster dash, helmbreaker, full house, etc.; boosted by techs like flying guard, inertial rain storm, inertial rave, gun-raves, guard-raves, bullet magnetism, reversed trick, etc.
Of course it's not just the movement. In a similar way to the example of gun shots/jealousy above, the most part of the attacks have specific and complementary functions regarding DMC's objective as well. As it's not the same to juggle with aerial rave compared to Yamato rave. The first has a very fast recovery, can be executed with inertia and has a hitbox in the form of a vertical arch. Yamato rave, on the other hand, stops it, has a slower recovery, longer reach, a more liner hitbox and is useful to lose quickly a bit of height.
Helmbreaker and shocking are 2 moves that travel downwards relatively fast and create a knock back at the end, but again, they are still complementary. As shocking doesn't hit until it reaches the ground and is much more suited as finisher, while helmbreaker has a knock down and faster recovery, which makes it really good to buffer a reversal from it.
This is very rough. There are more nuances and differences. The core of what I am saying is that DMC isn't about chaining moves in any order, because anything works. Languages have many words and one can combine them in many ways, but that doesn't mean putting them in any order creates an eloquent, interesting or creative message.
There are also more factors that increase complexity, like smaller and more varied hitboxes, dynamic stun values to juggle or different types of enemy displacement/stun depending on distance (see shotgun in DMC5). However, these aren't even common among all the DMC games.
In any case we don't need to make an in-depth analysis of the dissection and all the factors that increase DMC's complexity.
What matters is that DMC offers an incredible degree of freedom, but that freedom isn't for free. It couldn't even if we wanted, as it's derived naturally from the complexity of the systems (even if they aren't perfect). This is what makes DMC so great.
No, not every game with juggles is like DMC. Not every game that has remotely to do with visuals/appearing stylish is like DMC. No, I don't like DMC just because I like seeing Dante and Vergil flying around. It's also because of how I control and determine that movement.
Typical idiotic arguments from people with short-dick syndrome:
- Combos are dumb.
Nowadays many teenagers act like if they just discovered sarcasm and/or mockery (or maybe they did 🤷♂️).
But don't really grasp that:
1) It gets progressively devalued when you use it every few sentences;
2) It's not intrinsically good (mediocre sarcasm is actually the most common thing scrolling through twitter, in a festival of misrepresented opinions);
3) Its value as argument per se is 0. It's related to the form, not to the content of the message.
From DMC is just juggling vegetables to it just requires some finger gymnastics, all types of ignorant people try to ridicule the concept of combos as if the sarcasm itself or mockery were actual arguments. Talking like if something was absurd or dumb without addressing actual arguments doesn't make it absurd or dumb. Especially when it's the fucking opposite.
Anybody can do the same about anything. Ninja Gaiden is just beating more aggressive vegetables, but in a much more simple way. Football is just a bunch of guys running after a ball. Maths is just a bunch of formulas that you mostly don't even use after school. Chess is just a board game with some dumb pieces. The universe is just a bunch of atoms and stuff.
Nonsensical derogatory oversimplification isn't argumenting.
You only signal your short-dick syndrome attracting other people with similar (dumb) opinions for validation. But you don't prove your point only with sarcasm or plainly mocking, regardless of how badass that sarcasm sounded in your head.
DMC isn't just combos. High level freestyle with mobs and bosses or speedrunning require other types of skills (even if not totally independent) as well. If you don't know what I talk about, try to beat in an interesting and technical way 2 DMD frosts in DMC4 and let me know how it goes.
But even if it was... What's exactly wrong with combos? They require a refined learning process, mastering tech in the most complex system in action games, and let alone the creative process of designing a combo.
One thing is to dislike or not like as much as others the concept of a combo (which in most cases doesn't even sound genuine, keeping in mind the overall jealous tone of many of these people), and another one to mock it as if it was intrinsically stupid in an action game. The former is totally fine, assuming it's genuine; the latter is idiotic nonsense.
- Punching Bags.
I can consider valid criticism to ask for more aggressive enemies in DMC, while maintaining at least one type that would still remain relatively passive to allow players to execute the hardest set-ups and combos. This is however not the case of such comments.
What certain people mean with such expressions is that DMC lacks the component of challenge, which is beyond retarded (on top of this, this person above was calling actual complexity a mere RNG component in NG).
It shouldn't be needed to share the definition, but it's clear that challenge isn't necessarily related to an enemy or adversary. From climbing a mountain to playing a very difficult musical piece with an instrument, there are all kinds of challenges. And there is probably nothing in Action Games as challenging as reaching a high level in freestyle and/or combo making in DMC (especially 3 and 4).
Challenges like no-damage runs in other AGs aren't relevant when we discuss about the challenge of mastering a system, which is related to its complexity (yes, including the complexity of AI). And one could also suggest no-damage runs in DMC4 while performing high level freestyle, for example, which would be even harder.
DMC in this sense is unbeatable, to the point that I have to call mastery the current standards for high level play. Because they are still being pushed... Why? Because of the mentioned pretty much infinite ceiling. Freestylers could use more often pin explosions and rebounds, sky running in the air while juggling, side-raves from different angles, shotgun JC into ecstasy and not just jealousy, etc.; combo-makers could make longer combos, could use platforms and environment more often, could do interactive combos with 2 enemies using or not the key chamber with slow down, etc. Such things are so hard that only a few players use them. Or better said, have used them at some point.
DMC is the most challenging Action Game in terms of mastering its systems, and not merely finishing the game, which is clearly not the damn point of a creativity-oriented AG. If you still don't know why, it's most probably because you have never tried yourself to master these systems, like the ignorant author of the previous comment who talks gladly out of his ass, or you think mastery is just S ranking missions, because stylishness is subjective, thus combos and high level freestyle don't count. This is already countered here.
Finally, some people seem to also use the training dummy analogy implying that combos in fighting games are equally complex or hard, yet executed in a much more strict and demanding context. The first part is false.
1) Obviously it depends on the game, but most FG combos are focused on efficiency, which is why they can be replicated over and over, with certain variations depending on the relative position.
2) The difficulty of even exhibition combos is more related to speed, memorization and efficient motions (like using part of one move's motion for the next one), and not so much because of the complexity of the characters per se.
As pretentious as it sounds, I replicated some exhibition kof 2000 combos even in arcade rooms many years ago (later kof XIII on PC with keyboard). Same with Garou. Even if they probably weren't the absolutely hardest combos, I really can't say they are usually nearly as hard and complex as high level DMC4 combos. And even if they were equally hard, the type of difficulty is really different.
In DMC4 combos there are many more variables to manage because of the mentioned freedom and the price we pay for it. One may have to cut a flying guard with precision to make the rest of a combo work (not too early, not too late); one may have to JC ecstasy in a relatively small range of height to get lucifer glitch vs a frost (base variation, instantly launching without 16 hits), not too low, but not too high; one may have to JdC cancel star fall close to the ground, but not too high, to let Vergil land quicker and follow up with the next move... Etc.
In FG combos there are timings too. It's not always simply chaining moves asap, but things are much more sequential, intuitive and, overall, simpler.
In DMC there are just too many things that can go wrong from proper complexity alone, and on top of this there are one frame techs (or based on small frame windows) as well, even if we don't have 2xqcf motions and what not.
The current standards in DMC4 combos for duration are between 10-20 seconds for all these reasons. My friend TurtleSensei, one of the best combo makers, once said: I survive to my combos. This is his most recent one:
You can grab a FG and do a somewhat advanced combo in relatively short time if you are used to fast inputs from Action Games and other FGs. But I guarantee you that you need to develop very good fundamentals (probably months, at least) in DMC before even attempting to replicate half of the combo above (if you want to have a minimal chance of replicating it, and not simply breaking your hands for nothing).
Because of all this, you can't really call DMC a lesser variation of a FG that is basically just its practice room... Let alone how hard is freestyle in a real situation. Because even if people say lightly punching bags, trust me that it's another thing when you try to do technical and interesting stuff while DMD enemies like frosts do attack you.
In any case, good Fighting Games are still more complex than DMC overall because of the interactive component with a human adversary, but they are generally much simpler in terms of combos.
- Other Action Games are as complex as DMC, or even more complex, and/or stimulate creativity as well, but out of limitations instead of an opulence of options.
When I made the analogy with a tricycle and a jet, I wasn't even trying to ridicule other AGs. I have said many times that I have enjoyed MGRR and NG (especially 3RE).
However, despite all the nuances in MGRR or NG, they aren't close to DMC's complexity. Let alone Sekiros, Niohs, and what not. Still not mocking, but I really have to say it in such a raw way: if you really think Sekiro is technical, let alone more technical than DMC, you would really have an apoplexy trying to master DMC's systems. What many can't understand is that DMC isn't merely about finishing it.
And that's when one reads the finest and most ironic nonsense:
Regarding creativity, you could leave someone with just a notebook and a pencil in an empty room, and that would surely stimulate his creativity to try to entertain himself and not lose his sanity. Indeed.
But that doesn't mean such context has the same potential to develop and encourage creativity like a room with many more complementary tools and options.
People have done probably amazing tricks even with a tricycle... That doesn't mean much when comparing the potential for creativity.
No, you don't need necessarily anime flashy combos to make a satisfying combat system. But this doesn't mean a more aggressive AI and other factors automatically make other systems equally complex, let alone more complex. Again, currently there isn't anything that comes even close to the complexity of high level freestyle and combo-making in DMC because of the explained dissection of actions. You would need something analogous to a high Stockfish in Action Games to compensate it with the AI alone.
This is partly why Feyntan and other players said they can't really enjoy other AGs. It wasn't meant as insult, even if it sounds harsh.
There are other DMC players who have played NG, Bayo and what not. And yes, in the high difficulties (since that seems to be another usual cheap way to try to discredit DMC players).
When people are proficient at something complex, or at least knowledgeable, they will be prone to find it more satisfying. Complexity is universally relevant, and someone proficient in a complex system will prefer it before simpler ones in general. We can get sick from the complex one for a while, but we will go back to it eventually.
And no, it's obviously not a competition. I wish Action Game communities were more collaborative and I wouldn't have to write all this to counter argument nonsense from people who call combos dumb or DMC players section of weeb gaming Twitter.
But if you want to promote other Action Games and make people aware of how and why their combat systems are good or even great, despite not being that complex, maybe focus on explaining what makes them unique, instead of trying to pathetically mock DMC players and DMC.
Complexity is relevant, but it's not everything and it's totally understandable if some people don't want to invest so much in DMC games to become proficient in at least one of its areas. But maybe try to be also understandable with people who prefer DMC because of it without replying condescending nonsense and moronic assumptions.
Maybe keep an open mind to understand that many DMC players did give a chance to other games, and despite certain unique aspects that make us play them for a while, as I said, in the long term we will come back to DMC4/3, etc., for more meaningful reasons than flashy anime combos alone.
"(3/4/5 and DmC)"
ResponderEliminarthis... is true equality