It's more complex.

Origin: 1) I wouldn't be surprised if some of us have already played 5 longer than any one person in dev did. Completely irrelevant regarding what I said: 1) People haven't been playing the game for 10 years, despite the cliché. They were playing DMC with a bunch of breaks, playing other games, and only a few really play since 10 years. Because you said that play-time surpasses development time, implying that it took much longer to burn-out DMC4. This doesn't deny the obvious: if you have been testing mechanics over and over for 1 - 2 years, the way you would enjoy a fresh new perfect DMC6 would be significantly different. Even if you are not completely burned-out. And it's worse if you have played: 3, 4 and 5, and there are similar mechanics (but with improvements). Psychobiologically it simply can't be as rewarding. ...by the time the final product is released, there would be a burn-out... With a burn-out I didn't mean we wouldn...

First of all, there will be SPOILERS.  This is meant for people who have played already the game or are very sure they won't play it and still would like to hear my impressions. If you plan to enjoy Sekiro experimenting and learning yourself, without any hints or spoilers regarding bosses/enemies, the system itself... I recommend you to stop reading. System (general and main mechanics): This game offers a new approach compared to past souls games, with the new posture gauge and focus on 4 types of reactions: dash , deflect (normal parry) , Mikiri  (special parry for mainly thrust and charge attacks) and jumping -> aerial kick (more optional). At the beginning the game tells you that enemies will regenerate their posture gauge very quickly if they have a lot of health. Naturally one could think that it's a good idea to go first for direct damage on the health bar, dodging - hitting, before attempting to break the posture of the boss/mini boss (and even harder normal ...

If we define technique in DMC as  non-obvious and useful application of the game's mechanics and the listed move-set , including non-official elements like glitches, we could say that, for example, simply launching with ecstasy in DMC4 in mid air and then executing air trick would be a natural connection. While jump cancelling ecstasy into air trick would be properly a   technique . In the first case I just connected listed moves as they are supposed to be used merely from common sense . In the second case, without using any tech and being Dante airborne, one couldn't use air trick again. The technique breaks this rule. Why is tech important. Tech is practically a multiplier or booster of options. Some techs are more important than others, depending on how restricted and contextual their applications is. But all of them expand the immediate limits of the game beyond merely chaining different moves and skills of the move-list as they...

There are some not explained workarounds for a few of these issues, but they are still clunky. Important note: all the DMC5 clips are with non-legit Turbo 1.2. Which brings us to the first flaw: - Lack of official Turbo . Speed is a relevant variable in human's perception. It's not a mere coincidence that people tend to prefer to drive faster (if it's for fun), faster combos, faster martial artists in movies, etc. The brain gets more stimuli per unit of time, you get rewarded for interpreting them, and for executing at higher speed. Obviously it's a tendency (other variables can negate the preference) and there are limits, but DMC5 is far from such limits and is way too slow for experienced players in DMC and probably other action games or fighting games. The speedhacks aren't perfect and even mess up auditive cues. Let alone the fact that animations should be tweaked, but this will be seen in other points. - Lack of the highly manageable inertia in DMC4....

About Complexity and Depth First of all, you don't need to force a dichotomy complexity vs depth simply because people use indiscriminately both words. It's a good exercise, as attempt to define them in a more accurate and efficient way, but asking yourself what's the difference doesn't mean that there is actually any necessarily by default, and you need to ask yourself if there are already words to describe the difference you are trying to force in the context of video games. Signifiers with a big overlapping exist in language because also such signifieds /concepts can co-exist (and are overlapped too). One can still suggest a more consistent or logical normalization, but this is not the case. Not when complexity gets twisted in such a way, and oversimplified, simply to make more (meaningful) room for depth . People understand that an uppercut is more complex than a jab, a long pass is more complex than a ground short pass, (5x5)-5 is more complex than 5...

I won't keep and use this like a blog in a traditional way. This is just more comfortable than sharing files. I started writing a text some time ago to counter argument a few clichés against the implementation of inertia  in DMC5, but it lost quickly its purpose. To not throw it in the waste bin, I tried to transform it in something else, and my intention was to explain: Why we play video games. Why complexity is correlated to fun in DMC and video games (one can have fun with simple games, but, in terms of probability, for shorter periods of time and with a less intense reward, which I wanted to explain as well). Misconceptions about subjectivity and style (or perception of beauty in DMC or other videogames). Why we get bored from video games. And more. For now it's unfinished, unpolished, unorganized, I may delete some superfluous parts (I considered explaining some things in different ways and with different examples), etc. I may update it or I may leave it like ...