What are you currently playing? 4.0

[Foggle]

DMC4 is better than 1? I didn't think people liked it that much.

The combat is certainly better. People tend to prefer 1 for the superior level design and lack of Nero.

[Spark Of Spirit]

DMC4 is better than 1? I didn't think people liked it that much.

The combat is certainly better. People tend to prefer 1 for the superior level design and lack of Nero.

I only played 1 and I loved it, but that's because Kamiya is awesome. Still need to play through 3, but I always hear people bitching about 4.

[gunswordfist]

DMC4 is better than 1? I didn't think people liked it that much.

What? No bitch. 4 is better than 3. 1 is the greatest hack n slash ever. 

Anyway, I thought the Dante boss fight was just okay.Maybe I need to play it again. My brother ruined my copy quickly. My favorite is actually the plant dragon, believe it or not. I find it to be so damn fun. My 2nd favorite is Credo.

Also, I also have a complaint about the Devil Bringer. It's the cutscene attacks. (basically just when you use it against bosses) What I always liked about DMC i it never needed anything remotely like that.

I happen to like Nero's sword moves more than any of Dante's in 1, 3 or 4. Yes, I know, shocking. But not having to switch styles just to do the same old air combo and actually having better air attacks in the first place and badass moves like when Nero repeatedly slams his sword onto the ground won me over.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

DMC4 is better than 1? I didn't think people liked it that much.

The combat is certainly better. People tend to prefer 1 for the superior level design and lack of Nero.

I only played 1 and I loved it, but that's because Kamiya is awesome. Still need to play through 3, but I always hear people bitching about 4.

I haven't played more than a few hours worth of DMC1 and 3, so maybe my opinion isn't as valid, but as awesome as Kamiya is, and despite the fact that he would deny any other DMC game being better than his own, I personally find 3 to be flat-out better. The level design in DMC1 was great but I really feel that DMC3 improved on the environments, and honestly I feel that DMC3 takes a lot of what was good about the 1st game (from what I've played of it), and just makes it better (except for the music....I hate that battle music....). The level of challenge is higher, IMO, but still completely fair, and the boss fights are really well-designed. Also, I think it benefits from the fact that at this point it was kind of intentionally being over-the-top with a very tongue-in-cheek sort of feel to it, which really made it an even more fun experience that I one day want to own so that I can fully complete it.

I can already tell you what the problem with 4 is: lazy design. Don't get me wrong, the core game is still good, but its only because it takes everything that worked about DMC3 and then...,does nothing to expand on it. It also takes itself a bit too seriously with putting Nero in the story and trying to involve a romance sub-plot, which just kills almost any comedic value that Dante's character brings to the table. Also, it repeats boss fights and basically makes you play through the same game again in the same environments as Dante. Also, there is way too much back-tracking, IMO. Overall, though, the core game is still good (its certainly not a travesty like DMC2 was, in that regard).

Still, I find it funny that this game still gets more props from critics and the like yet NG2 was the one that got bashed despite doing a lot to change the core gameplay elements and further evolve them and having virtually no back-tracking while keeping in level designs that encouraged fast-paced gameplay akin to the classic NES games. And while that game also sucks at having platforming segments, at least they are more rare. Apparently the people in charge of DMC4 didn't realize that trying to make the game part platformer actually takes a lot of skill and experience in making platforming games, since not just any hack can add in poorly designed jumps and obstacles and call it true platforming.

Still, I swear to god....if there were a game that "successfully" combined hack n' slash style action and platforming....BEST FUCKING GAME EVER, PERIOD!

[Spark Of Spirit]

Man, I wish. The only good platformer/hack n slash hybrids are 2D. Maybe Shinobi if it used more platforms instead of wall running over bottomless pits (I hated that, talk about boring) to add to the action.

I wish someone would take the Sonic Colors approach to a beat em up/ hack n slash style game. 2D platforming exploration mixed with 3D spectacle and action. It would be an awesome combination.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Man, I wish. The only good platformer/hack n slash hybrids are 2D. Maybe Shinobi if it used more platforms instead of wall running over bottomless pits (I hated that, talk about boring) to add to the action.

Not sure what game you were playing, but it had plenty of regular platforming, and it wasn't just wall-running. And I seriously wouldn't call it boring considering how many obstacles there were, so I'm wondering if you even got past the 3rd stage since a huge portion of the platforming consisted of you having to expertly chain attacks from enemy to enemy to cross long gaps (which takes a lot of skill and timing), and you always had things that would knock you off the wall in later stages so you couldn't just use them as a crutch and would need to find solid platforms as well. What you call boring I call innovative and actually challenging. Why should platforming just be about being super simple and just jumping from one platform to the next. Shinobi had that plus it added another dimension to the platforming with the wall-running ability "without" letting players use it as a crutch past the first couple of stages.

I will say that Shinobi had problems in its actual hack n' slash aspects, though. Only having one combo and fighting brain-dead enemies was boring, but was made fairly challenging when combined with the platforming. The thing about Shinobi is its a rare breed of game. While it was released as a 3D PS2 game, it wasn't really a remake of the classic Sega games as much as it was its own style of game that encouraged fast-paced gameplay and a ton of practice to master. Truly its one of the most under-appreciated types of games out there (and no, I'm not referring to the NES style side-scrolling challenge either, Shinobi was in its own class). The HVGN can go fuck himself, BTW (I still enjoy his reviews, though ).

I wish someone would take the Sonic Colors approach to a beat em up/ hack n slash style game. 2D platforming exploration mixed with 3D spectacle and action. It would be an awesome combination.

Yes, indeed. Though I wouldn't mind if it had 2D platforming segments in combination with 3D ones as long as they flowed and transitioned together nicely. Unlike most people, I don't think that 3D platforming can't be truly great when its done right. Hell, even though its platforming segments suck, I'll give NG2 some credit for at least having some good ideas for platforming segments that would have worked out nicely had Team Ninja let professional 3D platformer developers handle those segments. The clock tower section is an example of that; it was frustrating as hell in the game but if it was designed with better controls in regard to platforming sections, it could have been a great experience in trying to get up to the boss of that stage).

[gunswordfist]

I like the original better than 3 because of the bosses and enemies. You know all too well that I think Devil May Cry has the best bosses and enemies ever. DMC3...not so much, which made backtracking even less fun, imo. I also actually think Vergil is overrated while I looked forward to every single Nelo Angelo fight. Those were the best. But yeah, backtracking sucks in both games.

And now to where I want this conversation to actually go. A very well done Action Platformer is also what I think would be the perfect game. I'd actually want more of a free roaming type of game but still a game with flawless platforming through areas that won't get on your nerves and a good combat system would make my...life time.

[Spark Of Spirit]

I haven't played Shinobi in a long ass time. I don't remember much about it. I wasn't really that into gaming in the PS2 era in general that I only remember stuff I've played more recently.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Well, I can understand not liking the game, but personally I still say its underrated. I know that it has a cult following, but still, I think if anything its main problem is that Sega just decided to slap the Shinobi title onto a game that was quite clearly never meant to be a Shinobi game to begin with. Sega probably just did it for marketing value, and ironically that only caused the game to suffer more criticism than it deserved since a bunch of fans of the Sega games thought that it was just some cheap generic anime-style version of the classic games that was all style over substance. Even the HVGN who usually seems to know a lot about the material that he talks about and has it all well-researched mistakenly claimed that this game was a shitty "remake" when its clearly not a remake at all (it doesn't even have the main character from the original games). Looking at the game on its own terms, though, I had fun with it, personally. I'm glad that it at least got some appreciation in some form on GT's list of the top 10 hardest games of all time.

[gunswordfist]

This morning, at 9:17 AM, I found a winning formula to beat Mother 1.

I used the strategy I was doing a few days ago but this time I did Quick Up twice because the final boss would usually cause me to lose by doing his turn first and kiling veryone At the end, me and Tea (I named her that (Get it Ness....Tea?), the weakling is named Lucas) I had her heal Ness and every single turn Ness heals her. When Ness is at full health, Tea sings. I did this a lot until the boss did !!!!!! for the second time. When bosses say the same thing again, it usually means I have to do something different. Ness had one or zero LifeUpCreams/LifeUp B left (or was it Tea?) but I decided to take a risk and let Tea use check. Maria said the same thing so Tea sang again and it was Game Over. Thank God. I was getting my ass kicked for close to a full week now.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I'm currently on mission 16 of DMC4, and I swear that this game must have gotten at least 10 times better when Dante took over as a playable character. For one thing, he has way more combat variety and weapons than Nero does, and its actually fun to take on enemies without having a cheap devil bringer arm to rely on for chaining combos. Furthermore, because he has no DB, I'm spared from having to go through those tedious and poorly designed platforming segments that I was forced to play through as Nero with the use of his DB. I also just find his gameplay to be more dynamic in general with how you can switch between his weapons and even his different styles on the fly. I also noticed how much more powerful Dante is than Nero, since having re-fought 2 of the bosses, which I originally faced as Nero and died at a few times when playng as him, with Dante, and having been able to take them out easily in one try each and in much less time than it took me to beat them with Nero. In all honesty, I'm beginning to feel that this whole entire game woulc have been better if it were just Dante. Nero's gameplay isn't bad by any means, but it honestly feels pretty shallow in comparison to Dante's with his lack of combos and the fact that he only ever has one melee and ranged weapon (each) to use in combat (unless you count the Yamato which he can use in his devil trigger form), whereas with Dante I already attained the Gilgamesh (which is a pretty cool weapon that gives Dante beat-em-up style combat as opposed to regular hack n' slash fighting) and Pandora's Box.

I may actually end up being a bit disappointed when I have to go back to playing as Nero, but I won't mind too much if they at least phase out those damned platforming segments later on in the game, as those are my biggest problem with DMC4's gameplay, since I can easily excuse most of my other problems with it, which are usually minor enough for me to ignore in the grand scheme of things.

[Spark Of Spirit]

Started Sonic Unleashed over again since I have no idea where I left off in my old save. I wanted to see if all the Sonic fans overpraising this now that Colors is out (I hate fantards) had any kernel of truth to it being the "best" 3D Sonic game. Well, I will say it's not really a bad game, but there is a lot wrong with it.

It hasn't aged particularly well. Sonic's race track gameplay is basically 3D Rush style only with QTE's and less platforming, and the less said about everything else in the game (UGH TOO MUCH FILLER) the better.

But while the Sonic gameplay is passable (despite being far too linear) and easy with cheap deaths, the Werehog shit has aged EVEN WORSE. The levels are still twice as long as they need to be, too many QTEs, enemies take forever to fucking die, and there are too many kill rooms  to make up for level design. This stuff still kills the game for me.

The voice acting... Wow, I forgot after an extended period how bad the voice acting really was in Sonic. It seemed acceptable at the time, but after Colors actually had way better voices and performances, this is just hard to stomach now. The super serious story that Sonic games had is just as tired now as it was then. On the plus side, Sega's sound team did a great job on the soundtrack. It doesn't touch Colors (Or Adventure, IMO) but as far as 3D Sonic's go, it ain't bad.

I ended up going back to Colors again, and its just no contest. My 30 hour save slot should say more than enough to tell which one I prefer more.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I don't really see how anyone, especially Sonic fanboys, could claim that Unleashed is better than either of the Adventure games. Those games actually got the formula onto a good start, and its still a wonder to me how Sega royally fucked up what was initially going in the right direction. As far as I can tell, Colors seems to be the only 3D Sonic game that managed to get back on the right track, and while it uses a completely different formula than what was set up by the Adventure games, that was probably for the best since apparently Sega didn't know what the hell they were doing with their old formula, which makes me wonder if they just got lucky that the Adventure games even managed to turn out to be fairly good before they started churning out the other shitty 3D Sonic games out there.

Anyways, I've been trying to convince one of my friends who owns a Wii to get Colors (mostly so that I can try it out, because I'm just a selfish bastard like that ), but he refuses to since he has lost all of his faith in current Sonic games and doesn't care that this one actually got better reception than any of the other 3D Sonic games since he doesn't trust any online sources anymore. So, it looks as though I may never get to try out Colors until the day that I can get a Wii for myself....which probably won't be for a long-ass time, to be honest.

[Spark Of Spirit]

That's a shame. I really took to Colors really well. While I doubt there will be a HD systems port any time soon, at least it bodes well for the next game in the series when it finally does come out because of everything Colors got right.

But as for Unleashed... A lot of people say without the Werehog it would be superior to Colors, but I disagree. The Sonic levels are all flash and speedspeedspeed the whole time, you never slow down unless you run into some stupidly placed obstacle or death trap, and the controls are far more slippery. Then you have the pointless hub worlds...

Did I mention that I don't like hub worlds? In adventure or RPG style games they fit, but in games like Sonic or Mario where you are meant to dodge obstacles and jump enemies as the primary goal, jogging around looking for the next place to go kills all momentum for me. I play platformers to platform, not talk to NPCs to exchange keys for level entrances.

[gunswordfist]

I'm currently on mission 16 of DMC4, and I swear that this game must have gotten at least 10 times better when Dante took over as a playable character. For one thing, he has way more combat variety and weapons than Nero does, and its actually fun to take on enemies without having a cheap devil bringer arm to rely on for chaining combos. Furthermore, because he has no DB, I'm spared from having to go through those tedious and poorly designed platforming segments that I was forced to play through as Nero with the use of his DB. I also just find his gameplay to be more dynamic in general with how you can switch between his weapons and even his different styles on the fly. I also noticed how much more powerful Dante is than Nero, since having re-fought 2 of the bosses, which I originally faced as Nero and died at a few times when playng as him, with Dante, and having been able to take them out easily in one try each and in much less time than it took me to beat them with Nero. In all honesty, I'm beginning to feel that this whole entire game woulc have been better if it were just Dante. Nero's gameplay isn't bad by any means, but it honestly feels pretty shallow in comparison to Dante's with his lack of combos and the fact that he only ever has one melee and ranged weapon (each) to use in combat (unless you count the Yamato which he can use in his devil trigger form), whereas with Dante I already attained the Gilgamesh (which is a pretty cool weapon that gives Dante beat-em-up style combat as opposed to regular hack n' slash fighting) and Pandora's Box.

I may actually end up being a bit disappointed when I have to go back to playing as Nero, but I won't mind too much if they at least phase out those damned platforming segments later on in the game, as those are my biggest problem with DMC4's gameplay, since I can easily excuse most of my other problems with it, which are usually minor enough for me to ignore in the grand scheme of things.

I could not disagree more. I thought Dante had too many moves and even with that, he still has too few sword attacks when compared to Nero.