You exactly sound like a fanboy. I don't like this new emo dante either
My distaste for the new Dante has nothing to do with the old one. Again, I've only recently gotten in to the DMC series, and DmC was the first one I actually played. The new Dante is just a bad character regardless of the previous one. It's like his personality splits three ways at the same time, and everything he says is incredibly stupid. He's not cool. He's a prick.
and sure the game has its flaws.
The flaws are really my main issue with the game. Notice how I only mentioned one thing involving story and everything else involving gameplay.
But the graphic style and the non-stop morphing of your surroundings is awsome.
Yes, they are. The game looks good, and the Limbo sections are excellently animated. That doesn't have anything to do with what I said, though.
And why the heck would you think that there is no lock on system? Its even clearly indicated in the manual how you lock on to enemies.
No, there's no manual lock-on option. Dante automatically aims at an enemy according to how close he is and what direction he's facing. You can't physically choose which enemy you want to target, and that's stupid in a fast-paced hack-and-slash game where enemies can come at you from every direction. It also makes hitting flying enemies overly tedious.
But really, first you dislike dynasty warriors because there is "very little strategy" (assuming you mean button mashing) involved. And now while this game has the "strategy" you mention you dislike this one too. Make up your mind man.
I never said I disliked DmC. I said it left a bad taste in my mouth. That
does mean that I didn't love it, but it doesn't automatically mean I hate it. It has solid gameplay despite its flaws, and there's definitely strategy involved. There are just a lot of little things that bog down the experience.
As far as "very little strategy" goes, yes, it's the button-mashing. All you do is mow down waves of enemies that can't put up a fight worth a lick. That just doesn't interest me. I don't mind feeling like a badass, but effortlessly mowing down thousands of enemies is more akin to a snorefest.
So let me ask you this, if you dislike this title for having a minimal variety and a Piss easy style system
I said it has minimal variety in the second half. Throughout the first half of the game, it's very reminiscent of DMC 1, 3, and 4. It's all about chaining combos together. Then it turns into "LOL KILL BLUE ENEMIES WITH BLUE WEAPONS AND RED ENEMIES WITH RED WEAPONS". This is fine when done in moderation, but that's pretty much all there is towards the end of the game. It limits your options and takes away the fun of performing endless waves of combos.
I don't know if you were asking about this or not, but as far as the Style system goes... just watch
this video.
That's inexcusable. You know what I would have gotten out of that in DMC3 and DMC4? A D rank. A bare minimum D rank. The Style system in DmC rewards lazy gameplay instead of punishing it, which in turn somewhat discourages chaining together combos like you're supposed to. Getting SSS ranks in DMC3 and DMC4 was tough because you had to work
hard to get them. A SSS rank meant you had an understanding of the mechanics and were a master at mixing up your combos. Only experienced players could get them? Now? They're handed out like candy.
then why is Metal Gear Rising: Revangence in your list and how is that any better?
Metal Gear Rising is infinitely better than DmC. Comparing the two is like comparing the the N64 Zeldas to the GameCube Zeldas. Aaaaaand reasoning is below. (Kind of.)
1. Combatwise its less complex and more repetetive compared to DMC. There is no chaining involved, mostly its either parry or blade mode/zandatsu.
This is a complaint that really irritates me. Rising wasn't going for a chaining combat scheme like the DMC series. Its variety came through the enemies and the different approaches needed to defeat them. The game constantly adds new enemies into the mix and swiftly alternates among the ones that have been seen. The point is to maneuver strategically to gain the advantage, since enemies are constantly on the offensive, and perform a chain of zandatus at the appropriate time, which is incredibly satisfying to do. There's also the option to do things stealthily, which can be quite challenging, albeit the mechanics are very light... but that was the point. It was essentially the polar opposite of Metal Gear Solid where stealth was encouraged and combat was a secondary option. This time combat was encouraged and stealth was a secondary option.
I know that Rising doesn't have as deep of a combo system as DmC, but DmC was following in the footsteps of the previous games where the combat was designed in such a way for you to constantly mix up your combos in order to get more Style points. But the enemy variety was very low. That's perfectly fine due to the insane amount of combos you can perform, but it's the exact opposite situation for Rising. The combo depth is low, but the enemy variety is high. Rising also doesn't have annoying issues like frame rate drops (outside of lengthy sequences of chopping something apart), has a lock-on system, and provides us the Ripper Mode, which provides a sense of badassery, unlike DmC's Devil Trigger mode where everything is flung up into the air, making them harder to hit and harder to chain combos together against all of them.
2. There are only 8 chapters, one of them is a intro/tutorial stage and the other one entirely a boss fight for some reason.
Okay? At least Rising has believable dialogue and likable characters. Besides, what's so bad about a relatively short hack-and-slash game? They're part of a genre that can easily be designed to be played in short bursts, just like handheld games. We're not talking about Zelda or The Elder Scrolls, here. Beyond that, Rising is about as long as the Solid games were, so I don't see why people are in a fuss about its length when they don't complain about it in the main series.
3. Even though there is a higher diffculties like in DMC, the game becomes quickly unbalanced due to overpowered weapons and infinite wigs (which is not considered as cheat since you still can unlock trophies/achievements)
Overpowered weapons? I was actually kind of shocked at how little damage the sub-weapons did compared to their Solid counterparts (which was actually a wise move, it'd be easy to spam them otherwise). The infinite wigs are also completely optional and are placed there for those who would otherwise struggle on higher difficulties, especially Very Hard and Revengeance. I know for a fact I would never have gotten through the Revengeance difficulty without the ability to have an unlimited Ripper Mode.
4. Weapons suck in this game, you basicly want to go back to your sword only because the heavy attack button is also your secondary weapon button. That awkward switch when Raiden suddenly teleports big weapons in its hands. Only the Pole Arm has a decent movepool, Sai and Pincer Blades has no variety at all.
That's one thing I can criticize the game for. I literally never use the weapons gained from bosses, aside from Sam's high frequency blade. They're shallow and felt like they were tacked on, although the Pole Arm is pretty useful at times (I still never use it, I prefer the base heavy attack). Still, that's one minor thing compared to how many consistent issues that hinder the gameplay experience in DmC? Like, 5? Yeah, it's not even a contest there.
So yeah, what you play and what you say are kinda contradicting IMO.
Now that I've gone in-depth with this, I think I can accurately say that assessment is not true.
By the way, just to save face, I'm not trying to belittle you, or anything. I'm just further explaining myself on the situation.
