What do you think of the enemies in DMC4 vs DMC3 enemies?

[Ceriss]

Sometimes I think DMC4 moved in an annoyingly gimmicky direction.

Blitz for example... much like blood goyles you have to use gunfire on them first but unlike blood goyles they can actually wreck you. Plus they have an attack that is inescapable without DT if they manage to grab you.

In DMC3 most enemies were stunnable and the ones that weren't... Arachne had enough tell from it's attacks and none of them were too difficult to dodge. The Fallen were dangerous but once again their attacks had enough tell for you to dodge.

In DMC4, Frost is difficult to stun, it's ice projectiles are ridiculously fast too and it often hits you when you're in the air. Assault have a similar attack with their nails and are also not so easily stunnable however they're attacks have enough tell imo.

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ Chimera enemies. You have to ensure the tentacles are down before you even get close else you're gonna take a ♥♥♥♥ ton of damage. All this while fighting dozens at a time.

Faust has that ridiculous summoned swords attack that can wipe you out.

In DMC3 I don't remember the enemies being quite such a pain. I feel they were balanced better.

Is it just me?

I've been thinking about this for a while but as I started going through DMD again I remembered what a pain some of the enemies can be.

Basically in DMC3 I felt the bosses were scary but in DMC4 the bosses are cake and the mobs are scary instead.

[Dankey Kang]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von William Shakesman:

I don't think you have much better tools in DMC4 for handling enemies than you did in DMC1. The variety is there but it is not appreciably more game-altering capabilities aside from juggling.

What is a Chimera Assault?

Royal Guard and Trickster man.

Chimera + the reptile

[Dankey Kang]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Kyokkai:

Sometimes I think DMC4 moved in an annoyingly gimmicky direction.

Blitz for example... much like blood goyles you have to use gunfire on them first but unlike blood goyles they can actually wreck you. Plus they have an attack that is inescapable without DT if they manage to grab you.

Blitz can be killed in multiple ways.
You can melee him and absorb the damage if you RG with right timing.

In DMC4, Frost is difficult to stun, it's ice projectiles are ridiculously fast too and it often hits you when you're in the air.

Frosts can be juggled quite effectively in the air, takes some jump cancelling to do so.

Assault have a similar attack with their nails and are also not so easily stunnable however they're attacks have enough tell imo.

Same as frosts, but easier.

♥♥♥♥ing Chimera enemies. You have to ensure the tentacles are down before you even get close else you're gonna take a ♥♥♥♥ ton of damage. All this while fighting dozens at a time.

You can shoot the wraps or long range kill them with pandora/dark slayer/overdrive etc.

Faust has that ridiculous summoned swords attack that can wipe you out.

Faust has a huuuuuge hitbox that you can easily jump cancell on.
Best method of weakening the cloak guys is to jump above and just rainstorm.

[Two-Timer-Twan]

the only problem i had with vergil was fighting the 2 elite Mephisto's"The cloaked enemy's i think" in the jungle platforming part, his ranged attack doesnt seem to do enough damage to be efficient unless in DT mode

[Dankey Kang]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Lazy Spartan:

the only problem i had with vergil was fighting the 2 elite Mephisto's"The cloaked enemy's i think" in the jungle platforming part, his ranged attack doesnt seem to do enough damage to be efficient unless in DT mode

You can lure them into the safe zone, kill them there and stinger jump onto the platform.

[Broadsword]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von William Shakesman:

Nevan is alright as a pattern boss. Not quite as good as Ys but no DMC boss comes close to Ys-tier except for maybe Vergil 3.

Nevan isn't actually a pattern boss if you're playing it right, but it's not the answer to Nevan is exactly clear cut. You need full DT before you can really play around with her and for a typical playthrough most players won't prioritize Purple Orbs immediately like they should for purchases.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von William Shakesman:

DMC3's roster has some seriously ♥♥♥♥♥♥ bosses though. Nobody can defend the heart, the big centipede thing, the shadow, the chariot, or the stupid big ugly blue jellybean. But the good bosses are still better than most of DMC4's bosses. Nothing in DMC4 is as good as Vergil 3.

There's only two on that list who are actually objectively bad bosses, the rest are pretty much not knowing how to play the game. The heart is a straight up fight, so it's still not a bad boss. You can completely ignore most of the pattern (again) if you're familiar with the fight, and you can even permanently kill one of the three hearts if you're extremely familiar (and good at spiking damage).

The shadow and centipede are both ping-pong bosses. They each have range attacks you can knock back with melee and that's how you're supposed to spike damage to them.

Arkham is a bad boss, but to say Geryon is is also, guess what, not understanding patterns. If the chicken segment isn't obvious, you're supposed to play chicken with them and win.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von William Shakesman:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Broadsword:

One dimensional punching bags are better than enemies you can't deal damage to except with certain weapons.

Not really.

Yeah, it is, otherwise DmC wouldn't be considered so ♥♥♥♥ as to have that mechanic completely removed from it.

[William Shakesman]

Yeah, it is, otherwise DmC wouldn't be considered so ♥♥♥♥ as to have that mechanic completely removed from it.

No it is not. Making that sort of blanket statement is just an example of not actually understanding how certain game mechanics interact with each other. And of course you're not actually going to understand what DmC did wrong if you just take what is "passive voice considered" about it as gospel.

[Broadsword]

Then prove it wrong through your indepth knowledge of game mechani-

Oh wait

[William Shakesman]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Broadsword:

Then prove it wrong through your indepth knowledge of game mechani-

Oh wait

I thought you were playing a game where the only thing you needed to do to wave away something someone else said was to imply they were ignorant. You had been doing such a swell job of saying things without evidence or completely unrelated to what was actually being said for a couple of posts now and so I figured I should get a turn too.

[Broadsword]

If I describe how to beat all those bosses, I'll take all the fun out of it. Do you want me to?

'Cause I can spoil that whole playing the game and learning it thing.

[William Shakesman]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Broadsword:

If I describe how to beat all those bosses, I'll take all the fun out of it. Do you want me to?

It's hardly necessary. I've already beaten them. But you can't have your cake and eat it too. If I'm mistaken, then you should provide the exact same evidence you demand, or hold your tongue. Surely you can see you just come across as an ass if you don't.

Speaking of which, enemies that can only be attacked with certain weapons are a staple of action games. We've had it in everything from Zelda to DMC1 to Guacamelee to TW101, which had even more color coding than DmC. It's not a bad mechanic in and of itself. The enemies in DmC have too much health to support such a limitation, and the limited weapons do not have enough variety to carry through for the length of a fight like that, not even counting that the angel weapons are generally sucky for anything other than the frisbee's command moves. People blame the color coding when they really mean to blame the implementation.

You could say adding characters to DMC4SE acknowledges it's so ♥♥♥♥ it needs more fun characters to play as to be playable. Seriously now. Pick a better reason.

[GroxeleZero]

Personally i prefer the enemies in DMC4. Much of the enemies in DMC3 weren't comboable, like Blood Goyles, Chessmen, Arachene's. They're challenging when thrown into compositions but enemies like that dont quite reward you as much for knowing how to combo in this game. While in DMC4 much of the cast of enemies can be juggled and combod but it's not stupid because all the enemies have different physics, gravity, etc. which means you need to learn how to combo them differently.

[Broadsword]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von William Shakesman:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Broadsword:

If I describe how to beat all those bosses, I'll take all the fun out of it. Do you want me to?

It's hardly necessary. I've already beaten them. But you can't have your cake and eat it too. If I'm mistaken, then you should provide the exact same evidence you demand, or hold your tongue. Surely you can see you just come across as an ass if you don't.

Beating them and actually understanding them is two different things. When you're SSing the entire mission and wrecking the boss's face is when you can say you understand them.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von William Shakesman:

Speaking of which, enemies that can only be attacked with certain weapons are a staple of action games. We've had it in everything from Zelda to DMC1 to Guacamelee to TW101, which had even more color coding than DmC. It's not a bad mechanic in and of itself. The enemies in DmC have too much health to support such a limitation, and the limited weapons do not have enough variety to carry through for the length of a fight like that, not even counting that the angel weapons are generally sucky for anything other than the frisbee's command moves. People blame the color coding when they really mean to blame the implementation.

No, the mechanic is ♥♥♥♥♥♥. Two quick questions: is Zelda an action game? No, have people complained about the mechanic in TW101? Three guesses.

Itsuno directly said himself during the Capcomunity streams that it's something to avoid at all costs (for an action game) which is one of the primary differences between Dragon's Dogma and Devil May Cry. Before you mention that, let's remember that DD is a roleplaying game first and an action game second.

The mechanic you can defend is an enemy having high resistances to encourage or discourage certain strategies - like Enigmas in Devil May Cry 3 having extremely high resistance to ranged attacks. Making enemies invulnerable except to certain weapons and attacks is just incredibly dumb, dull, and becomes extremely repetitive. In a game that judges you for your combat performance and variety, it absolutely 100% does not have a place and no amount of better implementation can save it, the alternative to encourage different strategies rather than force the player is always better.

[William Shakesman]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Broadsword:

Beating them and actually understanding them is two different things. When you're SSing the entire mission and wrecking the boss's face is when you can say you understand them.

And yet to you disliking them and understanding them are apparently opposites. It is impossible to both understand and dislike. I'm actually a little jealous. If all of my opinions were so, I would never actually have to defend any of my preferences. Definitionally, if you think what I like is bad, you don't understand it. What a clever little twist that is. Ah, if only I were as clever as you.

No, the mechanic is ♥♥♥♥♥♥. Two quick questions: is Zelda an action game? No, have people complained about the mechanic in TW101? Three guesses.

The first question is a red herring down a twisting alleyway of genre classification wankery. The second, I would answer no. I've seen nobody complain about it and countless people defend it when I have brought it up. People complaining about it is a crappy metric anyway.

Itsuno directly said himself during the Capcomunity streams that it's something to avoid at all costs (for an action game) which is one of the primary differences between Dragon's Dogma and Devil May Cry. Before you mention that, let's remember that DD is a roleplaying game first and an action game second.

Dragon's Dogma's problems are too numerous to get into here, but Itsuno is hardly the chief expert on the genre. He has an opinion, yes, but there is no standing to claim he has the sole dominion over what mechanic is forbidden forever.

I am curious what his defense is of Blitzes though is.

The mechanic you can defend is an enemy having high resistances to encourage or discourage certain strategies - like Enigmas in Devil May Cry 3 having extremely high resistance to ranged attacks. Making enemies invulnerable except to certain weapons and attacks is just incredibly dumb, dull, and becomes extremely repetitive.

Your defense of the incredibly minute difference in mechanics here is far more dumb, dull, and extremely repetitive than the mechanic itself. Extremely high resistance is functionally equivalent to immunity. Gamers will be equally vexed at a strategy rendered almost completely ineffective versus completely ineffective.

[Broadsword]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von William Shakesman:

And yet to you disliking them and understanding them are apparently opposites. It is impossible to both understand and dislike. I'm actually a little jealous. If all of my opinions were so, I would never actually have to defend any of my preferences. Definitionally, if you think what I like is bad, you don't understand it. What a clever little twist that is. Ah, if only I were as clever as you.

I know you're trying to be witty, but, seriously, Nevan's fight isn't a pattern fight unless you're bad, if you're good at it, the only consistent 'pattern' she has is the habit to hang around one side of the room or the other, which I think fails to meet the metric. Properly fighting her is, as with virtually every other boss in the series, a straight up honest fight. Not understanding the way it's supposed to work devolves the fight into working around her patterns.

Let's not forget Geryon, either. This one I'll actually be really clear with you because I don't think you'll ever figure it out: you can stop Geryon dead in his tracks at any point in time during the fight when he's actually on the ground. It's not only riding around on the back of the carriage, but several other valid tactics which I doubt you've bothered experimenting with because most of the strategies you probably learned to fight these bosses came out of some Prima guide from years ago.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von William Shakesman:

The first question is a red herring down a twisting alleyway of genre classification wankery. The second, I would answer no. I've seen nobody complain about it and countless people defend it when I have brought it up. People complaining about it is a crappy metric anyway.

Really? Incredible, because the few people who I know to have played and have been action game fans have indeed ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ about, but you're not going to find those likes hanging around anywhere other than forums where things like Bayonetta and Devil May Cry will be discussed. Casual gamers are quite fine with being firmly told "No"

Ursprünglich geschrieben von William Shakesman:

Dragon's Dogma's problems are too numerous to get into here, but Itsuno is hardly the chief expert on the genre. He has an opinion, yes, but there is no standing to claim he has the sole dominion over what mechanic is forbidden forever.

What do Dragon's Dogma's problems have to do with this? Nothing. But it does contain enemies which require set attacks to beat. Try and beat a Metal Golem with a Magick Archer.

As far as whether or not he's the chief expert, I think it depends on the subject. Were we to look for other directors who have produced blockbuster action games that actually have depth in them, we basically have him, and the other guy who directed Devil May Cry, Hideki Kamiya.

From the director's standpoint, he realizes it's a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ mechanic (yet we've seen the Bloodgoyle and Blitz, so we can take that with a grain of salt sure I'll give you that), and considering he's directed games like this and also worked on fighting games, I think he probably has a pretty fair understanding.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von William Shakesman:

Your defense of the incredibly minute difference in mechanics here is far more dumb, dull, and extremely repetitive than the mechanic itself. Extremely high resistance is functionally equivalent to immunity. Gamers will be equally vexed at a strategy rendered almost completely ineffective versus completely ineffective.

This is where we get back to you have no idea about of a given enemy in the discussion. When I say Enigma's have incredibly high tolerances to ranged attacks, do you know what that means exactly? I really doubt it, so I'll spell it out for you like Geryon:

An Enigma has 110 knockback resistance. For any standard enemy in Devil May Cry, that's actually extremely high. However, their actual damage resistance, seperated into melee damage (all melee attacks + Rebellion's ranged attacks which count as melee) and ranged damage (all other ranged attacks than Rebellion's), means that functionally, we see this resistance as about 100 for melee weapons (one knockback dealing hit from Beowulf can deliver knockback) but functionally as 110 for ranged weapons. This translates that the second most powerful gun in the game, Spiral, can't deliver knockback to the enemy in one shot on a non DT-Enigma, meaning that generally, your best rewarded option (with the highest risk) is to close in and engage in melee, but shooting twice with Spiral can still knock back the Enigma (as a functional waste of potential knockback).

Why don't you come back once you know what you're talking about or is this going to be like the other thread where you end up finally conceding to the discussion that's been happening and go hide in another thread? I mean, ♥♥♥♥, go ahead and act indignant in some random thread but when someone who actually knows what they're talking about comes in the only thing you're going to manage to do is make yourself look like an ass.

[William Shakesman]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Broadsword:

Really? Incredible, because the few people who I know to have played and have been action game fans have indeed ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ about, but you're not going to find those likes hanging around anywhere other than forums where things like Bayonetta and Devil May Cry will be discussed. Casual gamers are quite fine with being firmly told "No"

It was in a Bayonetta forum actually.

What do Dragon's Dogma's problems have to do with this? Nothing. But it does contain enemies which require set attacks to beat. Try and beat a Metal Golem with a Magick Archer

You brought up DD. Not me.

This is where we get back to you have no idea about of a given enemy in the discussion. When I say Enigma's have incredibly high tolerances to ranged attacks, do you know what that means exactly? I really doubt it, so I'll spell it out for you like Geryon:

An Enigma has 110 knockback resistance. For any standard enemy in Devil May Cry, that's actually extremely high. However, their actual damage resistance, seperated into melee damage (all melee attacks + Rebellion's ranged attacks which count as melee) and ranged damage (all other ranged attacks than Rebellion's), means that functionally, we see this resistance as about 100 for melee weapons (one knockback dealing hit from Beowulf can deliver knockback) but functionally as 110 for ranged weapons. This translates that the second most powerful gun in the game, Spiral, can't deliver knockback to the enemy in one shot on a non DT-Enigma, meaning that generally, your best rewarded option (with the highest risk) is to close in and engage in melee, but shooting twice with Spiral can still knock back the Enigma (as a functional waste of potential knockback).

Why don't you come back once you know what you're talking about or is this going to be like the other thread where you end up finally conceding to the discussion that's been happening and go hide in another thread? I mean, ♥♥♥♥, go ahead and act indignant in some random thread but when someone who actually knows what they're talking about comes in the only thing you're going to manage to do is make yourself look like an ass.

That's an impressive recitation of stats but it has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. It's a bad habit of yours.