Devil May Cry 2

owns the first with a vengeance

I thought the graphics were okay, not as bad as I've heard. The phantom doesn't speak anymore, which makes me sad, and the boss fights are just stupid.

The game blows on normal, it has to be played on hard or the must die modes to have fun with it.

Dante is slow as shit this year, and Lucia's quest leaves a lot to be desired...the boss fight that takes place underwater is a fuckin' joke! The infested chopper and flamming bull fights made me work just a tad on Dante's quest.

It took me 2 days to finish DMC. It took less than 8hrs of gaming on and off in one day to finish DMC2... I don't think the game is as bad as people let on, but to compare it to the first is just wrong...

Nice but the Onimusha series is much better...

Onimusha rock!! After seeing how much Onimusha 2 was improved over Onimusha 1, I had very high hopes for Devil May Cry 2. I think that is why I dislike the game as much as I do, because I was hoping for something so much more, and you know capcom is able to deliever. But they dropped the all on this one.

DMC2 is an awesome game.The gameplay is definately better than the 1st game.Its much more deeper now.There are many variations on Dante's combos.He could transform into a super devil(sparda form!) when his health bar is red and he could do MASSIVE damage.Its enough to kill enemies and does tremendous damage to bosses with a lot of health.The gameplay is deeper than you think.
Dante has many amulets to help him increase his power.Same with Lucia.His aerial heart is the most useful to me.You will see that the gameplay is much more smoother than the 1st game's gameplay.The screen does not shake when Dante does his stinger attack as opposed to the 1st game.The swords can be upgraded to LV5.The merciless sword is the best sword in the game.

As for the graphics, they are very good.They look clean and sharp.It amazes me that the game's environments are so big with many buildings and skysrapers and still the game somehow manages to keep a constant frame rate.The graphics are actually detailed, despite what most reviewers say.

Hard mode is indeed fun.The bosses are tougher to beat and they have more health.EGM was dead wrong when they say that the hard mode was easier than the normal mode(WTF are they smoking!?!?).
DMD mode is hard as hell but not as hard as the 1st game's infamous DMD mode.

The unlockables are really fun.Bloody palace has 9999 levels!!!
Can be frustrating to beat.
Dante and Lucia have some new costumes.
Trish is unlocked once you beat Dante's disc on hard mode.She wields a sparda sword(!!!) and she fights like Dante fights in the 1st game!
Her sparda sword could do the roundtrip which is useful.

<small>[ February 02, 2003, 09:38 PM: Message edited by: Devil_Gans ]</small>

Well I finished the game with Dante yesterday and I think the first game is better. Considerably. This game was too easy. I blew through it with using almost nothing but the pistols. The environments lack the detail of the first game, with the same textures all over the place. Many of the environments are big and empty. The game is also shorter, and some of the missions are pathetically so, (Mission 15 anyone?).

The camera is also considerably worse this time. The enemies are dull and the bosses don't have the spectacular deaths that the ones in the first game do. Now the bosses either fade away or shatter. Yawn. The "secret rooms" are also boring. The new map system sucks. And what happened to Dante's trash-talking? It's all but gone, along with the cutscenes. There's little explanation about who Arius is or what he's trying to do.

Despite all this, the game is fun. But compared to the first one, it doesn't push the bar or even touch it in some respects. A dissapointment. 7/10.

cosider it a different game with a different title and developer (Sony or Sega for example) ............ you won't give it less than 8

k'_127:
cosider it a different game with a different title and developer (Sony or Sega for example) ............ you won't give it less than 8

Click to expand...

Yes I would. It wouldn't change the fact that it really isn't anything over the first game.

see ? you stll compare it with the first one.
I meant consider DMC 2 a different game from the 1st

you wouldn't ignore all the great things in both games too wink

k'_127:
see ? you stll compare it with the first one.
I meant consider DMC 2 a different game from the 1st

you wouldn't ignore all the great things in both games too wink

Click to expand...

I see your point, but how can you rate a game if you're not comparing it to something else?

like you rated DMC 1 ......... simply. do you mean you will give your worst game now a 10/10 if it was the only game in the world.

btw, I think the same happened to Rygar, some people (reviewers) gave it low score because they were comparing it with the first DMC

<small>[ February 03, 2003, 11:08 PM: Message edited by: k'_127 ]</small>

k'_127:
like you rated DMC 1 ......... simply. do you mean you will give your worst game now a 10/10 if it was the only game in the world.

btw, I think the same happened to Rygar, some people (reviewers) gave it low score because they were comparing it with the first DMC

Click to expand...

Well, if there were only one game in the world, it would be pointless to rate it, so no. wink

RiotoftheBlood:

k'_127:
like you rated DMC 1 ......... simply. do you mean you will give your worst game now a 10/10 if it was the only game in the world.

btw, I think the same happened to Rygar, some people (reviewers) gave it low score because they were comparing it with the first DMC

Click to expand...

Well, if there were only one game in the world, it would be pointless to rate it, so no. wink

Click to expand...

........ annoyed

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.