Devil May Cry 3: Dante's Awakening (2005)

This game is a stylish, fast-paced action game that revitalized the series after the poorly received DMC2, which in my opinion was not all that bad, is just that the third entry is galaxies away better. As a prequel, it explores the origins of Dante and his rivalry with his twin brother Vergil, the game is known for its punishing difficulty, deep combat system, and over-the-top style, even though most games of this genre had these traits, this one is a big standout, which says a lot.

One unique mechanic is that Dante can switch between multiple combat styles (like Swordmaster or Gunslinger), adding tons of variety and replayability, since you can level up these skills. The boss fights are intense, it introduced some of the best bosses in gaming history, even for today's standards.

The music is adrenaline-pumping, I consider this one of the best OSTs of all time. And the story, while melodramatic, fits the game’s gothic tone, best part for me are the characters, they are very charismatic compared to the more bland ones of the previous titles. Visually, it pushed the PS2 impressively, this is a challenging but rewarding game that helped define the Hack'N Slash genre, I highly recommend playing the more modern re-releases though.

This is the sequel fans were expecting from DMC 2. It's fast, smooth and tough as nails. The nicest change is the ability to toggle lock-on and change your target which gives you more control compared to the first game. The lock-on targeting isn't perfect and it can feel a bit clunky trying to select the right target. Fortunately this isn't important too often. The enemies that hold giant explosive orbs are some of the few cases where this matters.

In addition, the camera has drastically been improved, though still not perfect across the board. It still ops for mostly fixed and dev directed camera, though there are some areas where you can move the camera around more freely. It can still feel a bit clunky in combat when near transition positions (where the camera angle will change) but these were fortunately pretty scarce from my play through. The biggest issue with the camera (which was sort of a problem in the first game) would be enemies charging/attacking you from off-camera which can be near impossible to react to. You basically just have to keep moving to mitigate damage from these cheap attacks. Overall, the placement of the fixed camera is an improvement over the first game.

Comboing is pretty similar to the first game. It's about hitting the attack button with varied delays and pressing directional buttons. One big improvement over the original is in switching between weapons. It's now more fluid (near instant) and allows you to quickly swap between melee/ranged and different melee weapons mid combo which feels fantastic. Not all weapons are good, but it's still fun to experiment. One new twist they add is in "styles" where you can swap around one ability between a few different options. You can opt for a dash that helps with avoiding attacks and mobility, you can improve your ranged or melee combat and finally you get a style that can parry and counter attack.

Boss and enemy variety is a huge improvement over the first game as well. In the first DMC, you actually never fight more than one type of enemy. Here they will throw multiple varieties at the same time which adds more depth to combat. Forcing you to adapt mid combat. Most enemies are enjoyable to fight but I found the knights that fly (who you have to hit in the back) to not be fun due to how much they break up the flow of combat and the blood gargoyles. Flying enemies are just annoying.

While these graphics won't blow you away (a PS2 game to be fair) they are a big improvement over the first game. There are plenty of levels that legit feel like art. It's very atmospheric despite the game using relatively muted colors. They still managed to make things feel fresh despite a muted palette.

The level design is decent. My only gripe with it is how you basically have to navigate through the entire game twice. They do add some twists on the second lap but overall it is a bit disappointing that they rehash the map to pad the game runtime. I did feel the game ran a bit too long. I was never bored but it was starting to wear out its welcome towards the end.

The other issues I have with this game is the difficulty curve and lack of innovation. It's a safe but well refined sequel. I personally felt the tutorial mini-boss was too hard. I beat DMC and jumped right into DMC 3 and was getting my ass kicked by that asshole. You have to fight through a gauntlet of enemies that have a tendency to lunge and attack you from off camera, making avoiding damage very hard, and you also have a very limited moveset given you haven't unlocked anything. I died a frustrating amount of times to that bastard and it was only normal difficulty... I suppose it forced me to master the changes to combat... but they really should have had the checkpoint be at the start of the fight with the Grim Reaper. Such a brutal intro to a game. Most bosses after that felt either fair or too easy. I did find Vergil's last form to be too frustrating, given it forces you to do hit and run tactics which isn't fun. I'd rather have a duel like the previous two fights against him. O well. Still a fun ride and worth my time.

Devil May cry 3 dante's awakening is a 2005 action, adventure, cut and shoot game.Capcom, the producer and distributor of the game, did a great job.The story of the game is as follows.A character named Dante sets out to stop his brother Vergil.In Vergil he is trying to open the demon world.The gameplay is as follows.in this game consisting of 20 tasks, you cut the creature.Boss battles are legendary.The music of the game is wonderful.The graphics are not bad.My rating for the game: 10/10 (y) Good games to everyone 🙂

По DMC 3 прям видно, что на середине проекта кончились деньги и все покатилось прямо в ад.

Очень обидно, первая половина игры просто гениальна, а потом вдруг оппа, в этой комнате я уже был... и в этой... и в этой... а тут уже сплошной реюз старых локаций, вообще ничего нового.

И финальный masterstroke - сначала заставить игрока биться со всеми боссами игры по второму разу, а потом выдать ему финального босса, бой с которым по сути состоит из узеньких окон возможности, разделенных 2-минутными фазами "босс неуязвим и регенерит все, что ты ему нанес за прошлое окно".

Ну как так, Ицуно, ну как так.

This PS2 hack and slash-classic really delivered a concentrated, expertly crafted gaming experience in a time when I have become disappointed with so many supposedly great contemporary games. It is also sort of a melancholy reminder of a time when triple A-titles were the major providers of artistic merit within the medium.

In contrast to the horrendous second entry in the franchise, Devil May Cry 3 is a return to form and a true evolution of the formula established in Devil May Cry. Back is the labyrinthian castle environments, edgy atmosphere and elaborate fighting system, but everything feels more coherent this time. Dante's cocky personality is ever so present in the cutscenes, something that is perfectly reflected in the stylish melee combat. One second Dante is asking a gigantic three-headed demon dog to go for a walk, the next he is interlinking sword combos with devastating guitar licks of doom to decimate hordes of giant spiders. This confidence in identity helps a lot to build a sense of a cohesive whole, something just clicks.

The strongest aspect of the game is without a doubt the combat. Almost every single enemy has an interesting pattern, requiring adaptability and quick thinking to survive the onslaught. Luckily, you are able to express yourself fully via a small but diverse arsenal of blades, guns and gauntlets. Most noteworthy is the ability (and encouragement) to switch between two melee and two gun weapons right in the heat of battle, allowing for endless creativity in chaining combos and utilising different the strengths of different weapon types on the go.

I am no expert of fighting games or classic beat 'em ups, but i still found the gameplay both exhilarating and manageable. The feeling of actually getting better when trying to understand enemy behaviours and executing combos or strategies is incredible. A special mention goes out to some of the boss battles, who rank among the most impressive fights from any game when it came out in 2005.

The fighting is balanced out with simpler puzzles and Zelda-lite dungeon exploration, as well as some platforming elements. The platforming is a bit stiff, and it is obvious that the Dantes movement is not designed for advanced jumping, but there are luckily only a few instances where this actually becomes irritating (I'm looking at you, giant flying insect snake).

I think my only major gripe with the game is in its scoring system. I love the idea that how varied you fight in regards to combos and weapon switching affects how you are ranked in stylish points, but to me it seems counterintuitive that you are punished with a lower final score for taking your time exploring different missions. In game you are encouraged to try some off-beat paths, either to find secret missions or valuable items. This is great game design and helps to make the world feel like a real place rather than a linear gauntlet. However, the scoring indicates that you should play through the level as fast as possible. I think these two ideas clash in an otherwise very harmonic experience.

This leads to my largest confusion with this game: It seemingly wants to be a swift arcade action game and an interconnected dungeon explorer at the same time. I have never understood the idea that Devil May Cry is a franchise typically described as intended to be replayed over and over due to this specific duality of intent. Devil May Cry 3 took me 20 hours to beat all in all on normal difficulty, 10 of those I would guess are from boss battles. It was hard, but not frustrating, and left me with a feeling of accomplishment and satisfaction. This is the exact opposite of a game I would describe as intended to be replayed. When I think of games designed around the idea of replaying, I think of shorter titles with far less exploration, such as shoot em ups or rogue likes.

It is worth noting that I do not necessarily feel that this discourse surrounding the game makes it worse by any means, nor do I question any fans who find enjoyment from becoming experts at this masterful game. Almost every great classic have a dedicated player base focused on speedrunning or other ways of reaching perfection with the systems, and that's wonderful. I am just baffled at how such a large, difficult and explorative game has gotten this label. No one would sell Dark Souls as "that RPG that's constructed around the idea of replaying several times".

That aside, Devil May Cry 3 stands as a stark reminder of the inherent qualities found in committing wholeheartedly to a few core design principles and constructing your game around those. Many modern action games could benefit from trying to apply this mindset to their own creation process, instead of competing on who is the best multi billion company at remaking Assassin's Creed.

This review will be a bit ranty and I know I will offend a lot of people with it. I have absolutely zero idea how this game got so popular. DMC 3 feels bloated and repetitive, the pacing of the game is absolutely terrible and the boss designs just straight up suck. "oh, so I heard you like bosses that don't take any damage"? This happens with three bosses. And you have to fight the same goddamn boss three times in the game. The bosses aren't even hard, they're just plain out boring and frustrating to fight against. Plus one mission is basically just a boss run. Overall, there is a lot of recycling happening in the game. And the difficulty of the game doesn't stem from difficult fights or situations per se, it stems from the fact that you gotta restart the WHOLE GODDAMN REPETITIVE AND TIRESOME mission when you die. There is a big difference between a difficult game that remains fair and rewards the player for learning the game and enduring the difficulty and just plain terrible, infuriating and annoying game design. Sadly, Devil may cry 3 is the ladder. But somehow, a lot of times hard difficulty and frustrating game design get mixed up in the eyes of the players.

I played through the whole DMC HD Collection, and I was really looking forward to DMC3 because of all the praise. I didn't expect though, that the oldest one, DMC1, remains the best game of the collection. I really regret having forced myself to play through DMC 2 and 3. I really hope that DMC 4 will be a bit better again, and I'm really looking forward to DMC Definitive Edition and DMC5. But after playing DMC3 which is considered to be an amazing game, I probably shouldn't get my hopes up too high.

This game is gold, but gosh does it feel like it eats up your time and make you feel trash at the same time. Took me 3 hours just to beat the second battle with Vergil on normal.

I'm seriously confused as to how Devil May Cry-games are described as intended to be replayed over and over in order to achieve better scores. This game will likely take me 30 hours just to beat on normal difficulty at this phase (with an average B-grade on most levels). If I would dedicate myself at beating this game with S-rank on harder difficulties, it would probably require 100 additional hours of gameplay. That's like three JRPGS of time.

If I - a person who genuinely love this game and have dedicated lots of time and effort to learn enemy patterns and weapon movesets - do not find the prospect of replaying levels appealing enough to warrant a try, then who is meant to adhere to this supposedly central idea of how Devil May Cry-games are supposed to be played?