DMC Downgrade #2: Hax Edition

[Armorchompy]

Is it me or is "Radiated despair" way too vague and flowery for us to count it as an ability?

 

[EFÍTÉ]

Earl, just google extra sensorial perception, 6TH is understood and studied as supernatural phenomenons / pseudoscience.
DMC is literally about supernatural entities doing supernatural things. Cant be just people being feared normaly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrasensory_perception
Here just check Earl, and there is a list of sources used.

Is it me or is "Radiated despair" way too vague and flowery for us to count it as an ability?

Aura in DMC actually does exist, even when the first scan isnt used, the second scan i showed showed aura fear hax feat.

There is another aura fear feat here, where Dante aura fear hax affects V (dante's aura can been see on the window).

Before someone says the window was already like that before.
Four pages before, we get a clear shot of the window behind dante, and no aura white ''thing can be see.

So, i dont believe to be flowery language when aura its showed to exist and is used to fear hax.

 

[Sevil Natas]

okay so im back, and since regen is gonna have its own thread, im gonna focus on the immortality type 5 negation, if you can bypass type 5 just with NPI why even give immortality type 5 to beings with NEP to begin with?

That is wrong, NPI can include interacting with non-existent beings.

i worded this wrong, i meant interacting with something that isnt physical but exists =/= killing something that doesnt exist, clearly if it does not exist it cannot be killed in the traditionnal sense, even if dante could interact with mundus in that situation, he cant kill him, because getting stabbed isnt enough to kill something with Type 5 because that would be the case with physical beings that have type 5 due to being unbound by life & death

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Earl, just google extra sensorial perception, 6TH is understood and studied as supernatural phenomenons / pseudoscience.

Ok but the issue is humans have this. So it being pseudo-science irl doesn't mean much as the verse considers it a natural thing humans have. The issue with that whole thing is the fear is not sth demons are doing. It's something humans have in DMC.

In DMC humans have a 6th sense that warns them of danger. This 6th sense would ring when they are in front of a demon due to how much more powerful demons are. However this wouldn't ring when you are so much more powerful than a demon. Cus the demon poses no threat.

It's not whether the 6th sense exists irl or not that is the issue. It is the fact that it's more an ability of humans to pick up danger than it is an ability of demons to force minds to fear them.

There is another aura fear feat here, where Dante aura fear hax affects V (dante's aura can been see on the window).

Nah bruv, that is just artistic design. It's like giving an ability to Dante cus his eyes in that shot became round and shiny, or that his face became dark. Or giving something to V because of how the 2nd pannel in the 2nd page you showed looks like that. It's just to artistically visualize Dante being angry. It's not a fear hax, you can even hear Griffon say "this is bad", implying that it's not the fear hax that's the issue, it's the fact that Dante is mad and they better not anger him any further.

 

[EFÍTÉ]

People lets focus on novel volume 1 changes
Lets not derail it again.
(talking to Sevil)

 

[EFÍTÉ]

Where you getting 6th sense = sense of danger ?
I want scans, what i showed contradicts what you are arguing here.
I already predicting nothing being concluded if only words are to proof something.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

I want scans, what i showed contradicts what you are arguing here

What? Which scans?

6th sense depends on what the author wants it to be. But even if you don't want to call it a sense of danger, whatever it is, it is this sense that tells them about demons. Rather than demons manipulating humans.

So again it's humans having an ability in this case. So whatever you want to use as the 6th sense it is fine by me, the issue is that it doesn't change what's happening (the 6th sense triggers when demons are near).

 

[Antvasima]

I have to unsubscribe to this thread due to time constraints. You can contact me later after you have reached a conclusion, if you need any help from me.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Bump

 

[Theglassman12]

Alright, finally finished with school stuff and some errands, but before I continue, did Matter manipulation get rejected while I was gone cause I don't see it on the OP.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

did Matter manipulation get rejected

Nothing happened while you were gone. So feel free to say what you wanted to say for matter manip.

 

[Thehunter077]

Does thread still limited if we reach 500 comment?

 

[Theglassman12]

@LordGinSama I literally have an entire article on how weaponized beam particles works, they literally state to disrupt the molecular bonds and break them apart once they collide with the atoms and subatomic particles. So yes I do know how weaponized particle beams work. Also why does the weapons not being made have anything to do with this debate? The actual theory has been shown by numerous researchers in terms of how it works. The weapons not being made doesn't debunk the theory existing, by this logic no one should have teleportation via portals or any devices just because we never got around to making it, that's an illogical argument to make.

Ok and that has absolutely nothing to do with this argument, Devil May cry not being futuristic doesn't debunk the fact that they use particle beams as an actual term for the attack Mundus uses.

@Firephoenixearl literally in a cutscene he gets shot by Mundus' attacks, so yes, the argument of him getting hit by Mundus' attacks is indeed valid cause that happened, Unless we have some statements on Mundus not being able to land a single blow on Dante, which is obviously not the case, there's no reason to assume he didn't get hit by anything Mundus threw at him.

Why are they not in character? Explain that. Saying it's not in character and not remotely explaining why is not an argument that holds any ground.

Did you actually read the page for Matter Manipulation or did you just gloss over it? Cause both molecular AND atomic level are a part of matter manipulation. Also it does count as matter manipulation, affecting matter in that way counts as matter manipulation, literally everyone with a high frequency blade from Metal Gear Solid has matter manipulation thanks to cutting on that level. Something Twellas pointed out in this very thread and you conveniently ignored his point.

Doesn't really matter when the particle beam mundus fires in the game is a giant beam that engulfs Dante so it doesn't debunk my point.

It's not heating things, its breaking things apart through energy at an atomic level, which by definition counts as matter manipulation, regardless if it's not manipulating it to the extent that you think it should be.

@Thehunter077 no, this thread can go on for a long while and it'll not run out of space. One of the few things this forum has over the old one.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I think Glass brings up some good points.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

literally in a cutscene he gets shot by Mundus' attacks, so yes, the argument of him getting hit by Mundus' attacks is indeed valid cause that happened, Unless we have some statements on Mundus not being able to land a single blow on Dante, which is obviously not the case, there's no reason to assume he didn't get hit by anything Mundus threw at him.

Yeah and what happens to Dante there? Oh yeah he gets pierced straight through. It honestly amazes me how you argue that Dante resists when he gets pierced straight through by the thing you argue he resists.

Why are they not in character? Explain that. Saying it's not in character and not remotely explaining why is not an argument that holds any ground.

We treat them as such. When have you ever seen Dante use them in a cutscene? It's the same with all game verses with free ability choice from the player. We don't say warframes start with whatever we want cus i play them, we look at what they do when we're not controlling them and we discuss based on that. Saying Dante uses X in character cus some random dude's grandma likes to spam it against mobs ain't a good argument Glass.

Did you actually read the page for Matter Manipulation or did you just gloss over it? Cause both molecular AND atomic level are a part of matter manipulation.

My point flew right over your head. Molecular and atomic manipulation are part of matter manip. Just a thing that randomly works on a molecular level isn't matter manip. Otherwise (as i've said), by that logic Absolute Zero is matter manip, Heat Manipulation is matter manip, having a sword sharp enough to cut atoms is matter manip etc. And i believe i don't have to explain why saying "yes" to those cases is dumb.

lso it does count as matter manipulation, affecting matter in that way counts as matter manipulation, literally everyone with a high frequency blade from Metal Gear Solid has matter manipulation thanks to cutting on that level. Something Twellas pointed out in this very thread and you conveniently ignored his point.

2 wrongs don't make a right. It's pure durability negation.

Doesn't really matter when the particle beam mundus fires in the game is a giant beam that engulfs Dante so it doesn't debunk my point.

Oh it does, cus in the cutscene he got f-ed by those same attacks. Using gameplay things that are contradicted by cutscene on top of the fact that Dante has gone out of his way not to tank them in cutscenes when possible does debunk your point very much.

It's not heating things, its breaking things apart through energy at an atomic level, which by definition counts as matter manipulation, regardless if it's not manipulating it to the extent that you think it should be.

Through energy. You apply energy to the atom then it does whatever the f it wants to do. You aren't controlling it and you don't decide where it goes. Similarly heat does the EXACT same thing, it applies energy to the things then they end up doing whatever the hell they want due to having their kinetic energy increased so they move around so much they can break the structure which is what turning things from solid to liquid to gas is.

 

[LordGinSama]

No offense to Glass but he inherently has no clue has to what he's even talking about. Hell he doesn't even provide citation for his claims, which are also blatantly false and quite frankly pulled from his own ass.

@LordGinSama I literally have an entire article on how weaponized beam particles works,

Stop bringing this up as an attempt to strengthen your argument. You based this argument off a theoretical weapon that's never been tested before, has years of failed and flawed research to the point where even the Pentagon stopped their research on this concept after 20 years. A typical Particle Beam once again, does not distribute the molecular structure of a person or object. You also really just gave me a link to a document that's 20+ years old that was made when the concepts of Particle Beam Weapons came out as if that's legitimate citation? It's honestly getting quite annoying having to explain this to you while you blatantly ignore everything. The Pentagon gave up on the notion of Neutral and Weapon Beams for a very good reason.

they literally state to disrupt the molecular bonds and break them apart once they collide with the atoms and subatomic particles. So yes I do know how weaponized particle beams work.

No you quite obviously don't considering the fact that our top scientists can't even figure it out, once again it's a flawed concept that the creators literally gave up on and are pursuing other laser / microwave based weapons. If that's the best form of citation and research you could provide after the literal week we gave you then we can stop arguing right now.

Also why does the weapons not being made have anything to do with this debate? The actual theory has been shown by numerous researchers in terms of how it works.

And said research doesn't hold up in modern times. You either lack proper reading comprehension or you simply failed to do more than 5 minutes of research. Instead what you did was Google "How do particle beams work" into Google and grabbed a random article that you read briefly.

The weapons not being made doesn't debunk the theory existing, by this logic no one should have teleportation via portals or any devices just because we never got around to making it, that's an illogical argument to make.

Well first of all, that's a very bad analogy considering your literally comparing Real Life to ******* fiction. Are you for real? The only illogical argument is the one you just presented. And it's not just the Weapon never being made, but rather it never being tested and thrown away and left in the dirt.

Ok and that has absolutely nothing to do with this argument, Devil May cry not being futuristic doesn't debunk the fact that they use particle beams as an actual term for the attack Mundus uses.

It has absolutely everything to do with this argument. Why on Earth would the Devil May Cry verse, who are much, much less technology advanced than us be able to produce weapons and such that we can't even begin to understand? Please don't try to act like a intellectual by providing extremely outdated and debunked citation that you only very briefly skimmed over. and if I may, I'm gonna use the citation you yourself provided. "The successful development of a particle beam weapon would require significant technology gains across several difficult areas."

 

[LordGinSama]

Honestly I find it doubtful Glass even read his own article that he used given that the text literally goes against his very argument.



"The result is that the target is heated rapidly to very high temperatures--which is exactly the effect that one observes in an explosion. Thus, a particle beam of sufficient energy can destroy a target by exploding it (although that is not the only means of destruction)."


Ignoring the fact that Glass hasn't even bothered reading the article in it's entirety, ignoring the fact that said article is outdated and debunked by modern day research and development. (His Article was made when Reagan was in office, which should tell you how old and outdated it is by that alone.) There's literally nothing for him to argue on behalf of Matter Manipulation Resistance unless he wants to argue out of stubbornness.


Also imma be blunt here. The fact that his comment got 5+ likes for being inherently wrong is blatantly proof of how mindless the Wiki can be. They simply pay attention to the amount of words one writes as opposed to legitimate citations and such. I can write a college level essay using nothing but various links to ******* Info Wars as my citation, it doesn't make my argument right. People really need to start paying for attention to arguments on this wiki, it's ridiculous.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Honestly I find it doubtful Glass even read his own article that he used given that the text literally goes against his very argument.



"The result is that the target is heated rapidly to very high temperatures--which is exactly the effect that one observes in an explosion. Thus, a particle beam of sufficient energy can destroy a target by exploding it (although that is not the only means of destruction)."

Kek, epic poggers from glass there.

 

[Lightning_XXI]

Why on Earth would the Devil May Cry verse, who are much, much less technology advanced than us be able to produce weapons and such that we can't even begin to understand?

The DMC verse that a single person on a van can create Time Manipulating Gauntlets via tech ?

Not only Nico, but Machiavelli could also create weapons like Pandora and Artemis, one can change into 666 forms and the other shoots energy beams, tech isn't a problem for the verse

Not that even matters, a supernatural verse like DMC using stuff we don't understand is expected, I can list a hundred of stuff more absurd then Particle Beams happening in the games or extended canon

 

[LordGinSama]

Yes and all of those are done via some sort of super natural BS, the point being that in terms of sheer and sole technological advancements, we're at a much, much greater advancement.



Turning isn't 666 weapons isn't an impressive feat, the most impressive thing about Pandora's box is the size of said box, but that's irrelevant since it wasn't made using solely knowledge and tech.



Either way doesn't counter the fact that Glass is inherently wrong regarding the Matter Manipulation thing. It can however, be changed with resistance to heat ( and a high amount of it. )

 

[Lightning_XXI]

The supernatural part is the source of the power, Nico still was capable of creating a gauntlet that can use Time Hax by only having a piece of Elder Geryon Horse, also DMC4 has artificial demons and labs that again, may have supernatural power sources, but tech enough to be able to channel said power. Besides, DMC is set on modern days, some places like Fortuna City may look like something from 18th or 19th century, but Nico explains that it's because it's a isolated Island, outside of normal society

Either way doesn't counter the fact that Glass is inherently wrong regarding the Matter Manipulation thing. It can however, be changed with resistance to heat ( and a high amount of it. )

I think Mr. Dante already has this resistance, if not he should have for other feats

I haven't read everything yet, but apparently Particle Beams can disrupt the molecular bonds and break them apart, right ? Something that never happened to Dante even being completely covered by it in the game, If that's what we know about it, why Glass is "inherently wrong" ?

Yeah and what happens to Dante there? Oh yeah he gets pierced straight through. It honestly amazes me how you argue that Dante resists when he gets pierced straight through by the thing you argue he resists.

Wow

Mundus Particle Beam isn't those red swords he used to pierce Dante, it's the White Laser-Like Beam, big enough to cover Dante's whole body when used in the battle. he used to knock out Trish and used against Dante, but he redirected

Glass used the red stuff as an example that Mundus could actually hit Dante during battle

 

[LordGinSama]

The supernatural part is the source of the power, Nico still was capable of creating a gauntlet that can use Time Hax by only having a piece of Elder Geryon Horse, also DMC4 has artificial demons and labs that again, may have supernatural power sources, but tech enough to be able to channel said power. Besides, DMC is set on modern days, some places like Fortuna City may look like something from 18th or 19th century, but Nico explains that it's because it's a isolated Island, outside of normal society

Let me reiterate perhaps? It's the difference between what's reasonable and logical in our world versus a world that clearly, does not have our levels of technology. (I.E Nuclear Warheads, modernized cell phones, etc.) Nico is smart but she's a different kind of smart in comparison to let's say Astrophysicists, Neurological Doctors, etc.

Either way doesn't counter the fact that Glass is inherently wrong regarding the Matter Manipulation thing. It can however, be changed with resistance to heat ( and a high amount of it. )

I think Mr. Dante already has this resistance, if not he should have for other feats

To which one?

I haven't read everything yet, but apparently Particle Beams can disrupt the molecular bonds and break them apart, right ? Something that never happened to Dante even being completely covered by it in the game, If that's what we know about it, why Glass is "inherently wrong" ?

Read my last reply to his last reply and you'll see. The Particle Beam thing about matter came from a very, very, very outdated study that's no longer in use today. Beam Weapons were deemed as "impractical" hence why the Pentagon dropped R&D on such a concept. And for the record, Particle Beams don't mess with the Molecular structure of it's targets, that's a trait unique to Neutral Particle Beams, well that was the theory at least until it got axed.

Yeah and what happens to Dante there? Oh yeah he gets pierced straight through. It honestly amazes me how you argue that Dante resists when he gets pierced straight through by the thing you argue he resists.

Wow

Mundus Particle Beam isn't those red swords he used to pierce Dante, it's the White Laser-Like Beam, big enough to cover Dante's whole body when used in the battle. he used to knock out Trish and used against Dante, but he redirected

Glass used the red stuff as an example that Mundus could actually hit Dante during battle

Glass probably should have made his point more clear with that, since it does look rather odd given he didn't provide the proper context? I can totally see the confusion since he didn't structure that reply the greatest.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

I haven't read everything yet, but apparently Particle Beams can disrupt the molecular bonds and break them apart, right ? Something that never happened to Dante even being completely covered by it in the game, If that's what we know about it, why Glass is "inherently wrong" ?

What? Never happened? What do you mean fam?

literally in a cutscene he gets shot by Mundus' attacks, so yes, the argument of him getting hit by Mundus' attacks is indeed valid cause that happened,

Look at him getting punched right through in cutscenes. Both cutscenes disprove the "he got hit head on by a particle beam and didn't suffer from anything".

Mundus Particle Beam isn't those red swords he used to pierce Dante, it's the White Laser-Like Beam, big enough to cover Dante's whole body when used in the battle. he used to knock out Trish and used against Dante, but he redirected

Yeah...and in cutscenes he puts up barriers to deal with those? Gameplay taking precedence over cutscenes ain't happening.

 

[Twellas]

2 wrongs don't make a right. It's pure durability negation.

What's so hard to understand about "durability negation via matter manipulation"? Do you want to argue that literally forcefully modifying an atom's electron-cloud is not matter (it's really quantum, but still) manipulation? You can't just slap "dura negation" on something and completely ignore the means through which said negation is achieved.

And just to make sure, are we arguing that Mundus' is not a particle beam or that it is but it doesn't have the properties of a real life particle beam? Because the former is not even up for debate, it's literally stated in a guide, the latter however...

And the argument of "He gets pierced by it in-game" is... baffling, because it isn't the same as "getting broken down on a molecular level" since Dante is completely fine right after (unless you wanna argue for Dante to have High regen, because if you're saying that that's proof of Dante being effected, then him being completely fine right after means he regenerated)

 

[Twellas]

Yeah...and in cutscenes he puts up barriers to deal with those? Gameplay taking precedence over cutscenes ain't happening.

How exactly does the cutscene "contradict" the gameplay? Are we going with the assumption of "He avoided it, which means he can't resist it"?

 

[Firephoenixearl]

What's so hard to understand about "durability negation via matter manipulation"? Do you want to argue that literally forcefully modifying an atom's electron-cloud is not matter (it's really quantum, but still) manipulation? You can't just slap "dura negation" on something and completely ignore the means through which said negation is achieved.

Wait, that's my line. You can't slap "matter manip the second you hear the word atom". Otherwise as i said heat and absolute zero are also matter manip. Particle Beams just energize the atoms, heat does the same. Literally no difference.

How exactly does the cutscene "contradict" the gameplay? Are we going with the assumption of "He avoided it, which means he can't resist it"?

Not an assumption, in the cutscene he found other ways to get around the particle beam. Not everything in gameplay is canon otherwise average demon arms would be superior to Yamato cus Yamato can't cut them during clashes in gameplay.

 

[Twellas]

Wait, that's my line. You can't slap "matter manip the second you hear the word atom". Otherwise as i said heat and absolute zero are also matter manip. Particle Beams just energize the atoms, heat does the same. Literally no difference.

I mean, ok, I wasn't necessarily refering to the Particle beam there, I was strictly talking about the HF stuff, I haven't followed the particle beam discussion and I'm not interested in doing so, it's an absolute dead end to me

Not an assumption, in the cutscene he found other ways to get around the particle beam. Not everything in gameplay is canon otherwise average demon arms would be superior to Yamato cus Yamato can't cut them during clashes in gameplay.

This is not even an argument, the fact that he redirected it instead of taking it to the face means literally nothing, let's stop assuming that since a character blocks/avoids an attack then it means that he cannot tank/resist it, it makes absolutely no sense, there is no canon indication of Dante not being able to resist the effects. And I mean, the Kalina Ann doesn't get cut by the Yamato IN CUTSCENES, Devil Arms not getting cut by the Yamato is not at all that far fetched, so what are you getting at with that? the Yamato not being able to cut clean through something doesn't mean it's weaker than the item in question; also, since Dante redirecting the beam is in NO WAY a contradiction to the gameplay, I don't see why we'd have to disregard it.

 

[LordGinSama]

Because Particle Beams don't actually mess with the Molecular structure of the opponent, that was from an old study back in the 70s. What they do tho is heat objects to the extreme and cause them to explode like a pool ball that's been shattered.




The discussion of Matter Manipulation needs to stop. Said resistance doesn't work, so he'll suffice with resistance to heat.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

This is not even an argument, the fact that he redirected it instead of taking it to the face means literally nothing, let's stop assuming that since a character blocks/avoids an attack then it means that he cannot tank/resist it, it makes absolutely no sense, there is no canon indication of Dante not being able to resist the effects

TFW "you can't prove he can't tank it" is an argument. My god.

And I mean, the Kalina Ann doesn't get cut by the Yamato IN CUTSCENES, Devil Arms not getting cut by the Yamato is not at all that far fetched, so what are you getting at with that? the Yamato not being able to cut clean through something doesn't mean it's weaker than the item in question;

It means it can't cut space though. Cus it couldn't cut through those.

since Dante redirecting the beam is in NO WAY a contradiction to the gameplay, I don't see why we'd have to disregard it

Cus it didn't freaking happen? It was all cus gameplay is all in the hands of the player. And if we gonna use everything from gameplay Dante can get damaged by fodder demons. Time to downgrade huh? Not all the things that happen in gameplay are canon. Not to mention even that beam still goes through Dante there.

Besides if some random spikes from Mundus pierce Dante, you can't tell me "a giant ass beam that is done by the same guy actually has no effect on dante".

 

[Twellas]

TFW "you can't prove he can't tank it" is an argument. My god.

TFW "The character doesn't just stand there like an idiot to get hit, so he can't take the hit" is an argument

It means it can't cut space though. Cus it couldn't cut through those.

It can tho, it's in the canon, it's the WHOLE POINT of the sword, 3/4 of Vergil's moves are based on the Yamato cutting space, could it be that this is only a videogame, which means that INCONSISTENCIES CAN HAPPEN?!

Cus it didn't freaking happen? It was all cus gameplay is all in the hands of the player. And if we gonna use everything from gameplay Dante can get damaged by fodder demons. Time to downgrade huh? Not all the things that happen in gameplay are canon.

But not all the things that happen in gameplay are NOT canon either, what is the argument here? Because it's in videogame's very nature that average mobs can hurt the much stronger protag we can't use gameplay feats?

Not to mention even that beam still goes through Dante there.

absolutely irrelevant, he tanked it, could it be that the beam passes through Dante because it's a 2001 game and the beam was treated as a semi-solid object that Dante clips through?

Besides if some random spikes from Mundus pierce Dante, you can't tell me "a giant ass beam that is done by the same guy actually has no effect on dante".

it's literally 2 different types of attacks, what are you even talking about?

And for the record, I don't even agree with tanking the Particle Beam being a matter manip-resistance feat, I'm just against this idea of "If the character blocks/avoids it, it means he can't tank it" and handwaving away gameplay for the sake of it .

 

[TISSG7Redgrave]

I mean for one thing how is the particle beam outdated doe? Is there even a new one to confirm it? Also saying DMC verse is lower than us in tech isn't an argument because it has tech and saying it isn't to disprove the particle thing means squat.

 

[Lightning_XXI]

Not an assumption, in the cutscene he found other ways to get around the particle beam. Not everything in gameplay is canon otherwise average demon arms would be superior to Yamato cus Yamato can't cut them during clashes in gameplay.

Those are...completely different things

Of course not everything in gameplay is canon, otherwise Low 2-C fodder for hurting Dante, but one thing is game mechs that goes against scalling, lore and cutscenes, other is assuming that Dante will never be hit by that attack because in cutscene he managed to redirect it once, the very link Glass posted here shows Mundus landing an attack on Dante, an attack that is slower and easier to avoid in the battle, and Dante was in Sparda Devil Trigger there, while he managed to redirect the Particle Beam in base, only with part of the DSS power coming to him, it's all a matter of situations in battle

Go to any game character profile and you'll see gameplay feats, similar to this one, being used

@LordGinSama

Let me reiterate perhaps? It's the difference between what's reasonable and logical in our world versus a world that clearly, does not have our levels of technology. (I.E Nuclear Warheads, modernized cell phones, etc.) Nico is smart but she's a different kind of smart in comparison to let's say Astrophysicists, Neurological Doctors, etc.

Oh, so you're saying Nico/Order of the Sword/Uroboros are just, let's say, beyond standard tech in DMC ? Well I can see that being the case, but doesn't change the fact that DMC is in modern days, take the anime for example, we see 2007 (the year the anime was released) tech there,

To which one?

I think we have one feat in this very battle, Mundus and Dante are fighting on a lava planetoid

Read my last reply to his last reply and you'll see. The Particle Beam thing about matter came from a very, very, very outdated study that's no longer in use today. Beam Weapons were deemed as "impractical" hence why the Pentagon dropped R&D on such a concept. And for the record, Particle Beams don't mess with the Molecular structure of it's targets, that's a trait unique to Neutral Particle Beams, well that was the theory at least until it got axed.

I see the logic behind this, but being old doesn't mean it's outdated unless something came after that and was able to debunk it, there was new studies about Particle Beams aftet this one, that showed how the old one was wrong ? If yes, wrong in what part ?

Being impratical for use doesn't mean everything they knew about its properties was wrong

Well, if only Neutral Particle Beams can do that, we have to take a look at its features and see if something is similar to Mundus' Particle Beam, similar to what we do with Laser and Lightning feats

 

[LordGinSama]

I mean for one thing how is the particle beam outdated doe? Is there even a new one to confirm it? Also saying DMC verse is lower than us in tech isn't an argument because it has tech and saying it isn't to disprove the particle thing means squat.

It's outdated and old, it's from the 70s making it old and it's outdated after the Pentagon completely stopped research and development behind the concept, and instead have switched to researching other weapons that are more suited for that, such as the use of Microwave based weaponry.



And no there isn't a new one, because the concept was completely scrapped much after the initial theory was made. We are however in the process of developing other laser based weapons.

 

[TISSG7Redgrave]

being in 70s doesn't mean its outdated doe? Unless u have smth to prove it then it just stopped not that anything disproves it. If we go by dates and simply cuz of that then the gravity theory is outdated due to how long ago it was made. as i said can u at least cite that it is outdated as even if we are developing laser based weapons it may even prove the theory correct so...

 

[Theglassman12]

@LordGinSama "claims I don't remotely provide citations... next line is quoting me where I provided citations" Ok sure, whatever fits your definition of "providing citations." Also pick one, do you want me to cite my sources or not? Cause you can't have both here.

The Pentagon not making these weapons means jack shit when the literal theory on how particle beams work is made. You keep arguing this when this has nothing to do with a FICTIONAL VERSE like Devil May Cry that's capable of going beyond normal human understanding to where they can do things that we cannot. How about you for once try to debunk that Mundus' attack is called a particle beam instead of making claims like "we didn't get to make them so they don't count".

The literal week where I had to stop going to the wiki because finals were around the corner... ok.

how does it not hold up in modern times? Can you give me any evidence right now that the theory on how particle beams work was completely debunked? Because all you've done so far is just say it's old and outdated because we stopped research. That doesn't debunk the theory.

Says the guy who's comparing the tech of Devil May Cry to real life because we're ahead of time in terms of technology. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Ok so the fact that you're not remotely paying attention to what Dante had to explain to you just shows you're not remotely gonna try to read anything we've said. How about read the text before you brush off what he said. If you're not gonna actually read what he said, then why even bother discussing this shit with you.

I doubt you read the article too given you ignored the first part of that paragraph you quoted. But if you're that insistent on them not counting just because it's an old article, then ok fine let's not use that then... instead I'll just use this article which was updated like a month ago so it's not remotely outdated in the slightest during the time this post has been made and literally says it attacks the target by disrupting the atomic and or molecular structure.

argue out of stubbornness

the lack of self-awareness here is amazing

Ok... you act like upvoting comments actually means something in this wiki, because it never has and never will. Also stop with the Ad Hominems, none of the people who upvoted my comments have done anything on this thread to justify you disrespecting them, if you don't behave yourself then I will report you to RVR.

Also for the last time, how about you bring up counter points from other articles that give the exact opposite explanation of what particle beams are supposed to do instead of just say it's old because it's old. Being old does not debunk something's claim being legit.

@Firephoenixearl way to go ignoring my points, once again as you always do, because that's not my point. My point is that getting hit by Mundus' attacks is something that happens in cutscenes, which by itself is dumb since Occams Razor would suggest that any fight would've had both fighters at least land one shot on any attacks they've thrown.

Oh you mean something that happens pretty much anytime Dante gets any of his weapons/abilities and he shows off using it with a lot of skill? The more you keep arguing points like this the more I'm starting to question if you've actually played these games, cause this is common knowledge to anyone who plays these games.

Except they do count, that's part of the status quo in this wiki, you don't need to manipulate matter to the extent that someone like Molecule Man can, if you're able to affect matter in anyway that's not natural and is shown as an ability, it counts as matter manipulation. Lets even ask DarkDragonMedeus about this if you're this hellbent on it not counting.

Saying something's wrong without explaining how or why it's wrong isn't gonna get you to convince anyone, just saying.

I don't think you understand what getting ****** up means for Dante, there's a distinct difference between Dante pre sparda devil trigger where he was in agony and couldn't move when getting impaled by random red spikes, to post sparda DT where he gets back up a second later and finishes off Mundus. That's the exact opposite of getting ****** up.

You aren't controlling it and you don't decide where it goes

You mean the beams that Mundus can fire at his command and decide to shoot wherever he wants with it if he likes to? Ok

 

[Galens]

This was like doing homework again, so it would be better to go in parts.
For starters, everyone already knows the declaration of "the particle beam that alters the molecular and atomic structure of matter". We save it for later, but we won't forget it.

It's outdated and old, it's from the 70s making it old and it's outdated after the Pentagon completely stopped research and development behind the concept, and instead have switched to researching other weapons that are more suited for that, such as the use of Microwave based weaponry.

Now, it is true that the particle beam is something that began in the 70s, it was studied by the Pentagon as one of the four directed energy weapons, but they saw it impractical causing them to discard it.
Well, this is not quite correct. The theory behind the particle beam and its operation has never been discarded and has never been revoked or considered obsolete so far, in fact to date you can see people within the scientific field who continue to support the particle beam.

The only thing that the Pentagon ruled out was the CONSTRUCTION of a particle beam weapon model because the means to create it did not yet exist and the difficulties to do so, such as figuring out how to miniaturize an accelerator to the point of making it a portable item. Reason why the project was not even scrapped, it was simply put on hiatus, even for the future there is still a desire to create it because despite all the drawbacks they claim that a particle beam weapon is considered much more efficient than a weapon lazer.

And for the record, Particle Beams don't mess with the Molecular structure of it's targets, that's a trait unique to Neutral Particle Beams, well that was the theory at least until it got axed.

The following is an error in thinking that the destruction of the molecular/atomic structure is unique to a beam of neutral particles, since both a beam of charged particles and a beam of neutral particles work in the same way. The difference between these is where they are placed, since a charged particle beam is more efficient in a place with an atmosphere, while a neutral particle beam is more efficient in the void of space. This is due to backscattering, because if we were to put a beam of neutral particles in a place with an atmosphere, it would only cause the high-energy particles to start bouncing off the air molecules and hitting even the person who would be pulling the trigger, or as the example mentions, it's like sending a load of red-hot pellets through a room full of dynamite. When you are inside the room.

We know that a particle beam does not fire projectiles, it shoots atomic particles to damage its target. Many things happen inside a particle beam, but the main ones are that when the particle beam hits its target it starts to heat up and explodes due to kinetic energy, but this is only what we see with the naked eye. But kinetic energy is not the only thing that does its job, but also the incredible amount of ionizing radiation, which in an easy way to explain, eliminates all electrons present in atoms, altering and breaking the molecular structure of the target.
And this is the reason why multiple sources mention that a particle beam weapon can damage and alter the atomic structure of its target, something that falls within the manipulation of matter.

 

[LordGinSama]

@LordGinSama "claims I don't remotely provide citations... next line is quoting me where I provided citations" Ok sure, whatever fits your definition of "providing citations." Also pick one, do you want me to cite my sources or not? Cause you can't have both here.

The amount of stupidity I see coming from you on the daily will never cease to amaze me Glass. Firstly I had made it abundantly clear that you did indeed provide citation for the Beam stuff, hence why I replied to it in the first place. Not only that but you didn't post any sort of citation for your scientific claim either, so don't try that card buddy. Grabbing a link that you've only read for a total of 12 minutes doesn't count as proper citation, so you can either start posting proper forms of citation or you can simply not make the claims at all.

The Pentagon not making these weapons means jack shit when the literal theory on how particle beams work is made.

... I want you to tell me the difference between the actual creation of a weapon and the definition of a theory. And no, once again the Molecular destabilization only applies to Neutral Particle Beams before, which once again got scrapped for a multitude of reasons, money, time and the fact that the concept of a Particle Beam weapon is extremely impractical especially in comparison to other easier alternatives.

You keep arguing this when this has nothing to do with a FICTIONAL VERSE like Devil May Cry that's capable of going beyond normal human understanding to where they can do things that we cannot. How about you for once try to debunk that Mundus' attack is called a particle beam instead of making claims like "we didn't get to make them so they don't count".

Once again, this comment is outright laughable at best. And I don't need to debunk anything here, because it seems as if your skull is much too thick to comprehend the fact that you have a MASSIVE misunderstanding of how these Particle Beams actually function and work. Ignoring the fact that The Devil May Cry verse isn't vaslty above us in technological advancements, we actually have a lot more going for us in that field barring the manipulation of time and such. But how's about you prove to me that Mundus's Particle Beam is comparable that in real life? You know the theory that's never been confirmed nor tested?

The literal week where I had to stop going to the wiki because finals were around the corner... ok.

Unfortunately for you, I don't care much. Point being is that if you wanna attempt to use citation at least know what your talking about, because it's evidently clear that you don't.

how does it not hold up in modern times? Can you give me any evidence right now that the theory on how particle beams work was completely debunked? Because all you've done so far is just say it's old and outdated because we stopped research. That doesn't debunk the theory.

You really, really need to pick up a dictionary at some point because I'm genuinely baffled by your lack of intelligence. Firstly must I go over the definition of a theory with you? The Theory is just the general idea of it, doesn't mean it's automatically correct even if (and for the record, it's not.) the argument of the matter destabilization. **** it's even a reason why the Pentagon is stopping research into these. And if that isn't enough, let me directly quote the man who's actually in charge of the Enegry weapon program, Michael D Griffin.

"My own opinion is we need to get systems built and put onto platforms so we can see what they do how they do it,” he said, meaning how the weapons interact with their platform(s) and environment. “We need to understand the lethality of those systems, things like beam control. We need to know how to scale them up in practical ways. If you have 250 kilowatts of, say, laser, and you are operating at best at 50-percent efficiency, you have to figure out what to do with the other kilowatts of heat.
“So there are a lot of practical problems with real-world weapons systems,” he said. “We are spending money on it.”


So now we have the guy who's literally in charge of the ******* concept you've been arguing so much for is literally telling you that the concept is both impractical and unsupported untill an actual one is made, so we can see what it actually does and if it works or not.

Says the guy who's comparing the tech of Devil May Cry to real life because we're ahead of time in terms of technology. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Totally different, ignoring the fact that's a debate between me and another user but now you wanna say me arguing over technological advancements is the same as you making literally the biggest false comparison I've seen? Sit down.

Ok so the fact that you're not remotely paying attention to what Dante had to explain to you just shows you're not remotely gonna try to read anything we've said. How about read the text before you brush off what he said. If you're not gonna actually read what he said, then why even bother discussing this shit with you.

Literally what are you even talking about? Dante literally agrees with me as far as the matter manipulation is concerned, and even then me and him very briefly talked about it and went onto to discuss the technology between the two worlds. And I didn't ignore him either so stop pulling shit out of your ass in order to make me look bad, we call that poisoning the well Glass, if you weren't aware but nice try.

I doubt you read the article too given you ignored the first part of that paragraph you quoted.

So you admit that you actually didn't read it? Nice, because that doesn't make staff look bad.

But if you're that insistent on them not counting just because it's an old article, then ok fine let's not use that then... instead I'll just use this article which was updated like a month ago so it's not remotely outdated in the slightest during the time this post has been made and literally says it attacks the target by disrupting the atomic and or molecular structure.

I'm under the assumption you haven't been in college for very long either, seeing as how they teach you to pay attention to the website you wanna use as citation, because literally nobody there is a scientific mind nor do they have the right to act as such. One is them is literally a boxer and the other is a musician, and it doesn't help your case either that they use Wikipedia as a legitimate source of information, which is laughable if we're to be honest. Hell the site you even linked is just that, a random site. Not an Edu nor a Gov in sight.

the lack of self-awareness here is amazing

See I would be insulted then I remember the one who the insult came from, but you should perhaps practice what you preach.

Ok... you act like upvoting comments actually means something in this wiki, because it never has and never will. Also stop with the Ad Hominems, none of the people who upvoted my comments have done anything on this thread to justify you disrespecting them, if you don't behave yourself then I will report you to RVR.

First off, you need to grow up and stop being overly sensitive because I didn't disrespect them in the slightest, nor was it Ad Hominem. That's a complete and total misuse of the word, because I never attacked them personally. I called the meta of the wiki mindless, and even that's not something anyone can get directly offended by. So no, unfortunately for you Glass you have no basis to make a report so don't threaten me with empty words.

Also for the last time, how about you bring up counter points from other articles that give the exact opposite explanation of what particle beams are supposed to do instead of just say it's old because it's old. Being old does not debunk something's claim being legit.

Aside from the mutiple paragraphs and citation I've provided, yeah sure thing telm yourself whatever helps you sleep at night. Because it seems like to me your stuck on part of the argument and intentionally ignoring the other exerts of information I've provided.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

way to go ignoring my points, once again as you always do, because that's not my point. My point is that getting hit by Mundus' attacks is something that happens in cutscenes, which by itself is dumb since Occams Razor would suggest that any fight would've had both fighters at least land one shot on any attacks they've thrown.

How the hell does Occam's Razor give that lol? "Occam's Razor says that Dante is unaffected by a beam much stronger than whatever he was hit by that in a cutscene he went out of his way to block instead of tank, so we're gonna give Dante some random ass resistance even though we have literally 0 things besides non canon gameplay based on character choices going our way". Yes that's absolutely how Occam's razor works.

Oh you mean something that happens pretty much anytime Dante gets any of his weapons/abilities and he shows off using it with a lot of skill? The more you keep arguing points like this the more I'm starting to question if you've actually played these games, cause this is common knowledge to anyone who plays these games.

Yes he uses them that one time to literally test them. When else? Honestly glass is this where you peak? You say "it's in character cus out of dozens of hours of cutscenes combined in all games he uses each of them about 1 min total when he gains them to test them out, so it's very in character"....honestly.

Except they do count, that's part of the status quo in this wiki, you don't need to manipulate matter to the extent that someone like Molecule Man can, if you're able to affect matter in anyway that's not natural and is shown as an ability, it counts as matter manipulation. Lets even ask DarkDragonMedeus about this if you're this hellbent on it not counting.

How is particle beam not natural? Dude again, do you think heat and absolute 0 count as matter manip?

Saying something's wrong without explaining how or why it's wrong isn't gonna get you to convince anyone, just saying.

Cus i haven't been doing that this whole time. Right, whatever you say glass.

I don't think you understand what getting ****** up means for Dante, there's a distinct difference between Dante pre sparda devil trigger where he was in agony and couldn't move when getting impaled by random red spikes, to post sparda DT where he gets back up a second later and finishes off Mundus. That's the exact opposite of getting ****** up.

He got f-ed up by spikes during Sparda DT. He can regenerate sure, doesn't mean that they didn't punch right through him with no issues.

You mean the beams that Mundus can fire at his command and decide to shoot wherever he wants with it if he likes to? Ok

Glass your reading comprehension is below 0 my dude. You don't control what the molecules do, not the beam.

 

[LordGinSama]

This was like doing homework again, so it would be better to go in parts.
For starters, everyone already knows the declaration of "the particle beam that alters the molecular and atomic structure of matter". We save it for later, but we won't forget it.

This is all false and I'll explain why in a minute.

Now, it is true that the particle beam is something that began in the 70s, it was studied by the Pentagon as one of the four directed energy weapons, but they saw it impractical causing them to discard it.
Well, this is not quite correct. The theory behind the particle beam and its operation has never been discarded and has never been revoked or considered obsolete so far, in fact to date you can see people within the scientific field who continue to support the particle beam.

First things first, neither one of those sites are accurate examples of proper citation. Neither one of those sites are ran by any sort of scientific group, it's ran by a Boxer and a Musician, in no way shape or form are they scientific minds. Secondly, that first half just isn't true, you took that paragraph completely out of context.

According to DefenseOne, U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Mike Griffin recently told a gathering of defense reporters, “We are deferring work on neutral particle beams, indefinitely. It’s just not near-term enough.” Griffin emphasized however that the Pentagon was still forging ahead with research into lasers and microwave weapons, for use by ground forces, air forces, and in space.

the plans for development and research for the PARTICLE BEAM WEAPONS have been INDEFINITELY dropped. There isn't any going back to it, they stopped it entirely and are venturing down similar yet different laser based and radiation based weapons, such as Microwave based weaponry and such. To say that they only held it off for a bit is spreading blatant misinformation. And as I said to Glass, Michael D Griffin, the man currently in charge of these sorts of operations even made this comment for verbatim.


"My own opinion is we need to get systems built and put onto platforms so we can see what they do how they do it,” he said, meaning how the weapons interact with their platform(s) and environment. “We need to understand the lethality of those systems, things like beam control. We need to know how to scale them up in practical ways. If you have 250 kilowatts of, say, laser, and you are operating at best at 50-percent efficiency, you have to figure out what to do with the other kilowatts of heat. “So there are a lot of practical problems with real-world weapons systems,” he said. “We are spending money on it.”


The man himself who's most definitely a lot more knowledgeable than any pseudo intellectual on this thread by a long shot, openly admitted that the Particle Beam Weapons affects have yet to ever be proven, and they have no idea on what it actually does.

The only thing that the Pentagon ruled out was the CONSTRUCTION of a particle beam weapon model because the means to create it did not yet exist and the difficulties to do so, such as figuring out how to miniaturize an accelerator to the point of making it a portable item. Reason why the project was not even scrapped, it was simply put on hiatus, even for the future there is still a desire to create it because despite all the drawbacks they claim that a particle beam weapon is considered much more efficient than a weapon lazer.

It wasn't put on Hiatus, read the comment above. The plan was scrapped indefinitely, there are no current plans to revisit this concept especially since we're already very busy with other much, much more practical weapons. And that isn't the only reason why Research and Development was stopped, it was quite literally decided to be both a waste of time and money due it being an impractical weapon. The CONSTRUCTION of the weapon is the only important factor, blue prints for buildings are useless if the building quite literally cannot be built. What matters is the end result, not the theory but it being proven.

The following is an error in thinking that the destruction of the molecular/atomic structure is unique to a beam of neutral particles, since both a beam of charged particles and a beam of neutral particles work in the same way. The difference between these is where they are placed, since a charged particle beam is more efficient in a place with an atmosphere, while a neutral particle beam is more efficient in the void of space. This is due to backscattering, because if we were to put a beam of neutral particles in a place with an atmosphere, it would only cause the high-energy particles to start bouncing off the air molecules and hitting even the person who would be pulling the trigger, or as the example mentions, it's like sending a load of red-hot pellets through a room full of dynamite. When you are inside the room.

It's not an error, and I'll also have to explain that while also providing proper context. First of all, that's not the difference between a normal Practice Beam and a Neutral Particle Beam weapon, but rather the difference between a standard Particle Beam (Which is essentially a glorified electrical arc gun but steroids. ) while the other is the Neutral Particle Beam which is what was theorized to mess with molecules, so once again that's misinformation on your end. And it doesn't help your argument that within the first paragraph they even state "deemed to be unfeasible for military application." which debunks your entire argument.

We know that a particle beam does not fire projectiles, it shoots atomic particles to damage its target. Many things happen inside a particle beam, but the main ones are that when the particle beam hits its target it starts to heat up and explodes due to kinetic energy, but this is only what we see with the naked eye. But kinetic energy is not the only thing that does its job, but also the incredible amount of ionizing radiation, which in an easy way to explain, eliminates all electrons present in atoms, altering and breaking the molecular structure of the target.

Thank you on the lecture on how Neutral Particle beams work but that's something I already knew but once again the proper context isn't being applied here. Firstly, Neutral Particle beams are the ones that ionize, not normal Particle Beams. And are we genuinely going to venture down this repetitive Avenue? You gathered all of this information off of Wikipedia, which they themselves also recognize the fact that this very concept is impractical in nature. At best I'd be willing to come to a compromise with a "possible" resistance to Deconstruction, NOT matter manipulation.

And this is the reason why multiple sources mention that a particle beam weapon can damage and alter the atomic structure of its target, something that falls within the manipulation of matter

 

[ShivaShakti]

I think you really need to calm down.