Well, anyone who actually thought the story in DMC1 mattered should get their head examined. This isn't a total insult, and I respect people's opinions, but Capcom didn't even hire a writer for DMC1 or DMC2 as far as I can tell.

So the cheesy dialogue was nice and such, but it wasn't the lack of it that made DMC2 bad.

What made DMC1 worst than DMC2, IMO, was the lack of a good camera and lack of effective moves. Sure Dante had the slash and jump, but half of his moves were useless. You ALWAYS had to be hit by the enemy(mainly by bosses) because Dante lacked the moves to dodge them. Even experienced DMC1 players would have to get hit because it's part of the game. DMC1 was more on survival than on skill. Some of the later enemies in the game were impossible to kill because they were too fast, too many of them, and took too much to take down. Normally I don't mind this, but my god, give Dante a chance at least...I barely beat the game, despite practicing on the game for weeks.

What made DMC2 better was that it was longer, Dante actually had some useful moves, and the camera was great. DMC1 was just a game that was flashy and flawed. DMC2, while not a great game, was a less flawed game with more USEFUL moves and based more on skill rather than survival.

That sounds like blasphemy to some of you, but many people really failed to fully explain why DMC2 was so bad, other than saying "No way DMC2 compares to DMC1."