First of all, I have to make something clear. I am firmly committed to the authority of Scripture as divine revelation. I also believe the book of Daniel to be viewed as a unitary structure and should be studied as such (I do admit that a measure of editing has gone into the book). On this basis I study the book.
When it comes to prophecy: 1) It should agree with context and fit in with rest of Bible. 2) It should be true according to the principle in Deuteronomy (18:22). 3) It could have more than one fulfillment as demonstrated by Jesus. By the way, he rejected the Maccabean interpretation of Daniel.
I differ those rejecting the predictive element of prophecy while emphasizing probability. For one, modern scholars ignore the internal evidence. Here’s a few examples.
Daniel is first and foremost a book of prophecy. It concerns the future. This we see from the arrangement of the contents. One quarter describes happenings in the life of Daniel and his friends. Three quarters contain prophecy.
This we also determine from the book itself. Daniel tells Nebuchadnezzar: “However, there exists a God in the heavens who is a Revealer of secrets, and he has made known to King Nebuchadnezzar what is to occur in the final part [’acharith] of the days” [“the latter days”, KJV] (Dan. 2:28). 
Later the angel Gabriel informs Daniel: “Understand, O son of man, that the vision is for the time of [the] end” [“the end time”, NAB] (Dan. 8:17b).  He continues: “Here I am causing you to know what will occur in the final part [’acharith] of the denunciation, because it is for the appointed time of the end”. The “final part of the denunciation” refers to God’s anger during “the time of the end” (cf. Dan. 8:19, 25).
The small horn or fierce king will rise “in the final part [’acharith] of their kingdom, as the transgressors act to completion” (cf. Dan. 8:23). Gabriel concludes: “And you, for your part, keep secret the vision, because it is for many days” [“it concerns the distant future”, NIV] (cf. Dan. 8:26b).
Concerning the final vision, the angel reveals: “And I have come to cause you to discern what will befall your people in the final part [’acharith] of the days, because it is a vision yet for the days [to come]” [“for the vision pertains to future days”, NET] (cf. Dan. 10:14). [Cursive script added.]
The final King of the North “will certainly prove successful until [the] denunciation will have come to a finish.” Again the “denunciation” here refers to God’s wrath, indicating that the final King of the North would from hereon remain the same, enjoying great success, until his destruction towards the close of “the time of the end” (cf. Dan. 11:36, 40, 45).
Secondly, they lose sight of the fact that the final vision (Dan. 10-12) starts with the Persian Empire and ends with the resurrection. Getting stuck with Antiochus IV Epiphanes is unrealistic, especially concerning Dan. 11:40-45. This would make Daniel a liar.
Leolaia has touched on it, but here is a prophecy that did come true. In sharp contrast to Maccabees, Daniel makes no direct mention of Hellenistic Reform. The angel in Daniel’s final vision would also doom a Jewish uprising, by saying: “And the sons of the robbers [“violent ones”, CSBO] belonging to your people will, for their part, be carried along to try making a vision come true; and they will have to stumble”, i.e., die  (cf. Dan. 11:14b).
This is what a conservative scholar had to say about current research. I agree with him:
The vast body of literature on the prophets has shown them to be first of all religious spokesmen in their own world and to their own times. That view is certainly correct, but not to the exclusion of their theological relevance for the future of Israel and the world. Unfortunately modern critical methodology has not consistenly set the stage for greater confidence in the integrity of the biblical prophets and the authenticity of their oracles and writings. The ongoing and asymmetric editing of the prophetic meterials in the biblical period, as suggested by some modern approaches to this literature, is at best hypothetical. Much remains to be discovered about the literary process, and that inquiry must take place not only in a literary context but in a theological one as well. 
 This eschatological marker often occurs in the prophetic books of the Bible, corresponding to a new era in human history (cf. Is. 2:2; Jer. 23:20; 30:24; 48:47; 49:39; Dan. 12:13; Hosea 3:5; Mic. 4:1; cf. Ezek. 38:8).
 This eschatological marker occurs six times in the book of Daniel. Only the prophet Daniel would use it (cf. Dan. 8:17 , 19; 11:35, 40; 12:4, 9) .
 The Hebrew word for stumble is kâshal (= “to cause to fall”). Especially in the book of Daniel this verb refers to a literal stumbling because of war (cf. Dan. 11:33b). In most cases the Syriac interprets it as “to overthrow.” This fact is corroborated by HALOT: to fall, collapse (of a government, dynasty) Dan. 11:14, 19, 33, 35, 41. In each of these cases, the verb refers to people, not countries. The Maccabean dynasty, and all break-away groups, disobedient to God, would come to a violent end.
 C. Hassell Bullock, An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophetic Books, Mooody Publishers (2007), p. 33.