The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: Flame on November 06, 2016, 06:34:46 PM
Title: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Flame on November 06, 2016, 06:34:46 PM
So now that the dust has settled, and it's going to soon be 7 years since the first Lords of Shadow released, how do you feel about it? Has your opinion changed at all? Do you like it more? Less? About the same?
I decided to start replaying it the other day. When it came out I liked it and I defended it pretty hard, despite acknowledging many of it's shortcomings and problems. But going back now, I still like it. If anything, going back after the disaster that was Lords of Shadow 2, makes the first one look better in hindsight. It isn't too overly ambitious, and having revisited many of the classics lately, I still appreciate many of the references and callbacks. And the combat, while not as refined as LoS2 was, (it's one good feature, admittedly) is still pretty serviceable, and I even have fun. And personally, I still enjoy Patrick Stewart narrating the beginning of each stage.
So how about all of you? Where are you on Lords of Shadow, 6 years later?
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Lelygax on November 06, 2016, 07:26:26 PM
I still blames Dave Cox and hopefully Rugal will login only to post here.
In all seriousness, in the gameplay department it can get boring easily if you aren't a God of War fan and in story department its hard to digest or take it seriously when you know well the franchise and its characters. To me its like Castlevania: The Movie if it was directed by the same guy that directed Resident Evil movies but instead of a movie, its a game.
Its not a bad game, but would benefit more if it wasn't a Castlevania game, since they really doesn't seem to care about the source material and they vision of how to appease fans did the opposite by shoehorning names in characters or places that doesn't do justice to their original self. Honestly it would be easier to appreciate this game if I didn't knew the franchise before.
LoS was the coffin, MoF were the nails and LoS2 was the hammer to this franchise, did more harm than good. I'll give it another chance when time comes though, because it carries CV name and I'm weak to that.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Flame on November 06, 2016, 08:23:29 PM
I really have to say, going back from LoS2, the combat is definitely clunkier. the perfect block barely works.
I kind of wish the ultimate edition had added the tweaked combat from 2.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: X on November 06, 2016, 10:46:30 PM
If it's honestly been 7 years then that's something. But I've still not changed my mind about the game. If it wasn't Castlevania at all, let alone have any of the names and/or references then I might have liked it since I did like God of War. But no. Still too butthurt by this one... 7 years of pain that has still not gone away.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 07, 2016, 04:42:05 AM
You know what, I have no issue playing good games over, and LOS1 was one of the top 5 if not top 10 PS3 games for me. There were a lot of technical complaints of the game at the time, and I never suffered from any of them. I was even willing to let the fact that it wasn't a true Castlevania game go (not set in the main timeline, not the 1999 game, different universe etc). I even liked the DLC and fighting TF1, as I thought he was a much better final boss than Satan.
Alas, the gamer in me has no interest to re-pursue this game for many reasons, namely I don't believe it will add to my liking of Castlevania in the slightest. Regardless of how decent LOS1 is, for me the Castlevania series is more successful in many other forms which superseded it despite the fact certain iterations (the 3d games) are 'technically' inferior or more outdated. Not to sound harsh because it was good for a time, but I feel like replaying it again would be a waste of mine.
Castlevania was never about being a blockbuster (even less so, Pachinko) it was about an immersive, gripping experience where each iteration had different elements which made it "Castlevania".
Title: BMC_War Machine
Post by: BMC_War Machine on November 07, 2016, 07:45:22 AM
it was about an immersive, gripping experience where each iteration had different elements which made it "Castlevania".
This. I definitely have a soft spot for LoS. LoS 2 was absolute garbage in comparison IMO. But i think Zangetsu nailed that comment. What made Castlevania so much fun growing up was that each game was a new adventure. Sure, the core elements remained the same, but there was always something that made each game unique. Until SOTN. We all now it is a masterpiece, but i for one thought the style was getting pretty worn out. I mean, look at the classics. You have the first 4 and chronicles, along with the Gameboy titles and then we have 7 metroidvanias, nearly back to back after SOTN. For me, the LoS series had the potential to be the game changer with the first game, and to me that was a MUCH needed breath of fresh air. But.......then LoS2 took a dump on us lol.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: X on November 07, 2016, 09:34:17 AM
Quote
But.......then LoS2 took a dump on us lol.
lol. The stains don't ever come out. :P :P :P
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Flame on November 07, 2016, 11:25:15 AM
I really kind of wish we'd gotten a spinoff game that played like the Alucard DLC, because that part was really good. it also had a lot of good puzzles.
augh, LoS2 really kills me, because it was beautiful, and had great gameplay but the plot and the finale just ruin the whole thing.
I could forgive the modern world and stealth sections if the plot was at least worth it, but nooo, no, holy shit. it alternates between the good castle segments, and the atrocious modern segments. and ends on the modern segments too.
oh well.
At least Death was worth the wait.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: theANdROId on November 07, 2016, 04:55:01 PM
It's a fun game. It was not the droid we were looking for, but it was still a nice droid.
And besides, is it really possible to not like Patrick Stewart? ;-P I think not!
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Claimh Solais on November 07, 2016, 06:44:05 PM
I really kind of wish we'd gotten a spinoff game that played like the Alucard DLC, because that part was really good. it also had a lot of good puzzles.
Oh, man. The Alucard DLC was REALLY good. Hands down my favorite part of the entirety of LoS2. It's a damn shame it was so short. Should've just had the whole game be about him.
Overall, I'm mostly in the same boat as Flame. Over the last few years, I've replayed LoS1 about four or five times, and I still have a jolly good time going through it every time. To me, it was still a great game. The other two were not up to par with it even remotely, but the first will always be one of my favorites in this franchise.
MoF, I've only played that one once. However, I've been planning on giving it another playthrough one of these days.
LoS2 on the other hand? Gonna shoot for the platinum on PS3, yeah. But probably after that I'll never play it again.
I was always one of the biggest defenders of the LoS trilogy. Back in the early 2010s, I'm sure people remembered, I was always standing up for it. MoF and LoS2 were easily some of my most anticipated games back when they were still coming out. Now, I'm really not afraid to say that MoF was alright at best, and LoS2 really sucked. It's few redeeming qualities are sooooooo easily overshadowed by everything it did wrong.
+Oozing atmosphere +Holy crap, the castle segments were gorgeous +Sound design was brilliant +Combat was more refined, and had a more stable frame rate +Death looked cool - Absolute garbage and rushed plot - Dull and dreadful modern segments - Death came way too late in the game and was gone right after appearing - Stealth segments. The stealth segments were garbage and everyone knows it - Seriously. Why hype up Victor when he's only in like 5 minutes of the game? - Crappy final boss fight. Didn't even get a real showdown with Satan, just a possessed Alucard who endlessly spammed unblockable attacks - An ending that made the first Assassin's Creed's look incredible - The "open world" that was really just a bunch of bigger hallways
Blah blah blah. LoS2 had so much potential. MercurySteam just got too big for their boots.
Their new game looks kinda cool though, I guess. Even if the graphics are severely outdated.
Title: Re: BMC_War Machine
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 08, 2016, 04:00:08 AM
This. I definitely have a soft spot for LoS. LoS 2 was absolute garbage in comparison IMO. But i think Zangetsu nailed that comment. What made Castlevania so much fun growing up was that each game was a new adventure. Sure, the core elements remained the same, but there was always something that made each game unique. Until SOTN. We all now it is a masterpiece, but i for one thought the style was getting pretty worn out. I mean, look at the classics. You have the first 4 and chronicles, along with the Gameboy titles and then we have 7 metroidvanias, nearly back to back after SOTN. For me, the LoS series had the potential to be the game changer with the first game, and to me that was a MUCH needed breath of fresh air. But.......then LoS2 took a dump on us lol.
That's not exactly what I was saying. Each adventure, be it classicvania, igavania or The 3d titles had their own persona, they had character. I would classify CV LOD as probably one of the top if not, THE most immersive experience which a CV game has ever offered me. Not only does this game embody the spirit of CV, it had storytelling, action, platforming and paced these elements the way that a 2d Castlevania does, something which has never been replicated by another 3d Castlevania (let me say that a game doing all those things on the N64 is a bigger deal than people realise.) You just take one look at the game and it's CV by nature. CVI is better than CVII imo, but CVII was so immersive it kept me playing again and again. When I got to play CV III on and off years later, I felt the same way I did about CVI. I felt the same way again about Vampire's Kiss, but I was loving the upbeat musical score and the highly colourful and improved visuals. SOTN was something else, the amount of exploration, items and hidden areas was ridiculous for its time. AoS reminded me a bit of SOTN (being the first non Belmont/ Whip-based Metroidvania since SOTN) but it was superior in every way to me, mostly the overall atmosphere and immersion of the game as well as being the first CV with a suspense/thriller style plot, had me hooked all the way. When I found out Soma was Dracula, I liked the game even more and I felt that AoS set new standards for the series, specifically during the Igavania era. I could go on and on but I will conclude simply by saying OOE is the Crown Jewel for me. See I get that even within hardcore Castlevania fans there will be the classicists/ purists who can't stand Igavania, there will be the strict Igavanians and those who embrace both (dare I say the slightly greater majority of CV fans). The thing about OOE is that it combined elements from Classicvania and Igavania, it reached a medium between the two which was not previously achieved (imo) in previous iterations of CV and it was a GOOD, well executed game in every respect. No game is perfect, but in a time when handhelds were the only thing keeping 2d Castlevania alive, it did a lot of things right and its flaws were minimal.
Each of these games (and all those I didn't mention) have something that makes them unique, yet they all felt like they inherited Castlevania's DNA... LOS had its positives and flaws, what it lacked was character and uniqueness, that same uniqueness that made the previous Castlevanias what they were. Why? It was advertised as a re-imagining of the CV universe, but what it did was it recycled a lot of things and not just from CV but from other games: - LOI and GOW's combat styles (GOW including button prompts) - SOTC's titan battles - AOS's plot twist re: Dracula - OOE's plot and outcome regarding "The Order" There's probably more but I've made my point. A lot of the best things about the game (the first 3 listed, in particular) were very blatantly taken from other games. The environements were not blatantly taken from any given piece of popular culture, and they were immersive but screamed "generic cliche-dark farytail" rather than gritty Transylvanian Dracula. It seemed like MS were pushing various ideas together rather than trying to form a new and cohesive identity to pay tribute to a franchise they were lucky to be involved with. Although Gabriel's design was the one thing about the game I really liked and had the game itself been better and more Castlevania-like, I think he could have worked as the protagonist. People keep going on about Patrick Stewart, yes he's a good actor, a decent narrator, but does nothing for the series. (Since when did CV need a fucking narrator?)
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: TatteredSeraph on November 08, 2016, 07:06:45 AM
I arrived at the party rather late with regard to playing the first LoS. I loved it, and Gabriel managed to wrap the links of his Combat Cross around my heart in relation to his story and character, and pulled on it. There have been moments in all three games where I've actually been sat there crying because of the emotion coming through from the voice acing. I love playing the game, even with certain parts driving me potty, such as Baba Yaga's music box, and my annoyance of not being able to have multiple saves running at the same time / ability to start completely from scratch as a fully new game, not new game +, without deleting the file in the main PS3 menu. MoF, whilst a cut down, way too short game, had it's moments, when Alucard first awoke, and his death as Trevor. In LoS2, the reunion between Gabriel and Marie, amongst others. The castle was magnificent, as was the Alucard DLC. The biggest fault I had with 2 was the horrible jolt between how good some sections were and how dire the modern segments were, which made teh disappointment all the greater. Wygol city had looked amazing in the epilogue for 1, and that stealth..... urgh. It's that failed promise of what the demo, the original trailer, and the art boks hinted at. But going back to 1, I haven't changed my feelings on it at all.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: SecretWeapon on November 08, 2016, 05:34:57 PM
I like LoS. My favorite thing was Carmilla.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: X on November 09, 2016, 09:32:44 AM
Carmilla's portrait before she was a vampire was pretty hot! At least they got something right.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Pemburu Vampir on November 09, 2016, 02:18:10 PM
I like Mirror of Fate the most as it has the most Metroidvania feel.
I don't like LoS2. Its combat and its big confusing map.
Title: Re: BMC_War Machine
Post by: Claimh Solais on November 09, 2016, 05:48:54 PM
People keep going on about Patrick Stewart, yes he's a good actor, a decent narrator, but does nothing for the series. (Since when did CV need a fucking narrator?)
It never needed it, but what exactly is wrong with it? The only mandatory narration is the one in the opening cutscene. All of the rest of them are simply there during loading screens, and once the stage fully loads, you can skip it if it isn't finished yet.
My only issue with the narration is that it made it extremely obvious that Zobek was a villain. I would have preferred if Gabriel had narrated the game. It could have been used as a way to really flesh out his character if we knew his thoughts on the situation from himself. Rather than just saying he has doubts about his quest, or things don't make sense, we'd understand why. It's why I really enjoyed the narrations for the DLC chapters: Gabriel was the one narrating.
I guess I can kinda understand why it'd be a bad thing since most of the story is told through the narrations and notes, but there's nothing inherently wrong with it. Without the narrations, there's still just about as much story as any other 'vania (except stretched out over 15+ hours rather than 5 or less lol).
I don't like LoS2. Its combat and its big confusing map.
The only thing I don't like about the combat was the over-reliance on the weapon switching to make battles harder. They'll constantly throw enemies at you that require you to break through their guard with the Chaos Claws, but if you're low on magic, they're just a major pain in the ass. Also wasn't a big fan of the Void Sword being the only way to heal outside of Health Fonts (or blood fonts or whatever they were in LoS2) since taking damage wasn't all that difficult with how often enemies spam their unblockable attacks in LoS2.
Title: Re: BMC_War Machine
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 09, 2016, 11:06:52 PM
It never needed it, but what exactly is wrong with it?
What you've written below hits the nail on the head. I know it is a blockbuster game, but the highly 'briticised' accent, the tone of the narration just doesn't suit Castlevania to me. You know what it would suit, a game such as Dragon's Crown, or Trine, or something with a more 'olde english feel to it'. You know what else it suits? Comedy! He was a fucking brilliant narrator in TED.
My only issue with the narration is that it made it extremely obvious that Zobek was a villain. I would have preferred if Gabriel had narrated the game. It could have been used as a way to really flesh out his character if we knew his thoughts on the situation from himself. Rather than just saying he has doubts about his quest, or things don't make sense, we'd understand why. It's why I really enjoyed the narrations for the DLC chapters: Gabriel was the one narrating.
This, spot on. Gabriel's grit and slight roughness to his voice made him the superior narrator imo. I once read a comment about someone wishing the main game hadn't been narrated by "Gabriel's gay stalker" and lol'd
I guess I can kinda understand why it'd be a bad thing since most of the story is told through the narrations and notes, but there's nothing inherently wrong with it. Without the narrations, there's still just about as much story as any other 'vania (except stretched out over 15+ hours rather than 5 or less lol).
I would have rather a darker voice, or a wall of text. Hearing a voice can just get old sometimes... Remember in OOT when Navi piped up? I admit she was cute the first 10,000 times though.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: SecretWeapon on November 10, 2016, 11:57:20 AM
Carmilla's portrait before she was a vampire was pretty hot! At least they got something right.
Irrelevant
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: KaZudra on November 10, 2016, 04:41:27 PM
Lords 1 surprisingly holds up, though the Combat doesn't work; Having 20 different combos is appealing to DMC/Bayonetta because it rewards mix-ups, if you leave that mechanic out, you'll just be spamming the 4 most effective attacks. Stage progression was a wise choice as there was at least some replay value. Overall 8/10.
Mirror of Fate is the misguided child of the entire Metroidvania genre, it has so much going for it in being the closest to metroid in gameplay.... but, Mediocre design choices bumped this down greatly, the Combat is worse given that every enemy is a hit sponge add in some dodgy platform detection and fall damage on a fairly descent map. 6/10.
Lords 2, The game that not only lived up to the hype, it couldn't even close the narrative in a satisfying way. Combat is better, but the attempt of bringing metroidvania to 3D was... okay at best; the replay value is shot down due to unskippable sections of the game you'd not want to revisit. 4/10.
Overall, the games are descent, but LoS1 is the only one worth ever coming back to.
Title: Re: BMC_War Machine
Post by: Flame on November 11, 2016, 05:42:54 AM
The only thing I don't like about the combat was the over-reliance on the weapon switching to make battles harder. They'll constantly throw enemies at you that require you to break through their guard with the Chaos Claws, but if you're low on magic, they're just a major pain in the ass. Also wasn't a big fan of the Void Sword being the only way to heal outside of Health Fonts (or blood fonts or whatever they were in LoS2) since taking damage wasn't all that difficult with how often enemies spam their unblockable attacks in LoS2.
didn't the neck chomping executions refill health as well? I seem to recall they did.
Title: Re: BMC_War Machine
Post by: Claimh Solais on November 11, 2016, 06:20:47 AM
didn't the neck chomping executions refill health as well? I seem to recall they did.
Oh yeah. I completely forgot about those somehow... lol
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: X on November 14, 2016, 06:20:49 PM
Quote
Irrelevant
For you, sure. But not me. The art style is about the only thing I liked about LoS, and Carmilla's pre-vampire image looks good. The whole pretty boy style of the IGA games was really starting to wear out on me. So it was very refreshing to see an art style more closer to what CV had started with. That is the only thing I'd take from LoS is the art (including some enviroments). But the rest of the game is forgettable.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Claimh Solais on November 14, 2016, 06:24:15 PM
For you, sure. But not me. The art style is about the only thing I liked about LoS, and Carmilla's pre-vampire image looks good. The whole pretty boy style of the IGA games was really starting to wear out on me. So it was very refreshing to see an art style more closer to what CV had started with. That is the only thing I'd take from LoS is the art (including some enviroments). But the rest of the game is forgettable.
I agree. I thought the artstyle was gorgeous. Carmilla, in particular, I thought was really well-done (pre-vampire or otherwise). But outfit design in general was REALLY cool, to me, in the LoS games. Both of Gabriel's outfits looked great, Alucard looked awesome, etc.
I just wish in LoS2's modern segments you played as Dracula as he appeared at the beginning after being revitalized. Basically, younger-looking Gabula in the rags that he had on. Would've been cool to use that suit for a little longer rather than him just materializing a suit by shouting. (By the way, that scene is hilarious if you have the Armored Dracula skin on, because he grows a full beard after shouting, too.)
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: KaZudra on November 15, 2016, 06:47:33 AM
I agree. I thought the artstyle was gorgeous. Carmilla, in particular, I thought was really well-done (pre-vampire or otherwise). But outfit design in general was REALLY cool, to me, in the LoS games. Both of Gabriel's outfits looked great, Alucard looked awesome, etc.
I just wish in LoS2's modern segments you played as Dracula as he appeared at the beginning after being revitalized. Basically, younger-looking Gabula in the rags that he had on. Would've been cool to use that suit for a little longer rather than him just materializing a suit by shouting. (By the way, that scene is hilarious if you have the Armored Dracula skin on, because he grows a full beard after shouting, too.)
Arguably, The Art style is Definitive for Castlevania, aside from OOE's Art. Ayami is fitting for Vampire characters and scenery, but everything else is rather meh.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Rugal on November 15, 2016, 06:54:48 AM
Lords of Shadow sucked 6 years ago and it still sucks now. I'd rather inhale skunk shit than ever play Lords of Shadow again. That fat fuck David Cox and his his senior citizen lover Enric Alvarez took a big spanish shit on your favorite franchise of all time. I still want my two on one boxing match with those sacks of T-Rex shit.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: GuyStarwind on November 15, 2016, 02:15:46 PM
Never played it then and have no interest in playing it now.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: X on November 15, 2016, 10:10:03 PM
Quote
Lords of Shadow sucked 6 years ago and it still sucks now. I'd rather inhale skunk shit than ever play Lords of Shadow again. That fat fuck David Cox and his his senior citizen lover Enric Alvarez took a big spanish shit on your favorite franchise of all time. I still want my two on one boxing match with those sacks of T-Rex shit.
You probably could via Robot Chicken styled.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: theANdROId on November 16, 2016, 03:44:24 PM
Lords of Shadow sucked 6 years ago and it still sucks now. I'd rather inhale skunk shit than ever play Lords of Shadow again. That fat fuck David Cox and his his senior citizen lover Enric Alvarez took a big spanish shit on your favorite franchise of all time. I still want my two on one boxing match with those sacks of T-Rex shit.
...but how do you really feel Rugal? ;-D
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Lelygax on November 17, 2016, 04:12:03 AM
Lords of Shadow sucked 6 years ago and it still sucks now. I'd rather inhale skunk shit than ever play Lords of Shadow again. That fat fuck David Cox and his his senior citizen lover Enric Alvarez took a big spanish shit on your favorite franchise of all time. I still want my two on one boxing match with those sacks of T-Rex shit.
Rugal appeared here to trash this game again, like I expected, good. :P
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 17, 2016, 06:11:47 AM
GOD RUGAL HATES ALL I am slightly biased towards Rugal as I love CVS2 - not because I tend to main Bison(Vega) in SFV - and I believe Vega(Claw) is one of the best ever designed SF characters, who's mask>God Mask from LOS 1. Vega(Claw) also has a tattoo of a serpent, symbolising Satan(Los 1 antagonist) who is known as the devil (the "devil mask" also exists in LOS 1). See what I did there?? Pay attention like I don't... ;)
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: KaZudra on November 17, 2016, 06:45:44 AM
Rugal appeared here to trash this game again, like I expected, good. :P
Rejection is what validates our existence, I just wish he could find ONE good thing about it.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Lelygax on November 17, 2016, 09:21:51 AM
I don't think Rugal have played it, but I know he didn't need to. To be honest I hate what LoS did to this franchise as much as him I think, only difference is that I ain't as vocal as him about it and I will give it a try sometime because I'm kinda masochist. Its really a shame that he doesn't post as much as before.
@zangetsu: Ironically, I like to play as Vega too since Street Fighter 2, but I suck playing as him on Street Fighter 4 because of his special combo finish move, its hard to do it.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Claimh Solais on November 17, 2016, 01:36:36 PM
Its really a shame that he doesn't post as much as before.
To be fair, there isn't a whole lot to talk about lately. LoS was the major thing to talk about on this board over the last few years, and with the last game having come out two years ago, that topic has pretty much lost its steam. News on Bloodstained is sparse, so the topics that come from that are pretty few and far between. That just leaves us with What-If, speculation, and Pachinko topics, and we pretty much burned through all those, too.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Lelygax on November 17, 2016, 06:48:58 PM
To be fair, there isn't a whole lot to talk about lately. LoS was the major thing to talk about on this board over the last few years, and with the last game having come out two years ago, that topic has pretty much lost its steam. News on Bloodstained is sparse, so the topics that come from that are pretty few and far between. That just leaves us with What-If, speculation, and Pachinko topics, and we pretty much burned through all those, too.
Well thats kinda true, but I think there is more material that happens to appear from time to time, like castlevania clones being discovered or fangames being created. Its kinda sad because it looks as if we were this franchise last defense before it vanishes into oblivion. Hopefully Bloodstained will bring more varied topics when it launches and maybe even open Konami eyes (later is kinda hard).
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Claimh Solais on November 18, 2016, 03:18:46 AM
Well thats kinda true, but I think there is more material that happens to appear from time to time, like castlevania clones being discovered or fangames being created. Its kinda sad because it looks as if we were this franchise last defense before it vanishes into oblivion. Hopefully Bloodstained will bring more varied topics when it launches and maybe even open Konami eyes (later is kinda hard).
Yeah, definitely hoping for some news on Bloodstained, something substantial that'll keep a conversation going. Definitely will be happening once the game releases, but we're over a year off at the very least on that.
It's a real shame such a classic franchise is being mostly relegated to slot machines and pachinko. Even though LoS2 was mostly a disaster, I'd still gladly take a fourth one over what we're currently getting.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Rugal on November 18, 2016, 05:23:36 AM
I've played Lords of Shadow 1 all the way through. I played the Mirror of Fuck demo until I fell from a high spot and got hurt from it.. In a god damn Castlevania game. As soon as that happened, I uninstalled it.
Vega is my favorite Street Fighter character. I made 97th place at Evo with him this year out of like 5k entrants.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: KaZudra on November 18, 2016, 06:07:03 PM
I've played Lords of Shadow 1 all the way through. I played the Mirror of Fuck demo until I fell from a high spot and got hurt from it.. In a god damn Castlevania game.
Well, pitfalls in classicvanias were also really high drops :^)))))
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 23, 2016, 12:35:29 AM
Well, pitfalls in classicvanias were also really high drops :^)))))
High drops could kill in CV64 if it was a pit, or kill if you'd already lost hp and it was a really long fall. I didn't have an issue, but CV 64/LOD were more realistic. It's a bit odd in a 2d game, where often you try to fall to save time moving through the area.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Darth Cariss on November 25, 2016, 12:36:32 AM
Yeah, LoS series is pretty bad. It has some decent qualities, I like the cast, and the references to previous games are amusing, but I'm already pretty sour most of the time on the 3D 'vanias and this one doesn't help with that viewpoint. My favorite LoS game is Mirror of Fate for sure, but I will say that I only played the HD version (I heard the original 3DS version was garbage so I skipped it back when it came out). I expected it to suck super hard so I was pleasantly surprised that it was a decent Castlevania game, though still much weaker than any of the IGA 'vanias of course.
I did enjoy how totally insane LoS2 was, in that "so bad it's good" sort of way. There was a point where I was battling against jetpacking riot police that I was like "what the hell am I even playing?" and started laughing. Played them all only once, they weren't good enough to be worth a round 2.
I don't mind there being alternate Castlevania universes and side stories, I think it mostly just bothers me that Lords of Shadow meant the end of the IGA games, which I was a huge fan of. As its own thing if it had only been a supplement I might've looked back on these games more fondly as an experiment, but as they pretty much represent what is seemingly the end of the Castlevania series at this point (though I have no doubt there'll be a reboot eventually), it leaves a pretty poor taste.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Intersection on November 26, 2016, 01:25:50 AM
Six years can go a long way in changing your perspective on things.
When I first started posting here, I was too busy despising Lords of Shadow to really give it a chance to entertain me. As a long-time fan of Igarashi's games, I was up in arms from the day LoS was announced: I didn't like what the game stood for, I didn't like the way it was being touted as a "reboot", and I especially didn't like what it meant for the future of the series: IGA sidelined, Castlevania shoehorned down the God-Of-War reboot path with an unknown developer. So when I actually got to playing it, it's no surprise I was disgusted: it wasn't the game I wanted to play, it fit none of the "standards" I had in mind for the franchise, so I naturally dismissed it as crap in as little as a few hours.
The next two games, at first, didn't exactly help change my sentiment: Mirror of Fate was a rookie and mostly excusable try at a 2D platforming game from a developer who had never really made one, and we all know how much of a mess Lords of Shadow 2 was. But after dejectedly abandoning LoS2, and dusting off my copy of LoS just to see if it was really any better than I remembered, I actually found myself having... fun. You see, Lords of Shadow ended up scratching an itch I didn't realize I had, because in retrospect the game has a whole lot going for it - most of which I glazed over trying to find a Metroidvania game in something that obviously wasn't.
Nowadays, I find myself resenting the way Lords of Shadow was marketed far more than I do the game itself. LoS happened to be a very promising hack'n'slash title that got mispackaged and thrown into the wrong franchise. Had it been released on its own, it would've probably been seen as a homage to Castlevania on the whole - it's packed with enough of that gothic aesthetic to make any Castlevania veteral feel at home. But for me, that's where the comparisons should've ended.
Look, the game itself is startlingly beautiful and imaginative; it's absolutely crammed with content that always oozes effort, even if it isn't all great; it has a simple, elegant combat system that never stops being challenging; and it comes with a good story to boot. I still find myself revisiting Lords of Shadow every once in a while, because you can tell pretty much throughout that the devs really wanted you to be impressed and have fun, even if they didn't always know what they were doing - and I'm humble enough to appreciate that. It's a telltale sign that a developer has some good, hardworking people behind it, even if their direction ends up screwing the sequel.
In short, I just feel like the original Lords of Shadow wasn't really a Castlevania game because it never really tried to be; the people at MercurySteam evidently wanted to do their own thing, and to their credit they actually did it pretty well. They just didn't make the Castlevania we were all expecting - and in a way they don't deserve all of the bitterness the game has seen over the years.
Because to be honest, if anything deserves that kind of bitterness, it's Konami.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 26, 2016, 06:24:21 PM
Six years can go a long way in changing your perspective on things.
When I first started posting here, I was too busy despising Lords of Shadow to really give it a chance to entertain me. As a long-time fan of Igarashi's games, I was up in arms from the day LoS was announced: I didn't like what the game stood for, I didn't like the way it was being touted as a "reboot", and I especially didn't like what it meant for the future of the series: IGA sidelined, Castlevania shoehorned down the God-Of-War reboot path with an unknown developer. So when I actually got to playing it, it's no surprise I was disgusted: it wasn't the game I wanted to play, it fit none of the "standards" I had in mind for the franchise, so I naturally dismissed it as crap in as little as a few hours.
The next two games, at first, didn't exactly help change my sentiment: Mirror of Fate was a rookie and mostly excusable try at a 2D platforming game from a developer who had never really made one, and we all know how much of a mess Lords of Shadow 2 was. But after dejectedly abandoning LoS2, and dusting off my copy of LoS just to see if it was really any better than I remembered, I actually found myself having... fun. You see, Lords of Shadow ended up scratching an itch I didn't realize I had, because in retrospect the game has a whole lot going for it - most of which I glazed over trying to find a Metroidvania game in something that obviously wasn't.
Nowadays, I find myself resenting the way Lords of Shadow was marketed far more than I do the game itself. LoS happened to be a very promising hack'n'slash title that got mispackaged and thrown into the wrong franchise. Had it been released on its own, it would've probably been seen as a homage to Castlevania on the whole - it's packed with enough of that gothic aesthetic to make any Castlevania veteral feel at home. But for me, that's where the comparisons should've ended.
Look, the game itself is startlingly beautiful and imaginative; it's absolutely crammed with content that always oozes effort, even if it isn't all great; it has a simple, elegant combat system that never stops being challenging; and it comes with a good story to boot. I still find myself revisiting Lords of Shadow every once in a while, because you can tell pretty much throughout that the devs really wanted you to be impressed and have fun, even if they didn't always know what they were doing - and I'm humble enough to appreciate that. It's a telltale sign that a developer has some good, hardworking people behind it, even if their direction ends up screwing the sequel.
In short, I just feel like the original Lords of Shadow wasn't really a Castlevania game because it never really tried to be; the people at MercurySteam evidently wanted to do their own thing, and to their credit they actually did it pretty well. They just didn't make the Castlevania we were all expecting - and in a way they don't deserve all of the bitterness the game has seen over the years.
Because to be honest, if anything deserves that kind of bitterness, it's Konami.
There's a lot of truth to this post.
When the game was simply advertised as "LORDS OF SHADOW" and the first trailer came out, I immediately thought it was cool that it's an homage to Castlevania with the main character and his chain/flame whip, I was really interested to see what the game was like.
When it was announced that LOS was Castlevania LOS, I had my doubts as to how that would work. The trailers leading up to the game didn't seem bad or anything, but I was worried about how a Castlevania game's pacing would work in 3d, using combo's, being combat heavy and straying from its 2d origins. Needless to say I was right to worry.
LOS1 was fun for sure, it had a lot of redeeming factors which mostly outweighed the few issues. If the main character was simply called "Gabriel", simply became a Vampire and not "Dracula" and they didn't try to shoehorn Castlevania's universe into LOS' universe, the game would have been better and felt much more original. The Castlevania title was a cashgrab to try and reinvent the series and make money. Konami should've treated one of their most beloved franchises with more respect when giving MS the authority to make LOS.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Crying Freeman on November 26, 2016, 08:43:48 PM
Been this long already? Lol
My main problems aren't the fault of the game, but the choices they chose. It's good to do different, but I wasn't the biggest fan of the LOTR styled fantasy narrative here. CV has been more inspired by dark fantasy, classic horror films and comics etc.- Conan and Dracula had a baby. Even then, it's executed perfectly- beautiful graphics, cinematic OST, great VA from real pros, and many areas of the game are just breathtaking and a beauty to look at. The biggest thing of all- it doesn't feel self indulgent like "isn't this cool and epic?" but more it deserves to be called that because it truly is that. Then the gameplay- very standard Rygar/GOW, with some SotC rip-offy scenes. These are what got everyone saying "This isn't Castlevania!! It's GOW!!" The presentation is the standout feature of the package... and hey, CV has always been that tbh, even if this is a different style.
It's a fantastic game for the most part, and I feel if it wasn't called Castlevania, it'd have a much larger fanbase and acceptance with gamers.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Rugal on November 28, 2016, 04:52:09 AM
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/gamesproducerdavecox
Look at this pretentious piece of shit.
"I am a successful and passionate games industry leader with over 20 years experience in senior positions in both game development and publishing. I have a long and successful track record of working on and delivering world-class, award-winning games.
I was responsible for rebooting the ailing Castlevania series and transforming it into a AAA multi-million selling franchise. I conceived, co-wrote and produced the game, sourced the talented developers and led the team to the most successful Castlevania games in the series history generating 100's of millions of dollars and two successful follow-up titles."
Ailing Castlevania series? This mother fucker. The series was only Ailing after you got your greasy claws over it. I wouldn't hire this swine to clean my dead cat's shit. Nothing is successful about what you did to Castlevania. Get that through your fat, ugly, thick skull.
"World-class, award-winning games." What planet does this idiot live on?
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 28, 2016, 06:10:48 AM
"I am a successful and passionate games industry leader with over 20 years experience in senior positions in both game development and publishing. I have a long and successful track record of working on and delivering world-class, award-winning games.
I was responsible for rebooting the ailing Castlevania series and transforming it into a AAA multi-million selling franchise. I conceived, co-wrote and produced the game, sourced the talented developers and led the team to the most successful Castlevania games in the series history generating 100's of millions of dollars and two successful follow-up titles."
Again *GAME, *TITLE
#mirroroffuckmyass
Your two latter titles tanked more than Tiananmen Square...
Ailing Castlevania series? This mother fucker. The series was only Ailing after you got your greasy claws over it. I wouldn't hire this swine to clean my dead cat's shit. Nothing is successful about what you did to Castlevania. Get that through your fat, ugly, thick skull.
I don't give a fuck what sales figures or corporate suits deem worthy of success, but LOS is not equal to or greater than any Castlevania entry which preceded it.
He reminds me of Ricky Gervais, only not charming and unsuccessful.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: TheTextGuy on November 28, 2016, 07:30:47 AM
Mirror of Fate was a bastardization of the IGA games imo. Fall damage that forces you to go where the devs want you to go, combat that while satisfying, is kinda shallow, and dull hallways make for a mediocre experience that's only worsened by the fact it's a half-assed attempt at lip-service towards IGA fans. Thank god we have Bloodstained to fill our IGAvania needs.
Also I have a feeling that many people aren't going to remember LoS as fondly (or at all) (or as just a small footnote) years down the line.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 28, 2016, 07:39:35 AM
Mirror of Fate was a bastardization of the IGA games imo. Fall damage that forces you to go where the devs want you to go, combat that while satisfying, is kinda shallow, and dull hallways make for a mediocre experience that's only worsened by the fact it's a half-assed attempt at lip-service towards IGA fans. Thank god we have Bloodstained to fill our IGAvania needs.
Also I have a feeling that many people aren't going to remember LoS as fondly (or at all) (or as just a small footnote) years down the line.
I think what annoyed me most was the force field/ barricades forcing you to fight enemies, this actually lessens the game's difficulty and makes moving through the map more annoying because: a) You're stuck in a fucking shoebox instead of freely roaming b) If you die you don't start at your save point, you just start around the corner.
People hammer Igavania's for being easier than Classicvanias, but remember the few areas in SOTN for example where enemies could pack-hunt you, such as the clocktower, inverted clock tower, the anti chapel, the inverted library and the reverse entry? You see when you don't force the player to conform (with the exception of boss fights) smarter AI actually makes for a more challenging game without halting the fluidity.
Yet in Mirror of PLEASEC*monmyFace, we get stupid shit like the aforementioned, flashing platforms (which we should hang off), axes hitting ceilings (but not hitting enemies as they fall down), Belmont domestic quarrels episodes 01-03, and Simon's walking paces screeching to the likes of OTHER M OTS moments...
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: SecretWeapon on November 28, 2016, 08:42:35 PM
I consider LoS one of the best CV titles. 2 is shit, and i didnt play MoF and Cox/Alvarez are annoying af to put it lightly but LoS1 is truly well done. You two (rugal and zangetsu) look as ridiculous as Cox and Alvarez though
Again, I still want Lords of Shadows 3: Bernhards Curse
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 28, 2016, 09:11:37 PM
You two (rugal and zangetsu) look as ridiculous as Cox and Alvarez though
I actually liked LOS1 and said it was a good game. I didn't like what it brought to the franchise as a whole.
How the fuck do we look ridiculous and don't compare us to Cox and Alvarez when it's reaching. In short if you don't like our opinions, then kindly eff-off.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Shiroi Koumori on November 29, 2016, 12:46:37 AM
I consider LoS one of the best CV titles. 2 is shit, and i didnt play MoF and Cox/Alvarez are annoying af to put it lightly but LoS1 is truly well done. You two (rugal and zangetsu) look as ridiculous as Cox and Alvarez though
Again, I still want Lords of Shadows 3: Bernhards Curse
Did you just fucking compare me to that fat sack of melted shit, and that crypt keeper looking maggot infested asshole? You sir have poor tastes.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: TatteredSeraph on November 29, 2016, 10:17:45 AM
Possibly walking away at this point might me the better thing to do at this point and calming down, guys, before things get too angry. That was a pretty shitty comparison to make, SecretWeapon. Especially considering the poor way that Cox and Alvarez regarded the fanbase while the games were being released. Peoples' anger is pretty justified, all things considered. In this situation, it's fine for different people to hold very different opinions on matters. The range of views on the Castlevania series you see on these boards is something I really like and respect about it, especially as there is so much passion for these games.
I love aspects of the LoS trilogy, and had no issue with the epic, LotR-esque take added, even though it's a huge departure from the series, in its attempt to pour fresh blood via a new spin. That I can respect, to an extent, even though the issues with the games from the end of Iga's reign were due to Konami putting Iga in a difficult position. I love some of the artwork, the music, the voice acting. However, LoS wasn't true enough to the source in many ways, and the content, after promising much, never fully paid out what it promised. The controlling hand from someone who didn't care for the series showed, especially as you progressed through the series, with LoS 2's plot in particular being clunky, with the jarring clash between stunning castle segments and lazy as all hell and unimaginative modern segments that made for most of the game. The choke-hold on creativity that the art books indicated towards being there stopped the potential from being reached. Likewise with bits from the Alucard DLC. Even still, the asinine attitudes from Cox and Alvaraez was not on, especially when called out on stuff, such as the ending for 2, when people sussed out immediately that Trevor becomes Alucard, etc etc. That, along with the faults within the games, has left very bitter tastes in too many peoples' mouths (myself included truth be told), causing even more dislike of the LoS games.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 29, 2016, 01:59:23 PM
Seraph's opinion is one of the better formed and more articulate posts I've read on this thread.
Additionally, good advice Seraph. I'm not fussed what complete strangers believe about me and at the same time it's my belief that especially if you don't know someone personally, judgement and personal attacks should be refrained from, or at the very least paired right back.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: TatteredSeraph on November 29, 2016, 02:39:05 PM
Thanks, Zangetsu, much appreciated. I could just see this ending up sidetracking the thread into devolving into a slanging match and have people getting far too angry, so thought it best to step in and try and nip it a bit in the bud now. It's just general manners imo, to not be rude to people like that.
I think a lot of the conclusions I've come to about LoS come about from a mix of quiet observance here, even back before I joined and just instead lurked, reading posts, and chatting to a friend not on the boards who's likewise a big Castlevania fan. When I finally played through LoS1, back before MoF came out, after initially being very skeptical about the reboot, I found myself enchanted by Gabriel's story. I found him a very strong and interesting character, and my friend and I frothed and theorized on stuff. But when LoS2 eventually came out, while we love certain aspects of it, we felt disappointed in wasted potential, with some bits handled rather sloppily, for various reasons, and we hated the attitudes that certain personages were taking with the series. However, when critiquing the games, I have tried to find the positive aspects of them. The bits that to me captured my attention, the bits that I find important in games, and I have clung my focus on those bits rather than get depressed about the shortcomings and failings in the games, irrespective of my views on how Cox and Alvarez in particular handled matters, and judged the games in their own contexts. For me, story, and the characters, are the main things I look for in games (includin pen n paper rpgs, as that's the sort of gamer I am). Artwork, and music, are likewise important, as they add to that. These are the aspects of Castlevania that I care about the most, as they're the bits that drew me in in the first place, some 15 years ago. The fact that I was emotionally captured by Gabriel's story is what made me a LoS fan, and still love it, despite the spark of promise not fully realised. It's that spark that was there that keeps me interested, even though yeah, the reboot's been concluded, in a fashion. However, I completely get the anger shown, like I was saying. This thread is a retrospective on the reboot, I'm assuming to see whether people have changed their views on it, or had their feelings soften at all over time or not. I think it's safe to say that for a good number of us, we still feel as strongly now as we did originally, especially seeing as we haven't had an actual Castlevania game release since.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Flame on December 02, 2016, 08:15:12 AM
Y'all need to stop gettin' angry at vidya games
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: X on December 02, 2016, 09:48:41 AM
I can't exactly get angry at the games because it's not the games' fault they were built that way. It is the fault of those who made the games that need to take responsibility for their incompetence and the irreversible damage they've done. But this is north America. And most game designers over here don't care much about polishing a product as they do about making money. Bethesda game studios is a good example of this sad, ever-growing trend.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: JayDominus on January 05, 2017, 02:03:44 PM
Yeah, I'm kind of really fond of those games. Though it pains my heart to see what a wasted opportunity they are. Y'see, while I love me my Classicvanias, Metroidvanias other than SotN kinda-sorta lose me. Couple that with neither owning a PS2 nor owning a PC powerful enough to emulate PS2 well back in the day, and I was really behind on Castlevania. I *read* about the plots of the newer games and... well, I wasn't really impressed. Hence why I couldn't care less for all the stuff they "got wrong" (as far as I'm concerned, they just felt it wasn't good and changed it around; some of the changes worked, others didn't). To me, Lords of Shadow 1 looked like exactly what I wanted Castlevania to be - more or less a modernized take on a classic formula - a linear action-adventure game in which you play as a badass warrior whose last name is Belmont, with Dracula at the end. And when I finally got to play it, that's pretty much what it was. Even if the soundtrack was very different (but still good: Oscar Araujo did a grand job on it) and it was trying very hard to be a Hollywood movie (some of the vampire castle locations remind me of Van Helsing, which goes well with Gabriel kinda looking like Hugh Jackman). And the story was kind of stupid with the God mask being the red herring all along. And yes, I do vastly prefer Dracula being a Belmont to Dracula being some guy who's neither a Belmont nor Vlad Tepes. Mirror of Fate I didn't play until after LoS2 and initially I was less than impressed. It's trying to play both sides against the middle and doesn't do very well as a metroidvania, but eh... okay. Whatevs. Story-wise, as always, we get the elements that appear right the hell outta nowhere (like, y'know, the Mirror Spirit) and go right the hell nowhere. As with the last game, I actually like the streamlined approach to Alucard. Adrian's origins never really made sense to me, especially if the Matthias!Dracula's origins are taken into consideration. I get that Matthias was retconned in, but it only made it all more needlessly convoluted and silly. I also liked Simon's redesign in this game, taking Kojima's redheaded hunter and combining him with the original barbarian image so he doesn't look like someone who just escaped from a BDSM club (I will forever call Kojima's design "BDSimon" for I despise it very much). Lords of Shadow 2... oh sweet merciful Christ, talk about all the potential wasted. It oozes from the game. There are lots of story ideas that could carry fully-fledged games on their own and none of them go anywhere (Dracula trying to find a way to off himself? Dracula's castle rebelling against him? Dracula taking a nap and awakening in modern times? Or in the future? Dracula vs Satan? Each of these could be fleshed out and carry a game on its own if given proper attention; none of them were). The graphics are the great last hurrah for the 7th gen with beautiful art direction (especially in the castle parts)... that clashes wildly with the parts that were blatanlty designed by someone else. The music... yeah, the music and gameplay mechanics are the only things that are consistently good, Oscar Araujo is still great. But the story. The unfocused, over- and underwritten Frankenstein's monster of a story is just a pile of awful mess that, despite the devs knowing that it'll be their last CV game, fails to provide an entertaining journey and a satisfying closure to the trilogy. Everybody is an idiot (other than Alucard, he suddenly turns into a freaking Machiavelli), Dracula is far too angsty and not arrogant enough (he should consult Kain on how a vampire overlord protagonist should behave), Victor is cool, only he dies for no reason, Satan is an idiot who gets gutted by the Vampire Killer near a pizza joint and the non-ending leaves a metric frakton of questions never to be answered. Such as: - What the funk and wagnal was that about the castle? Is it real? is it in his head? It seems to be in his head but then Alucard can suddenly travel there too? And what the flipping hell is up with Maria? - Why can Vampire Killer kill Satan? Seriously, it's never explained or alluded to. - So what, Dracula doesn't want to off himself now? - Was Trevor an illusion or was it Alucard? If it's Alucard, then how can he do that? - What's up with Alucard being stronger than Dracula, even after he defeated Inner Dracula?
And I can go on and on and on, but you get the point. The writing is stupid and horrible and practically buries the game and the few genuinely awesome moments ("I am his Chosen One!") are buried by all the idiocy that's going on. What a shame. This really could be something special.
Quote
I can't exactly get angry at the games because it's not the games' fault they were built that way. It is the fault of those who made the games that need to take responsibility for their incompetence and the irreversible damage they've done. But this is north America. And most game designers over here don't care much about polishing a product as they do about making money. Bethesda game studios is a good example of this sad, ever-growing trend.
MercurySteam is a Spanish developer. Also, Bethsoft produces GOTY candidate after GOTY candidate, what are you talking about?
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on January 05, 2017, 04:14:28 PM
Bethesda game studios is a good example of this sad, ever-growing trend.
I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of my 400+ hours in Skyrim, 220+ in Fallout 4, and that's not even considering other earlier games by Bethesda.
By the way, one of my Skyrim characters is Simon Belmont and yes, he uses a chain whip.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Kingshango on January 05, 2017, 04:31:39 PM
I still like LOS1 despite it's problems.
I only played MoF and I thought it was drab outside of a few boss battles.
LOS2 to me will go down as one of the biggest pieces of wasted potential in recent years. Seriously, it could have been the next Blood Omen but it ended up being the next Blood Omen 2.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on January 05, 2017, 04:36:03 PM
LOS2 to me will go down as one of the biggest pieces of wasted potential in recent years. Seriously, it could have been the next Blood Omen but it ended up being the next Blood Omen 2.
AKA it skipped the drinks, the foreplay, and the wild night of drunken passion, and elected instead to head straight for the awkward morning after, complete with hangover.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: X on January 05, 2017, 05:36:26 PM
Quote
I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of my 400+ hours in Skyrim, 220+ in Fallout 4, and that's not even considering other earlier games by Bethesda.
By the way, one of my Skyrim characters is Simon Belmont and yes, he uses a chain whip.
lol, I'm guilty of this too. I've got 5 years of modded Skyrim under my belt. Fallout is not far behind.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Flame on January 06, 2017, 10:04:02 AM
ive given up on modded skyrim. i load it with mods and then never play it. just take screenshots.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: JayDominus on January 07, 2017, 11:25:28 PM
AKA it skipped the drinks, the foreplay, and the wild night of drunken passion, and elected instead to head straight for the awkward morning after, complete with hangover.
Hangover + Walk of Shame = Stealth Sequence ???
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on January 08, 2017, 12:13:15 AM
Gabriel LOOKS like he's doing the walk of shame in Lords 2's "stealth" sequences. Even the goddamn Prince of Darkness recognized how BS those segments were.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Kale on January 09, 2017, 08:08:16 AM
I liked LoS1 but not that much... I liked LoS2's combat quite a bit, even if a lot of it is kind of just meh.
I also liked CoD a lot as well... which everyone seems to hate so....... my opinions is probably pretty contrarian to a lot of people. Hell, only real bad part about CoD for me is the final castle, which was a long stair case =( ... well, and the gay rival that looks like he'll rape you, and..... the story? Well I guess that's a lot but I just had a lot of fun with it. It was like a lower quality Ninja Gaiden/DMC to me with the Castlevania brand.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: Dremn on January 09, 2017, 11:28:29 AM
Still a decent game, but not a game I look back at fondly looking at the current state of the franchise now
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: e105beta on January 10, 2017, 08:36:39 AM
I still listen to the LoS2 soundtrack sometimes and remember how I thought the game was going to go when I first listened to it after it was ripped from the demo. Then I get frustrated with how it actually went. Lords of Shadow 2 is hot garbage as far as I'm concerned. I recognize there is good in it, namely the combat and the atmosphere in the castle, but the bad completely overshadows everything else. I mean, who cares how good the patty in your hamburger is if the chef served it with a bun covered in mold and instead of ketchup used shit?
I still like Mirror of Fate for what it is. Between the story, the art, the moody atmosphere, and the exploration I still remember my initial playthrough fondly, but after roughly 5 playthroughs that's worn off and the flawed combat really stands out. It's shallow and easy to abuse, and doesn't compliment the rest of the game. When I look at it now, it's a nice attempt with a good thought behind it, but the game designers weren't brave enough (or allowed enough freedom) to really stretch their arms and do their own thing, which is a shame.
7 years later, Lords of Shadow is still one of my favorite games in the Castlevania series. It's somewhere up there with Symphony of the Night, Rondo of Blood, and Portrait of Ruin. It's already been said earlier in this thread, but while the combat feels a bit clunky in the face of LoS2, as a complete package the game is fantastic.
I really miss Castlevania.
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: zangetsu468 on January 10, 2017, 10:27:03 AM
I also liked CoD a lot as well... which everyone seems to hate so....... my opinions is probably pretty contrarian to a lot of people. Hell, only real bad part about CoD for me is the final castle, which was a long stair case =( ...
This
Title: Re: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later
Post by: X on January 10, 2017, 09:32:23 PM
Quote
I also liked CoD a lot as well... which everyone seems to hate so....... my opinions is probably pretty contrarian to a lot of people. Hell, only real bad part about CoD for me is the final castle, which was a long stair case =( ...
Yeah, the final castle- Oops, pardon me. 'Cathedral' was more/less one long corridor that steadily climbed upwards. There was no real deviation as there was with the rest of the game. It just went on and on until you got to the top. And what's even more typical is that the map layout didn't even match the 'Cathedral' we saw in the final revealing cinematic scene. But the 3D-vanias have a history of doing that.