Topic: A Letter to All Iga-Vania Fans From a LoS Fanatic

[Gunlord]

Been some time since I posted in the actual Castlevania forum rather than the off-topic place, but I guess it couldn't hurt for me to give it a decent shot.

First off, to the OP: I won't mock you for liking LoS, and I respect your opinion. I also respect the amount of thought you've put into your posts as well as the empathy you display by comparing your experience as a CV fan disappointed with changes in the series to similar experiences (some) SoTN fans have felt over these new changes. It demonstrates an ability to put yourself in another person's shoes, which is something I wish more people had these days.

However, I'm with PFG. While I haven't been gaming as long as you have, maybe--the first system I have clear memories of is the Super Nintendo--I have been playing sinc SCIV and...not Rondo of Blood, but Dracula X on the SNES. While I love IGA's games, I am very much not opposed to the classicvanias either. Now, I haven't played LoS yet (I'll get on that soon...it's coming in the mail from amazon.com) but I think the good PFG's post spells out many reasons why retro fans might not like it very much. Since I haven't played the game, again, I won't criticize too much. But from the bits of soundtrack I've listened too and the gameplay I've seen on Youtube, it does have some problems--no music is as good or even as distinctive as, say, Aquarius from CV3, and the action doesn't look too great either--not bad, but despite some Shadow of the Colossus-style fights not that different from most other action games. Maybe my opinion will change once I play it, but for now, here's another retro-CV fan backing up PFG in saying you don't speak for all of us. Prunyuu~~

[Abnormal Freak]

This post of mine will come off a bit odd as only a month or two ago I was saying how Lords of Shadow is pretty good, but a few more hours in and I found myself yawning. First few stages were pretty damn cool with good atmosphere and fun level design. Whipping the shit out of and then raising the beam to impale the Warg? Awesome. Trudging through a spooky swamp? Also cool.

Then the gameplay started relying more and more on "whip, dodge, whip again, dodge, whip, whip, dodge, dodge, dodge," repeat. Those spiders are boring as hell to fight against, and I hate how the game pretty much forces you to go about killing them a certain way, rather than letting the gamer play the game in the way they see fit with their style of strategy.

Castlevania just isn't a hack and slash series and never should be, but at least Lament of Innocence had lasting atmosphere and pretty colors to make up for the mundane, not-very-Castlevania-like gameplay. I still feel the N64 games approached the series in 3D the best so far.

I'm an old school fan, been in love with the series since I first laid eyes on Simon's Quest as a tyke and was able to play Super Castlevania IV at my cousin's place. (My fam didn't get a Super NES until Christmas '92.) Grew up on Castlevania, even if most of my exposure to it didn't come until the late '90s. Symphony of the Night is up there with the greats in the old style of gameplay, although the post-SOTN Metroidvanias often left much to be desired. They still offered some cool gameplay, however.

Critical as I was of IGA, he at least kept alive familiar elements of the series. As a fellow classic, whip-toting CV fan, LOS just...doesn't feel much like Castlevania. By the time I got to the ice giant and had to climb atop him, I finished that level feeling like I'd rather be playing Shadow of the Colossus and other better, more aspiring games. LOS feels like a retread of so many games I've played before but coupled into one, and little of it has any sort of Castlevania flavor, classic or otherwise.

Endless ledge-grappling is also tiresome. I can only think of one moment where it was actually fun, and it's when you're crossing a broken bridge and need to use your whip in all sorts of ways to get across. That was enjoyable. I didn't see much of that.

Who knows where the series will go from here? I'm not sure I want more IGA recycle jobs—and let's face it, the guy in the last few years focused too much on "expanding" the series but in all the wrong ways (Harmony of Despair, Judgment, that puzzle game, etc. can all eat my dick)—but I want something that gives me the same feelings of excitement that the old games still give me today. Something innovative and full-on yet still looks and feels like Castlevania. It's a lost hope because I know no one's going to give the series the tender loving care it deserves.

[Maedhros]

Holy shit, this thread... Am I the only one who didn't read almost anything from here... I think that's a first. I'm so sick of these threads trying to defend LoS, it's the same arguments being used over and over again.

[e105beta]

I remember reading this on ScrewAttack.

I'm not sure where I fit into this conversation. I love every iteration of Castlevania in its own way, but I see can also see flaws with all of them. Sure, my favorites will always be the Classicvanias, and I was definitely disappointed when they got wiped from the face of the earth, only later to be revived briefly with DXC and Adventure Rebirth, but I love Metroidvanias too, and I never felt this sense of disinterest with the series that I know some Classicvania fans did when SotN came out. If anything, the worst part of the series was, for me, the period between PoR and LoS. OoE was the first Metroidvania that I never wanted to touch again after I played it. The level design and platforming was as poor as a typical Metroidvania, but it was missing all of the overwrought exploration and constant item drops that makes me come back to Metroidvanias for more. I beat it and I was done with it, and that's when I knew something was going wrong.

When LoS came out, I was excited. It wasn't so much that it was bringing back the Classicvania formula as much as it was bringing back the Classicvania feel. It wasn't a hardcore platformer, and gameplay focused more on actual combat, but what it did do was focus on one dude, with a whip, fighting monsters in a variety of environments, and running through designed, streamlined, challenging levels. I definitely felt that, while this wasn't the Castlevania I knew, it felt nicely familiar in an odd way. The art direction and cinematic-qualities were something new to the series, but they helped expand on the atmosphere of challenge I always got from the older games in a newer, more bombastic way. Instead of constantly looking backwards, which is slowly becoming apparent in beloved series like Legend of Zelda, it looked forwards, and as with pretty much everything in life, when it's time to go forward not everyone wants to go in the same direction.

Good post.

[thernz]

Vampire Killer/Simon's Quest are the roots of the exploration-based 'vanias, not Rondo.  And Rondo's layout was obviously based off of Dracula's Curse, what with the branching pathways.

Nah, in the Game Center CX interview with IGA, it's pretty clear he doesn't hold Simon's Quest in that high regard. I'm not sure about Vampire Killer, but I'm assuming Rondo was the main influence, besides Super Metroid ofc, because Symphony is a direct sequel.

But furthermore, Rondo is pretty much a little trove for secrets, what with unlocking Maria, the switches in the Clock Tower, the way you can lengthen the whip, and etc, and it all seems to vibe with Symphony's own particular brand what with its Richter, numerous instances of environment interaction like the bookcase, and its own special attacks.

I guess those comparisons are kinda stretching it and implying that Symphony's creativity is derived from Rondo, and I don't really mean that.

[Gaawa-chan]

Nah, in the Game Center CX interview with IGA, it's pretty clear he doesn't hold Simon's Quest in that high regard. I'm not sure about Vampire Killer, but I'm assuming

...

But furthermore, Rondo is pretty much a little trove for secrets, what with unlocking Maria, the switches in the Clock Tower, the way you can lengthen the whip, and etc, and it all seems to vibe with Symphony's own particular brand what with its Richter, numerous instances of environment interaction like the bookcase, and its own special attacks.

First off, so are Vampire Killer and Simon's Quest.

Secondly, lengthening the whip has been in the series since?  Oh, that's right.  THE FIRST GAME.

Finally, I find it interesting that you complain about Rondo and how it drifted away from Castlevania and then mention the minor puzzles it has.  What did Lords of Shadow have?  What do you claim Lords of Shadow did for you again?  And yet Rondo is 'the beginning of a betrayal'?

[uzo]

The difference is that Rondo's doesn't work with a powerup. The length increase is a secret move for when you press Forward just as you are attacking, and it gives the whip a slight reach advantage on that attack. You will know when you've performed it because the whip will flash white. You must do this every time to get the length increase.

[KyleVoakes]

Hey, Gaawa-Chan. I replied to your spoiler post. Yeah, it is VERY long indeed, so I've put it as a spoiler myself.

(click to show/hide)

1. Almost all of your initial complaints lodged against the metroidvanias (and Rondo, for that matter) revolved around character design.  "Belmonts aren't the main characters all the time, and when they are there they don't look the way I want them to!" 

Not an entirely accurate portrayal of me, but I can see what you're getting at. Yes, character design is a big deal for me whenever I'm playing a game. One such example is the 3rd Person Bionic Commando game, where Spencer has dreads. For me, it's entirely necessary to buy Rearmed for that classic "Ginger Duke" look. Without it, I'd rank it lower, but because I can fix my biggest gripe with the game, it flies right up as one of my all time favourite games of this generation. As for the "Belmonts not looking the way I want them to" argument, I must protest against that because I have no issue with Julius Belmont. I'd just wish I played through the game as J and not as Soma, and I loved how Julius is given the 8-whip directions from SCV4 in Harmony of Despair. Yes, I know you can unlock Julius after beating the game, but after completing it, I had no drive to play it again, and it was a bummer to feel that way after unlocking him.

But Lords of Shadow doesn't look like the classicvanias either; it's more like modern Forgotten Realms or Jackson's Lord of the Rings art, particularly as far as monster design goes.  And don't get me started on censor-cloud Satan. *rolls eyes*

2. I'd argue that the only point at which LoS returned to the 'gothic design' was within Bernhard Castle.  I'm not that bothered by it though because it is obvious why they did it that way. However...
The series didn't really have any music resembling anything even remotely 'orchestral' until the SNES/Genesis era and even that is pushing it; it always had catchy tunes that were some mix of techno/rock/jazz/baroque and other styles, the mingling of which resulted in a powerful and unique atmosphere, and to suggest that Shadow's OST is somehow truer to the older games like you did in your opening post is absurd.  It did NOT have music in line with the classicvanias AT ALL.  Furthermore, staples of the series like hearts, wall meat, etc... were taken out and in their place was crap like the chupacabras.  All of these changes resulted in a fundamentally different atmosphere.

As for the Gothic Scenery being absent in LoS, what about the architecture of the villages, and the costume designs of the people you meet?  How about the trees in the Forest of Bones? It has an entirely grim and medieval Gothic theme throughout the majority of the game, with a couple pauses like Pan's Temple to add some peaceful ambiance to even things out.

I agree with your chupacabra and lack of hearts and wall meat, but again, this isn't a traditional Castlevania game. LoS is if it took a more fantasy-realism direction. Looking back at the crawlspace before fighting the Butcher, would the atmosphere benefit from Gabriel finding cooked pork hidden in the wall? You still break objects like candles and other furniture for sub-weapons, sure they're not hearts, but the concept from the original is still there.

I will disagree with your discussion regarding the music though. I don't see how guitar/jazz/techno/rock would have improved the game. The LoS soundtrack fit their intended fantasy aesthetic perfectly. If you listen to the SCV4 soundtrack, there are moments in the OST where it's ambient and mood influencing. Some of those tracks are even remade for LoS, such as "Courtyard", the beginning of "Waterfalls of Agharta", and "Belmont's Theme". It had a pacing to it, and I found the "Ogre Battle" music entirely memorable. It's not as forgetful as, let's say, any of the original tracks from Harmony of Dissonance or Lament of Innocence.

3. Only people ignorant of the series would try to argue that the inclusion of locations outside of a castle made it less of a Castlevania game and I find the implication that most metroidvania fans think that to be a little far-fetched.  It doesn't help that multiple metroidvanias have places that take place outside the demon castle.

One of the recurring arguments I've read multiple times is "It's called Castlevania. Where's the Castle?" I've seen these come up many times. I know that not everyone has these views, but it's a popular argument for bashing against LoS. I think it's ignorant as well, but then again, non-CV fans say it too. I mean, I can say the same regarding Portrait of Ruin, which also took the player outside of the Gothic castle, one of the levels being a massive pyramid in what looked like Egypt while another appeared more Victorian, and not even LoS went as far as Egypt. MS wanted to make Castlevania seem more like a dark fairytale than remain confined to the more famous Castelvania trademarks. It was a gamble, but for a 20+ hour long game, it's necessary to have variety in the environments. What about the entirety of Simon's Quest, that took place entirely outside with towns and open forests/lakes? How about Castlevania 3, where half the game isn't even set in Dracula's Castle? You didn't even get inside the castle courtyard until after stage 6. So yeah, it's kind of a bad thing to say going against LoS. Sigh.

4. I hate the complete and utter absence of multiple staples of the series that have been in Castlevania since the first game in the series was released, and then see people saying that LoS is 'the Castlevania they grew up with.'  I hate that the LoS-verse story-line is obviously comprised of re-hashed plotlines and mushed-together characters from the old canon (mostly the metroidvanias) and then fans of LoS whine about the old canon's story and characters and LoS' creators belittle previous installments in every other article I read.  I hate that people claim that LoS is more like the classicvania games when it plays far more like the steroid-addicted love-child of Lament of Innocence and Legacy of Darkness, and contains metroidvania-esque content like fairies, monster steeds, puzzles, lame platforming, and I could go on and on...
I hate when LoS fans complain that LoI's motivation of having a 'personal grudge' against Dracula is insufficient when the same exact argument could be made against LoS because the motivations are incredibly similar. But most of all I hate that all of the changes made in LoS culminated in a fundamental alteration of the atmosphere of the series.  I am hoping that Mirror of Fate will fix that at least to an extent.

Simply by saying that you hate LoS could have sufficed. Saying it like this makes you seem a bit spiteful. I don't see how the LoS story is made up of rehashing old plotlines. I mean, having to re-open the heavens by using forbidden supernatural powers with an ongoing dread of the apocalypse or "the end of days" lingering in society is kinda complex. It's nothing like the far more simpler "Dracula's Back, Kill Him" plotlines. I know that's wrong of me to say, as I know there's complexity in the original timeline in itself. And it doesn't really do any damage bringing in some nods to the other games, such as naming one of the vampires Brauner, or having the Werewolf Boss named Cornell.

For someone that claims to be neutral towards it, you certainly have a lot of hate for the game. 

Now I will say that I wish more metroidvanias had focused on the Belmonts and had better level design, and that the original canon could REALLY benefit from being completely re-written and re-released in some sort of ultimate collection to iron out all the weird stuff within, but to say that you're 'betrayed' when the overall story is wonky and whenever whip-wielding Belmont isn't the main character of a series with well over 20 games that span over 1000 years that has a psychotic vampire that wants to kill everyone that were produced over 25 years and handled by multiple people during those years and you don't expect anyone outside of the Belmonts to take note-worthy initiative against said psychotic vampire in all that time is just... expecting too much.

It is expecting a bit. You're right, 27 games with 1000 years of plot is a lot of time for a lot of different characters, but out of those 27 games, there were only 4 games that featured Belmonts as the main playable character after SOTN, and that was more than ten years ago. Before SOTN, nearly every game had a Belmont, so to see Gabriel Belmont in LoS as the main protagonist... it's refreshing.

[Gaawa-chan]

Simply by saying that you hate LoS could have sufficed. Saying it like this makes you seem a bit spiteful.

I was using the same exact language you used to describe the metroidvanias. Now who is the spiteful one?
I considered using different language but I have a weird sense of humor, so...

I don't see how the LoS story is made up of rehashing old plotlines.

X is out trying to save love interest.  X has another guy, Y, that he trusts following him around/helping/encouraging him.  X actually killed his love interest because of Y, who then turns on X.

Gabriel is an obvious meshing of Leon and Mathias.  Zobek is an obvious meshing of Mathias and Death.  If you have played Lament of Innocence and Curse of Darkness the similarities are undeniable.


Anyway, that's all I have to say on the matter.  I disagree with you.

[e105beta]

X is out trying to save love interest.  X has another guy, Y, that he trusts following him around/helping/encouraging him.  X actually killed his love interest because of Y, who then turns on X.

When you start throwing in "X" and "Y" for characters reducing a whole plot to three sentences, similarities are bound to pop up.

Quests for love interests and sidekicks being present are pretty typical of just about any adventure story, so I won't even discuss that, but as for X killing his love interest because of Y, it's done completely differently in LoI and LoS. If anything, you could call it a reference, but "rehashed" is a bit much.

1. Marie is dead at the beginning of the game. Sara is not.
2. Gabriel is mind controlled. Leon is not.
3. Sara's death, while indirectly caused due to Mathias, is ultimately a willing decision made by Leon and Sara, and ends up being for the greater good. Marie's death, however, is a direct and unfortunate machination of Zobek, has no positive effect.
4. Leon immediately turns on Dracula. Zobek, however, bursts into flames and disappears for what seems to be hundreds and hundreds of years.
5. Leon stays a good guy. Gabriel becomes a bad guy.

[Nagumo]

I think Nagumo or someone mentioned that it was probably intended as canon from the start, but then IGA felt offended by it and kicked it down a pit. Probably because it undermined CVIII or seemed to be riding off of SoTN. Or because Sonia was a woman.

It makes sense for it to have been intended for canon, considering it has Alucard and foreshadows Trevor. CV64 and CoTM pretty much make no direct references to the past games. There's also a quip by Dracula that basically assumes Rondo and SoTN never happened. But then again, Dracula is kinda an idiot.

Recently I found a Japanese Konami magazine and it said Legends was never meant to be canon to begin with, lol. Back in 1997, before Legends was released, they released a timeline in the magazine that was developed as a reference for Symphony of the Night and Legends was on there too. The very next issue, they said the timeline does not to apply to Legends. Two months later the game got released.

That makes sense, since I got the impression that Legends was more trying to overwrite CV3 instead of being a prequel to it.

Also, IGA did mention he "removed" Legends from the timeline, but that must have happend while the game was still in development. It's kind off ironic that Legends got all this slack for conflicting with the rest of the series for years when it just was trying to do its own thing.

[X]

If Legends was trying to do it's own thing then why not release more games of that particular timeline? If Legends is to be the first for it's own timeline then we now have a thousand years to work with. Newer CV games to come in to the mix and they can be all original stories to boot.

[RichterB]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but this really does seem a generalization that LoS is a return to the roots. Cox keeps saying that, and then contradicting it with the product. I grew up around the Castlevania franchise, and began playing it for myself sometime between II and IV. I love Classicvania. I respect SotN (though I think the "Metroidvania" style went along too far on its own), even if it isn't my favorite. It's fine as a variation, much in the way Simon's Quest was. Let me say this: the Lords of Shadows reboot has been a great disappointment to me. It's fine as a game on its own, but when you put the Castlevania name on it, it just doesn't work. It's not as true to Castlevania in 3D as the N64 titles, and that's with tons more budget and technology behind it, and LoS doesn't substantially improve on what was done on the PS2, which in of itself was a few steps backward from the N64 attempts. We're still stuck with a lot of scripted hallways featuring super-powered, combo-styled beat'em up action, and not dynamic action-platforming. And now, with a new 2.5D game, Mirror of Fate, we're getting a game that doesn't even look like it'll live up to Castlevania IV--even when given free rein on the series. While I thought IGA's reins on the series had led it a little too far off the path, LoS was not the answer. Sure, we have whips and Belmonts back, but at what cost? God of War meets Lord of the Rings meets Shadow of the Colossus meets Uncharted. Didn't anyone consider looking at the meat-and-patatoes gameplay of the N64 games to see what was working and just needed more polish and tech? I am so frustrated with the Castlevania franchise, and I'm sorry, but it irks me when people tell me, a fan of Classicvania, that LoS is the second coming of Classicvania. Kudos to Mercury Steam for making Castlevania some cash (I guess?), but I hope the next reboot is better. Castlevania can be so much more than this.

[thernz]

maybe you guys should just judge the games on their individual merits instead of caring for castlevania-ness.
because a good game is still a good game. and bad is bad. and lords is lords...

[uzo]

You know full well that is not possible since it's titled "Castlevania: Lords of Shadow".