Topic: Lords of Shadow, 6 years later

[Flame]

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?

[Lelygax]

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.

[Flame]

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.

[X]

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.

[zangetsu468]

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".

[BMC_War Machine]

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.

[X]

But.......then LoS2 took a dump on us lol.

lol. The stains don't ever come out. 

[Flame]

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.

[theANdROId]

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!

[Claimh Solais]

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.

[zangetsu468]

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?)

[TatteredSeraph]

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. 

[SecretWeapon]

I like LoS. My favorite thing was Carmilla.

[X]

Carmilla's portrait before she was a vampire was pretty hot! At least they got something right.

[Pemburu Vampir]

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.