Topic: Streaming CV64, FINALE

[Abnormal Freak]

SOTN and the other IGA games kinda rendered platforming as something you do rather than a gameplay aspect requiring skill. Bloodborne is a pretty perfect, modernized translation of those games. It's not Castlevania, no, but it's the closest anybody has ever gotten. The N64 CVs made a strong attempt for the late '90s, but I don't know how well that style of 3D gameplay would work now—the gaming climate may not allow it (given how poorly Yooka-Laylee tried to recreate that era). It's hard to think of combat that could be done differently from Bloodborne for a CV game; after all, several of the classic CVs required a certain level of strategy in fighting an enemy, backing off when needed and knowing when to attack, and the dodging you do in Bloodborne is a good 3D representation of that. It also isn't a combo-fest button masher, so it's far more authentic to CV than either the PS2 or LOS games.



MediEvil, as you said, is probably one of the closest examples to similar gameplay to the N64 games from that same era. And having just beaten it for the first time recently, I can attest to it being far more troubled in play mechanics than either of the CV64 games. Perhaps one game near that style that Konami could have emulated a little was Soul Reaver, which had tighter platforming and camera controls.

[RichterB]

SOTN and the other IGA games kinda rendered platforming as something you do rather than a gameplay aspect requiring skill. Bloodborne is a pretty perfect, modernized translation of those games. It's not Castlevania, no, but it's the closest anybody has ever gotten. The N64 CVs made a strong attempt for the late '90s, but I don't know how well that style of 3D gameplay would work now—the gaming climate may not allow it (given how poorly Yooka-Laylee tried to recreate that era).

A well-put definition of how SotN changed things. From that perspective, I can understand. I think you're right...But say it isn't so! I've been upset for a while now how the industry's been contracting in its "definition" of what is acceptable for "modern games." (Mostly this has meant making games more cinematic and less interactive on the whole...or, conversely, in cases where interactivity is promoted, meaningful structure and skill is downplayed.) To me, meaningful platforming is a staple of action games, whether they be 2D or 3D, and adds to their appeal greatly. The way it's been trivialized and then all but gutted is depressing. I haven't had a chance to play Yooka Laylee yet (due to the cancellation of the Wii U version), and don't have huge expectations for it at this point, but I'd hate to think it's the case study by which 3D platforming will be forever judged in the modern era. Throwing out 3D, skill-based platforming at this stage is no more legitimate in my mind than if, during the transition from Mario 3 to Mario World, Miyamoto had said, "No more jumping!"

It's hard to think of combat that could be done differently from Bloodborne for a CV game; after all, several of the classic CVs required a certain level of strategy in fighting an enemy, backing off when needed and knowing when to attack, and the dodging you do in Bloodborne is a good 3D representation of that. It also isn't a combo-fest button masher, so it's far more authentic to CV than either the PS2 or LOS games.

I appreciate that it isn't a combo-fest, which is one of my complaints of the later 3D Castlevanias. You couldn't have meaningful platforming with those because of the way your attack moves changed your character's momentum and placement, not to mention the tiresome wailing on enemies that should take one or two hits. The N64's combat system was more diverse than people gave it credit, especially in LoD, where you could now do more actions while sliding. And there was an early form of dodging via a timed use of R + A + back on the stick, where you could still attack while in the act of dodging. I show this move early in that video earlier against the bone pillar. I'm fine enough with some dodging systems like Bloodborne, but I don't like when it becomes a chess dance of "you make a move, I make a move" and the level progression slows to a crawl. I want to make sure there's a forward-moving flow, and that it encourages use of sub-weapons for ranged attacks and such. Bloodborne, due to it being more in line with SotN as you say, has different priorities, encouraging exploration, but I don't begrudge it for being its own thing.

MediEvil, as you said, is probably one of the closest examples to similar gameplay to the N64 games from that same era. And having just beaten it for the first time recently, I can attest to it being far more troubled in play mechanics than either of the CV64 games. Perhaps one game near that style that Konami could have emulated a little was Soul Reaver, which had tighter platforming and camera controls.

Soul Reaver's camera was more refined in terms of its versatility, but it seems like it could still be pretty temperamental in more confined areas, and I'm not sure if the jumping had the same sort of momentum of snappiness/weight that CV64 had. I'd be tempted to call it a toss-up overall. Unfortunately, I never got around to playing that title (or its remakes/sequels). It had interesting ideas for sure, but it always looked a little too stark and spartan for my tastes. But the ability to rotate the camera would have been useful in CV64, no doubt.

[Abnormal Freak]

I'd love to see some good action platformers come out. I think the problem isn't so much that people don't want them, but that designers today don't know how to make them. I haven't spent enough time with Yooka-Laylee to say for certain if it's a dud, but one thing is apparent is it's nothing like the games that it emulates. This could be due to the designers and programmers not having made a game like that in such a long time, or younger members not having the necessary skill, and/or down to the director never having directed a game before (despite being a longtime programmer at Rare) and perhaps he wasn't the visionary to lead the team.

I'm super excited for Mario Odyssey, though. Galaxy 1 brought 3D platforming back in a new, refreshing way, and I think Odyssey will do the same.

If a new 3D CV got made, I wouldn't want it to follow the Bloodborne gameplay either; that's strictly a Souls thing, and I don't want another CV that's just "this game with a coat of paint" like LOS was. But unless another good attempt comes out, I consider Bloodborne to be as close to what a 3D CV should look like. Especially when taking in the branching area designs, the gothic art direction, and monster lore.

[RichterB]

I'd love to see some good action platformers come out. I think the problem isn't so much that people don't want them, but that designers today don't know how to make them. I haven't spent enough time with Yooka-Laylee to say for certain if it's a dud, but one thing is apparent is it's nothing like the games that it emulates. This could be due to the designers and programmers not having made a game like that in such a long time, or younger members not having the necessary skill, and/or down to the director never having directed a game before (despite being a longtime programmer at Rare) and perhaps he wasn't the visionary to lead the team.

Interesting theory. It's quite possibly true. I liked what I had seen from early demos regarding the first world of Yooka-Laylee. I figured it would come together well enough, but it's sounding like something went wrong somewhere.

I'm super excited for Mario Odyssey, though. Galaxy 1 brought 3D platforming back in a new, refreshing way, and I think Odyssey will do the same.

I really loved Galaxy 1 and 2. I played them in reverse order as a somewhat late Wii adopter. #1 was the more meaty experience, while #2 was like a huge toy box, so they both were worthy successors to Mario 64 for me. As good as Odyssey looks, and as good as the Galaxies were, I can't help but feel they are all a bit different breed from 3D platformers of the past, which is good, but also bad in that it doesn't set a path of fundamentals for something like a new 3D action-platforming Castlevania to emerge from. The stuff that Mario Odyssey is doing is surrealism and experimental gimmicks to the max--that's going to be the takeaway for people, I think. There will be a solid core, of course, but it's the zany one-off stuff that Mario seems to focus on these days, and that people seem to savor. It's cool, don't get me wrong, but it sometimes seems like an overload of frosting. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I would like to see a little more core concepts that carry over to different areas in different ways, versus a cap that basically repurposes whatever is in a given level, creating a series of interlocked events. But then, I was always more of a Super Mario World guy than a Mario 3 guy. The thing that blows me away is that the structure of Mario Odyssey, where the hub world transitions to subworlds, and you don't exit a level after getting a Moon or get direct hints about their locations--that's totally Banjo-Kazooie/Tooie with the Jiggies! And I don't hear people mentioning that...They just say "Mario Odyssey came up with this new open world concept of finding stuff..." Curious.

If a new 3D CV got made, I wouldn't want it to follow the Bloodborne gameplay either; that's strictly a Souls thing, and I don't want another CV that's just "this game with a coat of paint" like LOS was. But unless another good attempt comes out, I consider Bloodborne to be as close to what a 3D CV should look like. Especially when taking in the branching area designs, the gothic art direction, and monster lore.

Okay, I completely understand where you're coming from now.