Topic: Which of the Sorrow games are better and why?

[son_the_vampire]

I havent seen this topic in the forum but i did think that it would stir up some good discussion between the two games.

[Shiroi Koumori]

I love both games that is why i translated the "third" installment. Hehehe.

[son_the_vampire]

Ill be sure to read it through tonight, i know a lot of hard work has went into making that! THANKS!!!

[Shiroi Koumori]

Ill be sure to read it through tonight, i know a lot of hard work has went into making that! THANKS!!!

You're welcome! I hope you'll like it. 

[Nagumo]

I hold Aria of Sorrow in high regard as it's definitely one of the best games in the series. I like Dawn a whole lot less for some reason. I think because Aria had better gothic atmosphere and charming GBA visuals/music. The level design might also be better, but I'm not sure.

[X]

Area of Sorrow was the best of Soma's adventure through Castlevania. Everything that needed to be done was done in that one game, minus any dialogue between him and Death which should have been present. Dawn of Sorrow was really nothing more then a rehash of what we had already done in the previous installment. Although the graphics and effects were better (minus Julius' holy cross attack which looked and sounded weaker then hell), it didn't really add anything new. I found that the soul system did not need to be repeated and it was far more tedious in DoS when you consider that in order to have everything in the game, you needed to finish it twice as you only get one soul from a boss. And those souls are needed to craft certain weapons    I'd rather just have the enemies drop weapons and find them laying around the castle itself. And where was my positron rifle that was in AoS?! Instead they gave you an RPG and it wasn't even worth the hassle to acquire! Whatever 

[crisis]

Indeed, the Hellfire Soul is the last soul you can acquire, and the hardest.

DoS wasn't all bad as some people make it out to be, it had some good stuff; the parallax graphics & certain backgrounds looked beautiful, Soma's sprite was well-animated (i loved the fact that you can literally see his breath in the snow environment. Every little detail counts , it introduced "real world" mythic creatures (Big Foot, Mothman, etc.) cool enemy animations (when you separate the Homunculus from its oxygen tube and you watch it wraith around until it drownds!), JULIUS MODE, several good music tracks, the "bait and switch" Succubus enemies, Gergoth boss battle, etc. etc.

However AoS is overall just a better game. The type of game that didn't require a direct sequel, since the ending wrapped things up nicely (especially if you consider the "bad" ending where Julius confronts an "awakened" Soma). I believe a CV game taking place several decades or perhaps a century AFTER AoS while disregarding DoS would've been accepted better than DoS. A game that could've reinvented the mythos while still being connected, since a "new" Dracula or Dark Lord could've been the antagonist, Julius' descendants, etc. A lot of potential "spin-off" opportunities there. But that's just how I feel about it, feel free to agree/disagree!

[son_the_vampire]

Some valid points mentioned for each. I myself chose DoS. 1 main reason for Julius mode. The soundtrack also gave it points just because it has some very alluring music. Ill have to agree about the soul system being a lot more tedious for the completionists. But to AoS' favor, the story was masterfully written and by far one of the best "bad" endings in the series hands down. It's almost as if GBA was pushed to the brink, it seems like not one detail was missed in making it classic. But the same could be said for DoS as well because of the ability to use the stylus which was very fun for me. One thing I would've loved is a Hammer Richter mode in either title. DoS could've also contained items which affected Soma's appearance as well (i.e. secret boots, Joseph's cloak) it's undeniable that AoS is the more memorable of the two but Dawn won me over

[Pfil]

I personally prefer Aria of Sorrow (voted for it). I liked everything about it. The things I did like about Dawn of Sorrow were introduced by AoS.
Although DoS contains some of the best Castlevania tracks ever in my opinion (Cursed Clock Tower and Condemned Tower), I found part of the soundtrack lacking, especially at some of the first levels (not the first stage, which I really like), and, while a good track on its own right, I found the remix of the Haunted Castle track very out of place; while AoS's soundtrack was very good in general and included some rare gems like Study.
I loved AoS's story and I find the ending when Julius kills Soma as one of my favourite Castlevania moments ever. I loved the characters too.
DoS's story, on the other side, seemed pretty mediocre to me, and while it included the characters I love from AoS, I found the new characters to be generic and kind of "random".
In terms of scenery and look they are similar, and not counting that DoS was made for a technically superior portable console, I find it difficult to decide on this one. There was one stage I didn't like in DoS (the one with the ice blocks), but my favourite stages from both Sorrow games are also from DoS (Condemned Tower, Cursed Clock Tower and the first stage). However, I found DoS's castle in general to be kind of more of the same but with better graphics.
In terms of gameplay, I really liked them both, but DoS just used what AoS invented, and I didn't like the touch controls part (magic seals, destroying ice blocks with the stylus...).
So, in general, I liked everything more in Aria of Sorrow.
One thing that stands up for me with Dawn of Sorrow is the side quests (something very important to me in every Castlevania game). I really loved them, especially the ones about the supernatural newspapers. Sidequests is the thing I usually think of when talking about DoS. In this aspect, I think DoS established the ground for the far more complex, excellent PoR and OoE sidequests.

[darkwzrd4]

Area of Sorrow was the best of Soma's adventure through Castlevania. Everything that needed to be done was done in that one game, minus any dialogue between him and Death which should have been present. Dawn of Sorrow was really nothing more then a rehash of what we had already done in the previous installment. Although the graphics and effects were better (minus Julius' holy cross attack which looked and sounded weaker then hell), it didn't really add anything new. I found that the soul system did not need to be repeated and it was far more tedious in DoS when you consider that in order to have everything in the game, you needed to finish it twice as you only get one soul from a boss. And those souls are needed to craft certain weapons    I'd rather just have the enemies drop weapons and find them laying around the castle itself. And where was my positron rifle that was in AoS?! Instead they gave you an RPG and it wasn't even worth the hassle to acquire! Whatever 

I agree with this. DoS was so unnecessary. It didn't advance the overall plot what so ever. Julius in Julius mode was weaker than he was in the AoS Julius mode. Oh, and let's not forget the ambiguous ending. It's so open ended. At least, the AoS ending gave a sense of finality. The AoS ending would make a nice end point on the timeline in my opinion. The only think DoS had was better graphics. When you think of it, DoS was just an excuse to reuse the soul system.

Simply put, AoS was the stronger game. All it was really missing was some sort of dialogue between Soma and Death. It would have been nice for Death and Soma to talk right before the battle. After which, Death would retreat and then he'd show up again just after the battle with Graham where he would try to talk Soma into accepting his fate to become the new Lord of Darkness.

[Ratty]

DoS is a good game but as a sequel to AoS it pales in comparison, mostly for subjective reasons. The level design didn't feel as tight, everything felt less atmospheric and, perhaps unsurprisingly for a direct sequel, less unique. The switch from Kojima's artwork was a huge loss, a sacrifice to the gods of a tight schedule (as the refinement of level layout and bosses probably were) and more "hip" marketing. As others have expressed I also didn't feel the story added a whole lot, it wasn't bad but it wasn't great either. The new characters in DoS also felt kind of empty while characterization had been very strong and well done in AoS. So overall I'd say you've got a good sequel to a superb original.

[Phoenix7786]

DoS' bullshit "doodle this pattern on your screen or repeat this boss battle" system really pissed me off. So did the tedious, monotonous soul-grinding to forge weapons. At least the Julius Mode made up for it, especially since this was the first Richter Mode to fully incorporate the level-up system as we know it (Richter in SotN could technically get more life while Maxim could get more life and more max hearts while AoS Julius could grow stronger by collecting boss orbs) but DoS finally streamlined the whole process.

[X]

I personally didn't mind the art style used in DoS. It reminds me of the style used in Ghost in the Shell: Stand-alone complex. Also it was a break from the bombardment of androgynous pretty boys that was so prevalent throughout IGA's carrier as head of the CV team. DoS's art was a breath of fresh air to me and was a little more interesting. I also found Soma's look in DoS more accepting then his AoS Japanese emo-look (which, if I were Soma, would seriously question my own taste in style as well as my own state of mind). And yes I also hated those stylus seal spells that you were required to do in order to finish off a boss permanently. They felt more forced upon you then actually necessary, and didn't really feel at all important. Just another gimmick.

[Lelygax]

I love both games that is why i translated the "third" installment. Hehehe.

Wow! Its really ready? Thanks!

[xeilua]

Despite the fact that DoS was my first Castlevania title, I'll have to go with Aria. In my opinion, superior story, music, atmosphere, sound effects, and a higher HP cap!