Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: Dark Nemesis on January 19, 2009, 07:50:59 AM
-
It has a video and an article with interesting information, worth to look and read for how was supposed the game to look, but didn't make it in the final version.
http://gonintendo.com/?p=69331
-
In Reply To #1
The engagement ring... it is related to Carrie's Bad Ending, where Dracula (as Malus) promises to marry Carrie someday. In essence, he forces her to become engaged (she thinks Malus is just joking around, but Malus himself says: Good, now we have a binding contract).
It would've been cool to get that item as part of the bad ending on a NewGame+ of sorts. It would motivate people to get the bad ending in order to get some kinda prize.
Looks like there was a Fossilization/Petrification status. Don't know how Potpourri would correct it though. Interesting.
Good find!
-
I believe that new 3D Castlevania games should have taken for example the 64 serries at how to make the enviroments of the game. Also it would have been interesting if we could find some info about what was supposed to be the game original from Konami. But i doupt that this will ever happen.
Castlevania 64 RPG anyone?
-
I'd beat off all over Coller's sub-boss.
-
Its a shame they canned Coller's rival. I don't mind them canning Coller though, by the looks of him.
-
That was very interesting. I'd forgotten about the unused items in CV64. I did, however, remember before CV64 was released that it was originally supposed to have some RPG elements in it like CV:SotN. I also found the status "Bad" to be funny, when the character was low on health. ;D
I hope that more can be revealed about the Nintendo 64 Castlevania games through further hacking. I loved both CV64 and CV:LoD. :)
-
The only CV beta I ever seen before checking this video was SotN. Some really minor chances, but this N64 sounds like much more interesting than the released one.
-
The guys who have made Castlevania64 and LoD, they should have teach Iga and his team how to make a true 3D Castlevania game. I only hope that Iga will take in mind these two games, while he is developing the new Castlevania for x360 and probably for ps3.
-
The guys who have made Castlevania64 and LoD, they should have teach Iga and his team how to make a true 3D Castlevania game.
*spits out drink*
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
*laughs uncontrollably*
-
Well, I've seen in the original "Dracula 3D" trailer (as the N64 game was originally named) that there was going to be the ability to swing over obstacles with the whip (ala CVIV), as well. Many quest elements were talked about at the time in old Nintendo Powers, too. The final product is still stronger overall than any 3D entry IGA has done. If this team had been allowed to continue, something really great might have come out.
-
In Reply To #9
I believe that that team was having more potential than Iga and his team.
-
The removal of the extra elements, and further exclusion from the add on game, is proof that they were not capable of delivering the intended product on time. Ultimately this resulted in a game some fans of the series don't even recognize.
So given that, I would have to strongly disagree that they neither have the potential, nor created a stronger title than the current 3D entries.
-
In Reply To #12
I respectfully disagree, if only because I think they captured the spirit of Castlevania with their enemies and platforming aspects.
The other 3D CV's, while very pretty, feel like beat 'em up games or dungeoncrawlers.
-
I'm really happy with the end results of Castlevania 64. I think it translated well into 3D what the earlier games had in platforming
-
STO is probably Stoned. Konami couldn't get it to work in the areas that have Medusa heads without the game spazzing out, I'll bet.
-
In Reply To #12
The same you can say about Sotn. The game was rushed. Also what Jorge said. They were able to captured the spirit at how a true 3D Castlevania game was supposed to be. Graphics are nothing if they don't have a part at the game from just being there. Example God of War!! Castlevania 64 was having that, but Iga's 3D games, they didn't have that element. I prefer to play older Castlevania games from any new one that it will come out, because it only has better graphics!!
-
In Reply To #12
The same you can say about Sotn.
And you might seem to forget, surprise, SotN is a GREAT game. Castlevania 64 was, well, not. So now you're comparing the worst game in the series, to the best game in the series.
I guess that really just proves my point further.
-
In Reply To #12
I respectfully disagree, if only because I think they captured the spirit of Castlevania with their enemies and platforming aspects.
The recent 3D Castlevanias fit the recent 2D games more by that reasoning with that super platforming. Ha. Ha. ...Ha. *cough*
-
And you might seem to forget, surprise, SotN is a GREAT game. Castlevania 64 was, well, not. So now you're comparing the worst game in the series, to the best game in the series.
First, i'm not making a comparison between SotN and 64, but at the teams that they have work for each game respectively. The 64 team has rush the game, so the same has done the SotN team.
Second, the new 3D Castlevanias, they only have good graphics. So, if you remove graphics, 64 is far better than them! I'm not playing a game for it's graphics, but first for it's game play and second for the scenario. Also the platforming thing is almost not there at the new 3D Castlevania games. Also from the screenshots, even Resurrection was having more platforming.
To end this, i have a ps3 and many games, but i don't play any, because they might have great graphics or scenario, but their game play is flat.
-
So, if you remove graphics, 64 is far better than them!
Haha, no. You'd need to remove not only the graphics, but the combat engine, the music, the artwork, the character designs, and most notably, the CAMERA. If you remove ALL of those, then maybe, just maybe, CV64 could top them.
-
The only thing I saw going for the CV64 games were the pseudo-interesting storylines and the atmosphere/music. The graphics towards the end of the game and the combat system were abominable and clunky. Sure, they weren't the worst games in the world (I'd play Legacy of Darkness over Curse of Darkness), but they could have been so much better.
-
In Reply To #20
dunno, i found carrie's design to be superior to similar ones from igavanias. i mean, compare her to the travesties called dxc and judgement maria. one looks like a dude, another one like a cheap cosplayer from japan teleported to middle ages. enough said. :o
the combat engine wasn't that bad, i mean it was a classicvania in 3d. i don't see people hating on cv1 because it has clunky combat engine, no equippable weapons or combos, and lod's about as clunky in control as cv1. ;D
the only thing wrong with it was the hit detection - it could be improved a lot (hitting stuff with reinhardt was annoying).
other than that it had everything a cv title should. a primary attack, subweapons, hearts (well jewels, but it's just a graphic thing), crouching/jumps that actually meant something (3digavanias have no crouching and jumping is there just to be there. you can beat most of the game without touching the button even once, all you need to do is mash attack buttons to fight through copypasta rooms filled with lots of repetitive copypasta enemies) etc.
i agree about the camera though. it was annoying, especially when it switched into the auto mode and usually positioned itself in an annoying way that obscured stuff and had to be reset manually.
-
If the 64 team was having the same sources as Iga's team has now, i believe that they could beat Iga's 3D vanias blindfolded. :o
-
If the 64 team was having the same sources as Iga's team has now, i believe that they could beat Iga's 3D vanias blindfolded. :o
Agreed. They had a handle on what makes Castlevania Castlevania, even if they didn't have the time and resources to implement it all. I mean when IGA got a second chance at 3D after LoI, he decided that what was missing was a Pokemon-like Familiar system in CoD. That was the "key" element missing in LoI that would make a better 3D Castlevania. ::) (Not more platforming or swinging over gaps or interactive level design, etc etc). It was a level-based Familiar system and more hallways than ever before that was needed. And, if not that, then a 3D fighting game (Judgment).
I enjoyed CV64 and LoI when I first played them. Recently, I went back and played both.
I found myself refreshed by CV64 in that the level designs actually used 3D space dynamically. IE: The clock tower actually has 3D gears you can stand on and take multiple paths through!
Meanwhile, I was shocked at how simplistic LoI was. The graphics and music were cool, but everything was so flat and the combat was more boring than I remembered. (And then it hit me...why can Leon walk in the air as he jump-whips--it looks ridiculous. The Belmonts aren't super heroes, and therefore, any future 3D combat system should be based on more realistic mechanics. It creates a better balance for the use of things like sub-weapons).
I think the gritty art direction of the CV64 world was more compelling and immersive than the more fantasy-esque, cut-and-paste worlds of IGA. Whereas IGA's are eerie, CV64 was downright creepy.
Now, I like that a camera control system was added to CoD, and the general idea of more combat options is nice, but the makers of CV64/LoD just had a much better grasp of what Castlevania is in the classic sense. Castlevania does not = SotN. Symphony is a side-story, much in the same way that Megaman does not = Battle Network/EXE. Are both legitimate game formats? Yes. But the pedigree runs deeper than the latest trends, and that has to be observed. It'd be like someone deciding every new Mario game better follow Sunshine's example and have a water cannon, because that was an "evolution" of the series. I think Castlevania's been hamstrung in recent years by trying to repeat Symphony of the Night, when it was kind of a one time affair.
Regardless, the real test is coming. Castlevania for PS3 better not simply be 'God of War' or 'Devil May Cry' with a Castlevania skin. And it better not be a fanboy's tribute send-off to Alucard and SotN. It has to define itself, and feel like the soul of Castlevania in 3D, just as the N64 titles did.
-
If the 64 team was having the same sources as Iga's team has now, i believe that they could beat Iga's 3D vanias blindfolded. :o
Oh yes. Lets just balance this by giving the CV64 team a DECADE OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES. Brilliant. Man I bet if HITLER had technologies from a decade in the future, he'd have won the war. So that means Hitler was better than the allies. You sir are incredibly brilliant.
Despite your complete lapse of any logic there the point is still moot, because good gameplay has nothing to do with technological advances a decade ahead. Mario 64 did a good job, CV64 should have too. Bad gameplay transcends technological advances, even a decade ahead.
The development time for CV64 and Legacy of Darkness combined is quite large. They were not pressed for time or rushed. This is for what essentially should have been ONE game as well. In that entire time they failed to fix any issues the game had. That is true evidence of a failure in project management and ability.
And Serio, you just like loli's :P Though yes, I admit her design was pretty well done.
-
In Reply To #25
lol Hitler StrawMan argument. For shame, Uzo. XD
Konami did not have much to go on when they came out with their game back in that time. And to further get sucker-punched, Ocarina of Time came out while they were developing. That must've hurt.
Still, for a novice team I think they captured the spirit of Castlevania well given the tools, the time, and the 3D technology of that time period.
The N64 (and the PSX actually) all suffered from camera-angle issue games at that time. I think we're looking at stuff with today's standards and it's not fair to games of the time anymore than it is to look at CV1 and complaining about the play control (as someone mentioned previously).
It was a good game for the time at which game out. I can probably only count a fistful or two of games which had better camera angles and play control and told a decent story (Zelda's one... maybe I'd count Mario but its story is, well... Mario, haha... what else was there?).
-
Come to think of the camera thing, I guess that is why FPS were very popular to develop. There wasn't any camera issues.
But still, I disagree that CV64's camera issues was due to its time period, the camera should have been MUCH MUCH better. Goemon 64 (first one) had a great camera for its time. (Goemon2 for N64 doesn't count, wasn't 3D movement.) Also done by Konami. Leagues above CV64 in just about every aspect. That team certainly didn't have major issues with making a good platforming 3D game with good controls, good graphics, and interesting levels.
-
In Reply To #27
Yeah but wasn't that a different team? It's not like an entire branch of Konami works on one game. Yeah it could've been better (the camera)... but it's not nearly as bad a problem as people make it out to be.
I beat the entire game, and only found it to be a minor inconvenience at the time.
That particular team was a novice team, just like the LoI team was a Ps2 novice team when it came to programming in 3D (or so I've heard).
-
The camera can be awful in parts...
But it could be pretty bad in LoI too.
-
In Reply To #28
I know its a different team. That's the main point. The team apparently wasn't any good in comparison to many others. However that doesn't mean developers in the same house don't share ideas and techniques.
-
I prefer a 3D Castlevania game with the old classic feeling, like Castlevania nes, from Igavanias!! :P
-
lol goddamn, uzo strikes again with more retarded points that go nowhere.
CV64 and LOD are good games. Flawed, yes, but good nonetheless, and definitely more of a Castlevania game than the PS2 ones. The later 3D games don't even fall in line with IGA's style. The N64 games at least captured the old-school gameplay in a 3D environment. The PS2 games don't resemble Castlevania from any era. They're just poorly-made hack-and-slashers with no interesting level designs. Even the graphics aren't all that impressive as NOTHING STICKS OUT. Every room is flat with nothing to interact with. At least with COD they tried mixing things up a bit, trying to diversify and offer more than flat surfaces to walk across, but it still isn't designed well. It's still the same boring bullshit.
Even having played a superior game like Ocarina of Time, I still highly enjoyed CV64 when it came out. It's a fun game with interesting level design that's cohesive and makes sense, and it has some very fun platforming. And I'll take the character art and designs of that game over the superfluous "gothic" stuff we get now. As for the soundtrack, those are some very nice ambient tunes that fit the game perfectly, and it's somewhat of an exploration game (but not in a tediously mind-numbing sense like the PS2 games), so the music greatly adds to the atmosphere of the N64 games.
-
Interesting stuff.
Konami had the daunting task of trying to make a decent game for a more recent Nintendo system (something most 3rd party developers have a hard time doing) and given the system we're talking about, I think they did a decent job. Nintendo made the system, so of course they're going to understand it better than the 3rd party publishers. It's why there aren't any good 3rd party games on the Wii right now.
Regardless, like people have said, the 64 games brought the 2d feel of CV into 3d. The PS2 games could be ANYTHING, because they dont particularly feel like CV games. Not to say that every CV game needs to have classicvania type attack systems and such, but those games are just so...vanilla. They could have called them anything besides Castlevania and none of us would have batted an eye. They have little character of their own because they seem to just take elements from other games and put them together without any regard as to how a CV game should work.
-
In Reply To #32
Yes. Retarded points like project management, project schedules, gameplay, camera systems, and other things that generally make a game playable. Nothing I would know about right? Doesn't mean anything that I have been in the industry, and direct my own game project.
-
In Reply To #34
Face it or not, Iga is good only at 2D Castlevania games. At 3D he sucks. :P
-
In Reply To #35
That's not the point. The point is the CV64 team is no better.
And I'm the one whose supposedly shooting out random points everywhere? Did Abnormal Freak even read this thread?
-
Yeah, that beta stuff is pretty interesting.
As for the 64 vs. PS2 'vania thing, I've only properly played CV64 and CoD, but I can safely say that I find CV64 to be way better.
The only good things I find about CoD is the music, the cutscenes, the bosses and maybe some battles in between. The graphics could be considered good, too, but there was just so little that stood out and so much repetition that they didn't really seem good at all. And then there's the level design, which is the worst I've ever seen in the series. It's fucking horrible! It's all completely flat, extremely repetitive and redundant enemy placement doesn't help at all. So, what you've got is a good soundtrack, good cutscenes, a good story, fantastic bosses and, what, 8+ hours of excrutiatingly boring gameplay? That sounds like a pretty horrible package to me :-\ Fuck, even Legends is more enjoyable.
CV64, on the other hand, is much more evened out. The bosses and control scheme may not be as good, but even so I can't say it's bad per se. It was, as Serio said, very similar to the older games in that respect: Simple and sweet. So in that regard it's not as good as CoD. The cutscenes also don't have as much, even though seeing Rosa being controlled by Death was a very powerful moment. Then you have the music, which is very debatable. Some like CoD's soundtrack much more, but some like CV64's more. Personally I'd say they're very equal, only different. CoD takes a more straight-forward approach, with powerful, complex and beautiful songs, as well as some very aggressive tracks. CV64, however, takes a much more subtle approach, enhancing the atmosphere more, but perhaps not as listenable outside the game, very comparable to SCVIV's soundtrack. But where the game stands out as way, way better is in the level design. It isn't as long, no, but it's so much, much better. The enemies are simpler, yes, but the layout is much more complex, more variety in rooms and recognition of the third axis. Yes, it has platforming! Sure, it isn't as good as in a Mario game, but so much, much better than in CoD. It kept me going, rather than just letting me get bored. So in that sense, WAY better.
In short:
CoD is better in cutscenes, story, controls and bosses, albeit not really by a lot.
They're equal in music.
CV64, while not as good in terms of technical graphics, has much more interesting ones. And it has much, much, MUCH better level designs.
All in all, I prefer good gameplay and good bosses to better cutscenes and amazing bosses. It's just that whole "8+ hours of boring" that throws me off in CoD :(
-
the combat engine wasn't that bad, i mean it was a classicvania in 3d. i don't see people hating on cv1 because it has clunky combat engine, no equippable weapons or combos, and lod's about as clunky in control as cv1. ;D
the only thing wrong with it was the hit detection - it could be improved a lot (hitting stuff with reinhardt was annoying).
That type of combat isn't exactly proper or suitable for a 3D game, though.
In Reply To #34
Face it or not, Iga is good only at 2D Castlevania games. At 3D he sucks. :P
IGA doesn't make the games.
-
Doesn't mean anything that I have been in the industry, and direct my own game project.
Doesn't mean anything if your game's not all that good. :P For all I know, you're like that Bob dude who's developing "Bob's game." Maybe you are him! :o
And I never called your points random, just retarded. Sure, the N64 games have a bad camera, I'll give you that. But bad gameplay, graphics, music, artwork, character designs, etc.? I think not. One I possibly MIGHT give you is graphics, since they're certainly not the greatest, but they're good enough, even with all the glitches and the excessive "fog." Again, the games are far from perfect, but they deliver fun and some good aspects, which is far more than I can say for the PS2 games. Those ones may be more "polished," but what good is a sleek and shiny turd? You wanna talk about poor gameplay and design...those games have got it.
As for time schedules, and them not having the potential (as you put it) to deliver the game they wanted? I don't see how the time they take to develop something has anything to do with their potential, if indeed that's what you were getting at. Obviously it's great to be more time-efficient, but hey, sometimes people work slower and don't deliver on schedule. For example--and this isn't a video game example, but it's entertainment/art--John Kricfalusi was constantly late in delivering Nickelodeon new Ren & Stimpy episodes (the biggest reason why he got fired from his own cartoon after season two), yet in the end he always pumped out great products. Those cartoons are the absolute best we've gotten since the Golden Age of Cartoons, and they were never on schedule. What the hell does development time have to do with a person or team's potential and skill?
-
But bad gameplay, graphics, music, artwork, character designs, etc.? I think not.
CV1 gameplay for a 3D game isn't exactly a good idea, especially when it fails pretty bad at it. You have Reinhardt's shoelace and Carrie's seeking bolts along with a crummy knife and what appears to be a bubble wand. The jumps are terrible. The N64 games are imfamous for their nightmarish difficulty in jumping sections. Your jumps have to be so precise; it's ridiculous. You'll either not reach, miss by a thread, or badly overshoot. Sometimes you have no idea where you're supposed to land, so you have to completely guess how long you're supposed to jump. The graphics are also pretty terrible. You have Carrie's legs going through her boots, her thousand yard stare, and some apparently broken necks. I should also mention Rosa's sou'wester for hair.
And now I'm too lazy to type anymore so I'll just leave this (http://www.viddler.com/explore/Evil_Tim/videos/) here.
-
I agree with what some of the earlier posters have said. I think that, while CV64 may have been flawed, it did a much better job of capturing the feel and atmosphere of classic Castlevanias than Lament or CoD. The PS2 games felt to me like they lacked identity, and had too many similarities to a number of other popular action games whereas CV64 felt more unique to Castlevania. I'm hoping that this next gen Castlevania goes the route of CV64 (but with a decade of tech advancements to fix its flaws) and tries to get the series back to feeling unique, rather than be a continuation of the somewhat generic path they have taken with Lament and CoD.
-
In Reply To #41
Going in the direction of CV64 wouldn't exactly be a good idea.
-
In Reply To #42
level design or atmosphere wise it'd be a brilliant one. both ps2 games had awful level design, and they lack the definite "castlevania" atmosphere. they feel like some poor dmc clone or some lame dungeon crawler/beat'em-up.
but then again, it happens when you try to copy other franchises so much you forget what you're working on. :o
-
In Reply To #43
The N64 games don't really feel like Castlevania. At all. If anything, they feel more like Resident Evil.
-
In Reply To #44
wouldn't know, i never played that. in general though they still feel more castlevaniaish than both loi and cod together.
-
In Reply To #45
Nah.
-
"Going in the direction of CV64 wouldn't exactly be a good idea."
IMO, going in the direction of Lament of Innocence and Curse of Darkness would be a far worse idea.
"in general though they still feel more castlevaniaish than both loi and cod together."
I agree with this. I think CV64 does a great job channeling the feel of classic Castlevanias, even if it has some camera issues. I don't think it feels like Resident Evil at all, not sure where you see similarities there. LoI and CoD, on the other hand, do feel remarkably like Devil May Cry, in my opinion.
-
IMO, going in the direction of Lament of Innocence and Curse of Darkness would be a far worse idea.
The point is...?
I think CV64 does a great job channeling the feel of classic Castlevanias, even if it has some camera issues. I don't think it feels like Resident Evil at all, not sure where you see similarities there. LoI and CoD, on the other hand, do feel remarkably like Devil May Cry, in my opinion.
The classic CVs don't have ambient music and creepy RE-like atmosphere. LoI has more of a SotN-ish feel. I have no idea how LoI and CoD feel like DMC. The way the games are built and the fact that they don't have thrashing metal detracts from that.
-
The point is I would rather see them make a 3D Castlevania that is more in the tradition of the original games, rather than trying to do a 3D translation of a SotN-style game. I think CV64 goes in that direction more than LoI and CoD.
And music aside, I think the gameplay and look of LoI and CoD feel very reminiscent to DMC. Play DMC and then the PS2 CVs, but with the mute button on, and you'll see what I mean. The characters look and play like Dante.
But thats just my opinion though. You prefer LoI and CoD, thats fine, I just prefer CV64. Peace.
-
In Reply To #49
First, the N64 games are basically bastardized versions of the classic games, only rotated 90 degrees. They are more like CV games than the PS2 games, though, when it comes to gameplay and such. Second, The characters don't play or look like Dante. That's just silly. White hair ≠ Dante. Third, I didn't say I prefered those games, and neither did I imply it.
-
In Reply To #50
First... In that case I would prefer them to base future 3D efforts on bastardized versions of the original games, rather than continuing the LoI-CoD- chain, which I think has been less effective.
Second... Well, they remind me of Dante, in appearance and in gameplay. Don't know what to tell ya. I think its "silly" to not acknowledge that there are some similarities there beyond white hair.
Third... You had implied earlier in the thread that CV64 failed pretty badly. And my original point was that I prefer the direction of CV64 to the more recent PS2 games, at which time you started contradicting several things I was saying. So I could only assume that you were doing so to defend the PS2 games, rather than to just troll my comments.
-
In Reply To #43
The N64 games don't really feel like Castlevania. At all. If anything, they feel more like Resident Evil.
In Reply To #49
First, the N64 games are basically bastardized versions of the classic games, only rotated 90 degrees. They are more like CV games than the PS2 games, though, when it comes to gameplay and such.
These two posts cancel each other out.
Face it, for all the flaws that the N64 games have, at least they RESEMBLE CV. I don't know what RE games you've been playing, but they in no way resemble the 64 games. I'd probably like RE better if they did. The PS2 games follow the basic 2000's era dungeon crawler in 3d formula and in the end, while they're nice and shiny on the outside, have nothing underneath to support them. The 64 games may not be the prettiest things to look at, but at least there's something under the hood that makes them good.
-
The N64 games don't really feel like Castlevania. At all. If anything, they feel more like Resident Evil.
What.........the.............fuck?
-
In Reply To #50
First, Iga is the director of Castlevania franchise and the one who comes with the ideas on how the game should be and the scenario. I never said that he is the one who programing the games, but he is the one who takes the final decision, if the games is good or not. He always states that he likes to make 2D Castlevania games and that he also wants to make a decent 3D Castlevania. He has also admited that he has failed in making a true 3D Castlevania game. Yet.
Two, why Castlevania 1 game play isn't suitable for 3D games, if they can improved it? Do you prefer complicated menus, with items than traditional game play? And let me tell you that i'm crazy for RPG'S and i like the RPG elements at castlevania games, but i also like the original style.
Third, because i have played almost every Resident Evil game, i can tell that there is no way that you can say Castlevania 64 is the same as them. If you insitst at this. then i need proofs. Also Ps2 games, they look like Dmc.
In general, the Ps2 games have better scenario, game play mechanics, characters designs, but they fail in capturing the Castlevania feeling and atmosphere, while 64 and lod they succeed at this and while they don't have perfect camera and game play mechanics, they have more detailed enviroments and platforming. Don't forget that Castlevania was always about whipping and platforming and not collecting items or level up your character to keep going. Something that was requiring skill and reflexes from the player, if he wanted to gontinue on. But in our era, this seems to not be acceptable from the new gamers, because of the great difficulty that it implies that kind of game play.
Also in a recent interview with the silent hill team on a games magazine in my country, the director of the team, has said that they wanted to make a new Silent Hill game for next gen consoles, but Konami has told them to not change the game play of the previous series. Just to make a small improvement to make it seem like a new game play, when in reality the game play was the same as the previous games. Konami wanted this, because the new fans of the series, they liked the game play of the last two games and so, Konami wanted to keep them and that's why it didn't allow the team to make a new game play for the game or some other improvements, resulting in failing the new Silent Hill game for next gen consoles. On the other hand, Capcom wasn't hesitated to change the game play of Residen't Evil series in fear of loosing the old fans of the series, resulting at the awesome Resident Evil 4 and from what i have seen this far at Resident Evil 5. What i want to tell with this? That what happens with Silent Hill series, the same happens with the Castlevania series. Thar's why we keep getting the same game play style at every new Castlevania game, with some adjustments and first of all always at Nintendos handheld consoles. Because Konami afraids of loosing the fans of the series, because most of them are Nintendo handheld users. But Konami should know, that without risking, success doesn't come, something that Capcome seems to know very well. Examples: Resident Evil 4 and 5, Megaman 9, Super street fighter turbo HD remix and street fighter 4.
-
In Reply To #50
First, Iga is the director of Castlevania franchise and the one who comes with the ideas on how the game should be and the scenario. I never said that he is the one who programing the games, but he is the one who takes the final decision, if the games is good or not. He always states that he likes to make 2D Castlevania games and that he also wants to make a decent 3D Castlevania. He has also admited that he has failed in making a true 3D Castlevania game. Yet.
IGA is the producer, not the director. IGA can only suggest things, but he doesn't always get his way. For example, he wanted Simon's theme in Judgment to be Don't Wait Until Night or Bloody Tears, but that didn't happen. Other than the basic for the games and such, he hypes up the games and makes sure they sell.
Two, why Castlevania 1 game play isn't suitable for 3D games, if they can improved it? Do you prefer complicated menus, with items than traditional game play? And let me tell you that i'm crazy for RPG'S and i like the RPG elements at castlevania games, but i also like the original style.
Slow and clunky movement isn't suitable, and neither is single strikes for attacking. It just doesn't work in 3D.
Third, because i have played almost every Resident Evil game, i can tell that there is no way that you can say Castlevania 64 is the same as them. If you insitst at this. then i need proofs. Also Ps2 games, they look like Dmc.
1. I said they felt more like RE than CV, not that they feel like RE in general. There's a difference.
2. The PS2 games aren't like DMC in any way at all.
White haired hero + gothic castle ≠ DMC
-
In Reply To #40
This. While the gameplay was more classic Castlevania, that was particularly one of the flaws. You cant treat 2D and 3D games the same way gameplay wise. CV64's shitty movement, combined with a shitty camera made for very clumsy combat and platforming.
-
neither is single strikes for attacking. It just doesn't work in 3D.
works fine for me. you're just spoiled by all that new age shit, grasshopper. cv was never about combos, it was always single strikes. :o
White haired hero + gothic castle ≠ DMC
yeah, but white haired hero going through gothic castle doing fabulous combos to huge hordes of respawning enemies in rooms that get locked after he enters them and unlock only after beating everyone, the big emphasis on combos and stuff feels way more dmc than n64 games feeling like re. ;D
-
DMC felt more like what Castlevania in 3D should have been, than either of the three 3D games. Way better game in almost every aspect than all three 3D CV titles. Arguably LoI and CoD had better music though.
-
In Reply To #58
I agree that DMC felt incredibly CV-ish. That's as far as I'll agree though ('cept for the music bit, I agree with that too, haha).
-
Reply was useless spam.
Watch it.
-
Greetings, everyone. I just have a quick announcement I'd like to make. :)
This thread seems to have gotten a bit derailed from its originally intended topic. Please try to concentrate on discussing the original poster's topic from here on in. 8)
-
I still believe that we have YET to see a fully realized 3D CV game. I mean, CV 64 had some good things going for it, but despite the platforming goodness, it's just not what I'd expect a 3D CV to REALLY look like. Though, LoI/CoD aren't either. I think the PERFECT 3D CV experience would be something that takes the best features from both CV64/LoD and LoI/CoD, yet is something 5 notches UP!
When you move into 3D territory, you HAVE change it. You can't just apply classic 2D ideas to a 3D world. Especially with modern gamers. It has to be up there ENOUGH for the casual gamers(non-fans) to get into, while it has to retain enough goodness that us die-hards will LOVE! It has to be a fun experience.
-
Reply was useless spam.
Watch it.
How was it spam?
-
In Reply To #63
You replied without a reply, just three useless dots, adding nothing of value to the conversation/discussion. Essentially you just quoted someone else and then added nothing, which is the same as adding spam.
You just returned from a week-ban, but it seems you have not learned anything while on your time off.
Goodbye, sir.
Everyone else:
Move along, nothing to see here.