Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: Nagumo on January 02, 2010, 11:24:21 AM
-
I shamelessly copied this topic from the Chapel. Punish me.
What do you think will be the results of Lords of Shadow? Do you think it will be as popular as some think it will? Do you think Mercury Steam will become the main developers of Castlevania for a while, or do you think maybe they'll make one or two games and pass the series to other teams, kind of like how it was before Iga arrived.
And about Iga, what do you think will happen to him? Do you think we’ll still see Castlevania games from him? Do you think the 3-D Alucard game is still being planned, or do you think Iga and his team will move on to different non-CV projects?
Will Lords of Shadow become a template for many other Castlevania games, like how Symphony of the Night was? Would you even want that to happen? Will we start seeing lots of new Castlevania fans?
Your predictions?
-
I predict the game to do fairly well, scoring an average of 7,5/10 in most magazines. The major complaints will undoubtably be that the game isn't original enough, and magazines will unfairly compare it to God of War. I do however think that the game will sell A LOT more copies than both Lament of Innocence and Curse of Darkness did, resulting in Mercury Steam to create one more Castlevania game before passing the torch to someone else, possibly an american studio.
Meanwhile, IGA will make a few more Castlevania games, mainly for downloadable services and handhelds (because he told Konami that he, quite frankly, don't wanna touch 3D ever again). The Alucardvania is still in production though and will be released in 2011, which will give Mercury Steam enough time to finish the sequel to Lords of Shadows (much like how Lords of Shadows is released in 2010 to give IGA enough time to finish the Alucradvania).
Yeah, this is EXACTLY what will happen ;D
(I honestly don't have a frickin clue, I'm just making stuff up that sounds somewhat reasonable).
-
It depends on how LoS does. While the Alucardvania is still in production, I believe that if LoS is more popular, Mercurystream will make most of the future CV games (or at least the 3D ones). Assuming that will be more 2D CVs in the future, I believe that those games will be made by Iga or whoever his successor at Konami is.
-
lords of shadow will be successful enough to blow all the other 3D CVs outta the water, in terms of sales & reviews. However, the hardcore fanbase(us) will still be divided as it is now. I believe that after all's said & done, the hype will die down fast & people will find more and more flaws about the game. It'll be the closest to achieving CV in 3D, but there'll still be something holding it back.. what that something is, still remains to be seen.
I believe the reason IGA is out of the spotlight is because he's working on the next big 2D game from scratch, and Konami doesn't want to reveal it yet for the same reason they didn't announce lords as a CV.
And yes, the next 2D game, will be the best one since Symphony.
-
The major complaints will undoubtably be that the game isn't original enough, and magazines will justly compare it to God of War.
Fixed.
-
This will be the final Castlevania game ever made.
-
I've actually found that video game reviewers are pretty fair when it comes to judging a game's originality or not. If the game feels like God of War, they're going to compare it to God of War. If it doesn't they may still make a few passing comments, but they won't be spouting the clone nonsense that so many fans do.
It really all depends on how Lords of Shadow does. If it does well they'll probably continue in the same game. If it doesn't do well, well, Konami might just drop Castlevania after years of sub-par sales, focusing their efforts on hordes of Metal Gear Solid games. I would hate for the latter to happen, so I'm hoping it does well.
-
If it doesn't do well, well, Konami might just drop Castlevania after years of sub-par sales, focusing their efforts on hordes of Metal Gear Solid games.
Now you made me cry little :(
I've never thought about it before... I mean, sure Castlevania WILL come to an end.. Mankind too. But... I kinda see myself playing new Castlevania games for the rest of my life, both good and bad ones. However, in 30-40 years I don't even think there will be Final Fantasy or Grand Theft Auto left. Everything must go.
I am teh depressed naow :(
-
I am teh depressed naow :(
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to make you sad :(
I was just calling it as I see it.
-
Haha...I think Shelv and uzo pretty much nailed it.
-
MercurySteam is out to prove themselves and if they do, good for them.
If they fail, they'll pro'ly get tossed like yesterday's week-old leftovers.
And, honestly, as long as the game doesn't suck I don't care about the rest.
-
My hunch is the Lords of Shadow will get modest review scores, and will go largely unnoticed by a general gaming public, despite promotional hype (or for lack of hype, possibly). I hope this game succeeds (especially if it's any good ;D ), but it's hard for me to see this game being met with anything other than indifference.
-
My hunch is the Lords of Shadow will get modest review scores, and will go largely unnoticed by a general gaming public, despite promotional hype (or for lack of hype, possibly). I hope this game succeeds (especially if it's any good ;D ), but it's hard for me to see this game being met with anything other than indifference.
There's not much that can be done about that, then. Action games are hyper popular right now, and unless they make the next Castlevania a gorgeous, giga-hyped 3 disk RPG, nothing else is going to make the series successful if not this. Sure, they could make a game more appealing to the small numbers of forum going fans, but that doesn't sell.
-
I think a large part of the game's success will depend on its release date. Because of its similarity to GoW, if its released anywhere within the same timeframe as GoWIII's release, I expect game sales to be lower than if it came out a month or more afterwards.
-
Honestly, the way Western-developed games in Japanese series tend to go, who knows? I'm not terribly optimistic about the outcome either (as Konami's other outsourced games have done pretty damn poorly, like Contra 4 and the Silent Hills), but it seems like people are more hyped for Lords of Shadow than any Castlevania in recent memory. Kojima's approval of the game and the participation of famous actors like Patrick Stewart certainly didn't hurt, either.
To me, what makes this game stand out is that David Cox is stressing the importance of the game's environment as well as the action, something that IGA's games more often than not completely glaze over. He talks a lot about the game's platforming and slower-paced exploration. Hopefully, these will set Lords apart from your everyday beat-the-crap-out-of-stuff-stylishly action game, but I guess it all boils down to how well it generates hype.
-
Why do I have so much faith in this game? Two words: The-Budget.
ONly a very very very bad sutio could waste 20M Euros and make a crappy game, if MercurySeatm mess this game, it's perhaps the worst studio ever. They have a great saga as base, tons of money and Kojima san as supervisor, what could go wrong? a very very crappy developer. :P
-
Fixed.
How do you think this is? Cuz he uses a whip like weapon? Because it is 3d? Will it have QTEs as it's core gameplay?
-
Honestly, the way Western-developed games in Japanese series tend to go, who knows? I'm not terribly optimistic about the outcome either (as Konami's other outsourced games have done pretty damn poorly, like Contra 4 and the Silent Hills), but it seems like people are more hyped for Lords of Shadow than any Castlevania in recent memory. Kojima's approval of the game and the participation of famous actors like Patrick Stewart certainly didn't hurt, either.
To me, what makes this game stand out is that David Cox is stressing the importance of the game's environment as well as the action, something that IGA's games more often than not completely glaze over. He talks a lot about the game's platforming and slower-paced exploration. Hopefully, these will set Lords apart from your everyday beat-the-crap-out-of-stuff-stylishly action game, but I guess it all boils down to how well it generates hype.
I thought Contra 4 did alright, but yeah.....Shattered Memories bombed and that's why I shutter at the idea of "re-imaginings" in my games nowadays. This game is no exception.
I don't think we have to worry about hype though, really. The fact that the revelation that Kojima was directing the project was the HUGE NEWS of this past E3 (on top of it being a Castlevania) helped generate a shyte-tone of hype for the game right off the bat. Patrick Stuart and Jason Issacs being voice-cast also gives a large boost. I anticipate we'll probably see some major advertising for the game come time for its release.
-
I thought Contra 4 did alright, but yeah.....Shattered Memories bombed and that's why I shutter at the idea of "re-imaginings" in my games nowadays. This game is no exception.
I don't think we have to worry about hype though, really. The fact that the revelation that Kojima was directing the project was the HUGE NEWS of this past E3 (on top of it being a Castlevania) helped generate a shyte-tone of hype for the game right off the bat. Patrick Stuart and Jason Issacs being voice-cast also gives a large boost. I anticipate we'll probably see some major advertising for the game come time for its release.
I remember hearing that Contra 4 sold pretty poorly despite being a godly game. Which makes me very sad. One more nail in the coffin of retail 2D games. :'(
-
I remember hearing that Contra 4 sold pretty poorly despite being a godly game. Which makes me very sad. One more nail in the coffin of retail 2D games. :'(
True...but Mega Man 9 did well. So well they're doing Mega Man 10. That's something.
-
True...but Mega Man 9 did well. So well they're doing Mega Man 10. That's something.
Yeah, that's true. I'll rue the day when 2D games are entirely digital downloads, but hell, it's better than none at all.
I would be more worried about the possible negative side effects of Lords of Shadow, but I'm easy to please if I already like a game series. I enjoyed the hell out of Bionic Commando in spite of the radiation and completely retarded and nonsensical plot twist (but hey, wouldn't be Capcom without one of those, eh?).
-
I think a large part of the game's success will depend on its release date. Because of its similarity to GoW, if its released anywhere within the same timeframe as GoWIII's release, I expect game sales to be lower than if it came out a month or more afterwards.
I agree. Though a game like GOW3 could possibly raise interest in the genre even more, and Castlevania should be there waiting for action fans as soon as they're done with GOW3, Bayonetta and whatnot. On the other hand, if Castlevania proves to be a worse game than the ones I mentioned, it would've probably been a better idea to release it immediately so magazines won't say that LoS could've been a contender if only GoW3 wasn't already out. So yes, the release date is crucial.
-
I agree. Though a game like GOW3 could possibly raise interest in the genre even more, and Castlevania should be there waiting for action fans as soon as they're done with GOW3, Bayonetta and whatnot. On the other hand, if Castlevania proves to be a worse game than the ones I mentioned, it would've probably been a better idea to release it immediately so magazines won't say that LoS could've been a contender if only GoW3 wasn't already out. So yes, the release date is crucial.
Agreed.
-
Good reviews, the game will sell less than the most selling Castlevania on the DS, fans will love it. I hope the games sold well but it's only a wish.
-
You are nuts little Dracula, Kojima name only will sell 1M.
-
Well, Zone of the Enders and Boktai are kinda proof that it's really just Metal Gear Solid that gets attention.
-
Well, Zone of the Enders and Boktai are kinda proof that it's really just Metal Gear Solid that gets attention.
Exactly. I also imagine most people don't care about video game producers/directors. The casual crowd may not even know who Hideo Kojima is, but they would probably be familiar with the name Metal Gear Solid.
Here's a disturbing thought; What if, on the cover of LoS, there's a huge ass unremovable sticker saying "FROM THE MAKER OF METAL GEAR SOLID!". I would not be surprised.
-
people are going to call it a God of War 3 clone, and I will disagree..
-
people are going to call it a God of War 3 clone, and I will disagree..
Psh god of war is a clone of castlevania! IF anything... David Jaffe is a huge castlevania fan and it inspired him to make God of war.
-
Well, if GoW-clone means that a good chunk of the GoW-fanbase goes out and buys a copy of LoS because of the similarities, I think it's safe to say that Konami has a winner on its hands... even if it's not the ideal scenario. And yes, GoW is obviously inspired by oldschool action games, and what is more oldschool and action than Castlevania? (Except..eh.. many other games, but still!)
Also, after seeing the Gametrailer review of Bayonetta I think we can rule out the possibilities that people will compare it to LoS. It's sooooo over-the-top and.. downright vulgar! I honestly don't think the game will sell as many copies as I originally thought. It's too weird for the casual crowd. (Though I'm gonna get it ;D)
-
How do you think this is? Cuz he uses a whip like weapon? Because it is 3d? Will it have QTEs as it's core gameplay?
Because God of War did it better, and did it before Lords of Shadow. Lords of Shadow's current form owes a lot to God of War thus far we've seen. They did what Konami refused to or couldn't do, then Konami comes back many years later to re-take the basic formula after the fact. Devil May Cry is also another good example of being better at 3D Castlevania than Konami was, only more SotN style.
-
Because God of War did it better, and did it before Lords of Shadow. Lords of Shadow's current form owes a lot to God of War thus far we've seen. They did what Konami refused to or couldn't do, then Konami comes back many years later to re-take the basic formula after the fact. Devil May Cry is also another good example of being better at 3D Castlevania than Konami was, only more SotN style.
Until the game comes out, you have no idea. Blame IGA for that. You can't blame Konami for finally trying to do it right after all these years.
There's also the platforming. God of War had little to no platforming. If Cox is to be trusted at all, which I think he is because he gains nothing by lying about the game structure, Lords of Shadow will feel different from God of War even if we only take into account that the focus on platforming is being increased.
-
The bit of gameplay I've seen in the trailers actually reminds me a lot of the PS2 Rygar, which was an excellent game and also felt very Castlevania in many ways, including its beautiful orchestral music. The Combat Cross's swings remind me of that game's Diskarmor, and the way Cox describes breaking things to get items is more or less what Rygar did.
-
and the way Cox describes breaking things to get items is more or less what Rygar did.
And as we all have done in about every Castlevania game up to date.. ..
-
And as we all have done in about every Castlevania game up to date.. ..
Lies and deceit. The ONLY thing we have ever broken in a Castlevania game is a candle.
-
Lies and deceit. The ONLY thing we have ever broken in a Castlevania game is a candle.
And walls, chandeliers, urns, statues and what not!! <--- U forgot about these??
-
And walls, chandeliers, urns, statues and what not!! <--- U forgot about these??
And faces.
-
And faces.
U lost me there..
-
U lost me there..
You break faces....like zombie faces....okay never mind..
-
And walls, chandeliers, urns, statues and what not!! <--- U forgot about these??
Oh wow, I did. In all of this "lolcandles" I forgot that Castlevania is more than just whipping candles.
-
The effects of this game:
A possible good series of 3d castlevania games being made.
Sign me up.
-
You can't blame Konami for finally trying to do it right after all these years.
You're missing the point. Its not bad that they're going this route, but they shouldn't, and you shouldn't, expect people to not make comments about the similarity in regards to God of War and the like.
-
You're missing the point. Its not bad that they're going this route, but they shouldn't, and you shouldn't, expect people to not make comments about the similarity in regards to God of War and the like.
I'm not. From what we've seen, the combat in the game resembles God of War. You can't really argue that. What I was contesting is the idea that that:
A. Instantly makes it a bad game
B. Justifies statements such as "Because God of War did it better, and did it before Lords of Shadow."
-
I'm not. From what we've seen, the combat in the game resembles God of War. You can't really argue that. What I was contesting is the idea that that:
A. Instantly makes it a bad game
B. Instantly makes it so that the entire game is a clone of God of War.
C. Justifies statements such as "Because God of War did it better, and did it before Lords of Shadow."
-
Again, you're misinterpreting my words. I didn't say anywhere that God of War is better than Lords of Shadow, nor did I say Lords of Shadow is a bad game, or will be a bad game.
-
Well I apologize if I am, but I really don't see how else I can interpret the phrase "God of War did it better"
-
Well I apologize if I am, but I really don't see how else I can interpret the phrase "God of War did it better"
Here's a novel thought. Maybe a 3D Castlevania can/should be different than God of War and Devil May Cry? Platforming aside, who said fighting enemy after enemy with big, flashy hack'n'slash combos is a necessity of Castlevania? I don't remember that in the 2D games. (and we saw how redundant that got with the latter 3D Castlevanias). Sometimes less is more, and I think 3D action/platforming games in general should remember that.
-
I hate this stupid logic.
WHy do they have to make the fighting system stylish!??!
Because if it isn't it wouldn't be as enjoyable.
The devil may cry/ God of war/ Ninja Gaiden fighting systems are enjoyable and fun.
Games replicate and improve on things that are a success..
It's not the exact same fighting system, so what if it looks stylish, its not over the top like bayonetta or devil may cry.
I just don't get peoples complaints.
Please make the fighting system boring and not stylish so that it wont be like games that do it with great success..
Sorry I rather have a fighting system like Devil may cry than one like Elder scrolls where it makes a slashing motion that feels like you aren't doing a damn thing.
Devil may cry, god of war, castlevania lords of shadow while having stylish combat systems stylistically all three of them look VERY different as far as design and theme.
-
I hate this stupid logic.
WHy do they have to make the fighting system stylish!??!
Because if it isn't it wouldn't be as enjoyable.
The devil may cry/ God of war/ Ninja Gaiden fighting systems are enjoyable and fun.
Games replicate and improve on things that are a success..
It's not the exact same fighting system, so what if it looks stylish, its not over the top like bayonetta or devil may cry.
I just don't get peoples complaints.
Please make the fighting system boring and not stylish so that it wont be like games that do it with great success..
Sorry I rather have a fighting system like Devil may cry than one like Elder scrolls where it makes a slashing motion that feels like you aren't doing a damn thing.
Devil may cry, god of war, castlevania lords of shadow while having stylish combat systems stylistically all three of them look VERY different as far as design and theme.
I 100% agree.
-
I hate this stupid logic.
WHy do they have to make the fighting system stylish!??!
Because if it isn't it wouldn't be as enjoyable.
The devil may cry/ God of war/ Ninja Gaiden fighting systems are enjoyable and fun.
Games replicate and improve on things that are a success..
It's not the exact same fighting system, so what if it looks stylish, its not over the top like bayonetta or devil may cry.
I just don't get peoples complaints.
Please make the fighting system boring and not stylish so that it wont be like games that do it with great success..
Sorry I rather have a fighting system like Devil may cry than one like Elder scrolls where it makes a slashing motion that feels like you aren't doing a damn thing.
Devil may cry, god of war, castlevania lords of shadow while having stylish combat systems stylistically all three of them look VERY different as far as design and theme.
Yes and no. Stylish fighting is cool--I myself find some appeal in it in games like Devil May Cry 3--but it can be problematic to varying degrees in this sense: the enemies sometimes become 'punching bags.' Usually when you have chain combos, it means regular enemies take more and more hits to kill, which slows down the pacing of the game and feels like a hidden kind of level padding. (It also makes less distinction between regular enemies and bosses). The more you do these combos "systematically," the more redundant and robotic/technical they sometimes feel--like a cinematic button-based puzzle game. It becomes more about "pulling off" the "visually stylish move" than it does about surviving and progressing through the level design. And the more games that employ it, the less fresh it feels. (Has anyone seen the recent big-budget 'Dante's Inferno' or 'Darksiders' vids--they look cool, and have good art design and game principles...but the combat largely appears cut and paste).
Granted, I don't know to what extent LoS uses combos, so I'm not being entirely fair. At some point, I'm looking for a new 3D action paradigm. I agree with the idea of a strong and weak whip attack (confirmed?), a grab whip attack (not confirmed), and a defensive whip move (not confirmed)...but I'm not crazy about that downward flaming power punch and super spin-attack we're seeing. That suggests that enemies are used to "fill space" and be "smacked" than it does they are put strategically to meld with/enhance the level design. I just don't want to see enemies getting caught in a chain and getting juggled around like a fighting game for the previously mentioned concerns. But...if the game turns out to be exceedingly fun, I suppose it doesn't matter in the end.
-
Yes and no. Stylish fighting is cool--I myself find some appeal in it in games like Devil May Cry 3--but it can be problematic to varying degrees in this sense: the enemies sometimes become 'punching bags.' Usually when you have chain combos, it means regular enemies take more and more hits to kill, which slows down the pacing of the game and feels like a hidden kind of level padding. (It also makes less distinction between regular enemies and bosses). The more you do these combos "systematically," the more redundant and robotic/technical they sometimes feel--like a cinematic button-based puzzle game. It becomes more about "pulling off" the "visually stylish move" than it does about surviving and progressing through the level design. And the more games that employ it, the less fresh it feels. (Has anyone seen the recent big-budget 'Dante's Inferno' or 'Darksiders' vids--they look cool, and have good art design and game principles...but the combat largely appears cut and paste).
Granted, I don't know to what extent LoS uses combos, so I'm not being entirely fair. At some point, I'm looking for a new 3D action paradigm. I agree with the idea of a strong and weak whip attack (confirmed?), a grab whip attack (not confirmed), and a defensive whip move (not confirmed)...but I'm not crazy about that downward flaming power punch and super spin-attack we're seeing. That suggests that enemies are used to "fill space" and be "smacked" than it does they are put strategically to meld with/enhance the level design. I just don't want to see enemies getting caught in a chain and getting juggled around like a fighting game for the previously mentioned concerns. But...if the game turns out to be exceedingly fun, I suppose it doesn't matter in the end.
The only reason I'm getting defensive over this is because it's as if people haven't been reading about the game.
They went on record if you expect this game to play like a devil may cry or god of war you are wrong, its a slower more puzzle flatform paced game.
So we are complaining that they put in a ( looks enjoyable) nice fighting engine to enjoy the action parts within the game?
It's not even that stylish or over the top, just some nice ideas in my book.
Over the top and stylish to me is having a damn message on the screen saying RAD whenever you get a cool combo.
-
I wouldn't mind a 3D action game where enemies can take one or two hits instead of 15-20... First of all, the original Castlevania games, while in 2D, never had enemies that could take more than a few hits. Also, it would mean that you're constantly making progress through the levels, never being stuck in a square room, button mashing away at skeletons or other weaker enemies that keep coming from ever direction. It would keep the game from having the typical "battle arena" feeling that we see too often these days.
I know that some people say that this wouldn't work in a 3D game, but I don't understand why. Would it make the game too easy? The original Castlevania sure wasn't too easy, neither was Ninja Gaiden - both had one-hit enemies. I suppose 3D level design would make it too easy to just run past enemies if you don't have to kill them or even jump over them... Still, I think it could work if executed well.
Until then, I think combos are fun, but it's been done to death...
-
I wouldn't mind a 3D action game where enemies can take one or two hits instead of 15-20... First of all, the original Castlevania games, while in 2D, never had enemies that could take more than a few hits. Also, it would mean that you're constantly making progress through the levels, never being stuck in a square room, button mashing away at skeletons or other weaker enemies that keep coming from ever direction. It would keep the game from having the typical "battle arena" feeling that we see too often these days.
I know that some people say that this wouldn't work in a 3D game, but I don't understand why. Would it make the game too easy? The original Castlevania sure wasn't too easy, neither was Ninja Gaiden - both had one-hit enemies. I suppose 3D level design would make it too easy to just run past enemies if you don't have to kill them or even jump over them... Still, I think it could work if executed well.
Until then, I think combos are fun, but it's been done to death...
You are entitled to your opinion but bringing gaming back to concepts from the nes days would be silly imo.
The idea is to progress not regress. If combos have been done to death maybe someone should be innovative and come up with a new system, instead of going back to a simple design which would be much worse imo.
-
You are entitled to your opinion but bringing gaming back to concepts from the nes days would be silly imo.
The idea is to progress not regress. If combos have been done to death maybe someone should be innovative and come up with a new system, instead of going back to a simple design which would be much worse imo.
If "progress" just means giving standard enemies more hit points and turning every action game into battle arena brawlers, I dunno if progress is that...uhm.. progressive. To me, modern action games actually have a lot in common with 80's beat'em'ups - kill all enemies on screen so you can move to the next screen where you do it all over again.
But yeah, I see your point. My idea would be that enemies acted more as minions and less like mini-bosses. Instead the focus should be progressing through levels at a faster pace with more interesting level design. I have absolutely no idea how, or IF, it would work, but I just wanna see a game that does things differently.
I know most people won't agree with this, but the PS2 version of Shinobi was really cool IMO. The enemies were easily dispatched, the tempo was high, but the game was still really difficult. I know some of you will say it was because of terrible platforming with bottomless pits, but I gotta say I loved that game from start to finish. It's not my ideal 3D action game, but it's pretty damn close :D
-
I don't know, I see LOS as a kind of POP game, more than a GOW, more than DMC, I see it as a POP game, the escenery, the plataforming, the exploration, the puzzles, the on rails action sequences (The horse and the werewolves), I don't think this is more a pure action game than an inspired platafformer.
And remember, Cox said he was inspired by Street Fighter ,So, a more arcade fighting system?
-
I don't know, I see LOS as a kind of POP game, more than a GOW, more than DMC, I see it as a POP game, the escenery, the plataforming, the exploration, the puzzles, the on rails action sequences (The horse and the werewolves), I don't think this is more a pure action game than an inspired platafformer.
And remember, Cox said he was inspired by Street Fighter ,So, a more arcade fighting system?
Wow did not know he was inspired by Street Fighter. I wonder how that is gonna work into the game.
-
And remember, Cox said he was inspired by Street Fighter ,So, a more arcade fighting system?
I don't see how anything good can come out of such an inspiration, I sincerely don't.
Hopefully I'm wrong. It makes me very curious, but scared. Cox could've said Tetris and I would've been equally puzzled.
EDIT: Maybe, just maybe, Cox is talking about how to execute moves in battle? You use the analog stick in different ways to pull off different moves. Could that be it?
-
I know most people won't agree with this, but the PS2 version of Shinobi was really cool IMO. The enemies were easily dispatched, the tempo was high, but the game was still really difficult. I know some of you will say it was because of terrible platforming with bottomless pits, but I gotta say I loved that game from start to finish. It's not my ideal 3D action game, but it's pretty damn close :D
PS2's Shinobi was kickass. The only real problem I had with it wasn't the platforming and bottomless pits, but the CAMERA!!! ESPECIALLY when you're trying to platform, the camera suddenly shifts and you find yourself falling off into a bottomless pit. Then again, camera issues seem to be a problem of a LOT of 3D games. They've been getting better as of lately, but I still play some games where, suddenly you move the wrong way and the camera is inside the wall, or something.
-
So, with the new fixed camera, PROBLEM FIXED! ;D
-
Here's a novel thought. Maybe a 3D Castlevania can/should be different than God of War and Devil May Cry? Platforming aside, who said fighting enemy after enemy with big, flashy hack'n'slash combos is a necessity of Castlevania? I don't remember that in the 2D games. (and we saw how redundant that got with the latter 3D Castlevanias). Sometimes less is more, and I think 3D action/platforming games in general should remember that.
You missed the point of what we were talking about, FYI.
I'm going to say, though, that if they came out with a 3D Castlevania game where the fight with Dracula consisted of dodging fireballs in 3D space and launching single hits at his head, I'd be extremely disappointed. There's a reason why companies make retro-style games along with newer games. Sometimes, the transition from 2D to 3D just doesn't work. It needs more.
The reason the PS2 3Dvanias got redundant was because there was NOTHING else. You went through a series of flat, uninspired rooms killing enemies. Cox has said he's aiming for a platforming/combat/puzzle mix, and we've seen how nice the environments look.
Yes and no. Stylish fighting is cool--I myself find some appeal in it in games like Devil May Cry 3--but it can be problematic to varying degrees in this sense: the enemies sometimes become 'punching bags.' Usually when you have chain combos, it means regular enemies take more and more hits to kill, which slows down the pacing of the game and feels like a hidden kind of level padding. (It also makes less distinction between regular enemies and bosses). The more you do these combos "systematically," the more redundant and robotic/technical they sometimes feel--like a cinematic button-based puzzle game. It becomes more about "pulling off" the "visually stylish move" than it does about surviving and progressing through the level design. And the more games that employ it, the less fresh it feels. (Has anyone seen the recent big-budget 'Dante's Inferno' or 'Darksiders' vids--they look cool, and have good art design and game principles...but the combat largely appears cut and paste).
Granted, I don't know to what extent LoS uses combos, so I'm not being entirely fair. At some point, I'm looking for a new 3D action paradigm. I agree with the idea of a strong and weak whip attack (confirmed?), a grab whip attack (not confirmed), and a defensive whip move (not confirmed)...but I'm not crazy about that downward flaming power punch and super spin-attack we're seeing. That suggests that enemies are used to "fill space" and be "smacked" than it does they are put strategically to meld with/enhance the level design. I just don't want to see enemies getting caught in a chain and getting juggled around like a fighting game for the previously mentioned concerns. But...if the game turns out to be exceedingly fun, I suppose it doesn't matter in the end.
The kind of enemy placement you're talking about works wonders in 2D platformers, but really doesn't transfer over to 3D games very well unless you want the game to feel like Mario 64. I know I personally believe Castlevania has much more in common with DMC than Mario 64. As for your claims about Darksiders, well, that's not entirely true. Owning the game myself, I can tell you I'm reminded of Legend of Zelda more so than God of War. Sure, the moves can look flashy, but enemies generally go down pretty quickly, and the stronger ones tend to have some work-around to killing them. Dante's Inferno, as far as the demo goes, you're right, it's just GoW in Hell.
I see no reason to leave out flashy moves. This definitely wouldn't be the first Castlevania game to have them.
As for your "fill space" comment, I wonder if you've actually ever played DMC. If you're not playing easy mode, you tend to be the one getting smacked around if you aren't doing things right. Dodging, blocking, countering, and comboing takes, surprisingly enough, skill and timing, but more tweaked toward a combat aspect instead of a platforming aspect. The combat itself is gratifying. The way you make it sound is like you go into a room, beat some enemies by spamming buttons, then move on.
Now, I could understand that by adding the action, it's just not really your type of game, and that's completely understandable. But I will say that the platforming style of a 2D Castlevania game, as far as I see, doesn't transfer well into 3D because of that third dimension. In a 2D game, a skeleton on a platform would have to be whipped or jumped over. In a 3D game, you just given yourself the ability to go over, to either side, a combination of the two, or whip it and go through. It makes a skeleton not that big of an obstacle. The bones they throw can now just be sidestepped.
Also, as games have tried to go towards a more cinematic experience, placing enemies on every platform as an obstacle begins to feel frustratingly gimmicky, when that job could easily done by something like a spike trap, bottomless pit, flame jet, etc.
-
Fixed camera doesn't always correct the problem. It's a start, sure, but some occassions, with the fixed camera, it's like the camera's on a rail system that, depending on locations, will move around to allow a better view of down the way. Though, like LoI(which also used a fix camera), sometimes you get the camera trying to compensate for moving around too fast, and it goes haywire. Or, which was a big concerned with LoI, you get the "off screen" angles where you're stuck in a fixed angle and the enemies are attacking you from off screen. If they remedy this by tuning the fixed camera enough to not go haywire or get stuck in an awkward angle, that's awesome.
-
For what I can watch in the trailer, the camera looks very good, just watch the climbing sequence (IN a tower with the whip, you know, the second trailer) or the battle with the dark armor, it seems that camera angles are very cinematic, and, for what we've seen, there are not little squared rooms, the areas seem to be open. Of course, I don't know how the final game is :)
-
A fixed camera can be fine in a linear action game. It all depends on exactly HOW linear the game is. LoI was linear in a sense, almost like a Mega Man game with levels that didn't connect with eachother, though LoI had more exploration in each level. Which is why I don't think a fixed camera was the best choice for LoI.
3D Exploration + fixed camera = fail.
Now, with LoS, I guess the levels will follow a more classic, level-by-level structure, with little detours here and there? I don't get the impression that the levels will be as labyrinthine as in LoI, so a fixed camera could actually work... depending on how the platforming segments turn out. If the levels are mostly linear, I very much doubt you'll be attacked from off-screen or some stupid crap like that... if there aren't too many bransching paths all over the levels, it's gonna be fine... I think.
-
A fixed camera can be fine in a linear action game. It all depends on exactly HOW linear the game is. LoI was linear in a sense, almost like a Mega Man game with levels that didn't connect with eachother, though LoI had more exploration in each level. Which is why I don't think a fixed camera was the best choice for LoI.
3D Exploration + fixed camera = fail.
Now, with LoS, I guess the levels will follow a more classic, level-by-level structure, with little detours here and there? I don't get the impression that the levels will be as labyrinthine as in LoI, so a fixed camera could actually work... depending on how the platforming segments turn out. If the levels are mostly linear, I very much doubt you'll be attacked from off-screen or some stupid crap like that... if there aren't too many bransching paths all over the levels, it's gonna be fine... I think.
They said its level by level but there will be different routes you can take and places to explore. Some areas will be very big cox said.
-
EDIT (The crux of my feelings finally came to me at the end in bold).
I understand in the sense of "market-history" that Castlevania wants to blend all of these other modern games. At the end of the day, I don't think that strategy is going to make the Castlevania name huge. To connect with & answer a comment earlier, I don't hate Devil May Cry--in fact, I played through 1-3 and loved #3. But at the end of the day, DMC is about anime-style action and encountering enemies that you have to combo to death. It's fun, but if done on too many games, it becomes boring. And the list of these games has exploded in the last few years. LoS will be different, but will it be different enough? I think Shelverton is right on when he says that action games are becoming more akin to Beat-'em-ups. That's not to say they can't be fun, but as it goes on, using the analogy, you can't tell much difference between the basics of Final Fight and Streets of Rage.
I don't have all the solutions, but I want to see 3D action-adventure break out of that rut, and I expect the Castlevania franchise to be a distinct industry leader. LoS is going to have its share of puzzles and the like. It might all turn out fine, it might be a mixed bag--who knows. I do not think it will be horrible by any means, but I'm itching for a Castlevania that sticks it to the industry and says: "I'M CASTLEVANIA in 3D--move over chumps!" Not, "I'm 3D Castlevania, and you can't refuse me this time because I have enough elements from other games that are popular in this current generation & have star power with Kojima and Sir Stewart." I mean, theoretically, if you could make Mario more popular by giving him guns like the modern Ratchet and Clank, it wouldn't necessarily make a superior Mario game.
My bottom line: The LoS trailer looks solid. It doesn't make me jump up and down, but it looks like it will be a good game. Problem is I'm past looking for a "good game" from Castlevania. I'm looking for something that blows one's mind in the way that Castlevania IV did back in the day. That's my problem. I mean no offense. The next trailer may blow me away. But right now there hasn't been enough evidence. The crazy thing is, despite all the subtle hints/homages, I haven't connected this game to "Castlevania" in my head. At the same time, though, if it wasn't Castlevania, I'd feel it was ripping Castlevania pretty badly. Needless to say, I do not know what to make of this game yet, and the media for it so far hasn't been helping me. So really, with all this talk, I'm just trying to figure out how I could be more convinced that this game is definitely Castlevania in 3D and is a distinct, leading game in the industry.
Random: Yeah, Shinobi for PS2 was enjoyable for its time (good music, too). I think level checkpoints would have helped the frustration level of its camera issues (the idea of death pits is cool with me, though). Never did get to play the PS2 sequel, Kunoichi. Also, you know what were good 3D action-platformers?--PS2's Maximo and Maximo 2 (they were the 3D "reimagining" of Capcom's amazing Ghosts N Goblins franchise). There were combos there too, but not as prolific, and that had some of the best designed platforming with a 3D camera for an action game.
-
A fixed camera can be fine in a linear action game. It all depends on exactly HOW linear the game is. LoI was linear in a sense, almost like a Mega Man game with levels that didn't connect with eachother, though LoI had more exploration in each level. Which is why I don't think a fixed camera was the best choice for LoI.
3D Exploration + fixed camera = fail.
Now, with LoS, I guess the levels will follow a more classic, level-by-level structure, with little detours here and there? I don't get the impression that the levels will be as labyrinthine as in LoI, so a fixed camera could actually work... depending on how the platforming segments turn out. If the levels are mostly linear, I very much doubt you'll be attacked from off-screen or some stupid crap like that... if there aren't too many bransching paths all over the levels, it's gonna be fine... I think.
I'm not really sure how the level structure is going to be. I've heard linear, I've heard exploration, and Cox has said he was inspired by Legend of Zelda. If there was one thing I had absolutley no idea about in this game, it would be how the levels will play out.
And RichterB, I'm not sure if Castlevania will ever be an industry front runner again. That's my pessimism though. If the new Sonic game manages to be a smash hit, I will begin to believe that a dying series can come back with gusto. If it does poorly, it will only reaffirm my thoughts that the age old chant of "Old-skool but in HD" is nothing but a fantasy that only die-hard forum fans will ever be pleased with.
-
I'm not really sure how the level structure is going to be. I've heard linear, I've heard exploration, and Cox has said he was inspired by Legend of Zelda. If there was one thing I had absolutley no idea about in this game, it would be how the levels will play out.
And RichterB, I'm not sure if Castlevania will ever be an industry front runner again. That's my pessimism though. If the new Sonic game manages to be a smash hit, I will begin to believe that a dying series can come back with gusto. If it does poorly, it will only reaffirm my thoughts that the age old chant of "Old-skool but in HD" is nothing but a fantasy that only die-hard forum fans will ever be pleased with.
I loath the newer sonic games....
Fuckin Earth? Its suppose to be Mobius damn it.
-
I'm not really sure how the level structure is going to be. I've heard linear, I've heard exploration, and Cox has said he was inspired by Legend of Zelda. If there was one thing I had absolutley no idea about in this game, it would be how the levels will play out.
And RichterB, I'm not sure if Castlevania will ever be an industry front runner again. That's my pessimism though. If the new Sonic game manages to be a smash hit, I will begin to believe that a dying series can come back with gusto. If it does poorly, it will only reaffirm my thoughts that the age old chant of "Old-skool but in HD" is nothing but a fantasy that only die-hard forum fans will ever be pleased with.
I'll tell you what Cox said exactly. Just read it from an older review.
" Some areas are linear point A to point B, other areas are very big with multiple routes where you need to explore."
He was inspired by zelda in how they told a story within the gameplay not so much the game itself.
-
I'm not sure if Castlevania will ever be an industry front runner again. That's my pessimism though.
I sometimes think that the name itself is kinda doomed. For newcomers, just reading the name won't say much about what the game is about. And for gaming veterans you're either in or you simply don't care for the series. Personally I think "Castlevania" is catchy as hell, but the majority of people who walk into their local video game store looking for some quick action fix, you're most likely gonna go for something that reads "GOD OF WAR" och "KILLZONE" or anything else that tells you something about the game. This logic is obviously flawed, but still... I think something like "VAMPIRE KILLER" or even "DEMON CASTLE DRACULA" would attract more players.
Dunno...
-
I sometimes think that the name itself is kinda doomed. For newcomers, just reading the name won't say much about what the game is about. And for gaming veterans you're either in or you simply don't care for the series. Personally I think "Castlevania" is catchy as hell, but the majority of people who walk into their local video game store looking for some quick action fix, you're most likely gonna go for something that reads "GOD OF WAR" och "KILLZONE" or anything else that tells you something about the game. This logic is obviously flawed, but still... I think something like "VAMPIRE KILLER" or even "DEMON CASTLE DRACULA" would attract more players.
Dunno...
CASTLE and VANIA ... Do imply something though. It would seem pretty obvious that its a vampire guy to me if I was a newcomer. While I agree theres a lot of idiots out there who go for A DIRECT NAME I doubt that has anything to do with it.
Considering Sotn sold really well. I think it simply has to do with the fact that the games haven't been great lately and they keep rehashing. You go on other game boards and they all say " this is the first castlevania im gonna buy in a long time. Finally its done right"...
-
Legend of Zelda is perhaps the worst name ever and it sells zillions. Oh no, I forgot killzone, that's the very worst generic game name ever, and it sold a lot. It's not about how silly a game could be named (And, to be fair, sub-titles of castlevania games are excellent, Order of ecclesia, Portrait of Ruin, Aria of Sorrow, Symhpny of the Night... Lords of Shadow could be the second most generic, behind Curse of Darkness) but I think that when a franchise is stablished it could be great. For example, Spiderman games suck since Ultimate, but sell millions, Castlevania games are loved by game journalist, shine in metacritic, but sell 500k at the best, it's not a known franchise because it was turned into an eternal fan service in the last 12 years, I think that LOS could be the absolute smash up hit, or the last fail, if LOS fails, the saga is over, is that simple i fear ???
-
I loath the newer sonic games....
Fuckin Earth? Its suppose to be Mobius damn it.
They're going old skool. 2D HD and all that jazz.
I sometimes think that the name itself is kinda doomed. For newcomers, just reading the name won't say much about what the game is about. And for gaming veterans you're either in or you simply don't care for the series. Personally I think "Castlevania" is catchy as hell, but the majority of people who walk into their local video game store looking for some quick action fix, you're most likely gonna go for something that reads "GOD OF WAR" och "KILLZONE" or anything else that tells you something about the game. This logic is obviously flawed, but still... I think something like "VAMPIRE KILLER" or even "DEMON CASTLE DRACULA" would attract more players.
Dunno...
I think you've got to give gamers a LITTLE more credit than that. I don't think it's so much the lack of a brutal name but what Castlevania has become visually. Both games you mentioned are dark, gritty, violent games where the gameplay focuses on exactly that. Castlevania has a MUCH more elegant, almost feminine artstyle, but the gameplay consists of destroying monsters and demons. The people who want to destroy monsters and demons go play grittier games, while the people who play games with artstyle's like Castlevania trade action/RPG hybrids for RPGs like Persona.
That's just my take on it.
-
They're going old skool. 2D HD and all that jazz.
Yeah just got see the return of a long forgotten badnik via some official concept work from Sega who also stated Sonic would be the only playable character and no other new characters would be introduced.