Neglected.
Shitty.GTFO
GTFO
Hahaha. Did I hurt your feelings, junior? : )
Did I anger you?
undeadI c wut u did there.
Foggy.I like this one. seems about right.
There's potential, but uncertainty at the same time. Lords 2 could really (really) hit the spot, if Cox and MS can answer some criticisms . . . but what of the classic-style, and what for the future? Uncertainty, but potential.
I just want to know WHAT ELSE is in store for CV other than LoS2. I'm fine with them making these GoW-style Castlevanias, as long as there's something else too. If it's part of the old timeline or even a third one by someone new I don't really care.If Konami are streamlining their business logic, there is nothing else besides LoS for the time being. There's just no money, seemingly, in running two canon universes side-by-side. It would confuse newcomers and be a waste of money. That's not including the Pachi-slot thing, which I don't count as a CV title more than it is one of Konami's Pachi-slot ventures using popular Konami franchise(there are some others too) to sell it. I see LoS continuing on until it's wrapped up, then the CV franchise, if it's still relevant and doesn't suffer from ADHD-popularity(and in turn, doesn't gain as much momentum as Konami thought because the first was "lightning in a bottle", which would basically make Konami stomp the franchise FURTHER into the realm of obscurity), they'll hand it over to other producers.
My feelings about the state of the series don't have much to do with timelines, more so to do with Konami putting out crappy games and crappy games that behave as though they have no business being called Castlevania.
If Konami are streamlining their business logic, there is nothing else besides LoS for the time being. There's just no money, seemingly, in running two canon universes side-by-side. It would confuse newcomers and be a waste of money. That's not including the Pachi-slot thing, which I don't count as a CV title more than it is one of Konami's Pachi-slot ventures using popular Konami franchise(there are some others too) to sell it. I see LoS continuing on until it's wrapped up, then the CV franchise, if it's still relevant and doesn't suffer from ADHD-popularity(and in turn, doesn't gain as much momentum as Konami thought because the first was "lightning in a bottle", which would basically make Konami stomp the franchise FURTHER into the realm of obscurity), they'll hand it over to other producers.
That's not including the Pachi-slot thing, which I don't count as a CV title more than it is one of Konami's Pachi-slot ventures using popular Konami franchise(there are some others too) to sell it. I see LoS continuing on until it's wrapped up,In b4 LoS pachislot
Dawn and Curse were pretty much released in conjunction, so there was nothing to make us believe that we'd only be getting boring arena brawlers for the foreseeable future.On a side note, despite the flaws present in both games, I did think it was clever of those two games giving little nods to each other. One of of the biggest, apparent nod was that both games used a part of Voyager for their clock tower themes, and both clock tower bosses, for the first time to my knowledge, were time-related/time-controlling bosses. It was kinda like IGA said, "Hmm, lets do this and see if anybody picks up on it!".
Lords of Shadow is insulting and violating to the series.SOTN-clone #10 would be even much more insulting to the series, that was one of the few that differed with each installment.
Super Castlevania IV was one remake, clone of the first Castlevania. Is it insulting the series and the first Castlevania?Clone? really?
Because Simon definitely had 8 way whipping in CVI.
Meanwhile... All we have gotten for the past few years, are "re imaginings" of SoTN.
I love my IGAvanias, but cant deny, every single game after SoTN was trying to emulate SoTN's success. Specifically the games the came right after, such as Harmony of Dissonance, for example.
Clone? really?
You can modify F(x)=Ax^4+Bx^3+C(Dx-E)^2-F all you want, but ultimately it's a function of x.
If one wants to call those clones of SotN, one must also acknowledge the classicvanias as clones of CV1 (and I'm not including CV2 here), or else we are simply holding different eras of games to different standards.Each game was different from the other in gameplay and art direction. Much more different then SOTN and its brethren. And CV1 was supposedly succesful. Not even back then, company would create a sequel to a failure.
But did every game after CV1 try to emulate its success?
CV4 is still the same genre as CV1By that margin every action game could be count as clone.
Rather than building off of the original, they took it to 3D and it flopped. They tried again (if at first you don't succeed, try again rightly so). And that flopped. So then they went back to their roots, to the tried and true. They built off CV1. They decided to further build off CV2. They did away with stair climbing and made the Castle even more open-ended, but scrapped the countryside. It was a success. But Konami, it can be argued, forgot its roots and forgot what made it a success. Rather than continuing to build off of CV1, they decided to build off of SOTN, even though it could be argued that SOTN's success wasn't inherent in itself but a simple consequence of not being a 3D flop like its recent predecessors.I am not sure, if I understood you right, but there were no 3D Castlevania games before SOTN. The first CV3D was CV64 and it was released 2 years after Symphony. So your scheme is kind of off.
Each game was different from the other in gameplay and art direction. Much more different then SOTN and its brethren.
Like I said, a bunch of Americans.
:p
It's the spaghetti western of video games.
No. Castlevania 3 looks very similar to Castlevania 1 and 2, and it's artwork is very comparable. The gameplay of the action games didn't change up anymore than the metroidvania games changed. I will also note that the only Metroidvania games that look extremely similar to each other are the three DS games. Circle of the Moon has a different visual style than Symphony of the Night. Harmony of Dissonance has a different visual style than Aria of Sorrow. Aria of Sorrow has a different visual style than Circle of the Moon. If you can't perceive this, you're blind. There are similarities between them, but 2D Castlevania games have always had visual similarities to other Castlevania games.
So, in short, it is as someone else said. You've got convenient double standards going on.
By that margin every action game could be count as clone.
Like I said, a bunch of Americans.Yeah, because Spain in the America.
resulting in much more bright and clear pictureCV2 had darker pallets if I recall. CV1 had brighter colors and contrasts. (EG blue and orange)
I think you mean Spaniards
Yeah, because Spain in the America.
Everyday, you learn something new. Or not. :rollseyes:
CV2 had darker pallets if I recall.I am sorry, it seems I meant something else. Not brightness, but general "aquarelness" of palette.
You also neglected to mention CVA1, CVChronicles, Legends, Dracula X, and Adventure Rebirth for some reason; I guess because they didn't have notable differences worth mentioning from what came before.I didn't mention CVA and Legends because I forgot about them. And as far as I remember DX and CVC didn't had major innovations, when it came to gameplay.
Also, for Bloodlines, I'm not really sure different locales rather than just castles are notable for it alone--CV3, 4, Dracula X, and Rondo all have outdoor areas or areas leading up to the castle which aren't castle interior, like caves, forests and other varied environments.The fact that game didn't take place in the Castle and its surroundings already was pretty innovative, I'd say. Though I think it was not the first game that did it - it was CVA2 technically, but there action took place in a different castles, so it was kind of like CV2.
Also, the 8 directional whipping innovation seems to be mostly a hitbox variation issue, of which most castleroids have in spades.I think it was very major innovation comparing to the previous games. In the past you never had such freedom with your weapon. And we talking about overall innovations in the series, so I think this counts.
The problem is, with that type of loose description and justification, you do indeed end up acknowledging a great deal of video games as clones of each other and make it difficult for much innovation beyond major genre or structural changes to be satisfactory.Well, my problem with Castleroids in general is like this - they all for the most part, felt the same to me. No matter how much sugar-coating and new subsystems the game had, in the end I felt like I playing simple addon to the SOTN, not a separate game. Only two games came close to be considered as more or less separate entities - COTM and OOE, that actually did more than just having trying to retread SOTN for N-th time.
Finally, things like the HoD spell book system or the OoE glyph system I agree are mostly only minor changes in ways of doing things the games to some extent did before, but I wouldn't exactly lump the partner system in PoR in with that.The bad thing that dual partner system in POR was useless for the most time. It was only useful in the begining of the game, when developers thought of providing some puzzles to solve with this system. Later they mostly forgot about it and the game was comletely beatable with only one character, except for the few boss battles.
WayforwardThey made Contra 4 and BloodRayne Bertrayal, which according to many people resembles CastleVania in more than just having vampires.
Well, my problem with Castleroids in general is like this - they all for the most part, felt the same to me.
No matter how much sugar-coating and new subsystems the game had, in the end I felt like I playing simple addon to the SOTN, not a separate game. Only two games came close to be considered as more or less separate entities - COTM and OOE, that actually did more than just having trying to retread SOTN for N-th time.
I am not sure, maybe its just only my personal feelings about the matter, but I think that's how some other people feel about "metroidvanias".
The bad thing that dual partner system in POR was useless for the most time. It was only useful in the begining of the game, when developers thought of providing some puzzles to solve with this system. Later they mostly forgot about it and the game was comletely beatable with only one character, except for the few boss battles.
I think it could have been a major innovation, if it was done right. As it was executed it was more of a gimmick for the begining of the game. Like only 20% of what it could have been.
But--feelings must be controlled! =3We talk not about emotions, but sensations.
After typing that, it seems to me you focus more on the core mechanics of the games and that's generally why you get the same feel, the RPG (level, equipment) system, the "formula" of finding new items to access additional areas (although PoR and OoE didn't have as much of this given they have other methods of restricting your egress), whereas what I end up reminded of in each game is differing atmospheres, castle layouts or spell/attack mechanics.Most likely.
These little puzzles are actually a bit more spread out than you may remember.
Surely though, these puzzles didn't pervade the game or anything, but I think that was probably intentional so as not to interfere with what the player was likely mainly looking for, which was less of a puzzle platformer and more of a combat-platformer, with the puzzles as more of a side thing.I personally felt that the game should have rely more on the Dual Partner System, since it was kind of the main new mechanic introduced in this game. When supposedly main mechanic is useless for the most of the game duration, it invoke some questions about neccesity of said mechanic in the first place.
I personally felt that the game should have rely more on the Dual Partner System, since it was kind of the main new mechanic introduced in this game. When supposedly main mechanic is useless for the most of the game duration, it invoke some questions about neccesity of said mechanic in the first place.
After I read about this game I hoped to use two characters for the most of the time, but when it came to actual gameplay - for 90% of the game I used only one character. It was kind of letdown, since aside from DPS other innovations were minor and and if not the fact that I played as Charlotte, the game would fell to me like DOS copycat, but with even more uninpired design.
and BloodRayne Bertrayal, which according to many people resembles CastleVania in more than just having vampires.Mainly music and some of the aesthetics. Like some of the stage design resembles something you might see in castlevania.
A lot of games seem to do this when they try to introduce some kind of innovation into an existing genre.I am think that they could've created many varied ideas of how to use both characters in the game. They already had some good ideas, just seemingly didn't want to use them to 100%.
I'm not entirely sure how they could've required the partner system be more prevalent without repeating essentially the same puzzles many times (although that might be a failure of my own imagination).
and have more enemies like Death that grabbed one character and forced you to use the other to free him/her.I think battle with Reaper was one of the best uses of the DPS in the game.
I ended up using both (i.e. having both out) for probably 95% of the game, since it never seemed to hurt much (despite one's life bar being the magic bar), but it did help, especially with the special button to instantly use the other's special. I also ended up swapping between them and playing as both a couple times a portrait or so, so I suppose I got quite a different experience.I try limit my usage of special moves during the game - it just takes too much time and usually not worth it, because of the low difficulty. Besides, it more fun to jump around and kill enemies "personally", rather than unleashing some BIG BOOM on them. Most of the time at least. Charlotte and Maria (in SOTN Saturn) were good for both things. And combinations to execute specials weren't that complicated.
BloodRayne Bertrayal, which according to many people resembles CastleVania in more than just having vampires.
I try limit my usage of special moves during the game - it just takes too much time and usually not worth it, because of the low difficulty. Besides, it more fun to jump around and kill enemies "personally", rather than unleashing some BIG BOOM on them. Most of the time at least. Charlotte and Maria (in SOTN Saturn) were good for both things. And combinations to execute specials weren't that complicated.
From what I can tell, it's pretty universally believed (at least everywhere I look in the Castlevania fanbase) that the series is currently terrible. Perhaps even as bad as it's ever been. I think it would really be folly for Konami to continue the course that they are on. If they don't, they will survive solely on casuals who could not give a crap about Castlevania. These people buy a new game just because they buy new games, discuss them at Gamefaqs/Gamespot for about a month or less, and then once they're done with them, put them away forever or sell them and repeat the process. It's true that one guy's money is as good as the next, but it's saddening what it going on. As I've stressed before, they're generally not bringing in new fans with this stuff.
I'm really not convinced of Lords of Shadow's stellar sales because, from my personal experience, I'm seeing no evidence of them. I didn't have to go out of my way to know that San Andreas, Metroid Prime, Star Wars: Battlefront, Halo and Assasin's Creed were really big games. I've generally been around the gaming community enough to be able to tell what is a big deal and what is not, and Lords of Shadow ain't seeming like much of a big deal. When people talk about great 3D action games, it does not come up.
So, what I'm saying is...
No new fans + disillusioned and disheartened old fans = why should you continue this?
But, I dunno'. Maybe it's a game that sold a lot that nobody cares about... kinda' like a Nickelback CD or something.
They attached Hideo Kojima basically to hype Lords. And then they did nothing with that. They hired A-list actors to voice the characters. And they failed to advertise that as well. They produced the first 3D Castlevania that plays as well as it looks. And they did nothing to promote that.
Which would be fine with me, truly, except Konami keeps spending money trying to make it mainstream, and spending that money in vain. For all of Lords' big budget, the only ads I've ever seen for it were online, and even those were entirely confined to backwater Youtube accounts. No magazine pages, no TV presence, no posters in game stores. Nothing. That's a good way to waste money. Konami and Mercurysteam funneled all that money into a bottomless drainpit.
If you're going to make Castlevania mainstream, you can't pull any punches. Konami needs to market the franchise as aggressively as they've marketed Metal Gear Solid, or how Infinity Ward pushed their Call of Duty franchise, or how Microsoft implanted their Halo series into the minds of every gamer since 2002. You have got to be aggressive with your advertising. If you have a good product, mercilessly beat it into the skulls of anyone who will stand still long enough to be a target.
They attached Hideo Kojima basically to hype Lords. And then they did nothing with that. They hired A-list actors to voice the characters. And they failed to advertise that as well. They produced the first 3D Castlevania that plays as well as it looks. And they did nothing to promote that.
Konami treats Castlevania like a special needs child that has enormous potential and whose parents want it to succeed more than anything, but are afraid to advocate for them due to fears that any failure would make things more calamitously horrible than things already are.
With an attitude like that, Castlevania is doomed to die the slow, poisoned death it has been suffering for years.
Konami needs to man up and get their Belmont determination on, or they'll be bleeding dollars, euros, and yen through a Castlevania-shaped wound for years to come.
this is the best they could do in advertisingThe dude drinking his coffee at the end made my day. Thanks for sharing.
Castlevania Lords of Shadow commercial PS3 sony playstation3 JP jpn japanese japan (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_u6fsFnS6sM#ws)
LOL
Lackluster.
So much for the one word thread:/
From what I can tell, it's pretty universally believed (at least everywhere I look in the Castlevania fanbase) that the series is currently terrible. Perhaps even as bad as it's ever been. I think it would really be folly for Konami to continue the course that they are on. If they don't, they will survive solely on casuals who could not give a crap about Castlevania. These people buy a new game just because they buy new games, discuss them at Gamefaqs/Gamespot for about a month or less, and then once they're done with them, put them away forever or sell them and repeat the process. It's true that one guy's money is as good as the next, but it's saddening what it going on. As I've stressed before, they're generally not bringing in new fans with this stuff.
I'm really not convinced of Lords of Shadow's stellar sales because, from my personal experience, I'm seeing no evidence of them. I didn't have to go out of my way to know that San Andreas, Metroid Prime, Star Wars: Battlefront, Halo and Assasin's Creed were really big games. I've generally been around the gaming community enough to be able to tell what is a big deal and what is not, and Lords of Shadow ain't seeming like much of a big deal. When people talk about great 3D action games, it does not come up.
So, what I'm saying is...
No new fans + disillusioned and disheartened old fans = why should you continue this?
But, I dunno'. Maybe it's a game that sold a lot that nobody cares about... kinda' like a Nickelback CD or something.
The game still sold exceptionally well for a Castlevania game.
When it comes to Japan it is always one week and that is it hell even Zelda skyward sword is not selling that much over there the only game series I have found to do well in Japan are Final Fantasy,Dragon Warrior,Mario, and hell even to a point Devil May Cry (which is funny I do not see how the hell Devil may cry is more popular than castlevania it's like DMC is like Castlevania's hyperactive off spring that every one just loves while CV is just that once well respected adult that just got put into a retirement home to be put into a corner playing bingo and tapioca pudding), and to a point the tales of series, Xilla did really and I mean really well. At least from my understanding Lords has reached over 1million copies now I believe the ps3 sold 0.64m and 360 0.37m which is better than it's competition vanquish and enslaved. Vanquish did well in japan,but due to Japan's sale's tendency to drop like a ton of bricks it just crashed in the end sort of.
Enslaved on the other hand just crashed and burned all the way to the deepest part of hell.
Here are the sales from top best to worst bottom.
PS3
http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/35059/castlevania-lords-of-shadow/ (http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/35059/castlevania-lords-of-shadow/)
http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/42969/vanquish/ (http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/42969/vanquish/)
http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/44878/enslaved-odyssey-to-the-west/ (http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/44878/enslaved-odyssey-to-the-west/)
360
http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/44879/enslaved-odyssey-to-the-west/ (http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/44879/enslaved-odyssey-to-the-west/)
http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/35060/castlevania-lords-of-shadow/ (http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/35060/castlevania-lords-of-shadow/)
http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/42970/vanquish/ (http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/42970/vanquish/)
Now let's take Los success into some kind of consideration it did well it has reached the one 1 million mark, heck it did better than Other M 0.93M http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/35086/metroid-other-m/ (http://gamrreview.vgchartz.com/sales-data/35086/metroid-other-m/)
Los combined 0.64M + 0.37M = 1.01M and remember Los did not have commercials of any sort it for the most part except in Japan compared to others from my understanding.
Enslaved: Odyssey To The West TV Spot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT03OH2d-vQ#ws)
Vanquish - Spot TV (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_dlj5MYI5M#ws)
Vanquish - Launch Trailer (made by Maverick) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKbsulgMWv4#ws)
Metroid Other M Live Action Commercial [HD] (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlmMDbXxLw4#ws)
[Minna no NC] Metroid: Other M - Commercial 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIiYslRItYM#ws)
Vanquish 1st commercial sony ps3 xbox x360 xbox360 JP jpn japanese japan (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzkA7RNNNwI#ws)
Castlevania Lords of Shadow commercial PS3 sony playstation3 JP jpn japanese japan (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_u6fsFnS6sM#ws)
Look at this
Castlevania-Lords of Shadow- SPECIAL STAGE（2010年9月19日） (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUR256E2TFE#ws)
Some kind of attempt has been made, but one way I think for castlevania to gain the heart of japan again is to beat other action games to me it has to be dmc.
Thank you. I stand corrected, and rather pleased to be so corrected in this case.
If nothing else, it proves there might be something left in the Castlevania name yet.
Too bad there's no way to reliably track who actually kept their copies. That would be an ultimate judge.
Are you really shocked that a game thats over a year old is now on clearance and stores are advertising it?? Not every company is Nintendo, keeping their games at 50 for eternity.
And I thought neogaf and rllmuk were generally very, very positive of the game. Fantastic environments, the combat was challenging, some even said innovative (light/dark guage usage). The criticisms were still there, but it wasn't quite as overcast as some like to paint it.
Aggregate scores
Aggregator Score
GameRankings 83.05 (PS3)[71]
81.94 (X360)[72]
Metacritic 85% (PS3)[73]
83% (X360)[74]
Review scores
Publication Score
1UP.com B[75]
Computer and Video Games 9.2/10[76]
Edge 8/10[77]
Eurogamer 8/10[61]
G4 4/5[78][79]
Game Informer 9/10[80]
GameSpot 7.5/10[81]
GameSpy 4/5 [82]
GamesRadar 9/10[83]
GameTrailers 7.9/10[84]
IGN 7.5[85][86]
Official PlayStation Magazine (UK) 9/10[87]
Official Xbox Magazine 9/10[88]
PSM3 94%[89]
VideoGamer.com 9/10[60]
Awards
Entity Award
GamesMaster Gold Award[90]
Xbox World 360 Star Player Accolade[90]
Film Music Critics Association Best Original Score for a Videogame
LOL, at GameSpot, GameTrailers, and IGN scores. And people wonder why no one takes them seriously. They have no credibility whatsoever because according to their logic, if you're not a Call of Duty game or FPS, that instantly warrants you a bad review and title of so-called "bad game".
Seriously, this reminds me of the review score GameInformer (whom I might add are starting to become like the former three sites) gave to Sonic Generations.
I still remember the IGn review:
-"There is no castle"
-"There is no Dracula"
-"There is no old music"
- "Levels are in plain daylight"
-"It butches everything that CV has always been it doesn't have exploration and backtracking like SOTN"
lol
I still remember the IGn review:
-"There is no castle"
-"There is no Dracula"
-"There is no old music"
- "Levels are in plain daylight"
-"It butches everything that CV has always been it doesn't have exploration and backtracking like SOTN"
lol
"There is no castle"There certainly is. Apparently he didnt play past too far.
-"There is no Dracula"Certainly is. You may not like the way he comes about, but he's still "there"
-"There is no old music"At least 2 old tunes.
- "Levels are in plain daylight"Only some of them. It actually followed a more or less day and night system. as you progressed, the stages became nighttime stages. This is MOST apparent in Wygol, with the Abbey.
Gamespot is though sometimes just out there, gametrailers just has alot of money got bored of them, but I would say that IGN is the worst I remember hatfield just gave a bullshit review on lords that could be sumed up like this ahem drum roll please
This game is not a metroidvania nor does it have to do with anything with cv bam(subjective) 7.5. Not only that he said something along the lines like it's short but has tons of replay which made me go wtf not only that nothing good was really said about it I got nothing about the review A lot of people called bs on him and Iam not crazy when I know that the review that was written was edited so much bullspit, and they gave God of war ghost of sparda a 9.0 with one line saying if it is not broken do not fix it Gow does not need to improve so 9.0 for everyone. Sometimes there are goodreviews and shocking ones like bloodrayne getting a 9.0 but otherwise if it is a "mainstream" title bam 9.0-10.0 period so boring lesser games get almost nothing while big games get all praise. Oh and destructroid sucks major as well. Jim sterling is a troll I know of being a though reviewer but that gut is a purple dildo holding jackass saw some of his reviews and some just get unreasonably low scores like damn and I think somepeople believe him which is sad. Then again reviews are an odd bag if you do not base your choices of them I do not really follow them for I choose for my self if not I would be playing not but the "popular" games if I followed reviews.
"- Not Castlevania" this was part of the final say the final part was just so wow it was just a bs review and he got called out on it anyone with a brain could see the no smell the bullspit from a mile away.
It seems those three sites I have mentioned only favor mainstream titles (Call of Duty, God of War, ect), and anything else is considered a crappy game.
Many of the castleroids/metroidvanias (the DS ones mostly) are actually ranked pretty highly on those sites and those are far from mainstream titles. If anything I'd say a decent amount of reviewers are sort of enamored with the castleroid formula (judging from the scores I generally see for them) and were thus less enthused with LoS' genre choice and were unwilling to give it a stellar score based on that. But that's probably thinking too much about it as well. Might be a bit too conspiratorial.
-"There is no castle"
-"There is no Dracula"
-"There is no old music"
- "Levels are in plain daylight"
-"It butches everything that CV has always been it doesn't have exploration and backtracking like SOTN"
I personally liked X-Play's review. (http://www.g4tv.com/games/ps3/62174/castlevania-lords-of-shadow/review/) I thought it's one of the fairest conclusions I've seen.
In short, the game was given a low score for not meeting these expectations.
I think it's reviewer bias, really. They knew what they personally wanted, and they didn't get it. That creeps into even the best reviews, and sours the score.
They wanted a Castleroid. They didn't get one. Ragereview.
Of course, people will still argue whether or not they even got a Castlevania game, period.
I personally liked X-Play's review. (http://www.g4tv.com/games/ps3/62174/castlevania-lords-of-shadow/review/) I thought it's one of the fairest conclusions I've seen.
But they gave it a 7.5, didn't they?? That's not too bad of a score.
how is the ign review that much of a hateview? he praises the game half the time, and even when he points out flaws, they're either minor slights or he says action gamer people would like them anyway. the only times he doesn't is when talking about the story or acting. he still says it's a good game despite not being castlevania, so that isn't really quite a problem.
But they gave it a 7.5, didn't they?? That's not too bad of a score.
GameRankings 78.72%
Metacritic 79 / 100
GameStats 8.0 / 10
1UP.com B+
Computer and Video Games 8 / 10
Edge 8 / 10
Eurogamer 7 / 10
Game Informer 8 / 10
GamePro 5/5
GamesMaster 83%
GameSpot 7.7 / 10
GameSpy 3/5
GameZone 9 / 10
IGN 9.0 / 10
Official PlayStation Magazine (US) 4/5
Play Magazine B+
PSM 9 / 10
X-Play 3/5
Awards
Entity Award
IGN Editors' Choice
GameRankings 72.48%
Metacritic 74 / 100
GameStats 7.3 / 10
1UP.com 7.5 / 10
GamePro 4/5
GameSpot 6.8 / 10
GameTrailers 7.9 / 10
GameZone 7.8 / 10
IGN 7.8 / 10
Play Magazine 9 / 10
TeamXbox 7.6 / 10
X-Play 3/5
Gamers Hell 8.5 / 10
Hardcore Gamer 4.5/5
RPGFan 82 / 100
Dead. Like Contra and Megaman.
Dead. Like Contra and Megaman.Quite pessimistic.
Which do you think? its the only reason anyone here really considers the franchise "dead".True.