Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: olrox2 on March 02, 2014, 08:54:59 AM
-
In the latest years, a decent number of Old Ips have had a reboot, or new games that were controversial. Hitman got Absolution, Splinter Cell got Conviction,Thief just got this, well, special, fourth episode.
Sometimes fans tend to say that publishers have a Midas Hand that turn whatever they touch into dust. On the other part, people say: Oh fans, you are unable to evolve, to enjoy new content, you are delusional. Deal with it.
Same issues tend to happen for Castlevania: some fans think the doom of Castlevania starts after Circle of the Moon/Harmony of Despair, because Castlevanias should always be dark and 2d Castlevanias become colorful after those games.Others see Iga as the devil.Other just think Lords of Shadow is the ultimate heresy, the proof Konami is killing Castlevania.
So are such complaints legitimate or just the result of our bitterness and nostalgy? When changings i dont like happen about a game i love, i feel betrayed and not respected. I know i cant do anything, but a dark part of me thinks"Grrr how dare they, gonna lower the rate on metacritic, even if i know that wont change anything".
There is a writer who once wrote that when an author publishes a content, this content doesnt belong him anymore, but belong to people who read it, because they appropriate this content.Their own views of the content do matter, more than what the writer initially thought.
For video games that seems more complicated, there is not a single writer, and many artists are involved in the process.However, dont you think Konami should listen to his fans a bit more?
I feel myself entitled to have expectations about a gme i know well, and its hard for me to consider someone who nevr got interest in Castlevvania and suddenly getst to work on it should be considered as legitimate. Unlesss he proves he has a global good comprenhension of the universe, that he has artistic intuition.
-
Actually that sort of thing started out with Symphony of the Night and it's followups called "Metroidvanias" which overshadows the more linear classicvanias. Even before Lords of Shadows existed, CV fans was already divided into two factions, those who more favored with Classicvanias and those who more favored with Metroidvanias. Even Ninja Gaiden/Ninja Ryukenden series from NES/Famicom which I also grown with was also rebooted starting from the XBOX game to the present but I don't have a hard feelings or felt betrayed even the slightest so I won't mind it will happened someday in Castlevania series and it does.
-
For me, the only thing that matters is if the game is fun to play. The last couple of games I've played in the series (LoS, MoF, Despair and Judgment) were no fun at all. I've seen a few walkthrough videos of LoS2 and it looks boring too. So while I think Mercurysteam fucked up the series I also think IGA fucked it up even before that, just in a completely different way.
I hope someone new takes over. It 's not about being faithful to the series roots, it's about making a game that is fun to play. I don't care if it's dark, bright, 3D, sidescroller, metroidvania or God of War-style action. If it's fun it's fun, and if it ain't it ain't.
I'm not bitter, just bored.
-
The worst thing Lords of Shadow did for me was make me really like Dracula, so the next time we get a Castlevania with him as the end boss I'm not going to want to kill him again.
Reboots can be a good thing for older series that needed a breath if fresh air and I think Castlevania certainly needed one. I love Lords of Shadow but I'm glad it's not a full on reboot of the franchise because of how poorly LoS2 handled the series world and story.
I can certainly understand fans not liking where a series goes within reason but I draw the line at a lot of the belligerent attitudes I see over new game design in a series and fans trying to dictate what a series is or isn't supposed to be and generally acting like they own any part if it outside if the games they've already bought or that they're owed something.
I loved Prince of Persia, and I loved Sands of Time. Then Warrior Within came out and they turned the happy go lucky prince into yet another grim dark guy who smolders with generic rage. Now Warrior Within could be a perfectly fine game, but I never played it because I didn't care for the change to the protagonist. But that change in tone doesn't make it any less of a Prince of Persia title just because I didn't like it.
-
A little bit of both.
theres some legit complaints, depending on taste, for example- the combat or music just isnt for some people. But then there IS a lot of blind nostalgia going on too. Ive seen countless people bitching and boaning "THIS ISNT CASTLEVANIA, WHEN ARE 2D METROIDVANIAS COMING BACK"
There are people who feel that Metroidvanias started the decline of the series and almost Megaman'd it, while others are blind to the fact of the quality drop, and insist that we get nothing but metroidvanias by IGA until the end of time.
Personally? I feel like the decline started under IGA, not LoS. Dawn started it. And it only got worse from there.
Lords of shadow has it's faults, and I can get its not for everyone, but theres no denying its impact or sales numbers. Fact is, it brought Cast;evania back from the brink of death, so i appreciate that.
Who knows what will come next though.
-
For me it all comes down to whether I like the gameplay. If someone takes something with a gameplay style I like and replaces it with a gameplay style I don't, it's nearly impossible for me to like what they've done.
-
I spent a lot of time capturing all souls in Aria of Sorrow and tha element alone made me forget everything else. However, i didnt find the artistic design memorable, not as much as Sotn.
Regarding old casltevanias, i think i did all of them except Simon Quest, i used quicksaves a lot cause difficulty was "Nes hard" ,if not more. That was more to discover the story of this games,i mean, to say "i have played this games".
Even if it may seem a minor point, i liked the idea of an adventure running through générations, to think, hey "Belmonts have kept fighting all this time".
Circle of the Moon would have been perfect, if not for those lights issues that killed my eyes.
What i missed when i switched to 3 d Castlevanias(LoI) was not that much the fact it wasnt in 2d, but the fact it lacked content. Less to explore, powers less interesting than in 2d castlevanias...
Every Metroidvania i played featured cool powers. Sotn has the widest amount of powers of all castlevanias, and you can enjoy collecting those wonderful items:collectin all shields to get all summonings, collecting Swords, levelling your pets to see what power they get.... Well tbh Alucard was overpowered with all this, but that was lot of content.
Circle of the Moon had those cards to collect and combine.Aria of Sorrow had souls. Harmony of despair had less interesting powers imo.
3d Castlevania games hadl imited content regarding powers: orbs for Leon, Innocences for Hector(well thats better), combos, one summoning and knifes and fairies for Gabriel.
Gabriel only has at most a dozen of powers, when Alucard had items, spells and relics.
-
It's totally legitimate to dislike when a franchise changes drastically. You don't owe a corporation your loyalty.
That said, when a franchise has to change to survive, the companies don't want to 'betray' you, they just have to take the profitable direction.
There are some fans who think if the new ways failed, it would make Konami change back to the old ways, but that's where fans can be misguided. If the old ways were viable, they would still be doing things that way.
In the long term, there's probably more chance of getting old-style Castlevania games again if the new ones keep making money. Ideally Konami could do like Nintendo - they make 3D Mario and Zelda, but just recently also did a classic-style Link Between Worlds.
Try not to take it personally, but again, you don't owe them your support. Voting with your money is the most effective means. :)
-
There are some fans who think if the new ways failed, it would make Konami change back to the old ways, but that's where fans can be misguided. If the old ways were viable, they would still be doing things that way.
dingdingding, we have a wiener ladies & gentlemen
-
It's totally legitimate to dislike when a franchise changes drastically. You don't owe a corporation your loyalty.
That said, when a franchise has to change to survive, the companies don't want to 'betray' you, they just have to take the profitable direction.
There are some fans who think if the new ways failed, it would make Konami change back to the old ways, but that's where fans can be misguided. If the old ways were viable, they would still be doing things that way.
In the long term, there's probably more chance of getting old-style Castlevania games again if the new ones keep making money. Ideally Konami could do like Nintendo - they make 3D Mario and Zelda, but just recently also did a classic-style Link Between Worlds.
Try not to take it personally, but again, you don't owe them your support. Voting with your money is the most effective means. :)
Man, this post is great.
-
Good post, Trevelyan. That said, I think a lot of folks may indeed be voting with their money...LoS2 hasn't done that well in reviews. While reviews may not equal sales, sometimes they do correlate, and if thats the case...
-
LoS2 in particular fails to really provide an actual conclusion to its series, let alone a satisfying one. That's where the bulk of my disappointment with the new direction lies since I have otherwise enjoyed the gameplay, visuals, music, characters, and worldbuilding of the LoS games.
For me, the only thing that matters is if the game is fun to play. The last couple of games I've played in the series (LoS, MoF, Despair and Judgment) were no fun at all.
Yes, fun matters. I have highly enjoyed my time with all of those games, barring Judgment, so the issue of "fun" hasn't been a concern for me.
-
LoS2 in particular fails to really provide an actual conclusion to its series, let alone a satisfying one. That's where the bulk of my disappointment with the new direction lies since I have otherwise enjoyed the gameplay, visuals, music, characters, and worldbuilding of the LoS games.
Yes, fun matters. I have highly enjoyed my time with all of those games, barring Judgment, so the issue of "fun" hasn't been a concern for me.
I had fun playing Judgment. It was a nice little Castlevania theme'd diversion to play with friends.
I'm a bad person.
-
I had fun playing Judgment. It was a nice little Castlevania theme'd diversion to play with friends.
I'm a bad person.
Judgement would have been a ok "side game" in the castlevania series had the character designs been left alone.
Those new revamped designs really rubbed a lot of people the wrong way,
-
In the long term, there's probably more chance of getting old-style Castlevania games again if the new ones keep making money. Ideally Konami could do like Nintendo - they make 3D Mario and Zelda, but just recently also did a classic-style Link Between Worlds.
I think that's my hope. I'm usually okay with changes because I know that sometimes they have to happen. As long as the general story/idea of the series stays alive, it's there for someone new to come along and say, "Hey, I remember this certain Castlevania I liked from when I was a kid. Now I'm a professional game developer with money and now some ideas for a new Castlevania game! I think I'll make it!" This may mean some inevitable, less-than-ideal titles, but it just as easily means some inevitable, just-what-the-doctor-ordered titles.
But it seems my views are very different from many of the others here. As it was said, some say the metroidvanias ruined CV, some say it was brighter colors, some say we should ONLY have classic style, some say we should ONLY have metroidvanias...but I like and want them all. I like Legends, even though IGA kicked it from the timeline. I like CV 64 even though it has "pointy" edges. I like HoD despite the bright colors. I like DoS even though it's anime styled. Even though the men are girly, I like CoD. CV3 is freakin' hard, but I like it! Everything I know about CV was changed in MoF, and it was filled with references that sometimes felt like a forced fanservice for old-school fans...but I still like it. I don't know if all of that makes my opinions here worthless...but it is what it is. I just like Castlevania...even if it's sometimes "different".
-
I think the disappointment stems from all of the above honestly. I think there are some people that just legitimately dislike the latter Castlevania titles. (The overall tone and storytelling, along with gameplay may not have been some people's cup of tea for Lords, for example.) As a Metroidvania fan, I could see bitterness coming into play, as their 'series' got interrupted and now may possibly never be finished. They may feel IGA got a raw deal with how the series was taken from him or hell, they just want their 1999 game damn it. As for nostalgia, there's always those fans that can't let he past (whether it be Classicvania or Metroidvania) go and hate anything outside their realm of what made them love the series.
For me, it all just comes down to enjoying the damn game: as long as I can find some form of enjoyment, whether it be for the right or wrong reasons, I'm game.
It's why I still play, own, and actually like Judgement: questionable ass artwork aside, the game is just hilarious and fun for me to play. It's also why Lords is a very odd spot for me: I'm not a huge fan of gameplay and find the music utterly forgettable. But damn, I loved the story (until part 2) and Gabe has become my favorite incarnation of Dracula period, so that was seriously enough to keep me going.
-
They should have changed it up a bit more in the older games, like have your protagonist get to Dracula's castle, get to his throne room and then just, find it totally empty. Then you find out that Dracula isn't actually in his Castle this time, that he's off actually doing something, actually having some sort of scheme or a plan and that reaching his throne room was just the mid-point of the game.
Just, something other than the guy sitting around waiting to be killed.
-
That's actually one of the things that annoyed me with games like say, PoR. It had a vampire protagonist, with his own agenda using Castlevania for his own designs. Then BOOM! Dracula is the final boss (dull surprise twist face) after all! I almost laughed when you got to him because he barley even spoke, just driving home how he generic fighting him in the end had gotten. (Like the final boss fight though.)
I would like games where Dracula wasn't the final boss at all, say another vampire lord or creature, even Death more often. Or as said, Dracula is off doing other stuff and you have to track him down or something.
-
They should have changed it up a bit more in the older games, like have your protagonist get to Dracula's castle, get to his throne room and then just, find it totally empty. Then you find out that Dracula isn't actually in his Castle this time, that he's off actually doing something, actually having some sort of scheme or a plan and that reaching his throne room was just the mid-point of the game.
Just, something other than the guy sitting around waiting to be killed.
^Something like this:
Good Job Belmont!
But our dark lord is in another castle!
-
Personally for me I just plain hate reboots. I think that they're unfair to the fans.
Also Lords of Shadow doesn't look or feel like Castlevania. It should have been it's own series since the Castlevania elements felt forced.
-
Just my experience. The first time through it all, I was cool with Castlevania up until Curse of Darkness and Dawn of Sorrow. (And no, it's not because of the anime style. I like anime touches in art, which Castlevania had long before DoS. I just think that DoS started to overplay it, and then PoR started to really ham it up with that style--poking a little too much fun at itself--despite having some legitimately interesting character designs). Ultimately, why CoD and DoS were the "breaking points" for me (and I played them in reverse order of release), was their game design. CoD felt like it fundamentally didn't understand the flaws of Lament of Innocence, which I loved the first time through, and therefore, despite all its bells a whistles of a more interconnected world and a 3D camera, it ultimately felt like a chore to play. The intrigue of the story, the music, and the some of the art direction was what helped me through it. Meanwhile, DoS felt a bit like a reskinned Aria of Sorrow, when Aria of Sorrow had, to me, sort of taken the Metroidvania formula as far as it needed to go.
When Lords of Shadow was shown off as Lords of Shadow (not Castlevania), I felt like Castlevania fans were being slapped in the face by Konami. A high-budget, whip-wielding game that's not Castlevania? Then, whatever the truth of its convoluted origins are, it got made into a Castlevania reboot. I felt very intrigued, and was happy about a big break from the Metroidvania style and the Devil May Cry-esque style of IGA's 3D entries. But the more info that came out, the more concerned I got. I still went and got it, paid in full. But I felt like it was a glorified remix of LoI that tried too hard to follow/mash-up modern games like God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, and Uncharted. And in the process, visually, it became a little too Western, losing the charm of earlier entries. In the end, it was a fun game, but it never fully felt like Castlevania to me. It felt like it was trying to legitimize its Castlevania connections on shallow shoutouts. I haven't had the heart to continue on with the DLC or the sequels. The combo-based combat and lack of real platforming really betray what is at the core of Castlevania. It is all the more frustrating because the promoter of the project, Dave Cox, talked about how LoS was a 3D manifestation of entires like SCVIV, which it wasn't.
In the meantime, The Adventure Rebirth came out, and despite it's limited scope and budget, it captured a lot more of the action-platforming essence of Castlevania I was looking for deep down, and showed a lot of room for expanding the 2D entries. Its multiple paths through levels and strategic use of keys was a lot of fun, especially on Hard Mode.
Reexamining the series in the years since, I've determined that the last great Castlevania games were the panned and underrated 3D entries on the N64, which should have been the starting blueprint for all future Castlevania games in 3D, not Devil May Cry, God of War, or any flavor of the week. They had REAL platforming, a non-combo, player-based combat system of short, long, and sub-weapon attacks, and a sense of exploration blended into a forward-driving level-based format. At that point, Castlevania felt confidently on the right track to me, even with its flaws, and had found an art style that excellently blended anime style and realistic style. Still, if pressed, I might extend the acceptable period of Castlevania out to Aria of Sorrow and Lament of Innocence. But after that, the merits and fun become very few and far between. The series has been largely a bummer for me, except The Adventure Rebirth. And honestly, Judgment, it wasn't anything to write home about, and I don't consider it a main entry, but it wasn't terrible, and it felt like it had a good sense of a 3D Castlevania world. But those aren't mainstream enough to affect the direction of Castlevania in one way or another.
So, right now, I'm just trying to wait things out and hope for a miracle.
On the topic of reboots, the only one that worked recently, feeling both fresh and true to its source, was Bionic Commando's sole full 3D entry on PS3/XBOXOne. (I'm not talking about the 2.5D Rearmed or Rearmed 2). Even if it failed, it is head and shoulders above the LoS experiment, and was one of the boldest games of that generation. It may have had flaws, but it had everything to gain from a sequel with just a bit more refinement. It was one of the last games that really blew me away. It solved the fundamental question of how to do compelling Bionic Commando swing & action mechanics in 3D. (The last time I felt the fundamentals of Castlevania were captured in 3D was the N64 games, and since those were panned, it's going to be hard to get back to that point of understanding).
-
I'm bitter because they took one of my favorite game series and turned it into what I despise. I like all the flavors of Castlevania prior to LoS sans CVA1, CV:L, 64 1 and 2. I despise pompous self-serious AAA games with poorly written plots that take themselves 100% seriously and have padding and QTEs all over the place. I hate how LoS1 spewed CV names constantly while redesigning them in completely unoriginal and uninteresting ways. I also hate things that unabashedly steal from other games without improving what they take. Shadow of Colossus, GoW, and that arm Bayonetta thing in LoS...wtf?
...and coming from portable installments that were solid 2D action games with good RPG mechanics and great replayability and going to MoF with it's floaty physics and choppy framerate sucked. That just sucked.
I'm not nostalgic. Not in the least. I own as many CV games as I do because it was a great series. The new games are the exact type of crap that I avoid like the plague. It's why I was rather unhappy with the 7th generation of consoles. AAA really blows now. Maybe with the digital distribution boom we'll see an actually good CV next-gen instead of having to get our downloadable metroidvanias in furry edition.
-
I despise pompous self-serious AAA games with poorly written plots that take themselves 100% seriously
Both of the PS2 games took their plots pretty seriously outside of bonuses like the pumpkinhead kid. And Aria did too. Sure, there were some silly enemies and all that stuff you come to expect from metroidvanias, but the plot was played pretty straight. So did OoE if I['m not mistaken.
Also Poorly written? We're still talking about Castlevania here right? Just checking. because last I remember, plenty of CV games were poorly written.
and have padding and QTEs all over the place.
The PS2 games sure didnt have QTE's, but padding? you mean locking you in a corridor to defeat enemies, then repeating it every other identical corridor isn't padding?
I hate how LoS1 spewed CV names constantly while redesigning them in completely unoriginal and uninteresting ways.
That's entirely subjective. you may not LIKE the redesigns, but that's your opinion. I rather liked designs like Cornell or Carmilla. They definitely kept true to their types. still a werewolf and a vampire respectively. LoS2 Zobek is about as Death as it gets. I could say also, i was never a fan of Cornell's original design. And Carmilla? She's had almost as many designs as Simon has. one more won't hurt. Vampires? Tell me, when was the last time we even SAW vampires aside from Dracula and Olrox? (or Brauner, the Olrox stand in, both of whom represent the Nosferatu vampire) AKA when was the last time we had them as a regular enemy?
the N64.
the redesigns were hit or miss, but i'd say many of them were alright. Specially character redesigns like Simon or Trevor or Alucard.
I also hate things that unabashedly steal from other games without improving what they take. Shadow of Colossus, GoW, and that arm Bayonetta thing in LoS...wtf?
God of War did not invent hack n slash. Did you play LoI even? i dont think you did. Did that steal from GoW too? the devs I believe have stated that SotC is one of their inspirations or favorite games or something. It's not stealing if it's so damn blatant that they actually made them as homages.
I could also say SotN unabashedly STOLE from metroid. Where's your complains there?
Also, Bayonetta? what? Where do you see Bayonetta in LoS? Mind you also, LoS came out only about a year after Bayo.
...and coming from portable installments that were solid 2D action games with good RPG mechanics
HAHAHAHA
and great replayability
pretty subjective. i haven't touched Dawn of Sorrow after beating it. the metroidvanias sans Symphony i just dont really go back to after beating them.
and going to MoF with it's floaty physics and choppy framerate sucked. That just sucked.
No complaints here. It had serious issues. Ive heard the HD port fixes them. At least the framerate ones.
I'm not nostalgic. Not in the least.
Sounding like it. It's one thing to dislike something new, It's another to hate it just because it's different. AAA does not automatically = bad. And I dont know if I'd call LoS a AAA series. Feels more AA to me.
AAA really blows now.
Not if it's done right.
Maybe with the digital distribution boom we'll see an actually good CV next-gen instead of having to get our downloadable metroidvanias in furry edition.
You got a furry metroidvania BECAUSE of the digital distribution boom. Also, Don't expect a "next gen" downloadable CV. if it's downloadable digital distribution it will either be shit like HD, or a classic style game like Rebirth. But not "Next Gen".
-
Both of the PS2 games took their plots pretty seriously outside of bonuses like the pumpkinhead kid. And Aria did too. Sure, there were some silly enemies and all that stuff you come to expect from metroidvanias, but the plot was played pretty straight. So did OoE if I['m not mistaken.
The AAA aspect is important to that quote because it involves stopping the player frequently to show them a cutscene that only services the plot (which is garbage.) Only at the beginning and end did LoI stop to barrage the player with cutscenes. LoI and OoE are 2 of my least favorite outside those I listed for that reason. LoI had the chambers you mentioned and the mechanics didn't evolve significantly over the course of the game and OoE wrote an amnesiac without any personality for the main character with obvious plot twists. I still really enjoyed the action in it, even if I thought the glyph system wasn't necessarily better than PoR. Just different.
There is something less offensive about taking yourself serious plot-wise in some small text bubbles and taking yourself seriously in a multi-minute cutscene. I find the latter far more obnoxious. Also, I hate Dawn's story as it ruins just about every character from AoS...which is pretty impressive.
Also Poorly written? We're still talking about Castlevania here right? Just checking. because last I remember, plenty of CV games were poorly written.
Yea, they are. Now if they stick no text or just some text bubbles then it's fine. It's when cutscenes get involved that it kills me. I found CoD and LoI cheesy as heck though so they're more enjoyable than LoS in that sense. Some sort of Evil Dead vibe there.
The PS2 games sure didnt have QTE's, but padding? you mean locking you in a corridor to defeat enemies, then repeating it every other identical corridor isn't padding?
Yup, it sucks. I can't even play through LoI anymore. It's awful. Fantastic soundtrack though, Jesus!
That's entirely subjective. you may not LIKE the redesigns, but that's your opinion.
No crap it's my opinion. I've seen monster designs like that in a lot of places before so I found it unoriginal.
LoS2 Zobek is about as Death as it gets.
His design was pretty good. I found that boss battle disappointing though. I was thinking about the LoI boss battle as a comparison and that felt a bit more awesome. You were in some hell dimension and his moves were way more fantastical. As opposed to LoS which took place in a satanist church and had him possess statues and swing his scythe around. Design good. Game design bad.
AKA when was the last time we had them as a regular enemy?
I don't suppose you won't take the hopping vampire from OoE as an answer, will you?
God of War did not invent hack n slash. Did you play LoI even? i dont think you did.
No it didn't. Berserk did and Devil May Cry refined it to a point. They defined the genre and GoW and Ninja Gaiden both took it in interesting directions. Also, yes I did play LoI and if you bring it up again I'll kill you and the night!
Did that steal from GoW too?
It predates GoW by 2 years.
It's not stealing if it's so damn blatant that they actually made them as homages.
Except for the part where it's a classless and loveless version of that game crudely shoved into multiple boss-fights.
I could also say SotN unabashedly STOLE from metroid. Where's your complains there?
It improved on and changed the formula by having RPG mechanics and various other layers that Metroid never received because Nintendo didn't know what the hell to do with it. They still don't.
Also, Bayonetta? what? Where do you see Bayonetta in LoS? Mind you also, LoS came out only about a year after Bayo.
The scene in LoS2 where Dracul thrusts his arm up and forms a dark energy fist (looks exactly like bayonetta) and punches and rips out the heart of the gorgon boss. It was weird, made no sense for the character, and only happened once.
HAHAHAHA
You're not a very nice guy. Did I offend you because I disagree with your sensibilities in video game design?
i haven't touched Dawn of Sorrow after beating it. the metroidvanias sans Symphony i just dont really go back to after beating them.
DoS, PoR, OoE, HoD, CotM, AoS. Least replayable to most replayable. I don't like revisiting SotN because i don't think it's as good as CotM and AoS and I've played it through 2 or 3 times. I did want to play through it again on the DXC version.
Ive heard the HD port fixes them. At least the framerate ones.
I tried the demo on PS3 and the framerate still had major spikes and drops. Wasn't interesting in playing it again anyways.
Sounding like it. It's one thing to dislike something new, It's another to hate it just because it's different. AAA does not automatically = bad. And I dont know if I'd call LoS a AAA series. Feels more AA to me.
I dislike that they stopped making the things I liked (classicvania, metroidvania) and started making something that I detest. I don't detest it because it's not what I like. I didn't hate the N64 games. They're just weird. I think the Lords of Shadow games are terrible in the way that Dante's Inferno was. That DmC was. That Remember Me was. That every game that wishes it was Uncharted was (Tomb Raider.) I don't have any shits to give a game that is overly self-indulgent with cutscenes about it's terrible plot.
You got a furry metroidvania BECAUSE of the digital distribution boom.
Right, that's my point. I'm saying now that digital only games are becoming more of a thing for larger publishers and a middle-ground in budget and quality is starting to form a real company (not just one furry guy by himself) will come in give us a good metroidvania game. Unfortunately, Strider wasn't that great. It was just sorta okay.
I hope you enjoyed my thorough rebuttal as you apparently think my opinion is a point of debatable fact. I hope my reasoning for what I like has pleased you. Maybe you should chill and enjoy this Top 8 Castlevania Moments video (http://"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiZUETPzHwM"). It's funny or something.
-
There was a time when i let people convince me that my lack of enthusiasm for the new Castlevania titles was because of nostalgia and the bitterness i had was toward a totally alien feel. But enough time has passed and i have seen the same thing happen to enough other franchises to know better now.
The problem is the designers are far removed from what worked. The things that have always made Castlevania a success were fairly simple and as follows. Hardcore (haunted castle) atmosphere. A very high level of difficulty. Great music. And, killing EVIL!
Here are some of the things that started to go wrong, along with horrible plots and terrible mechanics. How about... Not turning the characters into anime abominations of what they were intended to be. Not killing your wife to make your whip stronger. (Wow on that one btw) Not summoning demon familiars to help you on your quest. (Didn't care for this at all) Not having Belmonts actually turn out to be vampires. (Blasphemy!) Not placing the number 6 in an altar between the sun and moon, like some pagan ritual. (Very creepy and it didn't feel right) Not needing to watch a movie to play the game. (I hate overdone, gay, cinematics!) Not having the emphasis shift from weapons and being a strong warrior, to magic and drinking potions to stay alive. And many, many, more..
In other words, this.
When you finish a game you should feel like a hero, not a bad guy.
And, if you find yourself rushing just to get to the next cinematics screen... The game is not hard enough!!!
Hire a small team of longtime, hardcore, fans. Do that and all these problems will crumble away, like the castle does at the end of the game. I would say two classicvania fans and two metroidvania fans should do the trick. Don't let the game be released until the entire team clears it and deems it worthy of the loyal legions of fans that are waiting.
So get on it KONAMI!!!
-
But Sotn is very easy and yet seen by many as the best Castlevania. No i think that what i lked when i layed my first Castlevania was i had the feeling i entred into a very magic world, in a giant castle.
The main issues with LoS is the lack of content imo. If you compare Lords of Shadow to all the previous Castlevanias until Sotn, i think you can say by far it has definitely the smallest Bestiary of all of them.
Not to mention items, spells and skills.
I was less shocked when i went from metroidvanias to LoI than when i went from CoD to LoS.
Its not just about changing, just felt frustrated, following a single possible path in all meanings of the terms.
And that feeling i was playing a depressive charcter, i mean not a tragic one but a depressive character. Lords of Shadow disappointed me as a Castlevania, buti feel it also disappointed me as a game, being an example of "play and forget game"
-
But Sotn is very easy and yet seen by many as the best Castlevania. No i think that what i lked when i layed my first Castlevania was i had the feeling i entred into a very magic world, in a giant castle.
You hit on something there and i just wanted to highlight something about it.
SOTN, did do a few big things and still manage to be a huge success. The game was much easier. The game was a metroid style rpg. The plot was changed in a very drastic fashion. And it did manage to bring in a new fan base that expected to see metroidvania style games. It was a huge success, even among the classic Castlevania fans. Now here is the rub.. And the reason i started a thread asking if people would give this game up if things would have remained the same.
Fans of the classic Castlevania games were ready for a break. It felt good to play an easy Castlevania game for a change. I admit that.. But SOTN was designed to be a one hit wonder. Sorry to tell everybody the truth here. That's why the system started to fail after this game. How many super easy, hack n slash, simple as dirt, rpg style games did they think they could make before people would just lose interest? The answer? Not many. It went downhill and never looked back.
The classic Castlevania style held up for many reasons. Difficulty is a major part of the formula. Difficulty gives a game replay value. These reasons are not present in SOTN, especially difficulty. Nor are they present in any other modern Castlevania title that was not just a remake of a classic game.
-
The AAA aspect is important to that quote because it involves stopping the player frequently to show them a cutscene that only services the plot (which is garbage.) Only at the beginning and end did LoI stop to barrage the player with cutscenes.
Fair enough. personally i don't mind cutscenes, and I enjoyed the more story heavy take. I'm a story guy. i DO dislike hand holding one,s such as when you enter the area and it pans the camera to the objective, although in some cases it can be excused as cinematic camera-ing.
There is something less offensive about taking yourself serious plot-wise in some small text bubbles and taking yourself seriously in a multi-minute cutscene. I find the latter far more obnoxious. ... It's when cutscenes get involved that it kills me. I found CoD and LoI cheesy as heck though so they're more enjoyable than LoS in that sense. Some sort of Evil Dead vibe there.
I actually find that the fact that LoS takes itself so damn seriously, is part of the fun. It becomes melodramatic and slightly cheesy like a Shakespeare play.
Also, I hate Dawn's story as it ruins just about every character from AoS...which is pretty impressive.
A-fucking-men to that. Dawn has no fucking reason to exist, and could have been instead, that 1999 game. (or just a more original Aria sequel. The novel seemed to do it right, which ironically came AFTER dawn- aside from the fact that Soma is just a cameo when Death asks him one last time to be Dracula, the main antagonist is not anything to do with Dracula's power or whatever the fuck they were going for in Dawn. It was literally the power struggle left by the void caused by Dracula's demise.)
Yup, it sucks. I can't even play through LoI anymore. It's awful. Fantastic soundtrack though, Jesus!
Can't argue that. One of the better CV soundtracks. I should really replay LoI one of these days. I don't recall if I ever beat Joachim mode...
No crap it's my opinion. I've seen monster designs like that in a lot of places before so I found it unoriginal.
The comparison I see get brought up alot is Van Hellsing. I'm ok with that though, since I felt Van Helsing felt a lot like a Castlevania movie itself. perhaps more than LoS does. (The Game based on the movie even namedrops the Belmonts in some book on a shelf)
His design was pretty good. I found that boss battle disappointing though. I was thinking about the LoI boss battle as a comparison and that felt a bit more awesome. You were in some hell dimension and his moves were way more fantastical. As opposed to LoS which took place in a satanist church and had him possess statues and swing his scythe around. Design good. Game design bad.
Well LoI Death was also the final boss. that's hardly an excuse though, considering Zobek is the next to last boss. His fight was easy. i was disappointed he didn't do more with his Scythe. I mean, that last segment where he creates a scythe barrier was cool, I would have liked to see more creative usage of his scythe.
I don't suppose you won't take the hopping vampire from OoE as an answer, will you?
Stretching it a bit. They blur the line between zombie and vampire. And are mostly there to fill the mythological niche. I mean Vampires like Dracula himself. (though obviously not as powerful) just random people turned and serving him. CV64 got it right in that regard.
No it didn't. Berserk did and Devil May Cry refined it to a point. They defined the genre and GoW and Ninja Gaiden both took it in interesting directions. Also, yes I did play LoI and if you bring it up again I'll kill you and the night!
heh.
Still, Im tired of the GoW comparison. all because GoW popularized it, doesn't make it any less true that LoS 1 plays similarly to LoI in regards to it's fighting mechanics being centered around dodging and perfect blocking, as well as light and heavy attacks.
It predates GoW by 2 years.
that it does. which is why I mentioned it. Lots of people are quick to call LoS a GoW knockoff and act like it invented the genre, when games like LoI predate it, and seem to be bigger influences on LoS than GoW.
Except for the part where it's a classless and loveless version of that game crudely shoved into multiple boss-fights.
There's only 3 big Collosus fights in the game. 1 per area. i thought they were alright, and fairly ramped up in difficulty. they were well presented too.
It improved on and changed the formula by having RPG mechanics and various other layers that Metroid never received because Nintendo didn't know what the hell to do with it. They still don't.
keep in mind that obtaining power ups? was considered an RPG element back in it's day. it's the reason Mega Man X features things like heart tanks and Armor parts. To introduce an RPG mechanic that makes you feel stronger as you progress in the game.
Metroid doesnt need a level up system. SoTN took Super Metroid though, and added an RPG level up system, along with another very RPGesque idea of different equipment and items. that doesn't change the fact that it is heavily derivative of Super Metroid.
The scene in LoS2 where Dracul thrusts his arm up and forms a dark energy fist (looks exactly like bayonetta) and punches and rips out the heart of the gorgon boss. It was weird, made no sense for the character, and only happened once.
Oh right that part. To be honest i never associated it with bayonetta. I can see how you would though. But since he's all about being the Dragon and all that, I just assumed it was something to do with that.
You're not a very nice guy. Did I offend you because I disagree with your sensibilities in video game design?
I meant no offense, I just severely disagree on "good RPG mechanics". Most of them just reuse the same shit from SoTN and tack on gimmicky gimmicks and call it a day. I wouldnt call the DS games Solid really. (except maybe OoE) In comparison to MoF though? Eeeh, the argument could be made I suppose.
DoS, PoR, OoE, HoD, CotM, AoS. Least replayable to most replayable.
we just differ on this I guess. I suppose it's more to do with liking the game. I disliked DoS despite the game being Aria 2.0 (Now with more grinding!) and the DS games in general. I might occasionally go back to fuck around, but I never bother to get 100% completion. I mostly revist the classicvanias.
I don't like revisiting SotN because i don't think it's as good as CotM and AoS and I've played it through 2 or 3 times. I did want to play through it again on the DXC version.
I occasionally revisit SotN probably most out of the metroidvanias. I just cant get enough of the visuals and music and smooth as fuck everything.
I tried the demo on PS3 and the framerate still had major spikes and drops. Wasn't interesting in playing it again anyways.
oh well. Im waiting for the PC version to test it. I played the 360 demo ages ago, dont remember it. i remember it being stiff though.
I think the Lords of Shadow games are terrible in the way that Dante's Inferno was. That DmC was. That Remember Me was.
Can't speak for Dante's inferno- Though I hear DMC actually plays pretty well, controversy aside. And ive played Remember Me. It was a promising idea. But it was just marred by overly linear gameplay which would be fine- if it didnt try and mask it as an open world, and then make you shimmy up specific sections when you should be able to shimmy up any. The art and sound direction were fucking fantastic though. Which makes it all the sadder. The devs had to sell the IP to Capcom for them to publish it, and then they went out of business. Sad. Also, Dat nilin ass. Yknow how all of LoS2's budget went into Carmilla's boobs? well ditto Nilin's ass.
I don't have any shits to give a game that is overly self-indulgent with cutscenes about it's terrible plot.
preferences I guess. I dont mind cutscenes, I dont even mind a bad plot on occasion. LoS2 just has a terrible ending, I feel the plot leading up to it was alright. But it's when you reach the last acolyte that the story gives up.
I hope you enjoyed my thorough rebuttal as you apparently think my opinion is a point of debatable fact. I hope my reasoning for what I like has pleased you. Maybe you should chill and enjoy this Top 8 Castlevania Moments video (http://"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiZUETPzHwM"). It's funny or something.
Dont think I hate you or something. I just felt the need to dig deeper
-
Hire a small team of longtime, hardcore, fans. Do that and all these problems will crumble away, like the castle does at the end of the game. I would say two classicvania fans and two metroidvania fans should do the trick. Don't let the game be released until the entire team clears it and deems it worthy of the loyal legions of fans that are waiting.
While this sounds like a great idea, and I think I like it...could two hardcore classicvania fans successfully work together with two hardcore metroidvania fans? No offense to anyone here of course. I know we have many types of fans here and we (generally!) get along just fine. But I would think their core beliefs/opinions on what Castlevania "should" be might be too different to cooperate on one title...maybe? Each game's style is different enough that agreeing on the details would seem impossible. But otherwise, I like the idea!
-
While this sounds like a great idea, and I think I like it...could two hardcore classicvania fans successfully work together with two hardcore metroidvania fans? No offense to anyone here of course. I know we have many types of fans here and we (generally!) get along just fine. But I would think their core beliefs/opinions on what Castlevania "should" be might be too different to cooperate on one title...maybe? Each game's style is different enough that agreeing on the details would seem impossible. But otherwise, I like the idea!
Yes sir. Thats exactly why i figured both sides of the fan base had to be in on it.
Just imagine a SOTN style game with the side scrolling difficulty of VS Castlevania. And with a belmont as the lead character. Meat in the walls that you can only get one time between save states. Open exploration? No. Survival exploration :)
-
You hit on something there and i just wanted to highlight something about it.
SOTN, did do a few big things and still manage to be a huge success. The game was much easier. The game was a metroid style rpg. The plot was changed in a very drastic fashion. And it did manage to bring in a new fan base that expected to see metroidvania style games. It was a huge success, even among the classic Castlevania fans. Now here is the rub.. And the reason i started a thread asking if people would give this game up if things would have remained the same.
Fans of the classic Castlevania games were ready for a break. It felt good to play an easy Castlevania game for a change. I admit that.. But SOTN was designed to be a one hit wonder. Sorry to tell everybody the truth here. That's why the system started to fail after this game. How many super easy, hack n slash, simple as dirt, rpg style games did they think they could make before people would just lose interest? The answer? Not many. It went downhill and never looked back.
The classic Castlevania style held up for many reasons. Difficulty is a major part of the formula. Difficulty gives a game replay value. These reasons are not present in SOTN, especially difficulty. Nor are they present in any other modern Castlevania title that was not just a remake of a classic game.
This is absolute rubbish imo. The metroidvanias varied in difficulty and out of them, one could say 3-4 of the games were easy. COTM was more difficult than a lot of the older CV games (with the exception of CV III), the next 2 iterations were fairly easy, Dawn was average, but harder than AOS and Julius mode was much harder. POR and OOE had an extremely hard difficulty for the average gamer with Level 1 max cap hard. Out of the 2, particularly with OOE, I debate that enemy and platform placement were most notable on the hardest difficulty. The only major difference between the 2 styles of gaming are the rpg elements and save points rather than levels. To say these games weren't designed to be difficult is just untrue. Iga even mentioned this mode prior to POR's release in EGM.
If you think simply that because it's not the default setting of the game that it wasn't designed with this intention, you are mistaken. It's not just CV, every gaming franchise which wants to be/remain big/commercial have incorporated an easy setting (even Mario games are now using Nobbit and white tanooki) The point being that if this ever was a downside or an issue, Konami did correct this by incorporating that difficulty in POR and OOE. Particularly when you don't play as the main protagonist and can't use potions etc, for most people, they wouldn't be able to complete those modes. In conclusion I don't see this as a valid argument, you can argue 3-4 of the Metroidvanias were easier than previous Classicvanias, but certainly not all of them. (That's like saying Muramasa for the Wii is easy, then you find out you have Shigurui mode.)
Metroidvania was contemporary CV, now that has become LOS, later it will become something else. It couldn't just be static and never try anything new, this alone would have killed the series.
-
Yes sir. Thats exactly why i figured both sides of the fan base had to be in on it.
Just imagine a SOTN style game with the side scrolling difficulty of VS Castlevania. And with a belmont as the lead character. Meat in the walls that you can only get one time between save states. Open exploration? No. Survival exploration :)
What about the Castlevania fans that enjoy the Lords of Shadow series, and the new fans that series created? Why leave them out?
-
What about the Castlevania fans that enjoy the Lords of Shadow series, and the new fans that series created? Why leave them out?
Yes exactly, what about them? And the initial comment by Morning Star is redundant. SOTN had the platforming of classicvanias to an extent. However, things like stair climbing, rigid slow movement, and actual pits which cause instant death, had to be omitted... Why? Because a SOTN game with Classic gameplay becomes, yep you guessed it... SIMON'S QUEST.
As charming as the game is, it's incredibly taxing moving this slowly with no warps through an open world/ Castle. In games like Sotn, Super Metroid etc you need to be able to move freely through the map (running with wolf spell, flying with bat spell, using superjump etc) Otherwise the levels would just end up being linear or you'd run into dead ends. Anyone is free to believe what they want, but playing SOTN with Simon from CV sounds like absolute horseshit... What a horrible fucking night to have a curse.
-
I dunno, I enjoyed playing the game as Richter and Maria. Why couldn't Simon have a super jump or a dash or a slide?
-
I dunno, I enjoyed playing the game as Richter and Maria. Why couldn't Simon have a super jump or a dash or a slide?
He could, just like Richter in SOTN, which is exactly what I'm saying. Putting the gameplay of SCIV into a SOTN environment doesn't really work - as was suggested by a previous poster.. Gameplay will always be tweaked to suit the environment.
-
Open exploration? No. Survival exploration :)
Definitely sounds interesting!
Because a SOTN game with Classic gameplay becomes, yep you guessed it... SIMON'S QUEST.
I don't think it quite has to be like that. The way I imagine what he's suggesting, the game would have exploration, platforming, and challenge, yet still play smoothly, have warps...whatever sort of things make it NOT Simon's Quest. I doubt it would be so rigid and slow. Morning Star only said the difficulty of classic style, not the graphics and mechanics of it. While it might be insanely difficult to get the two (or three, if we were to include LoS fans too) factions to wholeheartedly agree, there is still potential for a dynamite game combining some of the better elements of each style.
-
Definitely sounds interesting!
I don't think it quite has to be like that. The way I imagine what he's suggesting, the game would have exploration, platforming, and challenge, yet still play smoothly, have warps...whatever sort of things make it NOT Simon's Quest. I doubt it would be so rigid and slow. Morning Star only said the difficulty of classic style, not the graphics and mechanics of it. While it might be insanely difficult to get the two (or three, if we were to include LoS fans too) factions to wholeheartedly agree, there is still potential for a dynamite game combining some of the better elements of each style.
A significant part of the difficulty of Classicvania titles were the mechanics/ gameplay, the other part was the actual level design itself. Added that if you died enough on a level, you start at the beginning.
I'm not saying it absolutely can't be done, I'm saying that it doesn't work, I'm saying that contemporary controls for a metroidvania will always make it easier than a classicvania. Unless the controls are all that and they crank the difficulty of the platforming etc up so high, which not all fans would necessarily be cool with. Bring it on though!
-
It's been awhile since I've played a classic (or anything really...unfortunately). I'd forgotten how much the mechanics affected the platforming...so you're right on that account for sure. Smoother controls and play made platforming easier. Still, it sounds like a really neat idea if it could be carefully and intelligently done.
Actually, part of his idea reminds me a little of Joachim and Pumpkin modes in LoI and Trevor mode in CoD. Picking up any potions or health items used them immediately, which makes the player play more cautiously...well, it did for me at least. I remember paying much more attention to my health, and planning my attacks and dodges much more deliberately.
-
Death pits might be working on Metroidvania but more forgivable like Lords of shadows, when you fall you will go back to the last platform with some life deduction.
-
Death pits might be working on Metroidvania but more forgivable like Lords of shadows, when you fall you will go back to the last platform with some life deduction.
At that point why bother with death pits at all. why not just make it fall damage. :P
-
LOS2
Music?!
Graphics are amazing
Gameplay is good
Platforming is same as LOS1 but watered down
Story is interesting until the ridiculous ending
-
At that point why bother with death pits at all. why not just make it fall damage. :P
Ok granted fall damage.
-
At that point why bother with death pits at all. why not just make it fall damage. :P
Probably so they don't have to make a spot under it that you need to climb back out of.
Though I prefer harder platforming without the punishment of damage when you fail. Climbing back up sucks enough to be a worthy punishment, lol.
-
I'm kinda in this late but I'm in full support of pits or fall damage in any CV game. It drives me nuts when I'd fall from some high place and not even get hurt. Call me weird that I want this but I do.
-
I know it's not realistic at all, but I like NOT taking damage from crazy-long falls. I always jump from them and imagine some scene from some movie where the hero/villain makes a crazy jump like that, hits the ground (which crumbles under the sheer-awesomeness), and walks away like, "Yeah! Whatcha gonna do now?!" I can't remember what movie I'm picturing though...I'm sure it's been used a few times.
And personally, I think it's even cooler in the few titles where the main character has that echo behind them (or whatever it'd be called).
-
I just want to say that i understand that my opinion here will be quickly turned back against me, and that's exactly what i expect. But here's the thing... I didn't mention LOS fans because i don't care what they think. I have heard a few people mention that the game would be "too hard" or whatever, lol. So what? Leave the dead weight behind. If they want to feel good, make them earn it, that's all im saying. The 'select your difficulty' options are a joke. It lowers skill levels across the board and gives people a false sense of accomplishment. I don't support anything that makes people weak. That's not what Castlevania is about.
As for the gameplay thing. It would not be like Simons quest. It may look kinda like it, but that's about it. With way better graphics of course and the game would not be SUPER EASY like Simons quest either. Oh no.. We are talking about a tough game were instead of being done with a level just by clearing it, you may need to come back and do it in reverse as well. You know, while you explore your metroidvania !!nightmare!! of a game :D
-
I could see it where you take fall damage at first but later getting some sort of item to prevent you from taking it
-
It's been awhile since I've played a classic (or anything really...unfortunately). I'd forgotten how much the mechanics affected the platforming...so you're right on that account for sure. Smoother controls and play made platforming easier. Still, it sounds like a really neat idea if it could be carefully and intelligently done.
I think it can be, I personally believe that the in the next couple of gens, console games won't necessarily be as accessible or without the learning curves of older games. I do believe that newer fans are very important, but developers know that the niche fanbase of older gamers - who were the backbones of certain franchises' success - and even newer gamers alike, are seeking something that this generation has potentially neglected. Take Castlevania as a series, personally I believe comes down to 2 factors
1) maintaining the integrity/ identity of what the older games (eg classicvania and metroidvania) brought to today's franchises
2) not being afraid to take risks that the previous generation of games took
What springs to mind for CV OOE's challenge tower (the one where you can't use Vol aticus) which to some extent involved heavy platforming and defeating very strong enemies (golems). Incorporating more areas like these into normal stages would be beneficial if the series is to continue in 2d.
I say again also, Lvl 1 Max cap hard is always a nice addition for seasoned vets, regardless of how difficult they make the game.
After thinking about it enough now, I can imagine a Belmont style SOTN game with insane platforming and levelling up.
Think you start with the leather whip, at L10 it becomes the thorn whip, L20 is the morning star, L30 would be the flame whip etc
Subweapons could become more powerful too i.e. the cross' range increases, the axe deducts more damage, the holy water's range increases, the sword sticks into enemies and deals residual damage, the watch slows time>stops time and later can potentially reverse time should the player desire.
Actually, part of his idea reminds me a little of Joachim and Pumpkin modes in LoI and Trevor mode in CoD. Picking up any potions or health items used them immediately, which makes the player play more cautiously...well, it did for me at least. I remember paying much more attention to my health, and planning my attacks and dodges much more deliberately.
And I believe in the 2d games you didn't even pick up potions when playing as the second character. It was only the orb after defeating bosses.
Btw Joachim was awesome, and I was stoked they gave him an ending. Imagine an alternate canon where he became Lord of the Vampires, I actually smiled when I saw his ending :)
At that point why bother with death pits at all. why not just make it fall damage. :P
This is where LOD got it right, you fell, you were okay, you fell far, you lost up to 75% health, you took a leap of faith and you died. Exactly how it should be, falling has always equated to punishment in CV.
-
I just want to say that i understand that my opinion here will be quickly turned back against me, and that's exactly what i expect. But here's the thing... I didn't mention LOS fans because i don't care what they think. I have heard a few people mention that the game would be "too hard" or whatever, lol. So what? Leave the dead weight behind. If they want to feel good, make them earn it, that's all im saying. The 'select your difficulty' options are a joke. It lowers skill levels across the board and gives people a false sense of accomplishment. I don't support anything that makes people weak. That's not what Castlevania is about.
I agree with this comment whole heartedly. It really pissed me off when MOF didn't have a harder setting and I realised oh you can pause it and select 'hard'.... FML (first world problems I know)
Not good enough, there needs to be higher difficulty, CV has nearly always maintained more challenges after finishing the game.
As for the gameplay thing. It would not be like Simons quest. It may look kinda like it, but that's about it. With way better graphics of course and the game would not be SUPER EASY like Simons quest either. Oh no.. We are talking about a tough game were instead of being done with a level just by clearing it, you may need to come back and do it in reverse as well. You know, while you explore your metroidvania !!nightmare!! of a game :D
Reminds of DMC4, or the inverted castle and I like that idea. I'm a big believer in innovative reuse of environments.
Read my post above to see my views on a Belmontvania. ;)
-
What springs to mind for CV OOE's challenge tower (the one where you can't use Vol aticus) which to some extent involved heavy platforming and defeating very strong enemies (golems). Incorporating more areas like these into normal stages would be beneficial if the series is to continue in 2d.
I say again also, Lvl 1 Max cap hard is always a nice addition for seasoned vets, regardless of how difficult they make the game.
OoE was a blast! I'm not sure if I liked OoE or CotM better...but they're my top 2 of ALL the portable CV titles. I loved the difficulty of OoE. I like to think I'm good at games, and I'm sure I'm reasonably skilled (as much as I play), but most of the bosses killed me on my first playthrough. And the tower was awesome too! If anything, I just fear cheapness...or too much cheapness. For example, in OoE there was that cavern dungeon thing and in one room there were two of those hammer knights which were FREAKIN' ANNOYING! When stuff like that is rampant, it's just cheap. You're just being a...well, I can't recall the forum's profanity rules so I'll just say you're being obnoxious. I don't think OoE did that, but I've played games that did, and I'd hate to see CV stoop to that level.
After thinking about it enough now, I can imagine a Belmont style SOTN game with insane platforming and levelling up.
Think you start with the leather whip, at L10 it becomes the thorn whip, L20 is the morning star, L30 would be the flame whip etc
Subweapons could become more powerful too i.e. the cross' range increases, the axe deducts more damage, the holy water's range increases, the sword sticks into enemies and deals residual damage, the watch slows time>stops time and later can potentially reverse time should the player desire.
I LOVE this!!
-
Quote from: zangetsu468 on Today at 06:57:20 PM
After thinking about it enough now, I can imagine a Belmont style SOTN game with insane platforming and levelling up.
Think you start with the leather whip, at L10 it becomes the thorn whip, L20 is the morning star, L30 would be the flame whip etc
Subweapons could become more powerful too i.e. the cross' range increases, the axe deducts more damage, the holy water's range increases, the sword sticks into enemies and deals residual damage, the watch slows time>stops time and later can potentially reverse time should the player desire.[quote/]
Quote by theANdROId
I LOVE this!!
I didn't see this, but let me 2nd the motion. I also love this!
This is the direction alright :D I was thinking when you kill a ghost the souls could float up like they do all over the stage in the giant bat stage in CV4. Only use a single graphic of it. Along with a great sound effect. And when you strike a fleshy enemy the blood spatter could fly back and land on the ground behind him. Maybe even turn the whip red? Kinda like what you see in mortal kombat. Etc and so on. Great stuff.
BTW.. Why is my part of the post not wrapped in quote tags but it is in blue like its part of what i quoted from another member?
-
A lot of you seem to be asking for and describing exactly what this guy say he wants to do with his game:
http://sotnhacked.wordpress.com/ (http://sotnhacked.wordpress.com/)
Now let's hope he doesn't mess it up and finishes it SOMETIME in my lifetime. ;D
Also I'd give my opinion on the franchise at the moment... but that would be a VERY long post, and its late now. Suffice to say something has to change.
-
A lot of you seem to be asking for and describing exactly what this guy say he wants to do with his game:
http://sotnhacked.wordpress.com/ (http://sotnhacked.wordpress.com/)
Now let's hope he doesn't mess it up and finishes it SOMETIME in my lifetime. ;D
Also I'd give my opinion on the franchise at the moment... but that would be a VERY long post, and its late now. Suffice to say something has to change.
Oh boy, Esco.
He was here before actually.
He was a condescending egotistical asshole.
He barely ever listened to criticism, and insisted he could do basically no wrong. And when push came to shove, trash talked Jorge and ran because he was sick of hearing people criticize him. if you criticized him, he would literally put you on his ignore list.
I lost all interest in his project due to his rotten attitude and the fact that despite some ideas being not so great he would insist on them and argue and fucking ignore any complaints to the contrary.
Fuck him, seriously. He was a cunt.
-
OoE was a blast! I'm not sure if I liked OoE or CotM better...but they're my top 2 of ALL the portable CV titles. I loved the difficulty of OoE. I like to think I'm good at games, and I'm sure I'm reasonably skilled (as much as I play), but most of the bosses killed me on my first playthrough. And the tower was awesome too! If anything, I just fear cheapness...or too much cheapness. For example, in OoE there was that cavern dungeon thing and in one room there were two of those hammer knights which were FREAKIN' ANNOYING! When stuff like that is rampant, it's just cheap. You're just being a...well, I can't recall the forum's profanity rules so I'll just say you're being obnoxious. I don't think OoE did that, but I've played games that did, and I'd hate to see CV stoop to that level.
I think I finished the caverns on OOE and POR got quite difficult on the hardest setting, I only finished them on normal. The OOE Tower however, I did do on the hardest setting. POR's cavern had the creature x 2 which was difficult even on normal.
I believe it will only stoop to that level if the player chooses a mode where they just can not level up at all. Then again for experts of the game, situations such as this will always be a bonus. Currently I'm on hiatus playing Albus mode on L1 hard because I haven't been able to beat Dracula's 2nd form.
I LOVE this!!
Thank you. I believe the real bonus would be that say there was a mode where you couldn't level up, then you have to use base whip and base sub weapons, base armour, etc. I think that aspect could work very nicely. It wouldn't hurt to add new subweapons into the arsenal too; SOTN had the lightning spell and the salt etc.
-
OK now that it is not so late I'm ready to type this out:
As I said before the Castlevania series as a whole MUST change. The fact is that old 2d style platformers on average DO NOT sell extremely well, and are not the most profitable option for a company to choose overall. If anyone has doubts about this, feel free to google the stats. There are of course exceptions to this, but they are few and far between. It is not a fact that I like, but business is business and companies will choose the more profitable route 99.9% of the time. And the fact is that there are many more genre's of video games that just sell WAY better than 2d platformers. Especially ones that simply use the ancient format of get points, clear stages, beaten in an hour or two, and done with it (ex. CV, CV3, Super CV, Rondo). It worked in 1985, maybe even in 1995.... but that was 20-30 years ago.
Now Metroidvanias did try to take it a few steps further by introducing certain elements to it. But this again falls into the above category with having the same issues. It just isn't the most profitable route for a company to take. You also have to keep in mind that this format is 17 years old already. I also feel that SOTN while one of my favorite games started several very BAD trends:
- Sprite Recycling: good god, they took sprites from Drac X, Castlevania Chronicles, and even some from SCV (with some minor touch ups). POR And OOE HEAVILY did the same, and DOS had some too. I won't even talk about Castlevania HD. And the worst part is in many cases, as time went on the qaulity of the AI and death animations for those same enemies just went downhill. LAZY TRENDS like this = lower sales
- Poor Balancing: just look at how easy it is to NEVER die in every metroidvania. Between all the healing moves, being able to buy/find tons of healing/MP items, having tons of super powered moves, and the overall LOW damage of enemies and low difficulty of the games, if you are using ALL of your options it is VERY hard to actually die in most of the metroidvanias. OOE ramped the difficulty up some, which I was happy about. But it was too little too late.
- Low Difficulty: I mentioned this in my point above. And I see the debate going on about it between two other members, but I want to add one thing. In reference to the extra modes like LV1 cap when I say I want difficulty, I mean I want BALANCED difficulty. Think of Contra III, the american version of CVIII, or even DMC1,3, and 4. These were all balanced, even on the HARDEST settings. The same cannot be said for a game where a medusa head hitting me takes 3/4 of life and can hit me twice killing me instantly (OOE) or where some enemy attacks = 1 hit KO'S (POR). That is hard due to being UNBALANCED, and again a lazy method of increasing difficulty. Remember lazy = lower sales.
- Cheap ways of extending game length: reverse castle (SOTN)? Mirror Castle (HOD)? Chaos realm(AOS)? Recolored cut and paste stages with a handful of new rooms (POR, OOE, And HD)? 8 bit stages on a ps3 games (HD)? NO! Just NO!!!! Putting in new enemies after making stages like this is cheap and lazy. Lazy = low sales.
- Making it about "da loot": Collecting 80 extra useless weapons, useless souls, useless furniture, or creating 5 versions of the same familiar with MINOR differences = lazy attempt at AGAIN extending GAME LENGTH! A video game should NEVER be about item collection; it should be about the action and gameplay. Item collection should be an extra FUN and REWARDING feature of game. NOT the focus of it. Even games like diablo 2 and 3, which are KNOWN for loot collection made it a point to ensure that the biggest focus was on gameplay and storyline. Making a major focus just getting tons of useless junk = lazy. Lazy = low sales.
Notice how many times I said the same thing; lazy = low sales. This is to drill in this fact because as I said above, 2d platformers already aren't the most profitable genre in this day and age. And those are the 2 biggest issues: the laziness factor, and that 2d platformers aren't as popular as they once were.
With that being said, if Konami wanted to make a TRULY great CV they could do what I've been saying for YEARS should be done: create an HD OR 2.5D CV that is a fully 2d game (gameplay wise), has enough stages that it is several HOURS in length, with all unique stages, has multiple difficulties, multiple endings, and focuses on high speed gameplay and action (similar to the 2nd touhouvania game). With item collection being secondary to this and making sure that gamers couldn't utilize the nuances of the game to easily breeze thru it (like healing abuse or tons of overpowered moves). Multiple characters would be nice, but with them all having just enough unique and useful options, versus all the extra useful fluff. And with it all being balanced.
Sounds like a fantasy right? Well it isn't; dragon's crown alone is proof of this (and that game BTW was and still is QUOTE profitable and received several updates along with even FREE DLC). It's not impossible; but what such an endeavor would be is COSTLY!
.........yes, COSTLY! And There in lies the problem: why would konami do this when this particular IP and its genre has NOT been particularly profitable for a long time? It would be like setting themselves up for a double loss. A good quality 2d castlevania is VERY doable; but the fact is Konami doesn't want to take the chance there. Because if their employees blow it FOR THE TENTH time in a row, they lose money.
So the obvious solution? Turn to 3d. Which they sadly have fallen short on. The sad fact is while LOI and HOD weren't BAD games overall (I won't even mention the n64 ones; utter trash), compared to the ones that set the standards (DMC and God of war for example) they are just not as much fun, and their story lines just aren't as creative. Couple this with repetitive stages where most rooms look EXACTLY the same and stiff uninspired movements (LOI; HOD improved a bit there), and you have the makings of a mediocre game. So what did they do next? Reinvented the IP; with Lords of shadow. THAT was a good game; excellent story beautiful scenery, great combat, and most importantly: it was FUN and exciting!
Was it castlevania as we know it? To most, No... but then again neither were any of the other 3d games really if you are originally from the 2d era (like I am). Was it a GOOD game? YES! No laziness involved at all; you could see the love they put into the game. Hence why it sold so well, and made Konami enough money that they kept going with the series. I have not played MOF; but the gfx honestly look like trash to me. And the gameplay looks pretty dull. When I saw the game released, I thought to myself "is this a beta? NO, holy shit that is the final product. Wow." But again, I have not played it I do not intend to comment further. I did beat LOS2 this past week, and while it is not a bad game, in short it just doesn't feel as high quality or most importantly FUN as LOS1. And the sales #'s back me up on this. For reasons that have already been stated COUNTLESS times, so I won't bother repeating them again and boring you all. :)
Also lets not forget DXC; FUN GAME! And on an emulator like ppsspp it looks GORGEOUS TOO! Sadly they didn't take the time to balance Maria, so she still feels overpowered and richter is still too stiff. The SOTN version included with it is basically the PSX one with an underwhelming and underpowered Maria included. All wasted opportunities there, but overall for what you get its a good buy and it was a step in the RIGHT direction.
So what's my point? Well in short, Konami needs to do away will all the repetitiveness and laziness we have seen in the past, and stop having wasted opportunities left and right. They need to stop trying to turn CV into 3d, and focus on doing 2d THE RIGHT WAY: with a team that will make an all new HD game with as much effort and as much of a budget as was given to the team who made LOS. They will have to focus on making it more expansive, and adding in rpg elements and a scoring system that will give the game more replay value.
Will it happen? Probably not. For the reasons I stated above several times. :( At least not with the current management at Konami. Its going to take someone coming along that is as obsessed with making his/her dream come true as the maker of dragon's crown was, who also happens to have the capital to invest. Sadly people like that are one in a million.
But I'm hoping for that person to pop up... I truly am. It would make my century!
Angry post full of expletives
Wow, you really sound like you have some issues Flame. But that aside,I don't honestly care what the maker of the game acts like; I care what he creates. Though given the option of picking a nice person who puts out trash, or an absolute idiot who makes a game that blows my socks off, I would take the LATTER over the FORMER any day. But that is just me. :)
EDIT: sorry fixed some typos
-
- Poor Balancing: just look at how easy it is to NEVER die in every metroidvania. Between all the healing moves, being able to buy/find tons of healing/MP items, having tons of super powered moves, and the overall LOW damage of enemies and low difficulty of the games, if you are using ALL of your options it is VERY hard to actually die in most of the metroidvanias. OOE ramped the difficulty up some, which I was happy about. But it was too little too late.
LOS was an easy game, MOF was an easy game. I will say that fighting TF1 on hard or higher in LOS was difficult, that's about it.
I put it to anybody that COTM for example is difficult to never die, particularly upon first playthrough.
OOE remedied these issues, yes and consuming potions didn't rejuvenate the hero as much as previous handhelds.
- Low Difficulty: I mentioned this in my point above. And I see the debate going on about it between two other members, but I want to add one thing. In reference to the extra modes like LV1 cap when I say I want difficulty, I mean I want BALANCED difficulty. Think of Contra III, the american version of CVIII, or even DMC1,3, and 4. These were all balanced, even on the HARDEST settings. The same cannot be said for a game where a medusa head hitting me takes 3/4 of life and can hit me twice killing me instantly (OOE) or where some enemy attacks = 1 hit KO'S (POR). That is hard due to being UNBALANCED, and again a lazy method of increasing difficulty.
I don't see how it's unbalanced, firstly, it's still very easy to kill larger enemies and bosses if you bother to master the glyph system - which is the backbone of the combat within the gameplay. Secondly, it's enemy placement and platforming, jumping/ avoid enemies, using magnus to propel Shanoa out of harms way, while being able to platform. There is a lot of this in OOE. Take the monastery (first area) where the scales in the background can actually be jumped on by Shanoa's sprite, things such as this were included so that on the most difficult playthrough, there was an easier option for traversal rather than fighting every zombie. That's one instance, and it's not cheap when the game is not like that by default, nearly every CV game offers higher difficulty or another playable character upon completion, this is a trend the series set long ago. If you bothered to play them through, you will also notice on POR/ OOE's highest difficulties, you actually have to play the game differently. i.e. in POR you can't be careless walking around with 2 characters because when enemies hit the second player you lose MP which is crucial to surviving, in OOE you can beat bosses easily but you really need that glyph that you have to obtain (which could be elemental etc) as well as using your MP wisely and maximising combos. Where as on a normal playthrough you don't need to do that. There is a lot of movement involved in fighting bosses in OOE on this mode; Goliath, Blackmoore and Eligor spring to mind. (For POR I'd say Dulahan, the creature, Drac/Death.)
- Cheap ways of extending game length: reverse castle (SOTN)? Mirror Castle (HOD)? Chaos realm(AOS)? Recolored cut and paste stages with a handful of new rooms (POR, OOE, And HD)? 8 bit stages on a ps3 games (HD)? NO! Just NO!!!! Putting in new enemies after making stages like this is cheap and lazy.
You can argue this for the handheld games, however, specifically regarding SOTN, the way in which the second castle was used can not be labelled cheap. Having an inverted castle which had different enemies, a different soundtrack, a higher difficulty, different bosses and including multiple endings which may not have involved said castle was not lazy. For a strictly 2d platformer this was a 1 off move which blew fans away in context.
The handhelds were made on a budget, which you can argue cheapens the games, however, those handhelds kept the series alive for hardcore fans when the 3d CV's were failing and they had a lot of other good qualities in their gameplay, narrative, ost's etc.. And they are all still better than MOF which took 3 years to be released and did absolutely nothing to enrich the series (original or LOS).
- Making it about "da loot": Collecting 80 extra useless weapons, useless souls, useless furniture, or creating 5 versions of the same familiar with MINOR differences = lazy attempt at AGAIN extending GAME LENGTH! A video game should NEVER be about item collection; it should be about the action and gameplay. Item collection should be an extra FUN and REWARDING feature of game. NOT the focus of it. Even games like diablo 2 and 3, which are KNOWN for loot collection made it a point to ensure that the biggest focus was on gameplay and storyline. Making a major focus just getting tons of useless junk = lazy.
Which AOS, POR and OOE remedied imo.
Sounds like a fantasy right? Well it isn't; dragon's crown alone is proof of this (and that game BTW was and still is QUOTE profitable and received several updates along with even FREE DLC). It's not impossible; but what such an endeavor would be is COSTLY!
Dragon's Crown is a sack of crap. Maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, but the game is just not very enjoyable imo. A lot of it is to do with the momentum of the game being broken far too often, you play for 1 hour and you might actually be in combat for 30 mins - other half of the time is spent reading text. (and this is after playing Muramasa which I really enjoy)
So the obvious solution? Turn to 3d. Which they sadly have fallen short on. The sad fact is while LOI and HOD weren't BAD games overall (I won't even mention the n64 ones; utter trash)
That's interesting that the utter trash you speak of is still arguably the closest of an actual transition from 2d>3d castlevania. I'm not going to argue that the controls or camera were the best (some of which was fixed in LOD) however, those games included many elements of classicvania which was omitted from LOI and COD. LOD is the only game that got the clocktower right, LOS even failed at that. [/list][/list][/list][/list][/list]
-
LOS was an easy game, MOF was an easy game. I will say that fighting TF1 on hard or higher in LOS was difficult, that's about it.
I put it to anybody that COTM for example is difficult to never die, particularly upon first playthrough.
OOE remedied these issues, yes and consuming potions didn't rejuvenate the hero as much as previous handhelds.
No argument there about LOS (can't comment on MOF for the reason I stated above.) COTM was actually very challenging but ONLY until you learned to use the card right. Then it also becomes a joke sadly. OOE did fix it quite a bit, but only because I refused to use healing items. Otherwise it was also very easy to get thru sadly on normal. As for hard mode, see my post above.
You can argue this for the handheld games, however, specifically regarding SOTN, the way in which the second castle was used can not be labelled cheap. Having an inverted castle which had different enemies, a different soundtrack, a higher difficulty, different bosses and including multiple endings which may not have involved said castle was not lazy. For a strictly 2d platformer this was a 1 off move which blew fans away in context.
By definition, taking the first castle, flipping it and re-shading it DEFINITELY saved the company on costs, and definitely was not as intriguing as having an ALL new castle would have been. That is what makes it by definition a cheap substitute; it is a cost and time saving measure that lowers quality, versus the alternative. Can you honestly say you wouldn't have been more wow'ed by all new stages?
Also, 2 of the tracks were used for MOST of the castle. And I never said anything about the new bosses, enemies or multiple endings being bad. I actually stated the opposite.
The handhelds were made on a budget, which you can argue cheapens the games, however, those handhelds kept the series alive for hardcore fans when the 3d CV's were failing and they had a lot of other good qualities in their gameplay, narrative, ost's etc.. And they are all still better than MOF which took 3 years to be released and did absolutely nothing to enrich the series (original or LOS).
Redundant; ALL games are made on a budget. And while I will agree that something IS better than nothing in this case this does NOT invalidate my points above. :) Also, I never said they didn't have ANY good qualities.
Which AOS, POR and OOE remedied imo.
We will agree to disagree here.
Dragon's Crown is a sack of crap. Maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, but the game is just not very enjoyable imo. A lot of it is to do with the momentum of the game being broken far too often, you play for 1 hour and you might actually be in combat for 30 mins - other half of the time is spent reading text. (and this is after playing Muramasa which I really enjoy)
Ditto here. Even objectively speaking if I HATED this genre I would have to give them credit for their excellent work, and the #'s seem to back me up here too. But to each his own. :)
That's interesting that the utter trash you speak of is still arguably the closest of an actual transition from 2d>3d castlevania. I'm not going to argue that the controls or camera were the best (some of which was fixed in LOD) however, those games included many elements of classicvania which was omitted from LOI and COD. LOD is the only game that got the clocktower right, LOS even failed at that.
I still don't feel anyone has gotten it juuuuuuuuuuuuuust right yet.
-
That's interesting that the utter trash you speak of is still arguably the closest of an actual transition from 2d>3d castlevania. I'm not going to argue that the controls or camera were the best (some of which was fixed in LOD) however, those games included many elements of classicvania which was omitted from LOI and COD. LOD is the only game that got the clocktower right, LOS even failed at that.
Ditto. CV64/LoD was the closet for us in terms of a proper 3D CV transition. I never realized this till later on as it took the two 3D IGA games to make me see that. Even more now with the LoS mess. Even if the camera is bad, has spotty controls, dated graphics, etc. The game is far more CV then all the other 3D ones. The atmosphere is spot-on and the soundtrack adds to the environments they represent perfectly. Playing the game actually made me feel like I was there which is something that both the IGA games and MS games failed to do. And yes CV64/LoD got the clocktower right the first time.
-
No argument there about LOS (can't comment on MOF for the reason I stated above.) COTM was actually very challenging but ONLY until you learned to use the card right. Then it also becomes a joke sadly. OOE did fix it quite a bit, but only because I refused to use healing items. Otherwise it was also very easy to get thru sadly on normal. As for hard mode, see my post above.
Re: COTM, I must have really got a bum playthrough, because although I learned to maximise my DSS cards, many of the ones I picked up just wouldn't combine or seemed very weak even compared to regular attacks. I still beat the game and finished the coliseum, which was very rewarding.
At least OOE (and I believe POR) on the hardest settings gave nearly no X potions, so you either had to know the game back to front etc.
I generally refrain from using use items when I play CV games, because I like keeping at least 1 of every item, also you can't rely on use items when you're playing with momentum on a very difficult setting. (X potions are my ultimate no-no)
By definition, taking the first castle, flipping it and re-shading it DEFINITELY saved the company on costs, and definitely was not as intriguing as having an ALL new castle would have been. That is what makes it by definition a cheap substitute; it is a cost and time saving measure that lowers quality, versus the alternative. Can you honestly say you wouldn't have been more wow'ed by all new stages?
You know, I can't say that in honesty, however, I wondered why in some areas it looked as if there were steps on the ceiling or things could look a certain way upside down etc and I did think it was really cool that they designed the overlooked details to suit. I still thought it was innovative, and I guess I personally loved the castle so much at the time that I looked forward to playing through again.
Also, 2 of the tracks were used for MOST of the castle. And I never said anything about the new bosses, enemies or multiple endings being bad. I actually stated the opposite.
For most, but those tracks and the rest were beautiful, like the inverse Chapel. Of course more could have been done, as always.
Redundant; ALL games are made on a budget. And while I will agree that something IS better than nothing in this case this does NOT invalidate my points above. :) Also, I never said they didn't have ANY good qualities.
Actually I will say that sometimes nothing is better than something (erm... MOF..)
I'm not invalidating your points, I suppose I can see why people don't appreciate reused sprites etc. (Even though CV is not the only franchise to do this by a long shot) Honestly, I never really minded them. Call me biased, because I am, particularly when it comes to 2d sprite based games. I just don't mind things being re-used.. Must've been all those years of playing MVC2 ;P
I still don't feel anyone has gotten it juuuuuuuuuuuuuust right yet.
It's my view that LOD is by far the front runner, LOS was just a joke difficulty-wise, although it looked well composed.
Ditto. CV64/LoD was the closet for us in terms of a proper 3D CV transition. I never realized this till later on as it took the two 3D IGA games to make me see that. Even more now with the LoS mess. Even if the camera is bad, has spotty controls, dated graphics, etc. The game is far more CV then all the other 3D ones. The atmosphere is spot-on and the soundtrack adds to the environments they represent perfectly. Playing the game actually made me feel like I was there which is something that both the IGA games and MS games failed to do.
LOI and COD both had suitable OST's, LOI moreso, LOI; House of Sacred Remains and Fog-enshrouded Nightscape ftw..
64/LOD though.. The Castle Keep right before Dracula, that music had me hype and nervous as a 14 year old. Particularly the first time you stumble upon the invisible platforms :)
CV64/LoD got the clocktower right the first time.
LOD's was different though if I recall, it was longer and there was a larger room at the end where Cornell would emerge from the hands on the Clock itself. I thought that was awesome.
-
You can argue this for the handheld games, however, specifically regarding SOTN, the way in which the second castle was used can not be labelled cheap. Having an inverted castle which had different enemies, a different soundtrack, a higher difficulty, different bosses and including multiple endings which may not have involved said castle was not lazy. For a strictly 2d platformer this was a 1 off move which blew fans away in context.
The handhelds were made on a budget, which you can argue cheapens the games, however, those handhelds kept the series alive for hardcore fans when the 3d CV's were failing and they had a lot of other good qualities in their gameplay, narrative, ost's etc.. And they are all still better than MOF which took 3 years to be released and did absolutely nothing to enrich the series (original or LOS).
Dragon's Crown is a sack of crap. Maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, but the game is just not very enjoyable imo. A lot of it is to do with the momentum of the game being broken far too often, you play for 1 hour and you might actually be in combat for 30 mins - other half of the time is spent reading text. (and this is after playing Muramasa which I really enjoy)
[/list][/list]
The castle flip in SOTN was a cheesy gimmick. I don't care how you want to sugar coat it. I was never impressed by that. It would have been nice to have the second half of the game offer some new scenery.
The handhelds kept the series alive for hardcore fans? Do you speak for all of the hardcore fans? I've been a fan of the series for well over two decades and I found the gameboy advance and ds handheld games to be some of the most uninteresting Castlevania games ever made. For many people, they are what was killing the series with their redundancy.
I agree that Muramasa is funner game than Dragon's Crown, but to say Dragon's Crown is a sack of crap!? Come on man.
-
The castle flip was justified by IGA that they wanted to make the most of their assets (sprites, music, etc.) and also provide gamers more time to indulge in the game since it was expensive to buy a ps1 disc at that time. Cheesy or not, it was worth it in my opinion, considering the cost involved to buy the game and the amount of time you needed to complete everything. Kinda like Pokemon.
Well, regarding the original question, I feel... nothing, on the main console releases, and disappointment on MoF. Argh I need more use for my 3ds.
I am far more excited for the pachislots. Dammit Konami, I want my pachislots!
-
The castle flip was justified by IGA that they wanted to make the most of their assets (sprites, music, etc.) and also provide gamers more time to indulge in the game since it was expensive to buy a ps1 disc at that time. Cheesy or not, it was worth it in my opinion, considering the cost involved to buy the game and the amount of time you needed to complete everything. Kinda like Pokemon.
Well, regarding the original question, I feel... nothing, on the main console releases, and disappointment on MoF. Argh I need more use for my 3ds.
I am far more excited for the pachislots. Dammit Konami, I want my pachislots!
he can try and justify it all he wants, but it was a cheesy and lazy gimmick. Lots of the castle was annoying to traverse upside down simply because it was not really designed to. They designed it rightside up and then simply added traps to the upside down version, and figured that you get the upgrades to traverse it anyway, so no use in designing the castle to work both ways.
It wasn't really worth it. Considering they went out of their way to make new bosses and enemies and all that, they should have gone the extra mile. Unless they just didn't have enough time to make a whole other area for the post-castle section, and flipped the castle upside down with different color filters over it. That's what I'm leaning towards, since they also made a grand total of 2 tracks for the inverted castle. Which got really old really fast.
-
The handhelds kept the series alive for hardcore fans? Do you speak for all of the hardcore fans? I've been a fan of the series for well over two decades and I found the gameboy advance and ds handheld games to be some of the most uninteresting Castlevania games ever made. For many people, they are what was killing the series with their redundancy.
I speak for myself and the group of fans I know personally who have been playing CV for varying amounts of time, some are younger and some older than myself. Each fan is entitled to their own opinion, which does not deride that of another fan. Personally I love classicvania and I love metroidvania, I've bought consoles purely for CV games in the past. I believe that this doesn't make me less of a fan just because I prefer metroidvania style CV. A fan is really someone who will support the series no matter which route it will take, I didn't enjoy the LOS series as much as the original, but I can say that with certainty because I still purchased and played those games through and gave them a chance.
If you believe that, I'm not stating you're not entitled to. However it can also be argued what was killing the series was IGA's bad 3d translations of CV. Now I'm not saying they were bad games, I even thought LOI was closer to what a Belmont CV would play like in 3d. I would say they were simply missing a lot of elements not only that the 2d games had, but in and of themselves LOI had particularly uninspiring level design (aside from the secret areas which I thought were executed really well). I'm hearing areas an enemies were recycled in Classicvania>>SOTN>>Metroidvanias, but Iga's games were even more guilty of doing similar things. How many boxes (rooms) and halls were reused in LOI, how many of the same enemies were there - and God damn, was there even a bat in COD? (aside from the chauve souris)
I agree that Muramasa is funner game than Dragon's Crown, but to say Dragon's Crown is a sack of crap!? Come on man.
You know what, DC is a potentially good game, which is hampered by the amount of cutscenes/ script which don't actually involve animation or characters moving their mouths, or doing anything besides breathing heavily. I love the artwork, I like the gameplay, I think the developers have made some solid titles (muramasa, odinsphere) For me, DC is just broken by simple things, an eg. In multiplayer mode you want to do a side mission, all 4 players have to select that mission at the guild before you can even leave the hub... It's just like you have to grind in order to even go and grind.. which is a little painful.
I'm not saying I hate the game, it just puts me off a little bit, like I wouldn't put an hour aside to play it, I'd probably need 3-4 hours with friends. I certainly wouldn't buy it. Now I know people will say this isn't as deep, but a good example of a similar game which flows better imo is Guardian Heroes. You can still have a good crack even if you have 1 hour spare.
-
The castle flip was justified by IGA that they wanted to make the most of their assets (sprites, music, etc.) and also provide gamers more time to indulge in the game since it was expensive to buy a ps1 disc at that time. Cheesy or not, it was worth it in my opinion, considering the cost involved to buy the game and the amount of time you needed to complete everything. Kinda like Pokemon.
See to myself, this is much like what was done in DMC4. Simply put, I think a game is meant to be fun, if it's fun enough that they re-use stages or half of the game I really don't care so long as I like the game. Personally, I think gameplay, narrative(character development, plot etc), artwork and ost matter moreso to me than graphics, environments, and recycling. Each to their own though.
Well, regarding the original question, I feel... nothing, on the main console releases, and disappointment on MoF. Argh I need more use for my 3ds.
Fire Emblem, 3d Land, ALBW
-
God DMC4 was such a letdown at that point.You didn't even get new bosses on the way back either. At least the inverted castle had new bosses.
I can't go back and enjoy many of the GBA and DS Castlevanias. They were fun at the time, but once I was done with them, that was pretty much that. Maybe Circle of the Moon and Aria of Sorrow if I could find them. But Harmony of Dissonance is just plain fucking ugly and has terrible character design, Dawn of Sorrow has that pathetic shoehorned 'draw glyphs to kill boss' mechanic that just kills the gameplay for me. The few times I've tried to go back to that game, I just have to play it in Julius mode.
Portrait of Ruin, I'm going to say is probably the one I can go back to easiest. Order of Ecclesia has terrible characters and story for me, I just didn't like Shanoa at all. I think it has a great Dracula fight though, probably the best of out of the whole series since they finally did something different with him.
-
God DMC4 was such a letdown at that point.You didn't even get new bosses on the way back either. At least the inverted castle had new bosses.
Fair enough, we must live on different planets, I think DMC4 is tops. Inverted Castle had the track "lost painting" which is my personal favourite SOTN track.
I can't go back and enjoy many of the GBA and DS Castlevanias. They were fun at the time, but once I was done with them, that was pretty much that. Maybe Circle of the Moon and Aria of Sorrow if I could find them. But Harmony of Dissonance is just plain fucking ugly and has terrible character design, Dawn of Sorrow has that pathetic shoehorned 'draw glyphs to kill boss' mechanic that just kills the gameplay for me. The few times I've tried to go back to that game, I just have to play it in Julius mode.
DOS was a rare case where Julius mode (second playthrough) actually felt like another better and more difficult mode. I liked the throwback to CV III with the ability to switch characters, and I think this was executed better than what they tried to do in POR.
Portrait of Ruin, I'm going to say is probably the one I can go back to easiest. Order of Ecclesia has terrible characters and story for me, I just didn't like Shanoa at all. I think it has a great Dracula fight though, probably the best of out of the whole series since they finally did something different with him.
Haha, we are the opposite.. OOE is my favourite is nearly every sense of CV, yet I felt that POR's Dracula fight was even better!
-
Portrait of Ruins Dracula fight I would definitely place at a close second to OOE's because they still tried to do something different with it, by having you fight Death at the same time.
But OOE's Dracula is just an almost different boss entirely, new attacks, new variations on the staple attacks, and no "monster" form, he just actually starts walking around. I thought he had a pretty good design in OOE as well.
-
OOE's Dracula design especially in the intro where he's sunk into the throne with red eyes, that's probably the closest description I can compare with the way I imagine Dracula the first time I read Stoker's novel. They did him justice.
-
I think it's funny how much we (gamers) have changed. Years ago, people would line up for games like Donkey Kong, Pac-Man, and Galaga. There was little (if any) sprite difference from level to level in those games. Sure, DK had a few different levels, but they repeated and nobody cared. The games just got harder by adding more enemies or going faster, and that was enough. Now, some people start to cry "FOUL" if a part of one game even remotely resembles something from another. Yeah, I know, times have changed and technology can do so much more...right, right. That doesn't mean we had to though. And yes, this is a fan forum, where we all get together to share their thoughts and opinions, then fight over them, then either make up, agree to disagree, or kick someone out. I'm just noting the difference in the times...it's funny to me!
And of course, I don't mean to imply that I'm not guilty. When I first played through HoD (Harmony of Dissonance, that is) I complained at some reused sprites. Didn't that one use the lizard-man-thing 4 or 5 times? I hated that! But I'd imagine it uses less space or something, leaving room for other stuff. I just can't imagine the developers saying, "Hey, here's an idea! Let's reuse sprites as often as possible so we can party/be lazy and piss off our players!"
-
I think it's funny how much we (gamers) have changed. Years ago, people would line up for games like Donkey Kong, Pac-Man, and Galaga. There was little (if any) sprite difference from level to level in those games. Sure, DK had a few different levels, but they repeated and nobody cared. The games just got harder by adding more enemies or going faster, and that was enough. Now, some people start to cry "FOUL" if a part of one game even remotely resembles something from another.
I support this message, lol. This for the win.
-
Its mostly when those crying foul have a chip on their shoulder for the product already. If one game has something another game does, and you like it, then it pays "homage" to said game, if you don't like it, then its a "clone" or a "rip-off".
-
Okay to keep things short, when CV for the Dreamcast was released, people were kind scratching their heads about the idea of being created by a western studio. However in all honestly, I do not know if that was the case. The whole Sonya Belmont is the source of all the Belmonts and Alcard is the source of the Belmont powers, leading to the so called "Curse of Simon". When LOtI came along, looking at the game, makes you think "is this going to be like the N64 games or another SOTN clone", and now with Cox ( doing what we all dreamed of doing, turning us into Jelly players ), he pretty much decided to bring the game to the level of DOOM and Colossus, which is just silly. You have over the top boss fights, alongside lame but creative boss fights, and decent enemy design. It is hard to say, what is good and what is bad.
Once you start dwelling on the time-line, and looking how current trends ( cell phones, a room full crappy flat screens, and junk like that, one day we are going to see that robot from Rocky IV, make an appearance), are impacting the story, it stops being Casltevania. Sooner or later, and becomes another Blade.....Wouldn't it be nice to see, Dracula run into Blade one day.
All Castlevania's are great to play, with the same idea in mind. Kill the devil, stop the devil, crucify ( ha ) the devil, Make Akuma pay, with vengeance. That is what makes it unique, where people can ignore all the religious fractions, or RPGish ( DAD ) atmosphere and play something that is fun.
................
-
The whole Sonya Belmont is the source of all the Belmonts and Alcard is the source of the Belmont powers, leading to the so called "Curse of Simon".
Actually Simon was cursed by Dracula as a final act of malice before Simon killed him. It had nothing to do with the Belmont origins as Legends came out a decade later.
-
Actually Simon was cursed by Dracula as a final act of malice before Simon killed him. It had nothing to do with the Belmont origins as Legends came out a decade later.
This is a true story. IDK what weird made up timeline this other stuff comes from but i don't remember any curse that has anything to do with Alucard. Especially not one that involved Simon.
-
This is a true story. IDK what weird made up timeline this other stuff comes from but i don't remember any curse that has anything to do with Alucard. Especially not one that involved Simon.
He's talking about the curse of the Belmont blood through Alucard's affair with Sonia in Legends. This is irrelevant, as Legends was retconned and LOI became the new origins story afterwards.
-
He's talking about the curse of the Belmont blood through Alucard's affair with Sonia in Legends.
Ohhh, that curse! Well even before LoI and Legends there was already talk about how the Belmont family was forever cursed to fight off Count Dracula. It was mentioned in the intro-story of CV Bloodlines. The Belmont family are holy fighters for God and Dracula is the embodiment of all that is evil, so it would make sense that they have no real choice but to face him as the Belmont blood calls them to do so.
-
Ohhh, that curse! Well even before LoI and Legends there was already talk about how the Belmont family was forever cursed to fight off Count Dracula. It was mentioned in the intro-story of CV Bloodlines. The Belmont family are holy fighters for God and Dracula is the embodiment of all that is evil, so it would make sense that they have no real choice but to face him as the Belmont blood calls them to do so.
It's more like they're bound to fight evil it's, of course that started with Leon though, after Sara's sacrifice. The curse is really the fact that Dracula keeps on returning over generations etc. the Belmonts fight for god, Leon was fighting for god in the crusades (and his outfit is very similar to that of a Templar.)
-
It's more like they're bound to fight evil it's, of course that started with Leon though, after Sara's sacrifice. The curse is really the fact that Dracula keeps on returning over generations etc. the Belmonts fight for god, Leon was fighting for god in the crusades (and his outfit is very similar to that of a Templar.)
Well Leon was no Templar that I can tell you. His old uniform in the intro-story was that of a French knight. And while it says Leon fought in the Crusades the truth being is that the battle didn't start till a year after the LoI story. A fault on IGA's part I'm convinced. But truth be told even if LoI was not made the Belmonts are still called upon by higher powers to confront evil. We can claim it's through Leon and the sacrifice of Sara, but I feel it with the family long before that. After all Even Renaldo said the whip works better for Leon and that was due to his mystical bloodline. And this was before the acquisition of the completed Vampirekiller.
-
The thing with IGA Idk about, but it makes little difference in a fictional story. Mathias Cronqvist was taken off Mathias Corvinus who had a wife named Elisabetha, it's a different universe to our own.
X, that's my point though, having a mystical bloodline wouldn't classify as a 'curse' as such.
Curse:
a solemn utterance intended to invoke a supernatural power to inflict harm or punishment on someone or something
If anything the curse begins after LOI when Sara is sacrificed to complete the very weapon which the Belmonts require to 'hunt the night'.
By the same token you could argue Mathias/ Drac is cursed to be forever hunted by the Belmonts.
Unless a future entry to the og canon argues, mystical bloodline or not we can't be sure what happened to the Belmonts before LOI.
-
the Japan-only loi prequel cellphone manga said that leons parents died when he was very young, leaving him an orphan
or something like that, Nagumo knows a bit more about it
-
the Japan-only loi prequel cellphone manga said that leons parents died when he was very young, leaving him an orphan
or something like that, Nagumo knows a bit more about it
I'm sure this has been answered but is there an English translation to that manga?
-
I'm sure this has been answered but is there an English translation to that manga?
Nope. As far as I know no one here has a copy of that cellphone manga.
Unless we let Koutei time travel back in the past to grab a copy. ;)
-
The service that hosted the manga shut down 2 years ago. Nobody can't read it anymore. Now we can only hope they release it in tankōbon format someday. Then we can lock Shiroi in a dungeon and let her translate it in exchange for water and food.
-
Then we can lock Shiroi in a dungeon and let her translate it in exchange for water and food.
Awww man... that's cruel!
But hey, manga translations are easier than novel translations, so no need to lock me up. Though donations of food and water would be nice.
-
the Japan-only loi prequel cellphone manga said that leons parents died when he was very young, leaving him an orphan
or something like that, Nagumo knows a bit more about it
It came from not the comic but the guide.
http://castlevania.neo-romance.net/translations.php?lament (http://castlevania.neo-romance.net/translations.php?lament)
Comics are not the prequel. It is all.
http://castlevania.wikia.com/wiki/Akumaj%C5%8D_Dracula:_Lament_of_Innocence_(comic) (http://castlevania.wikia.com/wiki/Akumaj%C5%8D_Dracula:_Lament_of_Innocence_(comic))
And there is no sign that a time machine is still invented. hehe.