Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: brunobb1 on May 16, 2016, 01:40:42 PM
-
As you can see by my profile, my favorite Castlevania game is probably Lords of Shadow. Before everyone raises their pitchforks at me, let me at least explain myself: I know it's not the best Castlevania by far. I know it's not very true to its origins since most of the game is based on Fantasy rather than Horror and that the Castle bits are very short compared to the rest of the levels, but there is something about it that just grips me every time I play it. The beautiful visuals and art direction, the huge scope of this epic adventure, the fantastic things you can do with the Combat Cross and the great combos you can perform, the varied enemies with different weaknesses each and the fun boss fights like Olrox, Carmilla and Pan. The game has been criticized for ripping off God of War, but in my honest opinion, I think that the combat here is more complex than the game it is compared to because of the Light/Shadow magic mechanic and the Focus Bar, I also find the combo moves to be MUCH MORE memorable, and I own the GoW trilogy on PS3 mind you. Also, the game has one of the best endings I've ever seen (the Dracula ending) and it opened the door to such potential by being set in modern time. Now, I know Lords of Shadow 2 probably didn't live up to its premise (I'm still yet to play it for real), but as its own thing, it's a great twist. As for its flaws, I know the writing isn't that good, the story is cliche until the great twist at the end and there isn't enough of the Castle, but I can't help it but love it by what it is. I don't consider it a reboot, but a spin-off, because that's what it really is. I've beaten the original one on NES, SuperCV4, SOTN and I'm now playing Aria of Sorrow and I love them all, but there is something special in Lords of Shadow for me. So, what do you guys think about the game? Any other fans of LoS like myself? Castlevania is one of the franchises I like the most since I'm a huge horror fan, but as an admirer of grand adventures, I can't help but love this game.
-
I would place LOS1 in my top 10 favorite CV games.
So yes, I agree with you about the first Lords. It's a wonderful game. And I also thought it was far better than GOW.
Really, I loved everything about it.
My biggest complaint is the lack of breakable candles for items. That is a staple of CV and although it seems like a small detail, it would have made the game feel much more like a CV. Probably more than people realize.
Just to give to you an idea of where I place LOS.
1. SCV4
2. CV1
3. Rondo of Blood
4. SOTN
5. Bloodlines
6. LOS
7. CV3
8. LOI
9. Simon's Quest
10. DOS
Unfortunately, the only list I can place the other two LOS games on is my shit list.
-
Hiya,
The opinions on LoS here, as with elsewhere, are very divisive. If you look through various old posts, in here or in the archives, you should find numerous threads, some very long, discussing views on the games. I personally love the series, but see a number of flaws with them, especially in 2, where I felt the final game was curbed from reachign its full potential due to certain factors.
-
Definitely not a big fan of it, is on the lower list of games within the CV series as far as I'm concerned, to be frank I would only put it above Judgement,Mirror of Fate, and LOS2 to be honest.
The reason for my dislike is simple and does not require a huge post full of details, and that is that it simply did not fit with what I view a Castlevania game should be, it relied to much on bright fantasy elements, it did not have much in returning CV elements, naturally I'm not a big fan of reboots, and over all it felt way to much like God of War which is another game series I'm not really all that into.
-
For me, it all boils down to not enjoying the combat at all. LoS1 is big and beautiful and I don't mind the new story or anything like that. But the combat is just not fun for me. It's not even something that's unique to LoS, I just can't play games with combat as drawn out and tedious as in these kind of games. Every minor enemy has too much HP and it ruins the flow or something. I thought the enemies in LoI had too much health as well, for reference. I like games with a little quicker pace, is all. Like Shinobi on PS2 :) One hit kills but still challenging as hell.
-
For me, it all boils down to not enjoying the combat at all. LoS1 is big and beautiful and I don't mind the new story or anything like that. But the combat is just not fun for me. It's not even something that's unique to LoS, I just can't play games with combat as drawn out and tedious as in these kind of games. Every minor enemy has too much HP and it ruins the flow or something. I thought the enemies in LoI had too much health as well, for reference. I like games with a little quicker pace, is all. Like Shinobi on PS2 :) One hit kills but still challenging as hell.
That's a very valid point.
It was at all a deal breaker for me. But I could see how that could bother someone. And it was something that I noticed.
-
Lords of Shadow brought some good and fresh experience to me since I don't care about the "Should Lords of Shadow be Castlevania? "question at the first time when I heard the game
I stick to 2D but I see no control problem during playing Lords of Shadow; The control scheme is quite easy to start up and there's no problem with default/main weapon's attack range since it's very good, I was very satisfied with it
With the exception of occasionally glitch, it's a good game at its own and worth playing whether you're a Castlevania fan or not
The real problem is that during close combat with 3-4 enemies or more, it's a bit tough to refill magic energy in time (There are master players who can deal with some battles without using magic energy, but not everyone)
Also some minor enemies take too long to defeat as mentioned before (Skeletons...)
To fight enemies tough and challenging is not a really-that-bad thing but it may take away one's patient little by little unless you rest a whole day and charged up enough sanity to deal with them
To talk about Mirror of Fate and Lords of Shadow 2 is yet another story though (I personally like how Dracula revived from the Church because the red clothes/curtain thing reminds me Sigma 1st form in Mega Man X6 at some time)
-
Oh, hey o_o No one said "I wasn't a true Castlevania fan", you guys are pretty cool. Good thing I found this forum. I was searching through a Castlevania thread in a Forum (I don't remember which) and they were talking about their favorite Castlevania games and one said "If you say Lords of Shadow get out of this CASTLEVANIA thread" and I couldn't help but think that the guy was a complete snob and pretentious. I will admit, I was a bit cautious when I created this topic, but there seems to be no prejudice against LoS fans at all. Kind of refreshing since the game keeps receiving shit from everyone :P
I honestly LOVE the combat and didn't have any problem against enemies with high HP, ok, maybe two or three but nothing too bad since I found the combat to be so much fun.
-
I would place LOS1 in my top 10 favorite CV games.
So yes, I agree with you about the first Lords. It's a wonderful game. And I also thought it was far better than GOW.
Really, I loved everything about it.
[...]
Unfortunately, the only list I can place the other two LOS games on is my shit list.
^All this here pretty much sums up my opinions on LoS, save for the Top 10 rating which is why I omitted it.
I absolutely hate God of War -- the first one, which is the only one I've played. I played Chains of Olympus a long time ago on PSP and remember enjoying it. But that didn't really sway my opinion since I played LoS first. And I really enjoyed it. Going to GoW, I was expecting something like that, because LoS is, a lot of the time, considered to be just a weak clone of any GoW game.
But I loved it. The more epic-in-scope plot that still kept that level of ambiguity and mystique, the environments, the music, the voice acting, the combat, everything. I really enjoyed it and it was well worth the bargain $8 I got it for back in 2011.
...The other two on the other hand. MoF is a DECENT at best game. At the very best. For those who picked it up for $40 on 3DS when it first came out, I'm sorry. You didn't deserve that. It was alright as a $15 PSN/XBLA title, it seemed reasonable. But the overly streamlined gameplay, the sloooooooooow pace of it, and rushed/wonky ass story, it just stops it from being good at all.
And LoS2, while I love the combat, I pretty much hate everything else. Graphics are pretty (save for the modern city), music is really good, voice acting is great, story is freakin' bonkers, the ending was garbage, freakin' STEALTH SECTIONS etc.
LoS1 is definitely one of my favorite CV games. Up there with SotN, DXC, CV3, etc.
LoS2 and MoF, while definitely not the worst to me, are pretty far down, still. I've beaten LoS1 multiple times. I can't even consider the idea of playing the other two again.
But if you like MoF, or LoS2, I won't give you crap for it. It's more power to you. You got more CV to enjoy than I do. When those two games first released, I forced myself to love them. But now that I'm a bit older, I realize they're not that great to me after all.
LoS2 was probably supposed to be a brilliant game. And then Enric Alvarez happened.
(P.S: AND I BOUGHT LOS2 FOR $60 AT RELEASE. WHY DID I DO THAT)
-
LoS: Amazing game, Played it twice. 1st on Xbox360 and 2nd on PC, so there was time to let dust settle and It's still damn good, there is ONE horrible thing about it...
LoS MoF: Though the Lore and Story was interesting, that's the only real redeeming quality of it. It comes off as a cash grab filler title and playing it really feels that way too, The "HD" version is arguably better but worse, unlike the PSP, 3DS upscale looks rather bad. and the fact that no touch-ups nor did they bother making the game proper 16:9 says everything.
LoS2: THE HYPE, THE LETDOWN, THE DISAPPOINTING CONCLUSION. Unlike LoS1, the story progressed at a rushed and somewhat confusing pace. Unlike LoS1 I did not feel satisfied at the end, and after the DLC I'm still feeling like I'm playing something incomplete. The Presentation was top notch, and the game was pretty damn fun, but the broken narrative which was strong in LoS1 felt very off, and the cop-out final battle is what really left the bad taste in my mouth, which is a real shame because it really had the potential to really be something amazing. It's a real shame Director's Cut and going back to add things for a re-release isn't a trend.
As you can see, that ONE thing wrong with LoS1, it couldn't be properly followed up.
I still believe Castlevania can be properly transitioned into 3D but, I think it'll have to be either something like Ys or the bizarro Megaman X7 (the good one that only exists in a parallel universe)
-
My opinion is LoS is a pile of shit that should never have existed, a stain on a otherwise legendary series.
-
LOS is one of my favourite games for the PS3. I loved the combat, visuals, Gabriel as a character was good (although others lacked what he had). The biggest issue for me was that the story seemed intriguing but not necessarily interesting, and although its very close with its combat cross, the game itself doesn't necessarily feel like Castlevania. Had they eliminated the puzzles and the slower parts of the game then it would have felt more like Castlevania.
As its own game, it was very good and I actually thought certain reviews such as IGN were a bit harsh (7.5)
For me, it all boils down to not enjoying the combat at all. LoS1 is big and beautiful and I don't mind the new story or anything like that. But the combat is just not fun for me. It's not even something that's unique to LoS, I just can't play games with combat as drawn out and tedious as in these kind of games. Every minor enemy has too much HP and it ruins the flow or something. I thought the enemies in LoI had too much health as well, for reference. I like games with a little quicker pace, is all. Like Shinobi on PS2 :) One hit kills but still challenging as hell.
Although I liked the combat in LOS1 I have to agree. What I initially thought was it would be more like the pacing of Ninja Gaiden with short but hard hitting battles. I expected some levels to be more "on rails" and require jumping and platforming with specific timing. (Where the game seemed to fall short of this, the DLC did throw some of this in which increased the challenge level).
Although I don't mind accents, what I wasn't expecting was a "Briticised" (for everyone else, not Gabriel) version of LOTR meets Castlevania gameplay. Patrick Stewart is a great actor and narrator don't get me wrong, but his voice and presence in the form of Zobek did nothing for this series. The DLC which was narrated with Gabriel's voice actually sounded much better and fitted the context of the game.
The story with the whole God/Devil Mask aspect was so secondary it may as well have just not been there. Why not just make it a man trying to venture into hellish worlds to try and save the soul of his betrothed in the hopes of resurrection? Straight forward, no unnecessary plot twisting, no introducing new material at the end of an already unnecessarily convoluted story.
Castlevania's story has always been straight forward, pick up a whip, go through levels, beat Dracula's ass like he owes you money, simple, effective, rewarding. Why does Dracula come back? He comes back every 100 years because he's Dracula.. Again, it's simple, no bs and to the point. I once heard someone on a forum say he got sick of the story being narrated in the voice of "Gabriel's gay stalker" (not that there's anything wrong with that) and I instantly pissed myself laughing because it's true. Couldn't we have just had less talking and more gaming?
My opinion is LoS is a pile of shit that should never have existed, a stain on a otherwise legendary series.
I agree in principle that it never should have existed as "Castlevania".
-
I generally appreciate what Lords set out to do and I very much appreciated the apology to the hardcore fanbase that Mirror of Fate was meant to be, but all three games are guilty of Waffling to the First Degree (no, not Super Waffle-ing; that's something else entirely!).
Each feels like a Castlevania... but not enough. Each feels like something new and refreshing... but not enough. Each feels like it has the makings of a great plot... but not enough.
Really you could take any positive one might say about the subfranchise as a whole and just append "but not enough" to it and it's pretty accurate as a critique. The games come in with big, bold, and great ideas, but don't do enough with them. They come in similarly with all these hidden references and nods to the old games, but don't do enough with them. Is it supposed to feel like a traditional Castlevania or be something wholly new for the series? We'll never know because the games shy away from really being either when they get close to both.
Lords of Shadow is the skeezy politician cousin of the Castlevania franchise.
-
Each feels like a Castlevania... but not enough. Each feels like something new and refreshing... but not enough. Each feels like it has the makings of a great plot... but not enough.
Really you could take any positive one might say about the subfranchise as a whole and just append "but not enough" to it and it's pretty accurate as a critique.
^This, all the way.
As well, I just got really annoyed with the hamfisted dialog from SotN, with the poorly placed "What is a man?" line, complete with an entirely missing word from the line ("...but a miserable little pile of secrets!" was merely "...but a miserable pile of secrets!" in LoS2). It bothers, me because another line from SotN ("Join me in remaking this world.") was so well placed and naturally written into the script of MoF.
-
LoS: Amazing game, Played it twice. 1st on Xbox360 and 2nd on PC, so there was time to let dust settle and It's still damn good, there is ONE horrible thing about it...
LoS MoF: Though the Lore and Story was interesting, that's the only real redeeming quality of it. It comes off as a cash grab filler title and playing it really feels that way too, The "HD" version is arguably better but worse, unlike the PSP, 3DS upscale looks rather bad. and the fact that no touch-ups nor did they bother making the game proper 16:9 says everything.
LoS2: THE HYPE, THE LETDOWN, THE DISAPPOINTING CONCLUSION. Unlike LoS1, the story progressed at a rushed and somewhat confusing pace. Unlike LoS1 I did not feel satisfied at the end, and after the DLC I'm still feeling like I'm playing something incomplete. The Presentation was top notch, and the game was pretty damn fun, but the broken narrative which was strong in LoS1 felt very off, and the cop-out final battle is what really left the bad taste in my mouth, which is a real shame because it really had the potential to really be something amazing. It's a real shame Director's Cut and going back to add things for a re-release isn't a trend.
As you can see, that ONE thing wrong with LoS1, it couldn't be properly followed up.
I still believe Castlevania can be properly transitioned into 3D but, I think it'll have to be either something like Ys or the bizarro Megaman X7 (the good one that only exists in a parallel universe)
This hits the nail on the head for me through and through. MoF and LoS2 had some wonderful moments, but everything just felt so rushed. Why did the figths of the Belmonts have to be crammed into a single game? What happened between then and the flashback scenes in LoS2? Why was the modern city bit so lacking in comparison to the gorgeous castle setting, and the second half of the game so rushed compared to the overly long pacing of the first part? Why the forced stealth due to the moar powerful than Satan!! Galgoth guards? At the start it makes sense, but less so later on. I expected that in the modern city, there would be more than just mutated people and a few demons I expected to have people running about in terror, etc. Revelations in and of tself could have been its own game entirely. That, as brief as it was, felt so much more like a Castlevania game should. I won't even mention my annoyance at the devs saying afetrwards one thing about the ending when everything else seemed to indicate otherwise. Oh, I did. It felt like the good parts of the sequels were great, but they were dragged down by the bad bits due to constrained development from certain factors. The worst bit was gettign those glimpses of what they could have been. Trevor's death scene and the reunion with Marie had me in honest to goodness tears.
-
LOS is obviously good game, I didnt make it to the end but I guess I was quite far at least at half of the game. I am old school myself, raised on NES castlevania and I don't know I think this affected me. :rollseyes: I prefer every 2D (SOtN, GBA versions, DS versions) over LOS for some reason and I finished all of them.
I think I missed classic leveling, exp for monsters in LOS, but it was fun to play game.
-
My opinion is LoS is a pile of shit that should never have existed, a stain on a otherwise legendary series.
What this guy said, but I'd also like to add: This game fuckin sucks.
-
My opinion on LoS still hasn't changed in all this time. I'm still butt-hurt from the first time. And when I say that it's: Square peg through a round hole kinda butt hurt. 'Lords of Shadow of Colossus of War' is a far more accurate title for this game then Castlevania would ever be. Especially since that's where both the combat (GoW) and titan battles (Shadow of the Colossus) came from. The game did not utilize them in any way to make them unique. It felt tacked on and somewhat lazy. And don't even get me started on the use of QTEs. That was stupid. They were done in such a way that I couldn't figure them out. Took me who knows how long just to finish that first QTE fight because the enemy would regain its health if I failed (strike 1 on the game mechanics). Also didn't care for the sponge enemies. One or two hits for them to die should have been enough. But they wanted it to be more like GoW. The first titan battle was ridiculous. The whole Hollywood in your face moment really gave me trouble as the camera was right down that Gab's feet and he was mostly blocking my field of vision. so much so that I couldn't tell when the titan's projectiles were coming at me. I failed who knows how many times in that one fight alone. When I finally did get on by that part I was doing the whole Shadow of the Colossus thing; climbing all over the titan and stabbing its weak point sigels (strike 2 for poor implementation of camera usage and lack of originality on the fight itself). Strike 3 would be had on the Dracolich fight itself. Couldn't figure out where to go or where the weaknesses were. I had had enough at that point and never looked back. Either at that game or it's gone-downhill sequels.
The only plus side to LoS was the detail of the environments. Definitely a high score on that field. But even then it was still lacking something that would have made it feel just that much more like CV. But I guess that's what happens when the graphics are outclassed by everything else that had gone wrong with the game.
-
For me there are some things that really move me enough to say that it's not a failure or say it's total suckery. There are indeed some very big flaws in the game to which I understand the gripes of some people.
First the bad.
1.There are some issues with collision detection. Watch Gabriel when he dies sometimes he will bump off the ground and it really looks sloppy. Also you can get caught in corners or little nooks and crannies making it difficult to ward off baddies which ties into my next point.
2. Poor camera, the ghost of CV64 strikes again. This game would have benefited from the improved camera in LOS2 (which also had it's good points) but sadly they couldn't get it done until the second game.
3. Some of backgrounds were just boring. The Land of the Lycans was something you had to overcome rather than take in as to get to the prize of the vampires castle which was very well done but could have been better.
4. Lack of classic enemies. Yes you had werewolves, vampires, spiders, ghouls (GHOULS!!!!) headless zombies, knights (should have thrown axes too but they were great anyway) coffin monsters, skeleton knights etc. all well done. But there were no fishmen, bats(that you can kill but can get hit by), skeledragons/bone pillars, the dreaded Medusa's and she was terrible in the second LOS. A little bit of LOI or COD's enemies would have fit nicely updated graphics of course. You don't get to fight the actual Reaper and it seems like it suffered from the exploration/combat conflict (Egoraptor).
5. The platforming namely the rappelling and swinging was for the most part fail proof.
6. Sometimes the control seems to stick. Maybe that was the controller itself but as an example the clocktower was a pain when jumping from moving platforms only to have the controls stick and you walk off the edge. Or you are hanging from a wall want to get down and you immediately jump back up to cling to the wall.
We all know how cutscenes, QTE's and DLCs sometimes detract so onward and upward.
Now the good stuff
1 I liked the music. There were some really nice pieces in this, Belmont's Theme, Midst the Chaos, Relics of the Brotherhood, The black knight, the silver warrior, the swamp troll and a few others. No Yamane but Oscar Arujo did a marvelous job.
2 The combat had its high points. They could have tweaked the sync block to make it a bit more balanced it seemed way to easy at times but it worked. I liked some of Gabriels combos, the boots, gauntlet and wings had some really cool aspects to them as well.
3.I loved the Castle it made it feel closer to a Classic Vania. It was a nice dark atmosphere. Although the mirror puzzles could have been done a little better I liked them. The transition into night once you are in the main hall was very unnerving and the music for entering the hall and the sunset was very fitting.
4. Though many might say the puzzles broke the pacing of the game I did not feel that way with maybe the exception of the chess game. I thought for the most part they were enjoyable.
It seems like with all games I wish they would have expanded on the stuff that I feel was working but oh well.
-
LOS was one of the most enjoyable gaming experiences I've ever had.
I loved the motivation of Gabriel and how his fault was his inability to accept the loss of Marie.
The power of love to a fault is at the root of this game and that is what is so beautiful about it.
Grief can become an all consuming poison. That is a trait of the real Dracula and it's a nice parallel made in LOS.
MS could have done things to make this game feel more like an assumed Castlevania game. But I'm comfortable letting it be what it is and loving it for that. the sequels were dire... But that first LOS was magical.
It borrowed from games that borrowed from other games like CV. So I don't really care about that argument. It was a beautiful work of art and it should be appreciated for that.
-
I love the LoS games overall. The first game was PERFECT as far as I'm concerned. I thought it perfectly melded the combat style from LoI (another game I love in the series), with more believable and interesting stage design and platforming mixed with some puzzles. The story, I thought was brilliant, and the voice work superb. Easily the best voice cast in the series.
Mirror of Fate is a shorter and simpler game, but I love it! It slightly simplified the combat from the first game, and adjusted it for a side scrolling perspective. I liked the story, and although the story is told through three different characters, gameplay wise it feels constant between them, with your levels transferring, and similar abilities being present in following characters. I enjoyed the classic feel of fighting through a moody castle and fighting Dracula at the end. It was really refreshing for the LoS games.
LoS 2 started strong, but got really stupid later on. It would be cool if later Dracula could take on the Golgotha Guards instead of having to sneak. He's powered up Dracula! He doesn't need stealth at that point! Plus the ending was pretty blah, and unsatisfying. I was pretty disappointed upon first beating it. There are fantastic mo.ents, but it ended up being the weakest game to me.
1 and then Mirror of Fate are near perfect to me though. I like the LoS universe overall.
-
I found the weird arrogance of Cox-kun and MercurySteam to be the most fascinating thing about the Lords series, really.
I had fun with the first game, but it never "felt" like a Castlevania title at all despite the name-drops.
-
I found the weird arrogance of Cox-kun and MercurySteam to be the most fascinating thing about the Lords series, really.
I had fun with the first game, but it never "felt" like a Castlevania title at all despite the name-drops.
I feel the same way. It's a decent game in its own right, but it didn't feel Castlevanian in many places despite the team's insistence that they took inspiration from the classics (especially Super Castlevania IV); I felt the similarities are superficial at best and tenuous at worst. The name drops do not help when many of the characters are in name only or only share surface elements of their namesakes.
-
I think it was a breath of fresh air, as IGA Ran AD in to the ground with his arrogance and thinking he knew best for a franchise that he never started even though he acts like it.
And I never felt like I was out of the games world, unlike Most of IGA’s games. It’s like LOI there we are it’s 1094, look at the gothic architecture wow, I’m in the mood now and… I just found a can of tomato soup that looks like it came out of a Japanese convenience store. But ok let’s move on to COD its 1479, ok I’m here its all so old and gothic .... and there’s a Pachinko machine right there, so it’s sort of hard to really believe in his games after that.
As LOS you always felt that you were in that world. And it even made sense of the things that were odd, like heats filling your sub weapons. Cox tried to save AD.
Would I have liked to see an AD game with a Belmondo who Uses the real Vampire Killer ,
Yes But LOS Was By far better origin story, then all that with stones and Mathias Cronqvist, it was just paretic , and what happen to the whip being holy and all that with death, I mean it was like he was drunk and high when he came up with that.
This was meant to be the origin of the Belmondos vs Dracula, and the whip. But instead what we got was just a Pathetic excuses for a Story, and I find it odd that it was not the end of IGA dealing with AD, as it was really bad.
Unlike LOS that seemed to get better and grow the more time went on.
And unlike IGA Cox seemed to know more about his world, unlike IGA just Jumping from one idea to another, and giving us shady details. Like the demon Caste war, best idea he ever came up with, he just threw it to the ground and for an event that was meant to be HUGE we really got nothing.
I’d be lying if I didn’t think IGA had some Great Games and some really good ideas but he just kept making the same game over and over, and kept pushing the Belmondo out in favour of his little pets Alucard and Soma.
The thing is most saw LOD For the first time and the Fan Boys were all like “It no IGA me mad” But then that's fan boy logic.
But the thing was AD didn’t belong to IGA he just borrowed, It’s like Cox said “AD belongs to everyone not just one person”
And I will agree he saved it when AD was dyeing by giving us all something new SOTN, but then he started killing it by just doing SOTN over and over. And Cox gave us something new, the game play was better most of the story was better than a lot of his games. And yes others say it stole From God of war, and But after playing the first God of war it felt and played very much Like LOI, so pot this is kettle?
Los was Amazing set of games and I for one would have loved to see them handle the main timeline, but sadly it will never be.