Topic: Castlevania 3DS: What do you want?

[Sumac]

Personally I want 2.5D classic'vania with simple, but solid gameplay, with beatiful art, interesting levels and castle, that takes only 1/3 of the game.

What I expect is just another "metroidvania" clone, with 40% sprites lifted from previous games, taking place in a giant horribly designed empty castle, devoid of any idea or soul. Decent art (maybe) and nonessential storyline, overdriven with animeish elements. Oh, and the basic storyline must include elements from Circle of the Moon. Again. Just because.

[DragonSlayr81]

Personally I want 2.5D classic'vania with simple, but solid gameplay, with beatiful art, interesting levels and castle, that takes only 1/3 of the game.

What I expect is just another "metroidvania" clone, with 40% sprites lifted from previous games, taking place in a giant horribly designed empty castle, devoid of any idea or soul. Decent art (maybe) and nonessential storyline, overdriven with animeish elements. Oh, and the basic storyline must include elements from Circle of the Moon. Again. Just because.

I'd actually like a merger of the two for a change: Classictroid.

The initial play of the game will be stage based all the way to the end, but once you pass a stage, you could immediately go back and trek through areas you completed through a map(like castletroid map). To progress through the game, you HAVE to complete stage by stage, but after, the ones you've completed can be explored freely and seemlessly(I don't mean, like DXC, where you can re-do Stage 2, but if you are in Stage 3, you can go back through the door you've just entered, and freely, like SotN, just explore the previous ones, perhaps with no loadtime, as if Stage 1 and 2 have been combined into one explorable area connected via few doors. The castle won't be handled like a castletroid, either. But stages with a few alternate branches, leading up towards the keep(maybe like CV3). Of cource, I'd love 2.5D with nice art!!

[Sumac]

So you mean after I completed several levels they will be combined in one big area to explore?
Strange idea, to be honest.

[uzo]

I don't mind nudity in statues or in the succubus, but the nudity in LoS was not tasteful at all. Why the hell were the faeries of all things nude? And that demon you summon was a terrible idea (they should have replaced it with Grand Cross).

Agreed. Im all for boobs but Lords of Shadow didn't seem to play the card at the right time.

[Alutwon]

I don't mind nudity in statues or in the succubus, but the nudity in LoS was not tasteful at all. Why the hell were the faeries of all things nude? And that demon you summon was a terrible idea (they should have replaced it with Grand Cross).

I'm surprised the crystal wasn't affected by magic at all...

[thernz]

Oh, and the basic storyline must include elements from Circle of the Moon. Again. Just because.

Which CoTM took from SoTN lol. I agree about wanting a CV with solid gameplay, art, and interesting levels though.

Also, what DragonSlayr seems to be describing is like a more evolved OoE, but I don't think it'll be all that great to force the player into staying in a stage. I think switching between linear and non-linear modes would disjoint the game too much. If they did that, I would hope that there's a visual/stage design reason for it, like certain events in it force you to progress but then after, it's no longer there, hinting that you can re-explore it in a non-linear fashion. That'd be neat, having a stage play differently from the first time you went through it. It'll also allow them to also use more classic level design during the first play maybe.

[X]

DragonSlayr makes it sound like the later Mega Man games. You do a stage, but can revisit it to pick up what you might've missed the first time.

-X

[Sumac]

Which CoTM took from SoTN lol.

I think SOTN was different in that regard. After all Richter never appeared in this game as Alucard ally. So he didn't bertrayed Alucard, he didn't even know him.
Storyline about your ally bertraying you was used in the COTM first, though it could be loosely based on the SOTN idea, but I don't think so.

[thernz]

You could say that Richter being a Belmont made Alucard feel betrayed enough. On the other hand, Hugh never really betrayed you in CoTM either. He was manipulated by Dracula. It's similar to Shaft's control of Richter. I don't think the added familiarity causes much difference. It's more like Hugh adopted the roles of both Richter and Maria, except he was jealous instead of uh, cheery.
Betrayal itself is such a common theme throughout all works of fiction; it's really just putting too much value on such a simple story like CoTM or SoTN to say that the others ripped elements from them. That said, it's still incredibly repetitive and bland and I rather them not use it again. So I am disagreeing with my old post, and saying that the titles did not rip off each other because by having such general guidelines, someone would be valid in saying that LoS is a rip off of CoTM and AoS which is just sdhfasdf.

i would only say that only hod is really close to cotm's style of betrayal anyway. arguably, hod's approach was much more interesting in its execution as well since it actually affected gameplay. well, i dont think either have a really strong story anyway.

[crisis]

So I am disagreeing with my old post,

lol pwned!!!!!!1 XDD