Topic: Castlevania 64: The Beta, What We Got VS What There Was!!

[Dark Nemesis]

I prefer a 3D Castlevania game with the old classic feeling, like Castlevania nes, from Igavanias!!

[Abnormal Freak]

lol goddamn, uzo strikes again with more retarded points that go nowhere.

CV64 and LOD are good games. Flawed, yes, but good nonetheless, and definitely more of a Castlevania game than the PS2 ones. The later 3D games don't even fall in line with IGA's style. The N64 games at least captured the old-school gameplay in a 3D environment. The PS2 games don't resemble Castlevania from any era. They're just poorly-made hack-and-slashers with no interesting level designs. Even the graphics aren't all that impressive as NOTHING STICKS OUT. Every room is flat with nothing to interact with. At least with COD they tried mixing things up a bit, trying to diversify and offer more than flat surfaces to walk across, but it still isn't designed well. It's still the same boring bullshit.

Even having played a superior game like Ocarina of Time, I still highly enjoyed CV64 when it came out. It's a fun game with interesting level design that's cohesive and makes sense, and it has some very fun platforming. And I'll take the character art and designs of that game over the superfluous "gothic" stuff we get now. As for the soundtrack, those are some very nice ambient tunes that fit the game perfectly, and it's somewhat of an exploration game (but not in a tediously mind-numbing sense like the PS2 games), so the music greatly adds to the atmosphere of the N64 games.

[DoctaMario]

Interesting stuff.

Konami had the daunting task of trying to make a decent game for a more recent Nintendo system (something most 3rd party developers have a hard time doing) and given the system we're talking about, I think they did a decent job. Nintendo made the system, so of course they're going to understand it better than the 3rd party publishers. It's why there aren't any good 3rd party games on the Wii right now.

Regardless, like people have said, the 64 games brought the 2d feel of CV into 3d. The PS2 games could be ANYTHING, because they dont particularly feel like CV games. Not to say that every CV game needs to have classicvania type attack systems and such, but those games are just so...vanilla. They could have called them anything besides Castlevania and none of us would have batted an eye. They have little character of their own because they seem to just take elements from other games and put them together without any regard as to how a CV game should work.

[uzo]

In Reply To #32

Yes. Retarded points like project management, project schedules, gameplay, camera systems, and other things that generally make a game playable. Nothing I would know about right? Doesn't mean anything that I have been in the industry, and direct my own game project.

[Dark Nemesis]

In Reply To #34

Face it or not, Iga is good only at 2D Castlevania games. At 3D he sucks.

[uzo]

In Reply To #35

That's not the point. The point is the CV64 team is no better.

And I'm the one whose supposedly shooting out random points everywhere? Did Abnormal Freak even read this thread?

[True Sorrow]

Yeah, that beta stuff is pretty interesting.

As for the 64 vs. PS2 'vania thing, I've only properly played CV64 and CoD, but I can safely say that I find CV64 to be way better.

The only good things I find about CoD is the music, the cutscenes, the bosses and maybe some battles in between. The graphics could be considered good, too, but there was just so little that stood out and so much repetition that they didn't really seem good at all. And then there's the level design, which is the worst I've ever seen in the series. It's fucking horrible! It's all completely flat, extremely repetitive and redundant enemy placement doesn't help at all. So, what you've got is a good soundtrack, good cutscenes, a good story, fantastic bosses and, what, 8+ hours of excrutiatingly boring gameplay? That sounds like a pretty horrible package to me Fuck, even Legends is more enjoyable.

CV64, on the other hand, is much more evened out. The bosses and control scheme may not be as good, but even so I can't say it's bad per se. It was, as Serio said, very similar to the older games in that respect: Simple and sweet. So in that regard it's not as good as CoD. The cutscenes also don't have as much, even though seeing Rosa being controlled by Death was a very powerful moment. Then you have the music, which is very debatable. Some like CoD's soundtrack much more, but some like CV64's more. Personally I'd say they're very equal, only different. CoD takes a more straight-forward approach, with powerful, complex and beautiful songs, as well as some very aggressive tracks. CV64, however, takes a much more subtle approach, enhancing the atmosphere more, but perhaps not as listenable outside the game, very comparable to SCVIV's soundtrack. But where the game stands out as way, way better is in the level design. It isn't as long, no, but it's so much, much better. The enemies are simpler, yes, but the layout is much more complex, more variety in rooms and recognition of the third axis. Yes, it has platforming! Sure, it isn't as good as in a Mario game, but so much, much better than in CoD. It kept me going, rather than just letting me get bored. So in that sense, WAY better.

In short:
CoD is better in cutscenes, story, controls and bosses, albeit not really by a lot.
They're equal in music.
CV64, while not as good in terms of technical graphics, has much more interesting ones. And it has much, much, MUCH better level designs.
All in all, I prefer good gameplay and good bosses to better cutscenes and amazing bosses. It's just that whole "8+ hours of boring" that throws me off in CoD

[paletteswapmonster]

the combat engine wasn't that bad, i mean it was a classicvania in 3d. i don't see people hating on cv1 because it has clunky combat engine, no equippable weapons or combos, and lod's about as clunky in control as cv1.
the only thing wrong with it was the hit detection - it could be improved a lot (hitting stuff with reinhardt was annoying).

That type of combat isn't exactly proper or suitable for a 3D game, though.

In Reply To #34

Face it or not, Iga is good only at 2D Castlevania games. At 3D he sucks.

IGA doesn't make the games.

[Abnormal Freak]

Doesn't mean anything that I have been in the industry, and direct my own game project.

Doesn't mean anything if your game's not all that good. :P For all I know, you're like that Bob dude who's developing "Bob's game." Maybe you are him! :o

And I never called your points random, just retarded. Sure, the N64 games have a bad camera, I'll give you that. But bad gameplay, graphics, music, artwork, character designs, etc.? I think not. One I possibly MIGHT give you is graphics, since they're certainly not the greatest, but they're good enough, even with all the glitches and the excessive "fog." Again, the games are far from perfect, but they deliver fun and some good aspects, which is far more than I can say for the PS2 games. Those ones may be more "polished," but what good is a sleek and shiny turd? You wanna talk about poor gameplay and design...those games have got it.

As for time schedules, and them not having the potential (as you put it) to deliver the game they wanted? I don't see how the time they take to develop something has anything to do with their potential, if indeed that's what you were getting at. Obviously it's great to be more time-efficient, but hey, sometimes people work slower and don't deliver on schedule. For example--and this isn't a video game example, but it's entertainment/art--John Kricfalusi was constantly late in delivering Nickelodeon new Ren & Stimpy episodes (the biggest reason why he got fired from his own cartoon after season two), yet in the end he always pumped out great products. Those cartoons are the absolute best we've gotten since the Golden Age of Cartoons, and they were never on schedule. What the hell does development time have to do with a person or team's potential and skill?

[paletteswapmonster]

But bad gameplay, graphics, music, artwork, character designs, etc.? I think not.

CV1 gameplay for a 3D game isn't exactly a good idea, especially when it fails pretty bad at it. You have Reinhardt's shoelace and Carrie's seeking bolts along with a crummy knife and what appears to be a bubble wand. The jumps are terrible. The N64 games are imfamous for their nightmarish difficulty in jumping sections. Your jumps have to be so precise; it's ridiculous. You'll either not reach, miss by a thread, or badly overshoot. Sometimes you have no idea where you're supposed to land, so you have to completely guess how long you're supposed to jump. The graphics are also pretty terrible. You have Carrie's legs going through her boots, her thousand yard stare, and some apparently broken necks. I should also mention Rosa's sou'wester for hair.

And now I'm too lazy to type anymore so I'll just leave this here.

[justin312]

I agree with what some of the earlier posters have said.  I think that, while CV64 may have been flawed, it did a much better job of capturing the feel and atmosphere of classic Castlevanias than Lament or CoD.  The PS2 games felt to me like they lacked identity, and had too many similarities to a number of other popular action games whereas CV64 felt more unique to Castlevania.  I'm hoping that this next gen Castlevania goes the route of CV64 (but with a decade of tech advancements to fix its flaws) and tries to get the series back to feeling unique, rather than be a continuation of the somewhat generic path they have taken with Lament and CoD.

[paletteswapmonster]

In Reply To #41

Going in the direction of CV64 wouldn't exactly be a good idea.

[Long John Silver]

In Reply To #42

level design or atmosphere wise it'd be a brilliant one. both ps2 games had awful level design, and they lack the definite "castlevania" atmosphere. they feel like some poor dmc clone or some lame dungeon crawler/beat'em-up.

but then again, it happens when you try to copy other franchises so much you forget what you're working on.

[paletteswapmonster]

In Reply To #43

The N64 games don't really feel like Castlevania. At all. If anything, they feel more like Resident Evil.

[Long John Silver]

In Reply To #44

wouldn't know, i never played that. in general though they still feel more castlevaniaish than both loi and cod together.