Wow, I'm late to the little singing flamewar, here.
First off, there should be NO NEED TO BE CALLING ANYONE NAMES. If it happens in this thread again, I will bring down the hammer upon those responsible.
If you cannot manage to stay civil with your vocabulary, you will be removed from this forum, I care not if that's the way you talk, I will not allow it.
Now, having said that, I agree that references do not make the game. If we're straying from CV and into FF territory (which is a daaaaangerous road to walk), then I am more in agreement with Harrycombs than Nagumo, only because I've got FFXIII in my PS3 right now and it's saaaaaaaaadly not an FF game, despite having all the little naming references everywhere...
...however, this easily destroys the discussion back down to its roots:
What IS a certain series, be is CV or FF?
That becomes a matter of much debate. I 'currently' see the resemblance of a Castlevania game in Lords of Shadow. Since I want candles broken with items in them, and classic movie-style monsters, right now LoS seems more like a Dante's Inferno downloadable stage (Forest) with a hero that happens to use a Belmont-ish weapon (so we're not 'quite' there yet... but we cannot go too far that way before people start to cry out 'rehash' or 'the game has no original ideas', etc. A double-edged sword, it is). Having said that, I think that it still captures the essence of CV more than FFXIII captured the essence of what FF is (the description of that being far larger than it deserves mentioning, in this response).