Topic: I knew it! Castlevania: Lords of Shadow!(SPOILERS HERE, PLZ USE THE SPOILER TAG)

[C Belmont]

I remember years back of us having a discussion of how interesting it would be to play as Dracula himself and we had thought out how awesome it would be

I bet if someone had suggested that Dracula be a Belmont at the same time then the idea wouldnt have been so well recieved.
I've got no issues with playing as Dracula it's playing as Dracula Belmont that bothers me.

[Munchy]

I bet if someone had suggested that Dracula be a Belmont at the same time then the idea wouldnt have been so well recieved.
I've got no issues with playing as Dracula it's playing as Dracula Belmont that bothers me.

I just hope the next one keeps the "lone warrior battling supernatural shit with a whip" mantra, whatever else they do with it.

[Sumac]

As for being an old CV vet from the NES days, the entire game should of came alive to only have us want to break our controllers by stage 3.

Difficulty had stopped being one of the Castlevania defining traits at the time of Rondo of Blood. Later, series became even more easy, with some resurgence of old school difficulty in COTM and CV64.

Yup. Appealing to one set of fans while disregarding another isn't good business. Their goal should be to please everyone, equally.

When (old) fans and regular gamers have different views on what should please them - pleasing everyone become pretty much impossible task to complete. And let's not mention that CV fandom is split into several parts itself. It'd should take a genius to create the CV game that would please absolutely everyone.

If you still talk about it & think about it, you still care about it. Even if you consider it insignificant, you're still taking time out of your day to talk about it on the 'net.

What I meant is that CV storyline never was a deciding factor for me, when it come to why I like this series. As a rule, when I delve into new game (series) I try to know as much as possible about it's universe. In case of CV I care about story, just not enough to make it very valuable for me. Especially given it's current state of chaos.

Just reading between the lines, pal.

You apparently failed at it.

multiple retcons for what? No game steps on other games shoes, unless it's a direct sequel/prequel.

And that's enough already really. If the story was thought as much as possible then creators should've escaped those retcons alltogether. Or at least try to make them as disguised as possible.

you're right, by using other games ideas & doing them worse.

It's like your opinion.

you promise?

Ha-ha. 

It could flesh out why the Belmonts are so powerful/feared, give more backstory to the Belnades, why Galamoth wants to take Dracula's throne, etc. Stuff that fans are curious about.

Then it should be just the main game in the series.
As far as I understand "gaiden games" are such games that could be part of the series or could not be part of it. Like CV64 or COTM. Should things you mentioned above, be put in the game, then it should be 100% canon, without any ambiguity on it's part. Since it's very important plot points that deserve some definitive explanation.
Apparently not opinion that IGA upholds, but whatever.

Sorry to hear that.

Well, I am sorry that you stuck in the past, then and couldn't think without comfy box. 

In general such statements are ignorant and reeks of fanboism - it's like saying "my tastes are supperior, sorry that you like that shit".
Note: it doesn't say anything positive about you.

No you wouldn't.

Now that's a riddle.
What made you think so?
Illogical asspull of the "devoted fan" or just childish desire to piss me off?

It's should have been quite obvious for a long-long time, after everything that I said about Old Canon and IGA, that's I LIKE the old series and my main problem with it, that it's ended up in the hands of a guy who really didn't care about storyline or it's presentation. Which in turn transformed old canon into a incoherent mess of epic proporations with multiple aborted storylines and ideas that were quite hinted, but never elaborated upon.
I am not sure about you, but I like when the story I follow is coherent and neat. And without gaps size of an ocean.

Of course it's easier to appeal to the bigger crowd. That has been pretty much my whole point. But it's not a long term solution. It may boost the sales for as long as aping a couple of successful young series proves effective, but it'll alienate the ones that got hooked into CV in the first place.

If anything fans that hooked to CV in the first place already should have been alienated, given how series transformed over the years. And as I said before - there is not much of those people anyway. Catering to them in a big scale project would be unprofitable.

You can just look at the very first Castlevania and compare that to its sequels and see how much it has changed. But it mostly evolved through trial and error and creative experimenting. LoS was different. It was like pulling the emergency break, abandoning the train and catching another one. It was, in a word, desperate.

Given the state the series was in - it was justified.
Another clone rehasing old ideas - yeah, thet would what already wounded series needed.
CV needed fresh blood in quite some time. I'd say approximately after AOS and LOI - AOS should have been a foundation and roundabout prequel to the 1999 game and LOI should have been a foundation for permanent transfer of the series into 3D. Sadly Konami decided to milk 2D games further leading formula to the creative bankruptcy and constant scaling of budget. And instead of improving what LOI had to offer, Konami made COD, that effectively buried evolution of the metroidvania style into 3D. At least for a time being.
In such state series needed to be shaken up - by a way of reboot or completely new creative team - it doesn't matter. Most likely if a new team tried to make CV into an old timeline there would be even more cries of how new team made game that barely has to do with anything AND into the old timeline.
Basically like CVJ, but on a bigger scale.

And there's nothing wrong with nostalgia when it comes to Castlevania. Absolutely nothing.

I disagree.
Nostalgia, caring about roots and all that jazz is a good thing, but caterring to it alone without any changes and innovations, would not save the series from stagnation and eventual death. Evolution and experiments should prevail and nostalgia should be relagated mainly to the easter eggs and nods to the past games in the series. Or small scale projects like CV ReBirth.

Go through this series, see what worked with each installment, think why people became to like those games in the first place and start making the game with the motive of making it fresh yet consistent with its essence.

Times have changed.
What pleased gamers in 1986 would not please gamers in 1997.
What pleased gamers in 1997 would not please gamers in 2011.
It's not 1986, nor 1997. Technology and comptetitors set new standards of what games should be. If you want to have a profitable bestseller you need to take that into account. If you want  to make using old school formula, then be prepare that it will be a niche title and a "king for a day" that would be forgotten as a next good game will come out.

Besides, sure, recreating all great stuff of the past games could be a good idea, for a time being. But how far you can run with it? You can recretae it one time and that would be OK, recreate it two times - and it would be consider good thing, recreate it three times and people will talk about lack of creativity and evolution. To survive series need experiments and changes. Sometimes small, sometimes big.

[A-Yty]

I just said that nostalgia alone isn't a good thing. And I have constantly admitted that a reformation is needed, just not the way LoS is doing it. You keep repeating things. A lot.

You also keep referring to the original fanbase as very insignificant in numbers. Well, CV has been the equivalent of a cult indie movie series for quite some time; not a smash at the box office, but known and respected among those inside the "studio system" and kept alive by its fans. So, the crowd you point at has been its target group for most of the series' lifespan. Doesn't matter if it's smaller than the audience they're aiming at now. It's simply bad business to ignore the preferences of the original target group - especially if you concentrate your resources on a product that is so vastly different from any of the previous games. And like I said, the changes have been dynamic up until Metroidvania caused a syndrome of repetition. In that regard, the fact that Castlevania has changed a lot doesn't mean that appealing to its core fans is not financially wise. It does take work to get back on the saddle, but that is exactly why I am against a shortcut like LoS.

The problem isn't just going along the Shadow Colossus God of Castlevania road. If Konami wants to try making CV a best seller with this thing that is pretty much Castlevania in name only, fine. But if they're gonna do only that in the future, they shouldn't be surprised if they'll end up soiling their franchise for a long time or even permanently. As in, going from

- Hey dude, have you ever played Castlevania?
- Hell yeah! It's that series with kickass music where you whip monsters.

to

- Hey dude, did you get God of War 6?
- I preordered it and got a spiffy inflatable Kratos! Oh, I also got Castlevania. I got the previous game from the bargain bin. Maybe I'll check it out later.

[C Belmont]

prepare that it will be a niche title and a "king for a day" that would be forgotten as a next good game will come out

It kinda feels like a lot of games are just "King for a day" even the ones considered with the times, It doesn't seem like LOS reign has  been all that different.

[A-Yty]

Better be a king for a day than a fool for a lifetime

And yeah on that last remark. Think any of the newcomers will be around for 25 years? Somehow, I find that difficult to believe.

[Ahasverus]

Better be a king for a day than a fool for a lifetime

And yeah on that last remark. Think any of the newcomers will be around for 25 years? Somehow, I find that difficult to believe.

I don't undertstand, what does make you better than them? I mean, if we were hooked by an 8-bit platfformer with nice music and badass monsters, we people can't be hooked by a 25 hours shiny epic?? I don't seea difference, at all.

[A-Yty]

Huh..? I didn't say I'm better than anyone. I just can't think of a series that has potential to float for such a long time. I don't mean that all games were better back in the day.

[Sumac]

Well, CV has been the equivalent of a cult indie movie series for quite some time; not a smash at the box office, but known and respected among those inside the "studio system" and kept alive by its fans

And how it all ended?
Being indie could be good thing for quite a time. But sooner or later there would be choice - go big or just stay in your corner and die out (or live on a life support). I'm support Castlevania existence, so I want it to be a BIG name, not some niche title for a few dozen guys who played in the game almost 30 years ago.

So, the crowd you point at has been its target group for most of the series' lifespan. Doesn't matter if it's smaller than the audience they're aiming at now. It's simply bad business to ignore the preferences of the original target group - especially if you concentrate your resources on a product that is so vastly different from any of the previous games.

Considering that "original target group" was weary, because of copypaste and wanted some changes, it stopped being that profitable. Every new "metroidvania" sold less and less. Why? Because fans tired. Konami alienated CV fanbase on their own. As soon OTG stopped being profitable they turn on regular gamers who: 1) could make more money for the company 2) and generally wouldn't bitch about all small things that so dear to the old fans heart.
So in a sense Konami made a bad decision with cloning the series and than rectified it, by taking the series into new direction and making it profitable again. In the end it was a good decision, no matter how fans dislike it.

In that regard, the fact that Castlevania has changed a lot doesn't mean that appealing to its core fans is not financially wise.

With fandom like CV has - it would be a hard thing, since there are different parties. Pleasing everyone would be impossible. And there are some fans that never would be satisfied, because they have they own image of what series should be and any deviation from that ideal, will make them go angry, to say the least.

But if they're gonna do only that in the future, they shouldn't be surprised if they'll end up soiling their franchise for a long time or even permanently.

They already did it with "metroidvania" cloning. Declining sells and different lazy spinoffs like Pachislots and Tetris-like SOTN is a sure sigh of it.
I'd be happy as long as Castlevania exists in a form of quality games, changes be damned - it's happen not for the time, and for the last. Acceptance and understanding that time and technologies change - is a key for accepting evolution.

- Hey dude, did you get God of War 6?
- I preordered it and got a spiffy inflatable Kratos! Oh, I also got Castlevania. I got the previous game from the bargain bin. Maybe I'll check it out later.

It would be the same with another 2D game.

It kinda feels like a lot of games are just "King for a day" even the ones considered with the times, It doesn't seem like LOS reign has  been all that different.

No.
Super Castlevania 4? SOTN? Those games were released more than 10 years ago and still remebered as a one of the highest points of the series. And SOTN singlehandedly basically turned CV into new direction.

Better be a king for a day than a fool for a lifetime
And yeah on that last remark. Think any of the newcomers will be around for 25 years? Somehow, I find that difficult to believe.

I prefer my favorite series to live, rather then have a blast and die out.
It's not a succesful way for the series.

[A-Yty]

So, whose fault would you say it is, ultimately? You seem to endorse and enjoy the idea of trolling old fans and disregarding their desires because they "just can't accept change" and that Konami is doing the right thing. Yet, you also say Konami itself hampered Castlevania by sticking with Metroidvania. There is a huge contradiction in there somewhere, but I don't feel like pointing it out, because I doubt you would care. But I'm gonna have to cast a shadow of doubt over the claim that Metroidvania sales were dropping. It's not that I have a problem believing that, but the last time I heard, Ecclesia sold ok.

I think the teleportation into LoS is almost a parody; taking a giant step from here to here and calling it Castlevania's natural evolution. It's not very natural if it's almost completely different in one single stroke. It's more like a cry for help. A needless gamble and a waste of the series' history. If old fan opinions mean nothing, you shouldn't be tooting against those opinions as much as you do. Let them fools cry, amirite?

If CV was already peanuts, how much lower would they have sunk if they took a more deductive next step? If they wanted, they could've just learned from their errors and revitalized their series with more lasting effects. This is exactly what I meant about doing some research. It is necessary to clear up just what it is that makes one group agree that Metroidvania was great, another to spurn it and both of them to agree that LoS was not quite what Castlevania should be.  And at least they would have gotten a thumbs up for effort and would have had this "niche audience" to fall back on, if they did that. Even if that kind of assertive Castlevania would have failed, it wouldn't be a Castlevania mocked as God of Castlevania. It would be thought of as an installment of a classic series first and "not-a-hit-series" second. There are alternatives between being A HUEG SERIES and just rotting away, unlike how you presented the situation.

If the old pattern really was failing financially, copypasting in 3D won't work any better than it did with Metroidvania. So, unless they actually cook up something far more original than LoS for the sequel, they're not building Castlevania into one of their best selling series. Even a casual player isn't going to keep spending money on a second rate banana GoWSotc. If LoS was a one trick pony, they're just buying time until they've gotta go back to that audience. But maybe by that time that same audience will have grown tired of being ignored and they'll be busy playing Demon's Souls or something else that gives them a stronger dose of Castlevania.

And uh..I didn't mean that I prefer Castlevania to die. But if it has to die, I rather see it die the way it was instead of crashing and burning while U-turning.

[Sumac]

You seem to endorse and enjoy the idea of trolling old fans and disregarding their desires because they "just can't accept change" and that Konami is doing the right thing. Yet, you also say Konami itself hampered Castlevania by sticking with Metroidvania. There is a huge contradiction in there somewhere, but I don't feel like pointing it out, because I doubt you would care.

Maybe you won't point out the contradiction, because you know that there is actually none?
Konami did harm the series in the past with all copypasting, that's true (like anyone else could harm their series anyway?). That is the reason why it desperately needed some rejuvenation. But after LOS release, I believe that at least for now, Konami is on the right track with the series. As for desires of the old fans, I'm personally weary of the fact that some people want more of the same, again and again. As if there wasn't enough of the same thing in the past years.

I'm actually OK with them wanting the same thing over and over. As long as they don't diss new games that doesn't have to do anything with how series should be in their opinion. "Live and let live" basically. However it's not the case with some fans. Their whining and hatred won't do any good, just annoy other people to no end. If they had real power over series or some sort of influention, that's would be a different case. But as of now listening hundred time over about "how new game doesn't correspondent to the MY ideal vision of the series and that's why it SUCKS" become quite annoying. Not to say that such declaration is quite stupid, because the fact that certain game isn't created in the image of your perfect game, doesn't make it automatically bad, horrible or whatever. Logic. Simple logic.
So, there is no contradiction whatsoever.

I think the teleportation into LoS is almost a parody; taking a giant step from here to here and calling it Castlevania's natural evolution.

And why do you think that LOS is the evolution of the OOE? It's hilarious really.
If anything LOS much closer to the classic games in it's atmosphere. As for gameplay - you should actually understand that it's not 2D, it's not sprites, it's not Nintendo DS and it's not 1997. Hence the difference.

It's not very natural if it's almost completely different in one single stroke. It's more like a cry for help. A needless gamble and a waste of the series' history. If old fan opinions mean nothing, you shouldn't be tooting against those opinions as much as you do. Let them fools cry, amirite?

SOTN wasn't really that natural evolution to the series either, but I don't see anyone crying about it. Though, I wonder how things were back in 1997.
As for why I am here, I decide it for myself, thanks. I just want to put a little bit of logic in the matter, something that very often disappears, when people debate about such things.

If CV was already peanuts, how much lower would they have sunk if they took a more deductive next step? If they wanted, they could've just learned from their errors and revitalized their series with more lasting effects. This is exactly what I meant about doing some research.

I don't know how much lower the series could go in the case of another "metroidvania", but I don't want it to happen either. Happily LOS saved the series from this horrible doom at least for the time being. And even then it was not enough to shut down gargantunian monster that is "metroidvania cloning".

As for learning from their mistakes - they had 10 years to learn from their mistakes. 10 fucking years!! It's not several months, it's not a single year. It's 10 years. 1/10 of the century.
And yet every single "metroidvania", save for COTM, made the same mistakes in it's designs, actually going lower and lower with almost each new game.

The fact that they didn't learn practically anything from it was as surprising as much as appaling. Besides they had COTM - the game that improved on many failures in SOTN's design (adding actually useful subsystem, difficulty, changing enemies on locations to correspondent with your level) and did they used anything from it? Nope, save for partially rehashing it's plot in HOD.

OOE was a breath of fresh air, but at that very moment "metroidvania" formula already lose it's credibility, so it was like a last hurrah to the great idea that was never used to it's true extent. And HD practically is a mockery of the "metroidvania" formula, a scarecrow and a gravedigger all in one. It was to late to save the formula, so ridding of it, was probably the best thing that could've been done in that situation. At least until someone will be able to put a new spin to the formula and make it fresh and interesting once again.

It is necessary to clear up just what it is that makes one group agree that Metroidvania was great, another to spurn it and both of them to agree that LoS was not quite what Castlevania should be.

"It's like your opinion." As for me LOS is a good Castlevania.

And at least they would have gotten a thumbs up for effort and would have had this "niche audience" to fall back on, if they did that.

That's ceratinly would've helped to gain enough money to create another, better game.
Sorry, but video game creation is the business. Big companies doesn't do things to cater to the small groups of fans, because it would not be profitable. Epsecially in case of the big games, which development costs several million dollars.

It would be thought of as an installment of a classic series first and "not-a-hit-series" second.

Or an expected semifailure, given past history, once again pointing out that the series is in desperate need of sedative or a new blood. Thanks, but no thanks.

There are alternatives between being A HUEG SERIES and just rotting away, unlike how you presented the situation.

In case of Castlevania there wasn't. It was already pretty small. Each new title received smaller budget than the next. If that's trend continued than sooner or later it would be relagated to the cellphones. Cool. For some people. Not for me, since I want Castlevania to be succesful and not some tiny shard of it's former self created to cater to the small group of old fans, who eventually will be displeased anyway.

Even a casual player isn't going to keep spending money on a second rate banana GoWSotc.

You talking as if LOS2 already failed. Sorry, but it didn't happened yet, so your rethroric is petty talk of a defeatist fan who couldn't accepr that his favorite series doesn't go along with his ideal vision that he bulid for himself in his head.

But maybe by that time that same audience will have grown tired of being ignored and they'll be busy playing Demon's Souls or something else that gives them a stronger dose of Castlevania.

Then Konami will find some new audience for it's series. With such fractured fanbase it's hard to do anything meaningfull anyway.

And uh..I didn't mean that I prefer Castlevania to die. But if it has to die, I rather see it die the way it was instead of crashing and burning while U-turning.

In short you are on of those fans who basically want things to be "my way or not to be at all". Egoistic and generally immature dispostition. That's why in many cases I say that fans should be more open minded about changes and not sulking in the corner thinking that Konami didn't love EXACTLY THEM and doing stuff to piss them off. Sorry, it's business, nothing personal. If the series need to survive it should adopt to the modern technology and tastes. And old fans are natural enemy to such evolution. Accept it or leave, but don't fall into the emo mode crying "it's not like I want, then it's better to die alltogether". It's really disgusting and generally sounds like a bertrayal of your favorite series.

[crisis]

blah blah I am Sumac blah blah

When the figurehead of the entire project admits that his game only borrows "some DNA" from the series he's rebooting, instead opting to mold together everything that's the opposite just for some people to say "it's more 'Castlevania' than the last 10 years" when it obviously isn't, it's hard to take your argument(s) seriously. You've been using the same empty rhetoric for a while now and it's getting old. From what I've been reading on the net for the past couple years, a lot more people are saying "LoS is a little bit like Castlevania" than "LoS is original Castlevania before Metroidvania kicked in."

Yeah yeah it's Konami's series, they called it Castlevania because they wanted to. Dave Cox is on record saying it's not Akumajo Dracula; it's a Castlevania that isn't really a Castlevania. Damn near everyone on these forums (Dungeon, Chapel) pretty much say the same thing. Where are the armies of supporters that refute our claims? Is Sumac really speaking on the behalf of thousands? There's a few other outspoken members here that are like you, but you guys are still the minority. Lets not forget LoS was packed in a special PS3 system bundle, which no doubt contributed to it's sales. Do those players that bought those bundles know what Castlevania is? Would they even care? Prolly not.

Look, there's plenty of discussion here that's pro-LoS; we have plenty of topics on how this new approach is going to go. Even people that don't really like this game are discussing about it's potential. Your constant nagging of "old Castlevania fans need to open their minds" is straight bullshit; just because I & others don't agree that LoS is the right direction doesn't mean we didn't enjoy it. It was an alright game at best, many here agree with me & the sales prove that. But MercurySteam got a ways to go if they want to make this "reboot" as engaging as our beloved AKUMAJO DRACULA series, plain & simple.

[Dark Nemesis]

Yeah yeah it's Konami's series, they called it Castlevania because they wanted to. Dave Cox is on record saying it's not Akumajo Dracula; it's a Castlevania that isn't really a Castlevania. Damn near everyone on these forums (Dungeon, Chapel) pretty much say the same thing. Where are the armies of supporters that refute our claims? Is Sumac really speaking on the behalf of thousands? There's a few other outspoken members here that are like you, but you guys are still the minority. Lets not forget LoS was packed in a special PS3 system bundle, which no doubt contributed to it's sales. Do those players that bought those bundles know what Castlevania is? Would they even care? Prolly not.

Look, there's plenty of discussion here that's pro-LoS; we have plenty of topics on how this new approach is going to go. Even people that don't really like this game are discussing about it's potential. Your constant nagging of "old Castlevania fans need to open their minds" is straight bullshit; just because I & others don't agree that LoS is the right direction doesn't mean we didn't enjoy it. It was an alright game at best, many here agree with me & the sales prove that. But MercurySteam got a ways to go if they want to make this "reboot" as engaging as our beloved AKUMAJO DRACULA series, plain & simple.

These are exactly my thoughts!!! I never said i didn't enjoyed the game, but no matter what, i always felt, like i was playing something else, than Castlevania. Aside from that, it's a very nice game, but it needs to much work, if it wants to be called as a true Castlevania game!!!

[Nagumo]

also

not enjoying los ≠ not having an open mind

this has been stated 8000 times already but OK 

[Sumac]

When the figurehead of the entire project admits that his game only borrows "some DNA" from the series he's rebooting, instead opting to mold together everything that's the opposite just for some people to say "it's more 'Castlevania' than the last 10 years" when it obviously isn't, it's hard to take your argument(s) seriously.

I told you my own opinion. Not an opinion "of thousands" or whatever.
For me LOS is very Castlevaniash, much more than AOS and DOS for example.

From what I've been reading on the net for the past couple years, a lot more people are saying "LoS is a little bit like Castlevania" than "LoS is original Castlevania before Metroidvania kicked in."

LOSt is closer to original formula of the series mixing some contemporary elements form other modern games. It not like it is like orginal Castlevania in 3D.
I still support it, since for me it much closer to what Castlevania should be. Besides 2D was good for it's time but things changed and all that jazz, that I've already said.

Is Sumac really speaking on the behalf of thousands? There's a few other outspoken members here that are like you, but you guys are still the minority.

I never said that I speaking on anyone behalf. Stop fantasizing.

Lets not forget LoS was packed in a special PS3 system bundle, which no doubt contributed to it's sales. Do those players that bought those bundles know what Castlevania is? Would they even care? Prolly not.

I don't think that anyone in they right mind will buy bundle with the game that they do not have any interest in.

Your constant nagging of "old Castlevania fans need to open their minds" is straight bullshit;

In one of the previous post you started whining how you'd prefer series die rather then become something that YOU don't want to, even if it's not that bad deviation as you admitted it yourself right now. In my book it's pretty much a sigh that you still need to work on your openmindedness. And I am not even talking about intense overreaction that some people on different forums provided, instantly hating LOS even before it's release, because it didn't had bishounens and flowery artwork and generally looked prety different. Hell, there were some guy that claimed that LOS is not Castlevania because "light is falling in wrong direction in the screenshot". When fans using such arguments, then it's pretty clear that they claims of general openmindedness is quite exegerated to say the least. Basically your claims about "openmindeness" of fanbase is quite bullshitty themselves.

not enjoying los ≠ not having an open mind
this has been stated 8000 times already but OK

Not in all cases. But whatever.