Topic: Games you're not allowed to like or hate

[Munchy]

I like all of the games to some degree.

Judgment/Pachislot I can't comment on.

[Kale]

Portrait did suck but i did like the lvl of sub weapons... even if I didn't like how long it took. It was just dragging on and on...

[Pemburu Vampir]

@D.P.A.
PoR should be in the middle ground. It's not as bad as SotN Inverted castle.

[Sumac]

I am agree with Fofa's list, though I'd added LOS to the "No middle ground/flame war ignition" category.

As for the other games I'd say recently people started to warm up to the CV64. At least I saw a lot of positive praise to some aspects of this game in the last few years. It maybe does not
belong with the most revered games in the series, but I think it is not that hated at least by fans of the series, couldn't say the same about game critics, who seemingly loath this game for whatever reason.

I find it funny that I have disliking of almost every game in the "You're not allowed to hate" category except for CV1, SCV4 and OOE. Especially it goes to the CV3 as of late.

In the category "You're not allowed to like" I personally love CV64 (not LOD though) and consider Drcaula X to be better game than Rondo in some aspects (difficulty, music).

And I never saw any flame war about CV2.

[shelverton.]

I find it funny that people can hate PoR but love OoE. Or love DoS but dislike PoR.  These three games are pretty much the exact same games as far as gameplay, level design and graphics go. But still people pretend that they're vastly different. When they're not. Anyone can see that. When people are praising OoE and trashing PoR in the very same sentence, they're nitpicking on a level that people outside the Castlevania fanbase would never ever understand. I've got more than one friend who can't tell DoS, PoR and OoE apart. "Why would anyone wanna pay for the exact same game three times in a row?" they ask. Same question I ask fans of Call of Duty or EA Sports.

[DarkPrinceAlucard]

@D.P.A.
PoR should be in the middle ground. It's not as bad as SotN Inverted castle.

Matter of personal preference really.

I myself didn't like POR all that much.

1.lame storyline
2.lame level layout (the living picture thing was a dumb idea and only works for games like Super Mario 64)
3.Difficulty was REALLY easy, even more so than Dawn of Sorrow
4.Eric Lecarde gets murdered in this one (he was my favorite character in Bloodlines)

But to each his own I suppose...

[Jorge D. Fuentes]

These are the current trends.  The 'not allowed to love' one is more fluid than the 'not allowed to hate' one, with a large middle ground.

Not allowed to hate:
Castlevania III: Dracula's Curse (NES)
Super Castlevania IV (SNES)
Symphony of the Night (PS1)

Not allowed to love:
Castlevania Legends (GBC)
Castlevania Judgment (Wii)
Castlevania 64 (N64)
Castlevania: DraculaXX/Vampire's Kiss (SNES)
Castlevania: Order of Shadows (Mobile)

True Middle Ground (generally liked, but agreed upon that they're not perfect games):
Castlevania (NES)
Castlevania Adventure II: Belmonts' Revenge
Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow
Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia

The rest of the middle ground:

The Quirkies (these games have a following, but generally have one or more grating flaws that prevent them from being great):
Vampire Killer (MSX)
Decent game for its time, but Castlevania (NES) is pretty much better in every way.
Castlevania II: Simon's Quest (NES)
Decent game but improperly mapped out, difficult to understand without a guide, and some gameplay issues tack on as well.
DraculaX: Rondo of Blood (PC-Engine)
Pretty great game, but the control isn't as good as Super Castlevania IV.  Still widely held in high regard, and for some, is a "Not allowed to hate" game.  Also, the music is awesome.

The Mediocre (these aren't bad games, but they have a number of issues, enough to make fans generally recognize that they're not as great as we'd like them to be):
Castlevania Bloodlines
It's an alright title, but the rigidity of the characters, the missing color palette of the Genesis, and general lack of panache in comparison to Rondo and Super CVIV make this title fall into mediocrity by many.
Castlevania: Circle of the Moon
A pretty great title, but the (at the time) GBA display was just getting worked out, so the hero is tiny, the castle is huge, and double-tapping becomes a chore.
Castlevania: Lament of Innocence and Castlevania: Curse of Darknness (PS2 and XBOX for the latter)
It's not quirky... it's a cookie-cutter dungeon-crawler-style game with flat boring stages, even if they're visually appealing.  The music rocks, though.  Gameplay-wise, they're pretty OK.
Castlevania: Legacy of Darkness
People dislike it because they feel it is what Castlevania 64 should have been, thus they feel ripped off that it took two games to get it 'right'.  There are some gameplay issues that, though at the time were acceptable, have made the game age in an unpleasant matter.
Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow, Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin
These games are cookie-cutter titles that, while good, end up looking like copies of Symphony of the Night.  Some issues in the art direction and a nonsensical plot, accompanied by some light trampling of prior Castlevania canon (from AoS and from Bloodlines) also make them gather some negativity.

The Unimportant (games which may or may not be bad, but generally people feel 'meh' about them.  No true hatred, but no fire-in-your-belly passion either, save for a few):
Castlevania: The Adventure
Castlevania: Harmony of Dissonance
Castlevania: The Arcade
Castlevania: Pachislot

Current Hot Trends:
Castlevania: Lords of Shadow (has heated opinions both for the game and against it)
Castlevania: Harmony of Despair (has heated opinions from the item collectors and online community, but purists find it to be a cash-in)


THE ABYSS:
Really bad games we should hate (opinion) but no one listens to meeeee:
Castlevania 64 (Commodore 64)
Castlevania (Amiga)

If there's a game I've not mentioned, then it falls under "The Unimportant".  That's how unimportant it is.

Let it be known that, aside from THE ABYSS, I think all the other games are actually pretty good.  Yes, even that one.  And that one.  Yup, that one too.

[Chernabogue]

Mmmh, this thread has some kind of Déjà-Vu...

[beingthehero]

Castlevania Chronicles is important to me. ;_;

I always thought that both it and Belmont's Revenge are good games that just fly under the radar

[Sumac]

I find it funny that people can hate PoR but love OoE. Or love DoS but dislike PoR.  These three games are pretty much the exact same games as far as gameplay, level design and graphics go. But still people pretend that they're vastly different. When they're not.

I disagree with this.
DOS, POR and OOE, while certainly being similar games, are prety different from each other in terms of mood, atmosphere and level design.
DOS is generally plain. It is boring game with very good gameplay, but non-inspired level design, minimum platforming and generally plain mood.
POR have better level design somewhat, but even the best levels are not very interesting. Some of them just horrible. Besides different level appearance gave the game mish-mashy feel. Butchered story added insult to injury. And gameplay-wise it wasn't good as DOS.
OOE have different level design, resembling CV2 in idea and in general closer to the classic games, melancholic mood, awesome soundtrack. Coupled with interesting gameplay, mostly derived from AOS / DOS, it sets itself apart from DOS and POR.

[Fofa]

DOS, POR and OOE, while certainly being similar games, are prety different from each other in terms of mood, atmosphere and level design.
DOS is generally plain. It is boring game with very good gameplay, but non-inspired level design, minimum platforming and generally plain mood.
POR have better level design somewhat, but even the best levels are not very interesting. Some of them just horrible. Besides different level appearance gave the game mish-mashy feel. Butchered story added insult to injury. And gameplay-wise it wasn't good as DOS.
OOE have different level design, resembling CV2 in idea and in general closer to the classic games, melancholic mood, awesome soundtrack. Coupled with interesting gameplay, mostly derived from AOS / DOS, it sets itself apart from DOS and POR.

PoR was my first Castlevania game (yeah I know, I'm a late comer) and I've only played the DS titles, so I still have a bit of a soft spot for it, even though it does have the flaws I mentioned previously.

The main reason I started this was because I've seen some fanbases absolutely explode into civil war if one person didn't agree with the general consensus. At least this seemed to be a more civil discussion.

[shelverton.]

Interestingly enough, I think OoE has the weakest level design of all three DSvanias. Though there's less backtracking so you don't have to see the worst levels again and again if you don't want to. But to be honest I think level design in all three games leave something to be desired. They're pretty much the same to me. But DoS is better imo, maybe because it was first.

[crisis]

When people are praising OoE and trashing PoR in the very same sentence, they're nitpicking on a level that people outside the Castlevania fanbase would never ever understand.

These guys have proven your point, Shelvy.

[Sumac]

The main reason I started this was because I've seen some fanbases absolutely explode into civil war if one person didn't agree with the general consensus.

Such is the way of pretty much all old fandoms.
The series changed so much with the time and many people joined in different eras, so sadly there would be some disagreement between fans. I hate it, personally.

PoR was my first Castlevania game (yeah I know, I'm a late comer) and I've only played the DS titles, so I still have a bit of a soft spot for it, even though it does have the flaws I mentioned previously.

Nothing bad about being a late comer to the franchise. It doesn't make you less of a fan or something. I, for one, didn't even knew that there were other Castlevanias, except for the NES trilogy, up until 2003.

Interestingly enough, I think OoE has the weakest level design of all three DSvanias. Though there's less backtracking so you don't have to see the worst levels again and again if you don't want to. But to be honest I think level design in all three games leave something to be desired. They're pretty much the same to me. But DoS is better imo, maybe because it was first.

The reason why I like OOE level design is that its rely on platforming more than in previous two games, and levels are short. DOS levels were a chore to me. Too long, unimpressive and boring. And POR levels were mish-mash of different ideas that I didn't like, IMHO.

[Ridureyu]

I spent so many years enjoying my Castlevania games, and I didn't know I was wrong and being a nad fan.  But thankfully, I've managed to stop having inappropriate fun, and only enjoy the correct Castlevanias now.