Topic: A REALLY interesting take on Simon's Quest

[DoctaMario]

As some of you know, I've always felt like Simon's Quest has been something of a misunderstood title in the Castlevania series. But while reading a Castlevania topic over at fantasystrike.com, Obscura, one of the more vocal members over there made a post regarding the game that I found completely interesting. It was in response to the Sequelitis video which you can watch Sequelitis - Castlevania 1 vs. Castlevania 2


Obscura had this to say:

    His analysis of the game was really far off, because he misunderstood it at a very fundamental level.

    A minor nitpick before getting to the big issue: contrary to popular belief (and what this review states), the odd and misleading dialogue is not at all because of translation issues. The Castlevania fandom found out a loooong time ago that the Japanese version is just as insane. Yes, it even has the famous "graveyard duck". I don't know why this is such an issue with people, though, given that the manual even warns you that the townspeople are crazy and you shouldn't fully trust what they say.

    As for the main issue: he's judging the game by platformer standards. Why anyone would do this, I have no idea. Simon's Quest is a game where the final level has no enemies and no hazards. You just walk through a creepy mausoleum. The game is trying to be a good platformer as much as Silent Hill is trying to be a good third-person action game.

    I'll say this again for emphasis.

    Castlevania II: Simon's Quest is not attempting to be a good platformer!

    Just like Silent Hill used the trappings of a 3D action game to create an experience designed to push the player's buttons, Simon's Quest uses the trappings of a platformer to push the player's buttons. With this in mind, none of the criticisms in that video make any sense. Yes, it's at best frustrating and at worst infuriating when you lose all of your hearts when you were saving up for an item. Guess what? That was completely intentional! So is the irritation of waiting for night to end so you can actually buy that item in town. The game got under your skin; it worked perfectly!

The mansion layouts are the most obvious example of the game's aims: the first one has invisible pits that drop you at the start of a looooong path that forces you back to the beginning of the dungeon every few feet, and more towards the end; the later ones are even more devious (the fifth one is particularly evil). This isn't a game that wants you to have fun playing it; CVII is more akin to a survival horror game than it is a normal platformer.

Another example: in the town where you get the blue crystal, someone right by the entrance you'll approach from warns you that there's a criminal forcing people into bad deals. Then you talk to some random guy... and he says "I would like to trade a blue crystal for your white crystal", and the game gives you no option; the crystal swap is done instantly! When I was a kid and played this for the first time, before the dawn of the internet and before I knew this was a necessary step for finishing the game, I freaked the fuck out! Holy shit, I just got an item I already knew was crucial stolen from me! And yet, despite this, the game is still leading the player down the correct path with the misinformation, because it's already been framed as important!. I know that the blue crystal is different in some important way than the white one! I can go back to the first mansion and see that the blue crystal does everything the white crystal does, so it becomes obvious that it was a mindfuck, but it focuses me in the right place.

Likewise, the "clue" regarding Deborah's Cliff, where the guy tells you to bang your head into it to create a hole to crawl through. The video review complained about this, saying it had nothing to do with the real solution. Well, no shit, Sherlock. Did you seriously think that banging your goddamn head through a fucking cliff was a viable solution, and not something fucking crazy that some random guy said?!?! At the same time, it DOES clue you in that there's more to the world beyond that cliff, and you should try to get past it. The game pulls this kind of weird shit all the time, mixing lies with half-truths, in an attempt to fuck with the player's head.

    The bit where he shows off the "fixed" version of the game is goddamn hilarious. A townsperson straight up tells him what he should do with the white crystal! LOL! Yeah, that "fixes" the game alright; it turns it from a weird mindfuck game into a kinda sub-par platformer. What a great mod!

    The above isn't to say that the game is perfect by any means. I can't really even give it a star rating as you'd like. You probably noticed that it's at the bottom of my list of Classicvanias, and there's a reason for that. The fact is, I have literally no desire to ever play it again. At the same time, I haven't had many more memorable gaming experiences than the years I spent hacking away at that mindfuck in my youth.

So what do you guys think? Is he on point? Is Simon's Quest more of an unintentional survival horror than a platformer or is Obscura (who makes some brilliant posts over there btw) full of shit?

[Jorge D. Fuentes]

I can agree with that to an extent.  The manual says not to trust the townspeople, and they do indeed give you, at best, half-truths.  The only veritable sources of information are Dracula's Clues.  The villagers do NOT LIE about those.  I guess that's the only thing they can safely tell you.

Of course, the clues are also cryptic.
"Wait for a soul with a red crystal on Deborah Cliff"... it never says "Crouch".
However, the previous clue about the blue crystal DOES say so "Kneel by the lake with the blue crystal".
So, essentially one clue is a clue to the next clue.

Some clues are only story-based, though:
"Destroy the curse and you'll rule Brahm's Mansion" and "Destroy the Curse with Dracula' Heart" are strictly based on the "Curse" of the river that prevents the ferryman from taking you to the mansion.

[uzo]

It sounds like a load of blind justifications to me.

Even if things were intended to be the way they were, it didn't make them any less poorly designed, poorly implemented, and frustrating.

I also don't buy that they were intending it to be an early 2D equivalent of a 'Silent Hill' type game. If any thing, they were experimenting with an action orientated game, while including RPG elements such as leveling up, money, upgrades, and open worlds.

[DoctaMario]

I can agree with that to an extent.  The manual says not to trust the townspeople, and they do indeed give you, at best, half-truths.  The only veritable sources of information are Dracula's Clues.  The villagers do NOT LIE about those.  I guess that's the only thing they can safely tell you.

Of course, the clues are also cryptic.
"Wait for a soul with a red crystal on Deborah Cliff"... it never says "Crouch".
However, the previous clue about the blue crystal DOES say so "Kneel by the lake with the blue crystal".
So, essentially one clue is a clue to the next clue.

Some clues are only story-based, though:
"Destroy the curse and you'll rule Brahm's Mansion" and "Destroy the Curse with Dracula' Heart" are strictly based on the "Curse" of the river that prevents the ferryman from taking you to the mansion.

I agree. I do like the story based clues though. They flesh out the tale a bit and make Simon's Quest the first CV game to have something of a story beyond, "Dude with whip goes to kill Dracula."

It sounds like a load of blind justifications to me.

Even if things were intended to be the way they were, it didn't make them any less poorly designed, poorly implemented, and frustrating.

I also don't buy that they were intending it to be an early 2D equivalent of a 'Silent Hill' type game. If any thing, they were experimenting with an action orientated game, while including RPG elements such as leveling up, money, upgrades, and open worlds.

His argument wasn't that the game was INTENDED to be a 2D Silent Hill (which was years from even being thought of at that point) but that the blend of elements used and the attempt at immersing the player in the environment unintentionally created this.

I agree, not everything was as well implemented as it would have been had the game come out today (and who's to say it would have been much different were that the case), but I really think people play Simon's Quest thinking it's going to be like either the level-based classic games or a Castleroid, of which it is like neither. There really isn't another game in the series that's like SQ if you sit back and think about it.

[uzo]

I didn't say explicitly 2D Silent Hill. I used the word style in there. It makes all the difference.

Of course it cannot be intended to be a game from the future. The hell do you take me for?

[beingthehero]

A time traveler.

[A-Yty]

The dark palette was cool. It added to SQ's eerie atmosphere (which I believe was totally intentional) and I like it. Simon's an orange, brownish gingerbread man in the original, so criticizing his SQ sprite feels forced, IMO.

What is there left that hasn't already been said about this game? Lots of people think SQ was, at best, an auspicious experiment that ended up crappy, but there is still a lot of interest in these reviews that repeat many of the same points.

I'm not sure I'd call it a prototype survival horror game. Heck, CV1 was more survival horror than SQ2. The only real horror to survive in SQ that comes to mind is buying what you need before you suffer enough frustrating deaths to lose your hearts.

[crisis]

Perhaps the programmers were high on that green stuff whilst making it o.o;

[DoctaMario]

I didn't say explicitly 2D Silent Hill. I used the word style in there. It makes all the difference.

Of course it cannot be intended to be a game from the future. The hell do you take me for?

You're arguing semantics at this point. We've both agreed they weren't intending on making it a "Silent Hill style" game. Calm down, have some dip.

The dark palette was cool. It added to SQ's eerie atmosphere (which I believe was totally intentional) and I like it. Simon's an orange, brownish gingerbread man in the original, so criticizing his SQ sprite feels forced, IMO.

What is there left that hasn't already been said about this game? Lots of people think SQ was, at best, an auspicious experiment that ended up crappy, but there is still a lot of interest in these reviews that repeat many of the same points.

I'm not sure I'd call it a prototype survival horror game. Heck, CV1 was more survival horror than SQ2. The only real horror to survive in SQ that comes to mind is buying what you need before you suffer enough frustrating deaths to lose your hearts.

I think in a way it IS an unintentional prototype of the survival horror genre because some of the qualities of survival horror are present here albeit in embryonic states. i agree with you about the palette too. In a way it kind of reflects the story of the game too which is a pretty tragic one.

I don't really get the gripes about losing hearts though. If you die in ANY CV game, you lose your hearts. I don't get why people rage hard about that in SQ when they're just as plentiful there as they are in ANY CV game that has them.

[A-Yty]

Because, unlike other Vanias, you need hearts to buy weapons, items and upgrades.

[Lumi Kløvstad]

It sounds like a load of blind justifications to me.

Even if things were intended to be the way they were, it didn't make them any less poorly designed, poorly implemented, and frustrating.

I also don't buy that they were intending it to be an early 2D equivalent of a 'Silent Hill' type game. If any thing, they were experimenting with an action orientated game, while including RPG elements such as leveling up, money, upgrades, and open worlds.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

[DoctaMario]

Because, unlike other Vanias, you need hearts to buy weapons, items and upgrades.

Understood, but in any of the more arcade-type vanias, I'd almost say not having hearts is even MORE detrimental because it may mean the difference between beating a level and not beating a level.

All one needs to do in Simon's Quest to keep their hearts is merely stay alive (Simon's Quest isn't a super tough game by any stretch) and I'd say you're more likely to die because of a missed jump and a loss of energy.

[Belmont Stakes]

All I have to say is Zelda II and Battle of Olympus. Simon's Quest is not a bad game, you're not a bad game you've just gotten in with bad company, people. But Simon's Quest is not all it could be. You could have all those elements in the game that you mentioned and still have a great platform title. Although there are some good spots; the backgrounds are mostly redundant and lifeless i.e. look at the mansions. The platforming feels clunky & the enemies do not impede your path. Are you saying that weak enemies add to the mind fuckerishness and that Link and/or Olympus don't try to impede your path with fearsome and cunning lesser enemies? Also their bosses & final bosses are tough and something to be reckoned with sir. Dracula? No. When a game makes it big you don't expect the makers to low ball it's sequel and make it a lesser version than the original title. Despite the fact that it does give you a feeling of classic horror noir the lack of epic battles makes it a lesser game. The issue with hearts can be fixed by roaming mansions (where time stops) and gaining them up quick by fighting Gargoyles. It's a fair frustration that one should suffer for dying just like losing exp in Link or Olives in BOO.

[Gaawa-chan]

All I have to say is Zelda II and Battle of Olympus.

Haven't played the latter but I love the former.  Zelda 2 is incredibly underrated, maintaining the labyrinth-like dungeon feel in side-scrolling segments while discarding the ridiculous need to lay a bomb on every single wall, push every single block, and use every single item on every single screen from the first game. Unlike Zelda 1, you actually have a small amount of direction to help you.  Not to mention that Zelda 2 has some awesome bosses, especially when compared to Zelda 1 which had some really crappy bosses.

But Simon's Quest is not all it could be. You could have all those elements in the game that you mentioned and still have a great platform title. Although there are some good spots; the backgrounds are mostly redundant and lifeless i.e. look at the mansions. The platforming feels clunky & the enemies do not impede your path....
... Despite the fact that it does give you a feeling of classic horror noir the lack of epic battles makes it a lesser game. The issue with hearts can be fixed by roaming mansions (where time stops) and gaining them up quick by fighting Gargoyles.

I agree.  I think that Simon's Quest could actually be remade in such a way that it both achieves what it initially set out to do AND have good bosses, platforming, some way to tell which villagers are lying or some way to make them tell the truth, and better leveling and item systems.

[DoctaMario]

All I have to say is Zelda II and Battle of Olympus. Simon's Quest is not a bad game, you're not a bad game you've just gotten in with bad company, people. But Simon's Quest is not all it could be. You could have all those elements in the game that you mentioned and still have a great platform title. Although there are some good spots; the backgrounds are mostly redundant and lifeless i.e. look at the mansions. The platforming feels clunky & the enemies do not impede your path. Are you saying that weak enemies add to the mind fuckerishness and that Link and/or Olympus don't try to impede your path with fearsome and cunning lesser enemies? Also their bosses & final bosses are tough and something to be reckoned with sir. Dracula? No. When a game makes it big you don't expect the makers to low ball it's sequel and make it a lesser version than the original title. Despite the fact that it does give you a feeling of classic horror noir the lack of epic battles makes it a lesser game. The issue with hearts can be fixed by roaming mansions (where time stops) and gaining them up quick by fighting Gargoyles. It's a fair frustration that one should suffer for dying just like losing exp in Link or Olives in BOO.

Many of those complaints are things that could be said about CVs 1 and 3 as well though. I'd say the balance between enemy strength and player strength started to get out of whack around CV4, and got WAY Out of hand once the Castleroid formula took hold, but the NES CV games kept it fairly well in check. And if you're looking for platforming, there's plenty of it, especially in the mansions, though it's not the focus of the game this time around.

I don't think Konami low-balled this one, I think they were trying to figure out how to make the transition from the arcade to the home market. And in doing so, they made a game that was (and I'd say still is) misunderstood because people get wrapped up in comparing it to its predecessor and because it utilizes things that were considered acceptable design elements back when it was created that may not be now.

I agree.  I think that Simon's Quest could actually be remade in such a way that it both achieves what it initially set out to do AND have good bosses, platforming, some way to tell which villagers are lying or some way to make them tell the truth, and better leveling and item systems.

What you're talking about sounds as though you're trying to make it into a Castleroid. Leveling isn't really the point of the game, as it really only happens twice (and that's if you REALLY do some grinding.) I don't see any problems with the item system, but what would you change about it?

I agree about the bosses, it might have been cool to have been locked into the boss room until you defeat them. If they'd had better AI those could have been pretty cool fights, but they basically boiled down to *mash B until dead.*

As far as the villager thing is concerned, refer to the quote in the first post. The MANUAL even tells you not all the villagers' clues can be trusted and part of the game is sussing out the clues. If you could tell which clues were useful and which ones weren't, I think it would take a level of puzzle solving out of the game.