Topic: If Castlevania Legacy of Darkness/Castlevania 64 was released today

[DoctaMario]

The only thing that could save the N64 titles would be a complete remake, from the ground up.

When comes right down to it; the N64 games failed to have good gameplay, unable to transition itself properly into a 3D space.

The 64 games were a 3D representation of the 2D combat system which is what they were intended to be. 3D gaming was really in its infancy back when those games were released. They were a bit raw in places but I think they ultimately were a good representation of the classicvania formula but in 3D

[Beaumont_Belmont]

I would agree with that. It doesn't need to be rebuilt, it just needs a few tweaks.  The combat system isn't bad, it just feels a little clunky due to the limitations of the technology available and the amount of time the team had to get the finished product out.

[RichterB]

The 64 games were a 3D representation of the 2D combat system which is what they were intended to be. 3D gaming was really in its infancy back when those games were released. They were a bit raw in places but I think they ultimately were a good representation of the classicvania formula but in 3D

Exactly. I mean, you can tweak the combat, but it doesn't need to be totally redone. Tacking on all these modern combos is a flawed notion, as that means you're taking away emphasis from level/game design to make it an elaborate beat-em-up, which isn't a part of Castlevania's definition. 

[Maedhros]

It's not that combos are really bad... just limit them a bit, instead of what we see in LoS.

[Johnny]

I don't think if it were made today that it would need that "Press X to finish off your enemy" or "Press these buttons to grab your enemy and have a series of other things you'll do over and over". I liked the simplicity of fighting a boss and just getting his energy levels down to nothing and then if he had a second form you'd get a brief cutscene and get the energy meter again down to nothing. Why complicate something when its unnecessary? A Boss doesn't need to have 18 cutscenes and attack pattern changes after each one. I dunno just my thoughts.

[DoctaMario]

Exactly. I mean, you can tweak the combat, but it doesn't need to be totally redone. Tacking on all these modern combos is a flawed notion, as that means you're taking away emphasis from level/game design to make it an elaborate beat-em-up, which isn't a part of Castlevania's definition.

Well to be fair, LoI was the same type of game as LoS in terms of combat. So LoS wasn't exactly out of the blue with its combat system. I wouldn't mind seeing them do something like CoD's combat but a little more interesting.

[uzo]

@most replies:

Of course the engine wouldn't be the same. That's a given. But I mean literally from the ground up. Redesigned movement and combat, redesigned levels to fit that new combat.

Basically start over using the same plot and characters, but everything else has to change.

@DoctaMario:

The combat was inherently flawed by trying to be a 3D implementation of the 2D combat system. It was just broken by default. It doesn't get bonus points for being the first attempt, if it utterly fails at what it's doing.

Look at the difference between Zelda's first 3D outing and 64/LoD. 64/LoD just looks like utter shit in comparison. They even had a re-release to get it right and still failed.

Good designers rethink with new technologies. Poor designers take the old as they knew it, and try to shoehorn it into the new when it doesn't fit.



In conclusion; The game is just broken. It needs a straight up re-imagining. And by re-imagining I don't mean Lords of Shadow.

[RichterB]

The combat was inherently flawed by trying to be a 3D implementation of the 2D combat system. It was just broken by default. It doesn't get bonus points for being the first attempt, if it utterly fails at what it's doing.

Look at the difference between Zelda's first 3D outing and 64/LoD. 64/LoD just looks like utter shit in comparison. They even had a re-release to get it right and still failed.

Good designers rethink with new technologies. Poor designers take the old as they knew it, and try to shoehorn it into the new when it doesn't fit.

In conclusion; The game is just broken. It needs a straight up re-imagining. And by re-imagining I don't mean Lords of Shadow.

Two notes:

1.) Unfortunately, looking at the modern history of video games, a re-imagining of design ultimately means something "like" Lords of Shadow. That's just where designers mind sets are for 3rd Person Action. I honestly believe that the core of action platforming was captured on N64. Are you saying that implementing an idea like Level 2, where you have to run, jump, and whip through flipping platforms, falling guillotines and medusa heads in tandem is inherently flawed because it was an idea from 2D that's rarely if ever attempted in 3D? By that definition, and what you said previously in that vein about designers, Mario 64 is an awful, amateurish game. Now, combos can be implemented to a limited degree, so long as they don't mess up the flow of character animation for placement (you have to be able to fight on narrow areas without moving and falling off), but I don't want it to become a scientific slugfest where I have to remember every button combination. I agree with Johnny about the sense of personal skill and execution when fighting a boss in N64 versus relying on a long, preset series of moves and embellishments that slow down the immediacy of the fight. It's clunky, but is a lot more satisfying in the sense that you feel you're in control, and not the computer's programming of move sets. Now, a refined version of Castlevania 64's combat and platforming can perhaps be seen in something like Capcom's Maximo series, but that's already ancient by today's standards. However, everything from Devil May Cry to Uncharted to God of War to Bayonetta are terrible examples of the brand of consequential, dynamic action platforming at the heart of Castlevania. The basic sense of movement and level design in CV64 feels a lot more open and free--that I'm in control--versus so many of the modern action ilk, where it feels like I'm moving from pre-arranged set piece to set piece.

2.) I think the the Ocarina of Time comparison is a fallacy. Castlevania is VERY different in nature than Zelda. On the surface you can cite Zelda: Ocarina of Time as proof of CV64's ineptness, but OOT was in development at the same time as Castlevania 64 from a team that had already worked on several 3D games and had internal company insight on the N64 hardware. There’s no way CV64’s team could have looked at Zelda: OoT in-depth before releasing CV64, and Legacy of Darkness was developed just several short months later as a way to get some closure on CV64's many unused elements and thus  already had certain framework elements in it that could not be changed, only slightly polished or finished. Most importantly, again, Zelda and Castlevania are fundamentally different games. Castlevania leaned more toward a realistic style with realistic proportions, and was based in split-second action and platforming far more complex than Zelda’s more leisurely auto-jumping and largely puzzle/target-based bosses. The fact that Zelda uses auto-jumping to this day shows a lack of daring in 3D design.

EDIT: I don't know if anyone will see this at this point (I'll repost later in the thread if need be), but one brilliant thing that CV64/LoD did that I only notice in retrospect is how versatile the whip's striking is. A whip is an imperfectly accurate weapon in real life, but the way it tracks airborne enemies and the character animation follows suit, is very fluid all things considered. When you're whipping an enemy on the ground or in the air, even when jumping, it tracks in its physics accordingly, which is something LoI and LoS both fail to do in their whip mechanics. Those whips always move the same way, whether you or the enemy are grounded or airborne. It's a slave to its starting combo strike. The way CV64 did it felt aesthetically like you were controlling the whip like SCIV, because it was striking in all directions of where the enemy appeared. Jump whip the spider-women enemies in the cave to see a clear example.

[Beaumont_Belmont]

One of the big things I think a modern "re-imagining" would lose is the adventure elements of the game. I enjoyed exploring the castle grounds and just taking in the atmosphere when I wasn't fighting. A new version would probably fill it with setpieces, which would ruin the castle's ambience.

[Lelygax]

I think that Uzo was talking about more precise controls and not so repetitive attacks, then rework the existing stages to work with this revamped idea in mind. If I understood it right the stages are okay, but they would need some changes or otherwise it would be very easy for a character that you can control so well.

Imagine what Super Castlevania 4 did in 2D, he wants a game that achieves that feel of control in 3D.

I've understood it right?

[uzo]

@Lelygax

For the most part, yes, you got the idea. Though I haven't detailed any attack system, I wouldn't say 'less repetitive' is what it needs. Just more adapt to a 3D environment. See below for more thoughts on this.

@RichterB

Re: '1.)' You didn't read my previous post correctly. The key phrase you seemed to have skipped over was "when it doesn't fit."

Secondly, I never truly felt in control of the character in CV64. I felt more like i was fighting the game to try and get it to do simple tasks. This is simply bad control, and just doesn't work right.

Re: '2.)' Mario 64 was Nintendo's first shot at a 3D platformer on the N64. Even if you calculate for first party resources, it came out so many leagues better than CV64/LoD that it's basically an embarrassment to Konami.

Its clear that the technical side of things was not the issue. It all comes down to the core design. And in the case of CV64/LoD the core design was simply not thought out well. It failed to really take the 3rd dimension into account, resulting in a clunky, hard to control, mess.

Also, realistic proportions have absolutely nothing to do with it. The game could have looked like The Wind Waker and still held the same core design. That is all on the art side of things. Besides, Zelda OoT did in fact have a realistically proportioned playable character, with Adult Link in the second half of the game. But did you notice a major shift in gameplay? Not at all. This is because the core design was solid, and regardless of the character's proportions it all felt just as smooth.

Re: 'EDIT:'

"A whip is an imperfectly accurate weapon in real life" Are you saying that a whip is not an accurate weapon? Have you ever used one? I have. I can say this completely false.

As far as it's use in CV64/LoD, the way it tracks enemies is actually the best aspect of the combat.

If the re-imagining were up to me, my first thought on the combat would be to rethink about the use of a whip in 3D space. Whips have multiple uses, especially for controlling 3D space. The basic philosophy behind Lords of Shadow's desing is actually very good. They have two main attack methods. One controls direct target situations, while the other controls situations where you're surrounded. This was not very well executed in lords of Shadow int he end, but the basic concept is very solid.

I would go with a multiple whip action, via different buttons, system for combat. One button would act primarily how it does already in CV64 ("Direct Attack"). It targets an enemy within your viewing range, and makes a locked on direct and aimed strike to the enemy. The key difference I would implement into this system is the reduction of cool down. Not by too much, but just enough to get the following effect.

When you see someone actually use a whip in real life, often strikes with the whip can cause the whip to swing back around and come back to the other side of the person, to which you can repeat that move, but mirrored, and it brings the whip back to it's starting position. You can attack with a whip continuously like this in a cycle.

Have this type of animation playing, where the strikes are physically identical, and do the same precision aiming. Just reduce the cool down so it cycles in a fluid animation. Since you can attack a little more rapidly, reduce the damage by a degree.

The second kind of attack would be 3D space control ("Area Attack"). Much like the later 3D titles, a circular strike around the character. This would be effectively a "get off my back" move. Itll send any enemy around you into hit stun, but this attack cannot be spammed as it has a larger cool down. It is meant to get out of being surrounded, with the next feature...

A dodge roll, to get out of sticky situations. It can cancel a Direct Attack, but not an Area Attack. While you cannot directly attack out of a dodge roll, perhaps some sub weapons have a special condition. What if you could drop Holy Water as you dodge out of the way? Would be a nice way to trick enemies into extra damage.

Lastly, off the top of my head, I would add in the ability to grab enemies, and maybe environment objects, with the whip. Especially for the use of whip swinging. This is something that SCVIV started to do, but was dropped from just about any other game. And yes I am aware that the CV64 prototype was trying to implement this having a whip swing, but it ultimately did not make it in.

Instead of adding a button for this, perhaps when you hold down the button when doing a Direct Attack, instead of tapping it, it'll trigger you to attempt to grab the the enemy and reel them in or something. This also works for swinging hooks. So you don't accidentally grab one when you mean to attack, you must hold the button down.

This is just my initial thoughts for 5 minutes. Think of what a talented development team could do with more time to fully bring the idea to life.

[Inccubus]

The way it tracks enemies is actually the best aspect of the combat.

If the re-imagining were up to me, my first thought on the combat would be to rethink about the use of a whip in 3D space. Whips have multiple uses, especially for controlling 3D space. The basic philosophy behind Lords of Shadow's desing is actually very good. They have two main attack methods. One controls direct target situations, while the other controls situations where you're surrounded. This was not very well executed in lords of Shadow int he end, but the basic concept is very solid.

I would go with a multiple whip action, via different buttons, system for combat. One button would act primarily how it does already in CV64 ("Direct Attack"). It targets an enemy within your viewing range, and makes a locked on direct and aimed strike to the enemy. The key difference I would implement into this system is the reduction of cool down. Not by too much, but just enough to get the following effect.

When you see someone actually use a whip in real life, often strikes with the whip can cause the whip to swing back around and come back to the other side of the person, to which you can repeat that move, but mirrored, and it brings the whip back to it's starting position. You can attack with a whip continuously like this in a cycle.

Have this type of animation playing, where the strikes are physically identical, and do the same precision aiming. Just reduce the cool down so it cycles in a fluid animation. Since you can attack a little more rapidly, reduce the damage by a degree.

The second kind of attack would be 3D space control ("Area Attack"). Much like the later 3D titles, a circular strike around the character. This would be effectively a "get off my back" move. Itll send any enemy around you into hit stun, but this attack cannot be spammed as it has a larger cool down. It is meant to get out of being surrounded, with the next feature...

A dodge roll, to get out of sticky situations. It can cancel a Direct Attack, but not an Area Attack. While you cannot directly attack out of a dodge roll, perhaps some sub weapons have a special condition. What if you could drop Holy Water as you dodge out of the way? Would be a nice way to trick enemies into extra damage.

Lastly, off the top of my head, I would add in the ability to grab enemies, and maybe environment objects, with the whip. Especially for the use of whip swinging. This is something that SCVIV started to do, but was dropped from just about any other game. And yes I am aware that the CV64 prototype was trying to implement this having a whip swing, but it ultimately did not make it in.

Instead of adding a button for this, perhaps when you hold down the button when doing a Direct Attack, instead of tapping it, it'll trigger you to attempt to grab the the enemy and reel them in or something. This also works for swinging hooks. So you don't accidentally grab one when you mean to attack, you must hold the button down.

This is just my initial thoughts for 5 minutes. Think of what a talented development team could do with more time to fully bring the idea to life.

I like all of this. These are all great ideas.

The one thing I would also add is to keep the secondary main weapons. IE- Reinhardt's sword.
They were a good addition to the main form of combat and if they were expanded to have a number of alternative and varying uses besides straight up combat that would make things much more interesting.

Just off the top of my head, I can imagine a scenario where Reinhardt is fighting a lizard-man, for example. You can fight him normally with the whip alone, or use the crowd control move to stun him, circle around back pinning his tail to the ground with the sword, then finish him off with direct attacks from a safe distance.
Having lots of situational uses like that for the secondary weapon without any of the intrusive QTE's would make combat more interesting. And by not showing the player where to use them and only hinting that there are a variety of special uses will encourage the player to experiment in combat instead of just doing the dame things over and over.

Oh, here's another one. Since you mentioned being able to grab and reel in enemies how about a situation where you have an armored boss? The boss's weak point can be covered in armor necessitating a grapple move with the whip that would then allow the player to move in close and pry the armor off with the sword to expose said weak point making the boss much easier to beat. All done in fluid, uninterrupted animations.

[RichterB]

@uzo:

Everything you said sounds reasonable. I've suggested some of those concepts myself in the past as far as the grabbing (which LoI toyed with) and the circular attack (I used Circle of the Moon as an example). But for some reason, before, it sounded like you wanted to tear down everything that the game established aside from characters and plot. But with what you're saying, while the levels would have to be tweaked and rebuilt, the fundamentals of them would remain unchanged. This would simply embellish and refine the negative space. (Of conceptual note, interviews suggest a standing whip wiggle move like SCVIV was originally in the game to deal with being surrounded, or being attacked at odd angles. IIRC, you'd hold down the attack button, and move the analog stick to manually move the whip where you want it in twisting and slash-like motions).

I still feel a bit uncomfortable with your statement that "It failed to really take the 3rd dimension into account, resulting in a clunky, hard to control, mess." I agree it could go further, but compared to how IGA and Mercury Steam utilized 3D space and navigating that space, I have to say it was a lot more ambitious and far-sighted than you're giving it credit for, even if very unrefined/rough. The usable vertical and horizontal spatial depth alone is something one can only dream of in 3D Castlevania outside of these N64 titles.

One pro of its combat was the self-made combos through sliding. You can slide and drop your holy water, or slash and then come up from that slide with a whip attack. The R Button helps a lot with the game we got for turning and dodging by holding it down--just speaking of what we got.

Whatever the case is, rhythm is of more concern than repetition. When you have attack rhythm, you don't mind taking out enemies the same way, as the 2D games show. (Mercury Steam takes all the rhythm out of it with the excess hit points and super-powered combos in isolated, flat arena battles). And with the N64 games, while I sometimes would clunk-ily over- or undershoot, the fluidity in which I could combine jumping attacks with primary and secondary weapons and sub-weapons or sliding meant a lot of uncomplicated variety and ingenuity if you play it creatively.

And no, I have not used an actual whip. I was simply suggesting that a whip swing at a moving enemy at a distance might not always connect, as sometimes the enemies dart out of your lock in the N64 games. (assuming they're still in range, perhaps your recoil return could catch them).

Anyway, if it's well thought out, I don't care how it's done. So long as Castlevania gets back to the base line of these N64 games in 3D and doesn't keep trying to refine or tweak LoI, which is essentially what LoS has been attempting, succeeding in some areas while stumbling in others.

[Lelygax]

These ideas sounds good, what about bringing that stakes back from 64 prototype? They could be used like in Resident Evil Remake, if a Vampire tries to grab and bite you, you can counter attack using it if you have one.

[Johnny]

This is pretty awesome. You guys have some really great ideas. Reading through this thread I already feel like it has exceeded just talks about what could make a great game better but rather an actual blueprint which could make for an awesome reimagining of the N64 titles. I really have to commend you guys on your ideas.