Topic: Streaming CV64, FINALE

[Laina]

Hey, muchachos. Uzo & I are in the home stretch of our CV64 run, expecting to complete sometime tonight. If anyone's inclined to do so, you can watch him either breathe a sigh of relief at conquering it or spiral so deeply into that madness that he is forever lost to us. It's a real crapshoot. She all begins at 10:00 pm EST, July 16th.

www.twitch.tv/marcdwyz

[Abnormal Freak]

Did you guys ever finish it, or did Uzo just say, "Fuck this game forever"?

[TheTextGuy]

i played it again recently, first time since i transcribed all the game's text (which since then has been lost, sadly)
for me, this game holds up so well that it's amazing.  contrary to what people say, i never had a problem with the camera and actually found it to be more versatile than cameras in similar, more recent games.  also the epilogue is fantastic.  after all this time, i had forgotten that

(click to show/hide)

Malus is the son of Cornell/Ada.  well, at least it's heavily implied that way, but it's a twist that really brings things full circle.

aye, I need to dust off the old Ninty-64 again.

I remember when I first played it I thought it was a good game.  The first level stumbles a bit, but the rest of the game is pretty solid.  I think I did have problems with the camera or the aiming system, but obviously not enough to deter me from beating the game.  Also, that nitro part of the Castle wasn't that bad at all.

[Jorge D. Fuentes]

Uzo's a little bitch with that game.
It's kinda nice to see him screaming.
"Blah blah memory card is broken for this game only"
"Blah blah i are ded"

[Laina]

Did you guys ever finish it, or did Uzo just say, "Fuck this game forever"?

Saving it for when we can find my memory pack that is in working order. We'll announce it when we attempt a one shot.

[RichterB]

I'll be interested to check this out when it happens. These N64 games are worth the effort.

I'm reposting this here for those who mostly frequent this side of the forums:

You've undoubtedly seen me lay out my case for these games before. But I decided to show why these had so many fundamentals down from the franchise. I used the original hardware to make this video. It's not as comprehensive as I'd like--that'd be a much larger project and include LoD as well--but this shows the basics of why CV64 laid the groundwork for Castlevania in 3D better than any game since, IMO. I set it to Battle of the Holy to show how it's not a black sheep, but works with classic tunes as well: http://bit.ly/2v64Hkt

[Abnormal Freak]

It could be an icon of Carrie flashing her panties.

[uzo]

Guess nostalgia really blinds you from that bad game design and bad controls.

[Abnormal Freak]

CV64 and LOD had pretty bad controls even when they came out. Didn't stop me from enjoying them, and I've played through them several times, as recently as only a few years ago. What they lack in finesse, they make up for in ambience and the little quirks that make video gaming wonderful. I tend to favor stilted games with an interesting vision over the polished same-old.

There's no denying that of all the 3D Castlevanias, the N64 ones still captured the spirit and gameplay of the originals the best. (Although the actual best 3D Castlevania is called Bloodborne.)

Citing nostalgia when one enjoys something is always a lazy criticism; and no, there's nothing wrong with embracing nostalgia either.

[RichterB]

When Castlevania 64 came out, I remember playing it and thinking it was interesting and good, but I sort of took it for granted and didn't necessarily think it was special. In fact, I think Lament of Innocence had a stronger first impression on me in some ways. But I never thought of either N64 game as bad. And then, sometime after Curse of Darkness or the first Lords of Shadow, I really began to admire what Castlevania 64 (and Legacy of Darkness) had done. It wasn't simply nostalgia. They're flawed, but still managed to legitimately bring Castlevania into the third dimension in a big way.

I've found that over 90% of the camera problems can be fixed with the R Button, and I've never had much issue with the controls, especially after some practice (aside from a few ledge-grabbing sequences, I suppose). I posted a video earlier in this thread, and when you get in a rhythm with this game, it flows pretty darn well. The N64 game was the growing pains for Castlevania in 3D, but those growing pains were cut short in a "helicopter parent" sort of way with the attempts at taking shortcuts with LoI, CoD, and LoS. (i.e. Let's do Castlevania through the lens of Devil May Cry, God of War, etc.) LoD wasn't so much a full-fledged second attempt as it was a DLC patch that was likely trying to shore up development costs from the first game.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but like Abnormal Freak, I tend to give credit for the overall experience over the nuts and bolts. In today's overly perfectionistic world, we tend to judge video games by if they dotted all their I's and crossed all their T's, but if that were the case we could retroactively condemn a whole host of classic, influential, and fun games. And on that note, I'm trying to figure out what Castlevania 64/LoD is being compared to in that sense. The 3D biggies of its time were like Mario 64 and Tomb Raider and a few others. (You can throw in Zelda: Ocarina of Time and Metal Gear Solid...but those are not platformers by any means, and the former couldn't really be used as any sort of major reference given the overlap in development times.) Anyway, when you look at the general attempt at realistic proportions, physics, and environments in terms of translating real-time, input-driven 3D action-platforming with exploration elements and the quirks/trappings of the Castlevania franchise, it had a taller task than the highly praised Mario 64. If I compare it to contemporary games that I guess had similar-ish tasks...maybe Soul Reaver, Medievil, Nightmare Creatures, Tomb Raider...Castlevania 64 is generally less herky-jerky in controls/camera/visuals and in many ways just as or more ambitious while doing it. So, while the N64 era of Castlevania could be awkward or rough around the edges at times, for a first attempt, I think it stood up against the competition just fine and I don't completely understand where the judgment is coming from on that front.

I suppose there is the front that it wasn't SotN or SotN in 3D. But that's unfair. That's like saying Castlevania IV wasn't Dracula's Curse, or Rondo of Blood wasn't Castlevania IV, or Bloodlines wasn't Rondo of Blood, etc. Castlevania has always been a series that experimented and remixed itself, and the N64 games tried to bring a little bit of everything, including their own spin. (I guess I've heard the argument that the N64 games took too many cues from Tomb Raider...but that's not a fair argument, because they each brought a different gameplay mix to the table and one could also easily say that Mario 64 was too much like Tomb Raider compared to the franchise's earlier 2D entries.) There's a place for different interpretations within reason, where there is give-and-take from each entry, and that's what helped make this franchise great, IMO. If I'm disappointed about anything with the N64 games, it's that they weren't allowed to be completed as planned. The interviews and beta videos promised even more than what we got with the additional material of LoD. The hearts and minds of the people that worked on this were in the right place, I feel.

There's no denying that of all the 3D Castlevanias, the N64 ones still captured the spirit and gameplay of the originals the best. (Although the actual best 3D Castlevania is called Bloodborne.)

Not so fast...Bloodborne's got the visuals, atmosphere, interconnected world, and challenge...but it's lacking in the "platforming" and enemy placement departments, and has too much combat grinding, just like Dark Souls. I think we have to be careful that, should such a thing happen, the next 3D Castlevania doesn't end up trying to carbon-copy a successful 3D game that's missing fundamental ingredients of the franchise. It's probably much harder to get a potential new 3D Castlevania up and running with a paradigm of its own, but that's what the franchise needs to stand out and get the most mileage. I think Lords of Shadow proved that to me once and for all. But I doubt there's the guts to go for it at this point.

[Abnormal Freak]

SOTN and the other IGA games kinda rendered platforming as something you do rather than a gameplay aspect requiring skill. Bloodborne is a pretty perfect, modernized translation of those games. It's not Castlevania, no, but it's the closest anybody has ever gotten. The N64 CVs made a strong attempt for the late '90s, but I don't know how well that style of 3D gameplay would work now—the gaming climate may not allow it (given how poorly Yooka-Laylee tried to recreate that era). It's hard to think of combat that could be done differently from Bloodborne for a CV game; after all, several of the classic CVs required a certain level of strategy in fighting an enemy, backing off when needed and knowing when to attack, and the dodging you do in Bloodborne is a good 3D representation of that. It also isn't a combo-fest button masher, so it's far more authentic to CV than either the PS2 or LOS games.



MediEvil, as you said, is probably one of the closest examples to similar gameplay to the N64 games from that same era. And having just beaten it for the first time recently, I can attest to it being far more troubled in play mechanics than either of the CV64 games. Perhaps one game near that style that Konami could have emulated a little was Soul Reaver, which had tighter platforming and camera controls.

[RichterB]

SOTN and the other IGA games kinda rendered platforming as something you do rather than a gameplay aspect requiring skill. Bloodborne is a pretty perfect, modernized translation of those games. It's not Castlevania, no, but it's the closest anybody has ever gotten. The N64 CVs made a strong attempt for the late '90s, but I don't know how well that style of 3D gameplay would work now—the gaming climate may not allow it (given how poorly Yooka-Laylee tried to recreate that era).

A well-put definition of how SotN changed things. From that perspective, I can understand. I think you're right...But say it isn't so! I've been upset for a while now how the industry's been contracting in its "definition" of what is acceptable for "modern games." (Mostly this has meant making games more cinematic and less interactive on the whole...or, conversely, in cases where interactivity is promoted, meaningful structure and skill is downplayed.) To me, meaningful platforming is a staple of action games, whether they be 2D or 3D, and adds to their appeal greatly. The way it's been trivialized and then all but gutted is depressing. I haven't had a chance to play Yooka Laylee yet (due to the cancellation of the Wii U version), and don't have huge expectations for it at this point, but I'd hate to think it's the case study by which 3D platforming will be forever judged in the modern era. Throwing out 3D, skill-based platforming at this stage is no more legitimate in my mind than if, during the transition from Mario 3 to Mario World, Miyamoto had said, "No more jumping!"

It's hard to think of combat that could be done differently from Bloodborne for a CV game; after all, several of the classic CVs required a certain level of strategy in fighting an enemy, backing off when needed and knowing when to attack, and the dodging you do in Bloodborne is a good 3D representation of that. It also isn't a combo-fest button masher, so it's far more authentic to CV than either the PS2 or LOS games.

I appreciate that it isn't a combo-fest, which is one of my complaints of the later 3D Castlevanias. You couldn't have meaningful platforming with those because of the way your attack moves changed your character's momentum and placement, not to mention the tiresome wailing on enemies that should take one or two hits. The N64's combat system was more diverse than people gave it credit, especially in LoD, where you could now do more actions while sliding. And there was an early form of dodging via a timed use of R + A + back on the stick, where you could still attack while in the act of dodging. I show this move early in that video earlier against the bone pillar. I'm fine enough with some dodging systems like Bloodborne, but I don't like when it becomes a chess dance of "you make a move, I make a move" and the level progression slows to a crawl. I want to make sure there's a forward-moving flow, and that it encourages use of sub-weapons for ranged attacks and such. Bloodborne, due to it being more in line with SotN as you say, has different priorities, encouraging exploration, but I don't begrudge it for being its own thing.

MediEvil, as you said, is probably one of the closest examples to similar gameplay to the N64 games from that same era. And having just beaten it for the first time recently, I can attest to it being far more troubled in play mechanics than either of the CV64 games. Perhaps one game near that style that Konami could have emulated a little was Soul Reaver, which had tighter platforming and camera controls.

Soul Reaver's camera was more refined in terms of its versatility, but it seems like it could still be pretty temperamental in more confined areas, and I'm not sure if the jumping had the same sort of momentum of snappiness/weight that CV64 had. I'd be tempted to call it a toss-up overall. Unfortunately, I never got around to playing that title (or its remakes/sequels). It had interesting ideas for sure, but it always looked a little too stark and spartan for my tastes. But the ability to rotate the camera would have been useful in CV64, no doubt.

[Abnormal Freak]

I'd love to see some good action platformers come out. I think the problem isn't so much that people don't want them, but that designers today don't know how to make them. I haven't spent enough time with Yooka-Laylee to say for certain if it's a dud, but one thing is apparent is it's nothing like the games that it emulates. This could be due to the designers and programmers not having made a game like that in such a long time, or younger members not having the necessary skill, and/or down to the director never having directed a game before (despite being a longtime programmer at Rare) and perhaps he wasn't the visionary to lead the team.

I'm super excited for Mario Odyssey, though. Galaxy 1 brought 3D platforming back in a new, refreshing way, and I think Odyssey will do the same.

If a new 3D CV got made, I wouldn't want it to follow the Bloodborne gameplay either; that's strictly a Souls thing, and I don't want another CV that's just "this game with a coat of paint" like LOS was. But unless another good attempt comes out, I consider Bloodborne to be as close to what a 3D CV should look like. Especially when taking in the branching area designs, the gothic art direction, and monster lore.

[RichterB]

I'd love to see some good action platformers come out. I think the problem isn't so much that people don't want them, but that designers today don't know how to make them. I haven't spent enough time with Yooka-Laylee to say for certain if it's a dud, but one thing is apparent is it's nothing like the games that it emulates. This could be due to the designers and programmers not having made a game like that in such a long time, or younger members not having the necessary skill, and/or down to the director never having directed a game before (despite being a longtime programmer at Rare) and perhaps he wasn't the visionary to lead the team.

Interesting theory. It's quite possibly true. I liked what I had seen from early demos regarding the first world of Yooka-Laylee. I figured it would come together well enough, but it's sounding like something went wrong somewhere.

I'm super excited for Mario Odyssey, though. Galaxy 1 brought 3D platforming back in a new, refreshing way, and I think Odyssey will do the same.

I really loved Galaxy 1 and 2. I played them in reverse order as a somewhat late Wii adopter. #1 was the more meaty experience, while #2 was like a huge toy box, so they both were worthy successors to Mario 64 for me. As good as Odyssey looks, and as good as the Galaxies were, I can't help but feel they are all a bit different breed from 3D platformers of the past, which is good, but also bad in that it doesn't set a path of fundamentals for something like a new 3D action-platforming Castlevania to emerge from. The stuff that Mario Odyssey is doing is surrealism and experimental gimmicks to the max--that's going to be the takeaway for people, I think. There will be a solid core, of course, but it's the zany one-off stuff that Mario seems to focus on these days, and that people seem to savor. It's cool, don't get me wrong, but it sometimes seems like an overload of frosting. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I would like to see a little more core concepts that carry over to different areas in different ways, versus a cap that basically repurposes whatever is in a given level, creating a series of interlocked events. But then, I was always more of a Super Mario World guy than a Mario 3 guy. The thing that blows me away is that the structure of Mario Odyssey, where the hub world transitions to subworlds, and you don't exit a level after getting a Moon or get direct hints about their locations--that's totally Banjo-Kazooie/Tooie with the Jiggies! And I don't hear people mentioning that...They just say "Mario Odyssey came up with this new open world concept of finding stuff..." Curious.

If a new 3D CV got made, I wouldn't want it to follow the Bloodborne gameplay either; that's strictly a Souls thing, and I don't want another CV that's just "this game with a coat of paint" like LOS was. But unless another good attempt comes out, I consider Bloodborne to be as close to what a 3D CV should look like. Especially when taking in the branching area designs, the gothic art direction, and monster lore.

Okay, I completely understand where you're coming from now.