Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So, I got an email from gamestop telling me to preorder it... now, I love me some Castlevania, so I bit and watched the trailers. Let me say, THOROUGHLY disappointed. All it is is a God of War clone with some Castlevania references thrown in. And what the hell, you don't even use a whip?!?! You us a magical pointy cross thing. What happened to the days where Castlevania was about timing, precision, and beating dracula in the face with a chain whip?!? Now all it is is a button masher for spastic kids who don't have the attention span to play a proper platformer. Just goes to show how much more skill was required to finish a game back in the day.

Over the last 15 years, gaming has become more widespread, parents stopped caring about M ratings, and companies dumbed their games down so that the new age of pre-teen gamers won't throw their controllers across the room.

And you're still suprised about dropping quality?

Ya.
Games have been going downhill for ages. Standards too. Espeically on games.

ook guys, I too agree at the drop in game quality. I mean I can easily count on both hands the games I own, simply for that reason. But when you make a game as AWESOME as castlevania, and NOT include a damn whip? Someone seriously dropped the ball. Thatd be like pokemon games with no cute animals beating each other to near death. Whats the point?

KingCracker wrote:ook guys, I too agree at the drop in game quality. I mean I can easily count on both hands the games I own, simply for that reason. But when you make a game as AWESOME as castlevania, and NOT include a damn whip? Someone seriously dropped the ball. Thatd be like pokemon games with no cute animals beating each other to near death. Whats the point?

SotN had a whip?

metallifan wrote:Over the last 15 years, gaming has become more widespread, parents stopped caring about M ratings, and companies dumbed their games down so that the new age of pre-teen gamers won't throw their controllers across the room.

And you're still suprised about dropping quality?

Ummmm, just because that games have been dropping in difficulty over the years, doesn't mean I can't be mad when they ruin one of my favorite franchises even more than they already had with all the RPG ones that they made.

Slarg232 wrote: SotN had a whip?

And, if that's one of the RPG ones then it also sucked... and if it didn't have a whip... then it obviously sucked no matter what.


Also, the story line for this game is slowed. It's basically the same as Dante's Inferno, which of course is a huge cliche.

I will give them some credit though, the bosses look pretty cool. I just wish that they hadn't put the Castlevania title on it to whore out the franchise name.

The quality of games isn't dropping across the board.

The only reason old games were so hard was because of ridiculous balance, primative design and trial-and-error gameplay. Stop with the fething paranoia.

Cheese Elemental wrote:The quality of games isn't dropping across the board.

The only reason old games were so hard was because of ridiculous balance, primative design and trial-and-error gameplay. Stop with the fething paranoia.

Actually, I disagree. Old games were hard, but they were fun enough to keep you trying.

Good graphics can cover a multitude of sins. There are still good games, but I think they're few and far between.

Monster Rain wrote:There are still good games, but I think they're few and far between.

Sounds like the Film industry HA!

LordofHats wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:There are still good games, but I think they're few and far between.

Sounds like the Film industry HA!

Sadly, yes.

But as long as people keep lining up to pay for gak, it's what both industries will continue to hand out.

well, that's true. I don't really think games are becoming worse, just different. Usually by being easier and wanting to take full advantage of the system's capabilities.

One of the problems is that their are too many games that are all the same. They aren't necessarily bad, but it gets boring playing clones of other games ( IE: new castlvania being a God of War/Dante's Inferno) clone.

Also, there are plenty of old games that are horrible too. You just didn't hear about them as much because games weren't as heavily advertised and there wasn't wide spread internet access.

SamplesoWoopass wrote:well, that's true. I don't really think games are becoming worse, just different. Usually by being easier and wanting to take full advantage of the system's capabilities.

Lack of required effort hidden by graphics = worse

One of the problems is that their are too many games that are all the same. They aren't necessarily bad, but it gets boring playing clones of other games ( IE: new castlvania being a God of War/Dante's Inferno) clone.

Lack of originality... = worse

Also, there are plenty of old games that are horrible too. You just didn't hear about them as much because games weren't as heavily advertised and there wasn't wide spread internet access.

And because most of them weren't all that bad. Old games that did suck had a habit of not appearing in the mainstream market, thanks mostly to companies with a checklist of quality concerns.

Richter in the lastest game looks like a male stripper. Needless to say I couldn't finish the game.

Symphony of the Night is the last one i gave a damn about. Dont know how many times i played through that game. Not a big fan of the belmonts or whips in general as weapons to be honest -_-

I see we have a bunch of people getting their panties in a twist over a game that hasn't been released yet. There isn't even a demo. There is a difference between being apprehensive and judging something as if one has played. It is reasonable to be apprehensive, but there isn't any of that here. Everyone is saying it sucks but no one has played it; it is hard to take the false indignation all that seriously. Let's calm down and wait till it is out to hate it.

Also might want to check who's wagon your hitching up to as well. OP claims that Castlevania is one of his favorite series but doesn't know what Symphony of the Night is. Make of that what you will.

metallifan wrote:

SamplesoWoopass wrote:well, that's true. I don't really think games are becoming worse, just different. Usually by being easier and wanting to take full advantage of the system's capabilities.

Lack of required effort hidden by graphics = worse

Exactly. Every once in a while it all comes together(the original God of War comes to mind) but for the most part it's more of a mash-buttons-while-looking-at-the-pretty-pictures sort of deal.

Ahtman wrote:I see we have a bunch of people getting their panties in a twist over a game that hasn't been released yet.

Oh, I came to my conclusion long before this thread.

The Castlevania games for PS2 were sort of Devil May Cry rip offs if you ask me, so they've been on a bit of a downward slope for almost a decade now.

SamplesoWoopass wrote:So, I got an email from gamestop telling me to preorder it... now, I love me some Castlevania, so I bit and watched the trailers. Let me say, THOROUGHLY disappointed. All it is is a God of War clone with some Castlevania references thrown in. And what the hell, you don't even use a whip?!?! You us a magical pointy cross thing. What happened to the days where Castlevania was about timing, precision, and beating dracula in the face with a chain whip?!? Now all it is is a button masher for spastic kids who don't have the attention span to play a proper platformer. Just goes to show how much more skill was required to finish a game back in the day.

Summary of this post:

1. I became aware of this game
2. I've loved past incarnations of the game which led me to watch the trailer
3. I was extremely unimpressed
4. It completely rips off another game, even though I haven't played it yet
5. I'm upset about an arbitrary detail
6. I'm complaining about gameplay on a game that no one has played yet
7. I'm predicting the only people who will enjoy this game are inferior to me
8. I'm making sweeping generalizations about an entire industry

Not that I disagree with the last point. The password, and, to a much larger degree, the save state make games infinitely easier. Mess up? Just try again til you get it. Gone are the days of one-shot deaths (which I really like in some games like spaceship shooters). And for the record, console RPGs aren't games, they're movies with menus. Also, enough with FPS already! We get it, you can shoot things Hopefully the minor surge in fighting games we've seen makes way for a full scale comeback.

Fighting games are the devil, though.

SamplesoWoopass wrote:

Slarg232 wrote: SotN had a whip?

And, if that's one of the RPG ones then it also sucked... and if it didn't have a whip... then it obviously sucked no matter what.

You honestly think that Symphony of the Night sucked? It's already pretty obvious that you haven't played it, but SOtN is commonly regarded as the best game in the series.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

SamplesoWoopass wrote:So, I got an email from gamestop telling me to preorder it... now, I love me some Castlevania, so I bit and watched the trailers. Let me say, THOROUGHLY disappointed. All it is is a God of War clone with some Castlevania references thrown in. And what the hell, you don't even use a whip?!?! You us a magical pointy cross thing. What happened to the days where Castlevania was about timing, precision, and beating dracula in the face with a chain whip?!? Now all it is is a button masher for spastic kids who don't have the attention span to play a proper platformer. Just goes to show how much more skill was required to finish a game back in the day.

Summary of this post:

1. I became aware of this game -corrct
2. I've loved past incarnations of the game which led me to watch the trailer-correct
3. I was extremely unimpressed-correct

4. It completely rips off another game, even though I haven't played it yet-correct, if you've seen the trailer then you would be able to easily tell. Not to mention I've seen people lauding it for being similar to god of war

5. I'm upset about an arbitrary detail- arbitrary? It'd be like if Indiana Jones just ran around with a knife and he didn't have his hat. Or if Optimus Prime transformed into an xbox... it would be pretty disappointing

6. I'm complaining about gameplay on a game that no one has played yet- Sorta... I'm more complaining about how the game play isn't castlevania. It'd be better if they just used a different title. It's like Street Fighter 2010. A decent game, but not really street fighter.

7. I'm predicting the only people who will enjoy this game are inferior to me - Well, yeah! Everyone's inferior to me after all . But, not really, I'm just pointing out a fact about the target audience of game companies today

8. I'm making sweeping generalizations about an entire industry- Yup!

Chrysaor686 wrote:You honestly think that Symphony of the Night sucked? It's already pretty obvious that you haven't played it, but SOtN is commonly regarded as the best game in the series.

So, Because everyone else says it's good means that everyone else obviously does?

Ahtman wrote: Also might want to check who's wagon your hitching up to as well. OP claims that Castlevania is one of his favorite series but doesn't know what Symphony of the Night is. Make of that what you will.

Yes, one of my favorite series. It's very nostalgic for me and I liked the old platformers. I also didn't have a playstation as a kid and at the age so I never heard about it. I had a pretty good idea of which one it was, but I wasn't 100 percent sure, and didn't want to make an assumption of which one of the many games in the series that it was. Also, just because I love the series, doesn't mean I've played every single title in it.

I'll agree with you metallifan somewhat. I was just pointing out that a lot of the problems people have with new games, existed during the older systems too. I mean, there were a ton of RPG's and platformers that were very similar and the same brand names were reused constantly. It's just more publicized now due to internet access.

SamplesoWoopass wrote:

Chrysaor686 wrote:You honestly think that Symphony of the Night sucked? It's already pretty obvious that you haven't played it, but SOtN is commonly regarded as the best game in the series.

So, Because everyone else says it's good means that everyone else obviously does?

No, but it's tough to make judgements on something that you haven't even experienced for yourself. How are RPG elements or an open-ended structure in any way detrimental to the series? The game still shares the insane, soul-crushing difficulty of the earlier entries in the series, if that's what you're after. Is it so necessary to have a completely linear game with little to no variation in gameplay, wherein the only goal is to find the last boss and destroy him? Is it not beneficial to have other goals, like leveling up and finding new weapons to dispatch your enemies with? Does it not help you to feel an actual sense of progression? Is it not more rewarding to tackle goals in any order your please? If not, then why not?

It's obvious if you don't like any Castlevania game that doesn't include Simon or Richter Belmont as the protagonist that you're doomed to hate the series for the rest of it's reign. The 3D Castlevania offshoot is exactly that; an offshoot. The 2D incarnations of the games aren't going anywhere, as Castlevania is one of the last true bastions of 2D gaming, and they won't go back to the mindless classic formula any time soon. You know why? Because RPG elements are nothing but beneficial to the structure and potential enjoyment of the game. If you don't think so, then you're stuck in some idealistic haze of nostalgia.

Chrysaor686 wrote:

SamplesoWoopass wrote:

Chrysaor686 wrote:You honestly think that Symphony of the Night sucked? It's already pretty obvious that you haven't played it, but SOtN is commonly regarded as the best game in the series.

So, Because everyone else says it's good means that everyone else obviously does?

No, but it's tough to make judgements on something that you haven't even experienced for yourself. How are RPG elements or an open-ended structure in any way detrimental to the series? The game still shares the insane, soul-crushing difficulty of the earlier entries in the series, if that's what you're after. Is it so necessary to have a completely linear game with little to no variation in gameplay, wherein the only goal is to find the last boss and destroy him? Is it not beneficial to have other goals, like leveling up and finding new weapons to dispatch your enemies with? Does it not help you to feel an actual sense of progression? Is it not more rewarding to tackle goals in any order your please? If not, then why not?

It's obvious if you don't like any Castlevania game that doesn't include Simon or Richter Belmont as the protagonist that you're doomed to hate the series for the rest of it's reign. The 3D Castlevania offshoot is exactly that; an offshoot. The 2D incarnations of the games aren't going anywhere, as Castlevania is one of the last true bastions of 2D gaming, and they won't go back to the mindless classic formula any time soon. You know why? Because RPG elements are nothing but beneficial to the structure and potential enjoyment of the game. If you don't think so, then you're stuck in some idealistic haze of nostalgia.

Yeah, I've played one of the RPG versions of the series and didn't enjoy it. I just think that the RPG elements are not well executed from my experience and what I've seen in the game play of those games. Simon's Quest was okay, you had the towns and buying stuff but it focused more on the classic style. Also, I think if you played Castlvania 3 then you would see that all the old ones weren't completely linear with "no variation in game play" (which I think is wrong anyway.) I feel a strong sense of progression watching the character sprite move closer and closer to the end boss and seeing how much harder the game is getting. And, it's not like you get to do everything in what order you want in any game... maybe you could explain that to me a little more.

I don't just like Simon or Richter... Trevor is pretty bad ass too (I seriously think you haven't played the 3rd yet). As well as the characters from blood lines, I just don't remember their names. I disagree that the old ones were mindless, if anything you had to think about what you were doing a whole lot more than any RPG because all you have to do is keep walking around and killing the little guys until you level up. It makes it a whole lot easier when the answer to getting past the hard parts of the game is to go level up rather than think of a new strategy and

IF you think it's a bastion of 2d gaming, then you haven't seen the trailer for the new one yet... it's going to be pimped out just like ninja gaiden. I just didn't grow up with ninja gaiden so I didn't really care.

Again, I disagree that RPG elements obviously have to make a game better. If emphasis on grinding exp is your idea of how to make every game better then I'll have to kindly disagree. I also love your little ending there... If I disagree with you then I must be insane.... Maybe if I played another one of the RPG variations again, I might enjoy it... but just from what I've experienced it wasn't that good.

I just utterly fail to see how such simplicity is better in any way, especially when you're dealing with a genre that has so much potential for expansion. It's like saying that the original Super Mario Bros. is better than New Super Mario Bros., but to a much more severe degree. The only basis for this argument is nostalgia, and that's not a very solid foundation for an argument at all. I never accused you of being insane, I accused the rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia of being an instrument of stupidity.

How isn't RPG-style progression well-integrated into SotN? I feel that the newer games have become too easy, and have perhaps layered too much gimmick-based gameplay into the formula, but in SotN, the RPG elements were nearly transparent while still managing to be greatly rewarding. The game was incredibly well balanced, and managed to keep a consistant difficulty throughout. Just as you gained the satisfaction of finding a new sword with a longer reach or a faster attack, more difficult enemies were thrown at you to compensate (and the game never afforded you the ease of hiding behind a whip). If you're such a hardcore old-school Castlevania fan, then I seriously doubt that you would want to null the challenge by sitting there grinding levels, and that's never necessary within the context of the game. Symphony of the Night also shared about the same level structure that Super Metroid did, which is, needless to say, awesome.

The most important point of all that I forgot to make is: why are you sitting here complaining about a change in a game series that you haven't even enjoyed since 1998?

This won't go the way of Ninja Gaiden (Which wasn't really whored out; Ninja gaiden is now probably the most difficult 3-D game series in existance; the fact that it isn't exactly the same is irrelevant). Konami recognizes that the fans of Castlevania still actively clamor for 2D renditions of the series. There may be a completely separate series of 3D Castlevania games if this one does well, but if you honestly think that Konami would sodomize it's fanbase like that, then you don't know Konami very well.

alright, to settle this, I'll play through all of SotN. If I find that it's better than the other RPG versions of the series I'll say so. If I like it more than the older style, I'll say that too.

When I said that SotN sucked, I wasn't being that serious. but it's still disappointing how you don't have a whip.

This new xbox version that will come out, looks cool. But what I'm mainly saying is that it shouldn't really use the same title as it's nothing like the other games... They're just pimping the name to generate more interest.

It's sorta like if gundam wing had been called Transformers. You'd watch it, expecting transformers but there's not much similarity besides giant robots (just to make the point hit home a little more) and there's a guy named Optimus Prime in it. (Yes, I know that there actually isn't but just to prove the point a little more.) You watch it and wonder what the hell happened. So, you could have enjoyed it... but you would have enjoyed it more if it wasn't called Transformers.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

SamplesoWoopass wrote:So, I got an email from gamestop telling me to preorder it... now, I love me some Castlevania, so I bit and watched the trailers. Let me say, THOROUGHLY disappointed. All it is is a God of War clone with some Castlevania references thrown in. And what the hell, you don't even use a whip?!?! You us a magical pointy cross thing. What happened to the days where Castlevania was about timing, precision, and beating dracula in the face with a chain whip?!? Now all it is is a button masher for spastic kids who don't have the attention span to play a proper platformer. Just goes to show how much more skill was required to finish a game back in the day.

Summary of this post:

1. I became aware of this game
2. I've loved past incarnations of the game which led me to watch the trailer
3. I was extremely unimpressed
4. It completely rips off another game, even though I haven't played it yet
5. I'm upset about an arbitrary detail
6. I'm complaining about gameplay on a game that no one has played yet
7. I'm predicting the only people who will enjoy this game are inferior to me
8. I'm making sweeping generalizations about an entire industry

Not that I disagree with the last point. The password, and, to a much larger degree, the save state make games infinitely easier. Mess up? Just try again til you get it. Gone are the days of one-shot deaths (which I really like in some games like spaceship shooters). And for the record, console RPGs aren't games, they're movies with menus. Also, enough with FPS already! We get it, you can shoot things Hopefully the minor surge in fighting games we've seen makes way for a full scale comeback.

You win this thread. Although I'm getting tired of people whining about how games "were better back in my day" even though there's plenty of great modern adaptions of video games. I really don't think video games have increased or decreased in quality over the years and yes I play both old and new games.