Metroid 2 Remake AM2R Released!

[MrPopo]

I think SotN gets all the love because it's the only console one and it's the first one. Super Metroid is dramatically better than the original Metroid, but the other Castlevania games are not dramatically better than SotN. So it gets recognition for being first and doing it so well.

[Sarge]

Actually, I'd argue that the subsequent Castlevania games aren't as good as SotN, period. They get varying degrees of close (I love all of 'em, quite frankly!), but they're not SotN. I still replay all of them from time to time, but it's SotN that still wins out.

None of them are particularly difficult, except maybe Ecclesia, and even it's not that hard. There's just such an attention to detail in SotN, little secrets that I still uncover every time I play through the game. It's an easy game, for sure, but part of the fun is all the myriad ways you can play the game and dispatch your foes. Beating down Dracula in the end is just cathartic more than anything.

Besides, it's not like Super Metroid and its ilk don't end up the same way. Much like SotN, it trades challenge for exploration and atmosphere, and I still think Symphony has more atmosphere than any subsequent games in the series. (Although again, some come darn close!)

Really, the entire Castlevania line has been chasing that ghost. It's not a slight against them, it's just a testament to how fantastic the original game was. That they consistently managed to put out excellent and fun games after that shows they've still got some design chops. It's also why I'm very excited for Bloodstained.

[PartridgeSenpai]

I guess the main reason why my opinion differs so greatly would be more to the fact that I enjoy those games for different things. For people who enjoy atmosphere via the medium of exploration, they'd go more towards SotN, which I can totally understand.

I tend to mostly only like exploration because I like games with loot, and going out of your way to explore usually means loot. I also like 2D-action games with challenging bosses and lots of powers and weapons, so I'd definitely be more geared towards the later games. Similarly to how I also love games that use tricky (but not impossible) platforming as a medium to gate loot, which is a reason why I LOVE Guacamelee.

[Exhuminator]

Why do people like SotN over the later handheld Castlevanias so much?

Mainly because SotN did the "Castlevania in a Metroid style" first. It also did it extremely competently. The only handheld metroidvania that I think matches it in quality is Order of Ecclesia. But OoE is too hard for most folks, so SotN remains the fan favorite.

[casterofdreams]

My problem with Symphony is that I played the game after I played the GBA and DS releases. Its a great game for sure but I enjoyed Aria and Dawn of Sorrow more. I enjoyed the soul system quite a bit because I was always excited in getting a new soul and figuing out what it did or how it worked. The story was "whatever" but the gameplay was golden for me.

Technically aren't they sequels to Symphony?

[Sarge]

Yeah, sorta. They like skipping around the timeline, but the Sorrow games are the latest in the timeline. I think Dawn comes closest to Symphony in quality, with Ecclesia right behind.

[ejamer]

As someone who played the GBA Castlevanias (all of them) before having the chance to play Symphony of the Night (SotN), I have to say that love for SotN feels massively overblown.

It's a good game, and clearly it defined what Castlevania would be over the next decade or so. The art assets are probably still being reused, there are a ton of secrets, and the map is huge. But people talk like SotN is perfect "as is", and I believe that is flat out wrong - level design, how the player is guided and given hints, and difficulty balance could all be improved. Lots of details in the game are cool, but poorly fleshed out and feel like they would benefit from some extra polish.

Viewed with nostalgia, SotN is great; otherwise it's merely "very good". Of course, being very good - probably one of the best in the genre - is hardly a problem, even if that means the hype isn't met.

[Exhuminator]

It might be a case of "you had to be there". Playing SotN in 1997 was an extraordinarily impressive experience. I think it still holds up today. But admittedly, I have some nostalgia for it that surely colors the experience.

[Sarge]

Like I said, I regularly replay all of them, and SotN is still my pick for the absolute best. Heck, I finished it off again just this year!

It's not "perfect" the way no game is "perfect". I don't think those exist. Heck, I believe Super Metroid has imperfect aspects that could use work. Still sits at the pinnacle of the genre along with SotN and Zero Mission.

Can I see aspects of the later games tilting a person towards them instead of SotN? Sure! Just like I think Zero Mission improves on aspects of Super Metroid. They're quite close in quality for the most part, so certain elements are just going to appeal more to other folks. It's that pesky subjectivity rearing its head again!

Overblown, though? Nah. It's a legitimately fantastic game that happened to be followed by a bunch more fantastic games.

[MrPopo]

My first that I really put time into was DoS, then the other DS games, then backfilling with the GBA games, and only the did I get SotN. So I'd personally rank the DS games higher because they don't have as many rough edges as SotN has.