Do You Have Any Unpopular Gaming Opinions?

[Exhuminator]

I actually find Rondo a bit overrated.

Yeah. It's not a bad game, it's a good game. But it's not the best classically styled Castlevania. There are better Castlevanias insofar as actual design goes. I think Belmont's Revenge on GB is better even.

I think people give Rondo more credit than it's due because of its mystique. For a long time it was a Japan only release, and on a system not many people had. So for a western gamer, if you could play Rondo you felt privileged, and the experience seemed extra special because of its rarity. Couple that with some really nice cinematic cutscenes and there you go.

[marurun]

I give it props because it features well-animated sprites and really good level design (IMO), and Richter controls better (again, IMO) than in any of the other classic titles. I actually think the game is fantastically designed from top to bottom.

[CFFJR]

I dunno, I didn't play Rondo until it was easily and cheaply available on the wii virtual console. I still thought it was top notch.

Having said that though, Bloodlines remains my number one favorite. Everything about that game is incredible.

[ExedExes]

I know a guy who had an Atari 7800 instead of an NES. His psyche is permanently damaged.

Whatchu talking about?
I came out all right

[Sarge]

Bloodlines always felt a little "off" to me (like Hard Corps), but there's no question it's good.

Really, most of the classic series is quite good. It's a lot like trying to sort out the best Zelda. Even the worst in most cases is a cut above.

[Xeogred]

You guys like that Dracula X being a lame cheap platformer, even with the Dracula fight being amongst nothing but pillars and death pits? That was one of the dumbest final fights I've ever played. Not even in a cool, or hard, or interesting way, it was just lazy and dumb. The second level with the falling bridge requiring you to be pixel perfect was stupid too.

Rondo obliterates Dracula X. As does Super IV, which came out years before Dracula X... despite Dracula X feeling like a downgrade and backwards trip up in every single department. And I don't care if they had a short dev crunch. It's startling how much better Super IV is.

Like CFFJR, I first played Rondo just a few years ago and it was incredible. Felt like Dark Souls with how tough the bosses were and it seemed more action oriented. It was awesome conquering it. Also the OST is better than Symphony of the Night's. I prefer the badass melodic side of CV music. For instance, I think Michiru Yamane's work on Bloodlines is way cooler than SoTN's. Now I'm not saying SoTN's music is bad, not at all! That goes to Lords of Shadow and any other Western CV of course.

Hell I'd take God of War over Lords of Shadow. And I don't love God of War.

[marurun]

Konami did get the music right in Dracula X. If you had never heard the CD soundtrack from Rondo it would have felt like super fantastic original music. I don't appreciate it as much as some because it isn't as good as the CD tracks and I've been listening to those CD tracks for so long, but I definitely respect the effort their sound team put in. But I do prefer SCIV's music to DracX for its variety and originality.

But I do have a bias. I picked up my first copy of Rondo in a train station in Japan, new in package, in summer of 95. So I have been playing this since high school.

[Tanooki]

Hah should have figured the irrational ragging on the SNES Dracula X would happen since it's this thread and castlevania was up for discussion. Some things never die. The CD and the SNES cart aren't the same game, not (though close) even the same name either. The SNES one I read ages ago was a side story knockoff away from the CD title as something as a fill in later in SNES life title. I've owned both, only have the SNES one now with the Duo very long gone. I never thought lesser of either as I took them on their own. Sure it plays as a throwback lacking the length and the 360 whip of SCV4, but who cares, it's a harder game and fun.

[Xeogred]

Hah should have figured the irrational ragging on the SNES Dracula X would happen since it's this thread and castlevania was up for discussion. Some things never die. The CD and the SNES cart aren't the same game, not (though close) even the same name either. The SNES one I read ages ago was a side story knockoff away from the CD title as something as a fill in later in SNES life title. I've owned both, only have the SNES one now with the Duo very long gone. I never thought lesser of either as I took them on their own. Sure it plays as a throwback lacking the length and the 360 whip of SCV4, but who cares, it's a harder game and fun.

You're half wrong half right. Konami decided to make Dracula X to build up hype for Symphony of the Night. Since Rondo of Blood was the direct prequel and something the US market didn't get, they had to cook up Dracula X quickly and it was made to serve the same purpose and get people up to speed before Symphony of the Night dropped.

So I agree with you that they are basically their own games, which is neat. But they try to share the same purpose, and the "alternate history retelling" that is Dracula X is the worse version.

I'm sure it could have been incredible if they had more time to develop it. But still, again considering it's almost an entirely different game from the ground up, the level design in like 70% of the game is insanely questionable and terrible. Not sure what they were thinking in a lot of areas.

[Sarge]

I think most of the problem in Dracula X is less level design and more lack of i-frames. And yes, I just went for fighter terminology in a platformer.

That last battle with Drac? Tricky, yes, but not nearly as bad in my opinion as trying to stay on-route in another pillar section of the game with Medusa Heads and Bone Towers.