Symphony of the Night, still a classic

[RadarScope1]

Been thinking about spending the spacebucks on this, even though I too own the original. I'd sell the disc but it's worth less right now than what I paid for it....

[ott0bot]

Just got a disc only for free this morning. Mom and pop thrift stores can be so generous sometimes. lucky me.

Anyway....as far as SOTN marking the end of the "good" Castlevania games goes....What did you expect Konami to do? It's already mind boggling enought they even made a 2D game on PS1. If they wouldn't have progressed at the time and just went right on making 2D games they probably would have went under. You have to understand at the time this was not a desired style of game, everyone and their mother was moving to 3d polygon based games. Konami is a business...it's not Treasure or some small company that just wants to produce creative games.

That being said...while Ps2 & X-box moved toward realistic and 3d games, it's great that companies like Konami and Capcom still put out 2d games on GBA and now DS. I heartily agree that the 3d Castlevania's games are pretty much crap, but why is everyone getting down on the 2d stuff that comes out. It's not like there was a heck of alot of difference between Castlevania 1, 3, IV, Bloodlines, or Rondo of Blood...they pretty much followed the same formula. Why would Konami change it if it's making money? Because that really is their ultimate goal.

[Gamerforlife]

You know they remade rondo of blood for psp, which is essentially the best of the classic castlevania? Also the creator has stated if it does well he might delve a tad into the old castlevania stile.

Hate to be a downer, but recently Igarashi(is that his name?)implied that there doesn't seem to be much interest in old school style Castlevania, which is why the next one is going to be a fighter

Yes, you heard me. Castlevania is now a fighting game. Makes me appreciate Symphony of the Night even more.

I think this guy really wants to stick to doing Castlevania as a 2-d old school style game, but it seems like the big dogs at Konami have no faith in Castlevania as a franchise and think that turning it into a gimmicky fighter for the Wii will get people's interest...which may be an indicator that this "casual gaming" rennaissance is getting a bit out of hand.

Anyway, here's the article:

http://kotaku.com/5020097/wii-castlevan ... hting-game

Honestly, do we really need this? We've already got Soul Calibur which is the same game that keeps getting released over and over again with a different number after the title each time...and is getting ridiculously gimmicky with characters like Spawn, Yoda and Link in it.

Alright, if your going to use a kotaku article, atleast use the recent one. http://kotaku.com/5028782/igarashi-wii- ... ream-alive . also... order of eclesia? did you forget about that or something?
Also, stop the soul caliber comparison. Read the previews and you'll find out that this game is more like powerstone than anything.

Fair enough, good post

[Gamerforlife]

You know they remade rondo of blood for psp, which is essentially the best of the classic castlevania?

Yeah, I played through Dracula X Chronicles and it's quite a good re-make, although jumping feels a bit weird - thankfully the original Rondo can be unlocked. Personally I think the original Castlevania titles peaked with Super Castlevania IV, easily my favourite of the whole series.

Super Castlevania IV was awesome. I really wish they'd release Rondo on Xbox Live, along with Sonic CD.

I read your comments Doctor, and I get where you're coming from though I don't agree. I haven't played the recent Castlevanias, and I don't really do a whole lot of portable gaming as I find that the main consoles keep me busy enough. So I can't compare Symphony of the Night to more recent Castlevania titles. All I can say is that I'm having as much fun with it now as I did years ago. I don't find it boring at all, it's classic 2-d gameplay at its best in pretty much every way imaginable. There's depth, challenge and great enemies and bosses. Even the game's artistic style and soundtrack are fantastic. Frankly, the soundtrack is one of the best video game soundtracks ever made

I understand your feelings towards linearity too. I typically enjoy my games linear(like The Red Star on the PS 2), but a little non-linearity doesn't bother me if it's done right. Symphony of the Night has a great map that keeps me from getting lost and shows me where I have and haven't been. Plus, you unlock lots of shortcuts throughout the game which makes backtracking easy and painless. This is non-linear gameplay done right. It always keeps you on track, and with my character gaining new levels, finding new secrets and items along the way, I don't even mind backtracking and fighting the same enemies again.

I just think this game is a 2-d masterpiece of the highest calibur. So much attention to detail went into every aspect of the game it's just mind boggling. The way Alucard's appearance changes as you get different equipment, the cool otherworldly after image you see when he's moving, the variety of voices they put in for your enemies, the little secrets and easter eggs like getting stabbed by a ghost in the confessional of the Royal Chapel, the library where you can get info on every enemy and even purchase no damage boss fight videos to give you new strategies. They thought of EVERYTHING in this game. The only thing that could have been done a bit better was the voice acting, but even that is not as bad as some people say it is. Very few games today have the level of polish this game has, and it was so new and different compared to the Castlevanias that came before it and 2-d gaming in general. Some call it a Metroid ripoff, but that doesn't take into consideration the rpg elements, the street fighter like magic commands and the cool use of familiars. I just have a lot of respect for this game

[Doctor Fugue]

^Fair enough.

Can anyone explain why SOTN is better than all the others that came after it? That is the problem I'm having. It was the most recent one I played, and it just didn't seem that different. I preferred PoR above all because of the 2-player stuff, the side-challenges, the better balance between magic and weapons, and the level design with the paintings and no inverted castle.

[RadarScope1]

Just take a look at where you're posting. It's the nostalgia, man. Or at least it's a big part of it. And I think in a lot of people's minds console > portable.

I haven't put enough time into the games themselves to talk about the details, but I think those two things are big factors overall.

[ZenLogikos]

I'll be the first to state that I haven't put any time into portable versions, but I detest handhelds. Like the tv show "Lost", which the producers realize can generate revenue outside of the original medium, through ARGs, books, etc. - I look upon handhelds as nothing more than additional revenue, catering to those fans of the original but I maintain it's separation from the main series, sometimes despite canonical claims of producers. Now, as handhelds become more powerful, they are able to match and exceed in all areas those versions which were last seen on consoles. This just pisses me off. It has been decided that 2D is not suitable for consoles any more. With the advent of downloadable services, this is slowly changing (maybe). My perhaps narrow minded view, is that handhelds are for kids for long car rides(the last time I ever considered getting one), or for adults with ADD or too much time on their hands. So I guess my problem is both with the devices themselves, and the way the videogame market has progressed. I can understand the opposing viewpoint - that handhelds let you experience the games of yesteryear - I just don't share it. Both are likely to be expressed on these "retro" forums.

[Doctor Fugue]

Just take a look at where you're posting. It's the nostalgia, man. Or at least it's a big part of it. And I think in a lot of people's minds console > portable.

I haven't put enough time into the games themselves to talk about the details, but I think those two things are big factors overall.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Of course it is nostalgia. I have been trying to go against the "it's still a classic" of the topic in this thread because of this. I originally asked if anyone had played SOTN after playing many of the later games, and what their opinion is of SOTN then. Obviously there are very few people like me who had not played SOTN before beating all the rest. To be the best in the series, and be called the one of the best games of all time, it needs to be considered outside of any nostalgia and with a cold heart.

I can accept and understand nostalgia. I am willing to bet my love for Shadow Dancer would not be as much if I didn't have strong memories attached to it. But I will never claim it to be a true classic game that everyone should play. I believe it to easily be one of the best ninja games ever, but I cannot defend it without relying on my nostalgia.

On the other hand, SOTN is lauded by many people as one of the greatest games of all time, and certainly by far the best of all Castlevania games; yet I have never seen an argument that wasn't clouded by nostalgia. It certainly is an important game in the series, but I don't understand anyone who claims that the later games are SO much poorer in comparison.

Nostalgia should be only a tiny part of reviewing the quality of a game. If I write a review today of Ikaruga and only talk about how it made my girlfriend like me and I have great memories of the first time I played it Japan, no one would take me seriously. Who cares about that? The real meat should compare it to Radiant Silvergun and the pros and cons of the game mechanics.

I'm ranting because SOTN seems to me to be the greatest offender of nostalgia-based praise. If there were no later games in the series, I wouldn't be so angry about people saying how awesome it is. They just happen to like it more than me. That's fine, I know I'm not a huge Castlevania fan. However, I feel the later games DID offer something on an equal level. That, and rampant universal love irks me.

And ZenLogikos, I hate handhelds as well. They piss me off for so many reasons, but unfortunately it was the only way to get new 2D games. Fortunately for us, these downloadable gaming networks are allowing some new content to appear on real gaming devices. Maybe Mega Man 9 and Gradius Rebirth will change the world.

[ZenLogikos]

Maybe Mega Man 9 and Gradius Rebirth will change the world.

I hope so, but more than likely, 2D will die when our generation does. Or become truly niche. I mean, who was the last person you met who enjoyed silent movies? ...Primarily? Now that we have this fancy "third dimension" in videogames, there's no going back. 2D will become increasingly obscure.

[RadarScope1]

Actually, I think we're getting more 2D thanks to DL services and indie games. Hate to link to other forums, but I'll submit this thread for your perusal as evidence.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=328496