Maria mode is too ez and her moveset was basically a prototype for Alucard. She even has a slide and the same floaty jump and everything. Rondo was the start of the end of the classic difficulty.
>also Rondo is an amazing game
Didn't claim otherwise.
Why is Castlevania so cringey and immature? I hate the cartoony/anime look. If you want serious gothic fantasy with good combat and levels, play Bloodborne.
Castlevania was never supposed to be serious, you fricking imbecile. The first game has film rolls at the edges of the screen and 80s dance music for a soundtrack and at the end it has fake credits with mangled Universal and Hammer actors' and directors' names. Later it became more of a tongue-and-cheek shonen thing but it never went fully serious. Even Lament of Innocence does the "I'll kill you... AND the night!" thing right at the start. Castlevania was never serious until the Western reboot.
Yeah, the Lords of Shadow garbo would be easier to ignore if it weren't the absolute last three games in the series. It's like a corpse of a loved one: if you look at it, you can never remember the person alive anymore. Lords of Shadow and the moronic cartoon are what springs to mind when I hear "Castlevania" these days.
Is this some kind of OLD GOOD NEW BAD moronic shitty opinion? LoS wasn't a masterpiece of course but the first game was pretty good and the other two were at least okay. I mean half of the Castlevania series is pile of shit with other half being awesome games but LoS got so much undeserved hate.
3 years ago
Anonymous
LoS gets all the hate it deserves. Sure the first one isn't attrocious, but it's NOT castlevania and its only quality is environment design, giving a few great vistas here and there. Mirror of fate is a pile of dogshit through and thorough. It has no redeeming quality whatsoever. LoS 2 traded the nice environments from the first for better gameplay, but it's still unworthy of being called castlevania.
3 years ago
Anonymous
It's a case of in-house good, cheap outsource that killed the series bad.
He just never played any of the games in the series. Lots of people who aren't familiar with the series think that Castlevania was supposed to be tragic gothic fiction of some sort. The cartoon and the three Western games didn't help either.
Here's the third one. Just like the other two, it's a solid 6/10. Aesthetically, it's a Western comic book trying to be series and tragic yet kewl at the same time.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/282530/Castlevania_Lords_of_Shadow__Mirror_of_Fate_HD/
The cartoon kind of pissed me off. Warren Ellis couldn't stop with his Reddit rage over Christianity for five seconds to honour the tone of the games, and then people said that it was "clever" and "morally complicated", because that's what Castlevania is about, I guess.
The Van Helsing Movie with Hugh Jackman is unironically a better take on Castlevania.
>Van Helsing Movie with Hugh Jackman
Based and I agree totally. It's a shame that the castlevania porn parody Frankenwienerer got cancelled because the studio imploded or there would be two of them.
I watched the first series and it was underwhelming. My biggest problem with it was that every single character seems to have a humanities degree from an American uni and have graduated in mid 00s. Hunters, vampires, sorcerers, peasants, priests, and Dracula himself all have the same exact mellow "complicated" passive-aggressive personality.
3 years ago
Anonymous
I thought the girl was cute.
3 years ago
Anonymous
I thought the girl was generic.
3 years ago
Anonymous
It's just Warren Eliis. That's what he writes. It was kind of funny when he was doing Transmetropolitan, but that whole style is beyond the point of being stale.
You'd think it was a repurposed game, but what's worse it's that it was never intended to be anything else than castlevania as evidenced by the pitch prototype. But I really blame konami or green lighting this piece of shit, the spanish redditards in charge just don't know any better than being themselves, konami should have known better.
It's actually by far the worst of the home console ones. People hated it for not being Rondo, but on its own it's horrible. It's more like a puzzle game than an action game.
For example, you can't even kill bats until they activate and fly: they're completely invincible until you're very close, so you have to jump at them while whipping in advance. You can't hit the bat with a knife or anything. And the whole game is like that: almost every situation has a single scripted way to deal with it, everything else leading to damage or death. It's one of the least flexible "action" games I've played.
>you can't even kill bats until they activate and fly: they're completely invincible until you're very close
Which means that the game was probably recoded from scratch, including all game systems, collision, everything. Imagine being a dev in the 90's, can't reuse any code because everything is platform specific, you have to literally rebuild all of it and you only get a few months to do that. Insane.
Of course it was. Gameplay is nothing like Rondo at all. It just borrows some assets. Which in itself is not a bad thing now that we've all played Rondo a million times anyway, but the real problem is that the SNES game just isn't well designed.
It's just an example. All enemies and most stages work like that. For example, there's a very particular correct way to play through the collapsing bridge or to fight the panthers or the spear knights. For almost every situation in the game, there's a very specific solution, almost as if it was one of the "cinematic platformers" like Another World. No other Castlevania is this restrictive.
Not really, if you use the jump you have enough time for the collapsing bridge to do whatever you want, even walk back
This is like claiming there is only one specific way to go through the corridor before death in CV1.
DXX is actually the CV sequel that plays and feels the closest to CV1 than any other; in the way gameplay is almost mathematic and how similar the encounters, level and trap designs are. Not even CV3 is as close.
The main difference is, it's trendy and hip to claim you like CV1 but it's trendy and hip to shit on DXX without having played it enough if at all.
Nope. You have to jump at the right time and whip at the right time, often in advance. If you follow the rhythm, you easily succeed, and if you don't, you can't do anything. It's much closer to a cinematic platformer where you have to know than an action game where you have to react and adapt.
3 years ago
Anonymous
>Nope. You have to jump at the right time and whip at the right time, often in advance
I have several videos of recording myself that can prove this wrong, get good; and again CV1 has similar setups but everyone calls it masterpiece then
3 years ago
Anonymous
In CV1 you learn the mechanics, whereas in DX you learn particular situations, most of them one-off. The former is more fun than the latter to most people.
I always wondered, would it have been possible to do a 1:1 port of Rondo on the SNES? Instead of this abomination? The soundtrack was actually adapted really well to the SNES sound chip, but about the rest? I guess they'd have to remove the cutscenes due to ROM size limitations? What about level size? Maybe some specific graphic effects?
Not much, according to my subjective opinion - which is the only one I, or anyone else can have, as it pertains to video games. Thanks for shitting up the board with this worthless thread, idiot.
It's a loose adaptation of Rondo of Blood for the PC Engine CD, that probably started as an attempt at making a port before branching in another direction. It's inferior to Rondo of Blood for the PC Engine CD in every respect, and it's also underwhelming in comparison to Castlevania IV. I also prefer Sharp X68000 Akumajou Dracula (Castlevania Chronicles) and Castlevania Bloodlines to it.
That being said, I just listed four fantastic above-average classic side-scrolling action games, (IV, Bloodlines, Rondo of Blood and Chronicles) so to say it's "worse" is putting it below a high bar. On its own devices, Dracula X is a competent game. It's underrated by some as a result, just unfortunately sandwiched between better games and thus overshadowed by them. But I think it's the most passable "main-line" game not counting Haunted Castle and the Gameboy ones.
It's an above average side-scroller. It's better than what would pass as an "average" side-scroller for the SNES. Hence why I said, it's worse than the other Castlevania games but this "is putting it below a high bar."
Konami put their a-talent on the Genesis game for fricking once
Maria mode is too ez and her moveset was basically a prototype for Alucard. She even has a slide and the same floaty jump and everything. Rondo was the start of the end of the classic difficulty.
Also
>official art
This is about Dracula X on SNES, also Rondo is an amazing game
>This is about Dracula X on SNES
Don't care, this is a Rondo thread now.
>also Rondo is an amazing game
Didn't claim otherwise.
Why is Castlevania so cringey and immature? I hate the cartoony/anime look. If you want serious gothic fantasy with good combat and levels, play Bloodborne.
Why are zoomers so obsessed with not appearing "cringy"? It's just 90's anime cheese, it's fricking awesome.
They apparently don't know what board they're on
Speaking of cringy, consider the irony of needing your games to look "mature"
Castlevania was never supposed to be serious, you fricking imbecile. The first game has film rolls at the edges of the screen and 80s dance music for a soundtrack and at the end it has fake credits with mangled Universal and Hammer actors' and directors' names. Later it became more of a tongue-and-cheek shonen thing but it never went fully serious. Even Lament of Innocence does the "I'll kill you... AND the night!" thing right at the start. Castlevania was never serious until the Western reboot.
>the Western reboot
Doesn't exist, never happened, stop talking about it.
Yeah, the Lords of Shadow garbo would be easier to ignore if it weren't the absolute last three games in the series. It's like a corpse of a loved one: if you look at it, you can never remember the person alive anymore. Lords of Shadow and the moronic cartoon are what springs to mind when I hear "Castlevania" these days.
Is this some kind of OLD GOOD NEW BAD moronic shitty opinion? LoS wasn't a masterpiece of course but the first game was pretty good and the other two were at least okay. I mean half of the Castlevania series is pile of shit with other half being awesome games but LoS got so much undeserved hate.
LoS gets all the hate it deserves. Sure the first one isn't attrocious, but it's NOT castlevania and its only quality is environment design, giving a few great vistas here and there. Mirror of fate is a pile of dogshit through and thorough. It has no redeeming quality whatsoever. LoS 2 traded the nice environments from the first for better gameplay, but it's still unworthy of being called castlevania.
It's a case of in-house good, cheap outsource that killed the series bad.
Just go ahead and signal that terrible taste all over the place.
He just never played any of the games in the series. Lots of people who aren't familiar with the series think that Castlevania was supposed to be tragic gothic fiction of some sort. The cartoon and the three Western games didn't help either.
What three western games? I only remember two.
There was a 2.5D one pretending to emulate actual castlevania games. It's basically as bad in its genre than the 2D arkham game.
Disgusting. I am glad I have no idea what you're talking about.
Here's the third one. Just like the other two, it's a solid 6/10. Aesthetically, it's a Western comic book trying to be series and tragic yet kewl at the same time.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/282530/Castlevania_Lords_of_Shadow__Mirror_of_Fate_HD/
The cartoon kind of pissed me off. Warren Ellis couldn't stop with his Reddit rage over Christianity for five seconds to honour the tone of the games, and then people said that it was "clever" and "morally complicated", because that's what Castlevania is about, I guess.
The Van Helsing Movie with Hugh Jackman is unironically a better take on Castlevania.
>Van Helsing Movie with Hugh Jackman
Based and I agree totally. It's a shame that the castlevania porn parody Frankenwienerer got cancelled because the studio imploded or there would be two of them.
I watched the first series and it was underwhelming. My biggest problem with it was that every single character seems to have a humanities degree from an American uni and have graduated in mid 00s. Hunters, vampires, sorcerers, peasants, priests, and Dracula himself all have the same exact mellow "complicated" passive-aggressive personality.
I thought the girl was cute.
I thought the girl was generic.
It's just Warren Eliis. That's what he writes. It was kind of funny when he was doing Transmetropolitan, but that whole style is beyond the point of being stale.
thirded
You'd think it was a repurposed game, but what's worse it's that it was never intended to be anything else than castlevania as evidenced by the pitch prototype. But I really blame konami or green lighting this piece of shit, the spanish redditards in charge just don't know any better than being themselves, konami should have known better.
How old is she supposed to be again?
Not that I'd stop me, it's just for reference.
Twelve. Old enough by Japan's standards.
A bit too old for mine.
The funniest thing is you're probably underage yourself.
That wouldn't make for a good jest if I was underage, dumbass.
Disgusting pedoshit. Nobody will ever love you. Now's the the time. Just do it. Fricking mentally ill pussy.
Seethe.
Mods
Not much, it's one of the best games in the series
It's actually by far the worst of the home console ones. People hated it for not being Rondo, but on its own it's horrible. It's more like a puzzle game than an action game.
For example, you can't even kill bats until they activate and fly: they're completely invincible until you're very close, so you have to jump at them while whipping in advance. You can't hit the bat with a knife or anything. And the whole game is like that: almost every situation has a single scripted way to deal with it, everything else leading to damage or death. It's one of the least flexible "action" games I've played.
>you can't even kill bats until they activate and fly: they're completely invincible until you're very close
Which means that the game was probably recoded from scratch, including all game systems, collision, everything. Imagine being a dev in the 90's, can't reuse any code because everything is platform specific, you have to literally rebuild all of it and you only get a few months to do that. Insane.
Of course it was. Gameplay is nothing like Rondo at all. It just borrows some assets. Which in itself is not a bad thing now that we've all played Rondo a million times anyway, but the real problem is that the SNES game just isn't well designed.
There is like 2 of those bats in the entire game and I can't think of any similar situation
It's just an example. All enemies and most stages work like that. For example, there's a very particular correct way to play through the collapsing bridge or to fight the panthers or the spear knights. For almost every situation in the game, there's a very specific solution, almost as if it was one of the "cinematic platformers" like Another World. No other Castlevania is this restrictive.
Not really, if you use the jump you have enough time for the collapsing bridge to do whatever you want, even walk back
This is like claiming there is only one specific way to go through the corridor before death in CV1.
DXX is actually the CV sequel that plays and feels the closest to CV1 than any other; in the way gameplay is almost mathematic and how similar the encounters, level and trap designs are. Not even CV3 is as close.
The main difference is, it's trendy and hip to claim you like CV1 but it's trendy and hip to shit on DXX without having played it enough if at all.
Nope. You have to jump at the right time and whip at the right time, often in advance. If you follow the rhythm, you easily succeed, and if you don't, you can't do anything. It's much closer to a cinematic platformer where you have to know than an action game where you have to react and adapt.
>Nope. You have to jump at the right time and whip at the right time, often in advance
I have several videos of recording myself that can prove this wrong, get good; and again CV1 has similar setups but everyone calls it masterpiece then
In CV1 you learn the mechanics, whereas in DX you learn particular situations, most of them one-off. The former is more fun than the latter to most people.
ignore the austist, he's been posting these for a while
I guess he just like jank
I always wondered, would it have been possible to do a 1:1 port of Rondo on the SNES? Instead of this abomination? The soundtrack was actually adapted really well to the SNES sound chip, but about the rest? I guess they'd have to remove the cutscenes due to ROM size limitations? What about level size? Maybe some specific graphic effects?
It definitely would have been possible tbh. I think if the snes could do Castlevania IV then it would do Rondo basically perfectly.
The LoS games were such shameless God of War rip-offs it's embarrassing. Why even use the Castlevania IP at this point.
Not much, according to my subjective opinion - which is the only one I, or anyone else can have, as it pertains to video games. Thanks for shitting up the board with this worthless thread, idiot.
...and then there's this imbecile.
Why couldn't have Richter had invincibility frames?
It's a loose adaptation of Rondo of Blood for the PC Engine CD, that probably started as an attempt at making a port before branching in another direction. It's inferior to Rondo of Blood for the PC Engine CD in every respect, and it's also underwhelming in comparison to Castlevania IV. I also prefer Sharp X68000 Akumajou Dracula (Castlevania Chronicles) and Castlevania Bloodlines to it.
That being said, I just listed four fantastic above-average classic side-scrolling action games, (IV, Bloodlines, Rondo of Blood and Chronicles) so to say it's "worse" is putting it below a high bar. On its own devices, Dracula X is a competent game. It's underrated by some as a result, just unfortunately sandwiched between better games and thus overshadowed by them. But I think it's the most passable "main-line" game not counting Haunted Castle and the Gameboy ones.
>On its own devices, Dracula X is a competent game.
An average potato is well worth eating. An average game is not worth playing.
It's an above average side-scroller. It's better than what would pass as an "average" side-scroller for the SNES. Hence why I said, it's worse than the other Castlevania games but this "is putting it below a high bar."