Dreamcast Porno Party
- Oct 27, 2017
Super Castlevania IV doesn't play like classicvania. The correct answer is Castlevania 3.
i think it's the only "all time classic" i never particularly enjoyed as a kid. played the hell out of it though
Here's the source of that info. Don't know how much it holds up in terms of budget of the actual release, since Akumajou Densetsu was released with a special chip in the cart and no Turtles game got that.I just learned from the Retronauts TMNT podcast that TMNT games ended up selling so well they diverted resources and manpower from Konami's other NES projects, including Castlevania. I wonder if an otherwise planned NES Castlevania 4 would have ended up better than the SNES one.
True follow up would be castlevania 2 and 1. The 3rd wasnt that great imo. After those i would say the Metroid vanias and thzn dracula x and so on.I'm glad to see that castlevania 4 is on top.
It's the castlevania game that provide the same atmosphere as super metroid does.
It reach some point that you are really connected with the world like no other castlevania game does.
It's the art/music that provide this which you will remember for years to come.
(And Yes i played every castlevania game.)
I normally don't complain about difficulty in games, but I think Konami could have pared it down to a more humane level. There's little to no breathing room in that game. It reminded me how ridiculously difficult Ninja Gaiden was on the NES. If you die towards the end of a level, you're screwed because you lose all your special weapons and upgrades. Just not a fun game, which is infuriating because of how slick the visuals were for 1990. It's also worth mentioning that Super Contra was released for the NES that year and you didn't have the cheap bullshit going on in that game. It was a fun sequel to Contra.
Are you my lost brother or something, we usually agree pretty much on everything Castlevania related.I vote CV4 for it achieving something so new with a new generation. It doesn't play the same as the games before, and Drac X Rondo carried a lot of what it did over plus returned to the classic gameplay, which is why it's the best overall.
CV4 has many issues, but had so much detail, and a real spooky sense of place. Very naturalistic environments (eg the first sections at the start, the waterfall section with the low piano music, the entrance area to the castle). It was one of the first games to at times completely hide that the graphics were made of tiles. It’s very uneven overall though, later areas in the game feature many more blocky parts, and there are some weird colour choices.
It goes out of its way to create a grand sense of place graphically. Enemies are so integrated with the environments, and many of the screens look very natural and not like a bunch of blocks. It makes the game feel like a genuine journey through the cursed countryside and huge castle, rather than just a bunch of themed levels.
I't something I found very disappointing about Vampire Killer/Bloodlines. Almost all levels in Bloodlines look very much like they are made out of graphical tiles. Look at the abrupt edges on the platforms here:
The levels have a setting (eg Greece) but then it just has a bunch of NES-style video game level platforms dropped in that setting. You're just fighting skeletons on video game stairs and platforms floating in the middle of the air above Athens for some reason. It's a completely abstract video game construct, like one of those later Bubble Bobble games with scenery in the background. Also almost every sprite is poorly animated, so many jerky animations, especially the main characters which are very poorly done. John ascending the stairs is one of the worst animations ever put in a major game.
Compare that to a similar 'ascending a waterfall' scene in CV4:
Very natural looking, you don't even think of the graphics as being made of tiles at all. And the enemies are mostly plant based to fit in with the environment naturally. It really feels like you are ascending the side of a damp cave.
The appeal of 4 essentially mirrors that of Symphony of the Night in how you compare it to its peers (Igavanias and Classicvanias respectively). In terms of pure game design and challenge/balance it has been outdone by other entries, but just taken as an experience where you just romp around casually with satisfying controls and soaking in the audiovisual atmosphere it is unparalleled.I think Super Castlevania IV is given a huge boost because of its difficulty. It is essentially one of the few power fantasy Castlevania games. It doesn't hurt that it sounds great and has those giant sprites. It leaves an impact, for sure. I think the reason people who are big into Castlevania are far more critical of it has to do with how loose it feels in comparison to the other games. It also isn't nearly as enjoyable on the second time around (while other games in the series have excellent replayability).
Just to be clear, I am not saying that if you love Super Castlevania IV then you aren't a big fan. It certainly has its fans among the hardcore. However, it is certainly more criticized among the hardcore Castlevania fans, while it seems to be beloved by the people who are more passing fans. There is most certainly a reason for that.
It's very good and an indie throwback but it's not as great as the originals. So obviously a knockoff with the enemies that are knockoff versions of classic Castlevania ones.
Yeah that's pretty much it. Both of those games are broken on an action level but have lots of great stuff to see and hear on a journey.The appeal of 4 essentially mirrors that of Symphony of the Night in how you compare it to its peers (Igavanias and Classicvanias respectively). In terms of pure game design and challenge/balance it has been outdone by other entries, but just taken as an experience where you just romp around casually with satisfying controls and soaking in the audiovisual atmosphere it is unparalleled.
I think you nailed it. Well said. Personally, I would say that Rondo and Bloodlines are a bit more appealing to me on those fronts (audio and visual), but I can see why people would be into Super Castlevania IV. I know I was a huge fan of it when it first came out on the SNES.The appeal of 4 essentially mirrors that of Symphony of the Night in how you compare it to its peers (Igavanias and Classicvanias respectively). In terms of pure game design and challenge/balance it has been outdone by other entries, but just taken as an experience where you just romp around casually with satisfying controls and soaking in the audiovisual atmosphere it is unparalleled.
Agreed, Dracula's Curse plays better, and has some interesting mechanics. But it's got too much platforming, and that one level with the falling blocks is just awful.
It's unfortunate because this game had all the tools it needed to be what Simon's Quest wasn't. A return to form, but with better visuals and level design. Where they fucked up on was the placement of powerups, in addition to the unforgiving level of difficulty in the game. Maybe they shouldn't have tried innovating the series with the optional characters. It really threw the balance off in terms of where upgrades spawned.Agreed, Dracula's Curse plays better, and has some interesting mechanics. But it's got too much platforming, and that one level with the falling blocks is just awful.
I'm split between Castlevania 1 and 4. I voted for the original since it felt like the more rewarding experience to me.