Castlevania Chronicles 5.99 on PSN

[quote name='Pojo']Depends on which style you prefer. This Castlevania is oldschool design at it's finest.[/quote]

I strongly disagree with that. I don't think it's aged well at all. I mean Castlevania 2 or 3 (or especially 4) are much better action games IMO.

It actually feels "fresher" than the surplus of Metroidvania games we've been getting lately, which I also enjoy.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I HATE all the DS ones. They're way too hard. I got suckered in to the first two just because I love the genre and 2D gameplay, but there was no way I was touching the third...especially when it's supposed to be even HARDER.
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']Unfortunately I HATE all the DS ones. They're way too hard. I got suckered in to the first two just because I love the genre and 2D gameplay, but there was no way I was touching the third...especially when it's supposed to be even HARDER.[/quote]

:whistle2:|

Out of the GBA & DS Castlevanias, only Circle of the Moon & OoE present a challenge, the rest were cakewalks. Still enjoyable but seriously felt easy enough for someone's grandmother. & its about time difficulty was brought back for another series this gen instead of losing it altogether to "appeal to the mainstream" :roll:
 
[quote name='opportunity777']This game is fucking hard on the highest difficulty.

Usually, I don't have a problem with the older-style Castlevania games, but this one is a pain.

I like Castlevania SNES and Dracula X more than this remake.[/quote]
Tough game for sure, i bought it when it first came out, never could get past a certain level, and up till then i was pretty much a crack Drac killer!
 
I've only got around to Circle of the Moon so far even though I own SoTN on the Playstation, HoD, and the PSP one. I love CotM though, but partially because it's like Metroid as other people have pointed out.

I guess I'll have to check out Chronicles when I get a chance.
 
[quote name='UberNinjaz']:whistle2:|

Out of the GBA & DS Castlevanias, only Circle of the Moon & OoE present a challenge, the rest were cakewalks. Still enjoyable but seriously felt easy enough for someone's grandmother. & its about time difficulty was brought back for another series this gen instead of losing it altogether to "appeal to the mainstream" :roll:[/QUOTE]

I 100% disagree with all of that. First, the DS games were MUCH harder than Circle of the Moon, which was similar to Symphony of the Night. Second, difficulty does not = fun for many people. You're cutting out a huge part of the market by making something too hard, and it isn't the "mainstream" market secondarily, it's people who like and play games but don't want a "challenge".
 
the challenge in the DS games is not the combat, but the exploration. Although the newest DS game does have challenge in the combat
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']I 100% disagree with all of that. First, the DS games were MUCH harder than Circle of the Moon, which was similar to Symphony of the Night. Second, difficulty does not = fun for many people. You're cutting out a huge part of the market by making something too hard, and it isn't the "mainstream" market secondarily, it's people who like and play games but don't want a "challenge".[/QUOTE]

To be fair: Traditional castlevania games are hard. They have always been that way. The Symphony of the NIght style games (Metroidvanias) are generally easier. This is something that bothers people who have been fans of the series since before 1997. Obviously making your game too hard and cutting out the mainstream would be a bad idea....but casltevania games aren't mainstream anyway, so that isn't a particularly persuasive argument.

Slight aside, as well: You really thought Dawn of Sorrow and Portrait of Ruin were harder than circle of the Moon? Maybe you didn't delve into the Tactica Soul System in DoS or all the skills in PoR enough: They make them wickedly easy.
 
[quote name='SDC']To be fair: Traditional castlevania games are hard. They have always been that way. The Symphony of the NIght style games (Metroidvanias) are generally easier. This is something that bothers people who have been fans of the series since before 1997. Obviously making your game too hard and cutting out the mainstream would be a bad idea....but casltevania games aren't mainstream anyway, so that isn't a particularly persuasive argument.

Slight aside, as well: You really thought Dawn of Sorrow and Portrait of Ruin were harder than circle of the Moon? Maybe you didn't delve into the Tactica Soul System in DoS or all the skills in PoR enough: They make them wickedly easy.[/QUOTE]

I don't think any of the current Castlevanias (at least the ones I played) are any more (some iterations certainly less) difficult compared to the older ones. The hardware limitations of the past, smaller development houses and lack of templates for game structure made a lot of jerky movements, no save states, long annoying password systems and poor level design. Currently, the Nintendo controller is really hard for me to use. Looking back, I'm not sure how I was so precise with it. Other games were hard because they were just poorly made; e.g. Castlevania II.

The "argument" for the transition from Castlevania's traditional structure to its current state was / is actually strong. As a series, its long term survival depends on its ability to penetrate the mainstream market.

The first step was the evolution of the series into "Metroid-like" gameplay. Even Dracula Chronicles for PSP was packaged with SOTN to push sales. Otherwise, the mainstream market may have ignored it. Next, the series needs to make a successful transition into 3D. Over the years, the 3D iterations' had poor to mixed results. I'm sure Konami would agree with all of those assessments.

Capcom took the hard-ass approach with MMPU (Mega Man), MMMH and Ultimate Ghouls N Ghosts. The sales numbers didn't meet their expectations. Honestly, I thought some parts of MMPU (like the 100 Challenges) was way too hard. Also, playing on the PSP made the game more cumbersome than necessary. On the other hand, the Castlevania PSP game is now a GH title because SOTN (either directly or indirectly -- I'm not explaining this) helped push sales.

When I was younger, I used to beat Ninja Gaiden, Castlevania, Mega Man and others on the actual hardware. Along the way, I either "regressed" or adapted my play style to newer games. Sometimes, I go back and play classic titles, but I usually never prefer them over current AAA releases. The general public's taste has changed over time, and their influence far exceeds the desires of hardcore nostalgic gamers. Some older titles hold up well, and others are glossed over with a new coat of paint. These exceptions exist, but they are not prevalent. In the future, our ideas about how a certain series should evolve need to change as well.
 
I was hesitant to buy this because of people saying it's "JUST" a remake of the first Castlevania... It's much less a remake and more of a retelling... Similar to how Castlevania IV is also a "remake" yet has entirely different gameplay mechanics and scenarios than the original..

While Chronicles does stay a bit closer in level design to the original than IV did, there have been many times where I have been flat out surprised or said "wow that's cool!" in the first third alone... Anyone who is a Castlevania nut (or more specifically an ACTIONvania nut) should get this if they haven't played it already...

just my $.02
 
Dracula X Chronicles on PSP and Order of Ecclesia are probably the toughest Castlevania games I've ever played, and are up there for toughest ever IMO, especially OoE.

My only pause on buying this is because I bought Super Castlevania IV on the Virtual Console, so if it's just a remake of Castlevania 1, like that, why should I pay $6 for this?
 
[quote name='KingBroly']Dracula X Chronicles on PSP and Order of Ecclesia are probably the toughest Castlevania games I've ever played, and are up there for toughest ever IMO, especially OoE.

My only pause on buying this is because I bought Super Castlevania IV on the Virtual Console, so if it's just a remake of Castlevania 1, like that, why should I pay $6 for this?[/QUOTE]

The gameplay is more CV1 than CVIV.

For instance, there is no 8-directional whipping in this game.

I think it's harder than CV1. When it came out, people weren't really too impressed by it because the release was after SOTN.
 
[quote name='Richlough']Do PSN PS1 games save into the game or a PS1 virtual memory card ?[/QUOTE]PS1 Virtual Memory card. If you have an old PS1 save, it will work for a download too.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']Dracula X Chronicles on PSP and Order of Ecclesia are probably the toughest Castlevania games I've ever played, and are up there for toughest ever IMO, especially OoE.

My only pause on buying this is because I bought Super Castlevania IV on the Virtual Console, so if it's just a remake of Castlevania 1, like that, why should I pay $6 for this?[/QUOTE]

The levels are completely different from what you get in Super Castlevania IV. It's a completely different game, just like Rondo of Blood is different from Super Castlevania IV.
 
I still don't know why anyone would consider Castlevania 4 a remake of part one. The levels and bosses are almost entirely different.
 
[quote name='Chacrana']The levels are completely different from what you get in Super Castlevania IV. It's a completely different game, just like Rondo of Blood is different from Super Castlevania IV.[/quote]

Rondo of Blood isn't a remake of the original Castlevania
 
[quote name='KingBroly']Rondo of Blood isn't a remake of the original Castlevania[/QUOTE]

Yeah, neither is part 4. Try playing Castlevania 1 on NES and comparing it to 4.
 
[quote name='eastx']I still don't know why anyone would consider Castlevania 4 a remake of part one. The levels and bosses are almost entirely different.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='eastx']Yeah, neither is part 4. Try playing Castlevania 1 on NES and comparing it to 4.[/QUOTE]

People are not just considering CVIV a remake of part one. It actually is a remake of part one.

The story and setting are the same. It's a retelling and remake of CVI by a different development team.

I can post links for you, but I shouldn't have to do so. A long time ago, I figured this out on my own.

Here is just one excerpt:

"1691: (The events of Vampire Killer, Haunted Castle, Castlevania, Akumajō Dracula X68000, Castlevania Chronicles, Super Castlevania IV) After a Black Mass, the evil Count Dracula rose once again to plunge the European landscape into a state of total darkness. The count's legions grew like a plague, infesting the land like a disease everywhere they went. Simon Belmont, great-grandson of Christopher Belmont, rose to the cries of the citizenry, and took up the legendary Vampire Killer, setting off for Castlevania, the ancestral home of the evil Prince of Darkness. In the end, Simon had a one-on-one battle with the count, but proved victorious, sending him once again to his dark grave, saving the world from his torment." - Source

All of those games in parantheses are the same game, but remade or redone several times. Also, the grammar check on CAG doesn't know how to spell parathesis or parantheses. It keeps underlying the words as incorrect. I had to second-guess myself. What a piece of crap.
 
With 90% completely different levels, it's pretty hard to consider it a remake. I guess it's just semantics. Only the setting is the same. Here King Broly was under the impression that if he has played Castlevania 4, he has also played Castlevania 1. That is completely untrue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top