267 replies to this topic

[Koh]

This is probably another preferential thing.  In general, controls that are perfectly responsive and fluid are the controls that are praised timelessly, whereas stiffer controls only contain a very niche market.  It's why there's the divide for the super awkward stiffness of Oldvania versus the fluidity of Super Castlevania 4.  You'll rarely find games with such a stiff control scheme in this day and age, or at least one that hasn't been ripped to shreds by critics.

Edited by Koh, 21 August 2015 - 05:40 PM.

[Air Luigi]

The controls of the oldvanias are perfectly responsive .-. They just require timing and strategy. You have to think about when to jump, when to whip... because if you fail, you are fucked. AND THAT IS THE KEY. Castlevania 1-3 are still considered masterpieces, just look any random page with reviews like gamefaqs, they were always mainstream, at least in their time. Anyways, niche games are always better, because they are focused in pleasing a certain type of people, and usually they succeed.

 

One of the reasons because La-Mulana is so awesome is that the game UNDERSTANDS perfectly how important is to take a DECISION before taking a jump, that adds a lot of tension and depth to the game. Spelunky is another great example. Both are heavily praised indie games with old school philosophies.

 

"Stiff controls" aren't bad per se, what defines if they are good or bad, is how the game is designed around these things. Castlevania design complements perfectly these controls, and the subweapons are the thing...

Edited by Air Luigi, 21 August 2015 - 07:17 PM.

[Koh]

Actually, in LaMulana, you could control your jump if you jumped properly.  It was actually required in some portions, in both the old version and the remake.  You jump straight up without any direction held, then at the peak you have free mobility.  I honestly thought it was awkward to not have it, because it made no sense.  How can you NOT change your momentum, especially after just walking off the edge of a ledge?   In real life, all you have to do is change your center of gravity by leaning in the direction you want to travel in, and letting the forces applied to you by gravity add up enough to get you going the other way.

 

At least, LaMulana let you slow down your momentum when you jumped with a direction held, unlike Stiffvania.

 

And the Stiffvanias are considered goodgames, but even in the reviews and articles, the stiff controls are mentioned as awkward or frustrating.  You can have overall good games that have flaws, unanimous or not.  In fact, every game has them.  There's no perfect game, by subjective standards or technical standards.

Edited by Koh, 21 August 2015 - 07:25 PM.

[Air Luigi]

 

And the Stiffvanias are considered goodgames, but even in the reviews and articles, the stiff controls are mentioned as awkward or frustrating.  You can have overall good games that have flaws, unanimous or not.  In fact, every game has them.  There's no perfect game, by subjective standards or technical standards.

 

Not put these words as a general statement, that's not true.

 

There is a reason because Grant has "smooth modern controls" in CV3, so how can the controls of Trevor Belmont be classified as a "flaw"? They are totally intended to work IN THAT WAY. You can love or hate it, but these controls has sense and complement perfectly the gameplay, which is the purpose of a great gameplay. It's like complaining that a tennis game has rackets.Well, maybe you have to find another sport xd

[The Satellite]

The reason Castlevania 1 and 3 are such good games (and to a lesser extent Bloodlines) were because they at least accommodated the play style. It's tough, yes, but far from impossible. Skill and patience (and admittedly some luck) will get you by, though by no means are they perfect, though the only example I can think of that truly annoyed me was Dracula in the first game teleporting on top of you, and it wasn't always easy to escape before taking a hit.

 

This is also why Dracula X for SNES, while a passable game, wasn't so good: The level design seemed like it was built for a less stiff play style, but in the end you had controls almost as stiff as the original games, and they didn't mesh very well; platforms were spaced poorly, enemy placement was spotty, it was all a big pain in the ass. The older games realized what they had to work with and built around it well, especially Castlevania 3.

 

I actually came to that realization lately and warmed up to the old control style, except when the game was clearly not built for it, though only Dracula X so far seems to bear that distinction. To quote Alestance from a Skype conversation: "I like the idea of jumps having no control, like, as a game concept. And Castlevania was built around making the situations look and feel helpless. It was horror before horror could effectively be a thing on game consoles."

[Air Luigi]

Yes, TS got the point. Dracula X is the perfect example, the funny thing is that Rondo of Blood (the original source) has the more closest controls and style to the metroidvania games, specially if you play with Maria. Dracula X in the snes was a failure, and not only because was a poor reimagination of Rondo, it was poor because the game design was lackluster around Richter.

Edited by Air Luigi, 21 August 2015 - 08:14 PM.

[Koh]

 It's like complaining that a tennis game has rackets.Well, maybe you have to find another sport xd

 

This doesn't work.  It would sorta work if you said something more like "It's like complaining that if, in Tennis, you could only swing the racket in a very specific way that doesn't reflect your usual instinct."

 

Anyone who's played Mario, for example, and most likely has before Castlevania, has accustomed to having actual physics with the actions.  You jump, and to go the other way in midair, you have to start accelerating the opposite direction.  Takes a bit to gain momentum that way, but it's still possible.  Then you go from that to something like Castlevania, where it's like "Sorry, but you have to make marriages to your jumps here!"  That's why many reviewers and review articles complain about the controls.  They go against your natural instinct and what most people are accustomed to in platform games, from the standards Mario set.  Basically, when something raises the bar high in some aspect, then you play something else that isn't anywhere near that bar.

 

Take an AVGN segment as an example of this:  https://youtu.be/5BqCAOGRR2Q?t=245

Edited by Koh, 21 August 2015 - 08:26 PM.

[The Satellite]

Many games around that time though hadn't all followed Mario's example yet. Regardless, it was intended so as to be realistic. Because we need more realism in a game about skeletons, zombies, flying snake-lady heads, and knights with boomerang axes.

 

But I say, unless it's an absolutely stupid feature (which stiff jumps are not), it's made up for as long as the game complements it well.

[Air Luigi]

Koh, you are comparing potatoes and oranges here. Castlevania isn't a platformer, it's an action game, even it has platforming elements. In Castlevania, the point with the platforming isn't the precission with jumps (you always jump the same distance), the point is TO KNOW WHEN AND WHERE TO JUMP. In a certain way, it's a puzzle game, that's why is super important to pick the more effective subweapon in the correct places. Mario is pure platforming about skill with the jumps and inertias. BOTH are great in their styles, they were aiming to different things. In Castlevania, enemy design and atmosphere is way more important than in Mario.

Edited by Air Luigi, 21 August 2015 - 08:32 PM.

[Koh]

Even so, it still isn't realistic, lol.  As I said, you can change your moment in air in real life.  Not as fast as Mario, but you just change your center of gravity by leaning, and letting the force of gravity do all the work.  

 

And something complimenting or hindering the gameplay is something subjective as well.  One person can love how everything feels, whereas someone else says it feels stiff and sluggish.

 

 

 that's why is super important to pick the more effective subweapon in the correct places.

This is the aspect of CV 1 I greatly consider terrible game design.  There are three reasons for this.

 

1.  When you die, you go back to nothing for a subweapon, and when you respawn, you generally don't have access to the "intended" subweapon.  This makes the game more frustrating and hard to recover from an error (like dying at Death and losing the Cross or something), all because they wanted you to have something you no longer have access to.

 

2.  Everything should be plausible with the primary weapon.  I'm not saying it should be EASY, but rather, reasonably doable.  If you're stuck with the whip and maybe the throwing daggers for Death or something because you died, it shouldn't suddenly be near impossible to survive.  

 

3.  It's a perfect example of Unstable Equilibrium.

[The Satellite]

Even so, it still isn't realistic, lol.  As I said, you can change your moment in air in real life.  Not as fast as Mario, but you just change your center of gravity by leaning, and letting the force of gravity do all the work.

You try jumping between two platforms and, while in midair between them, turning around and landing back on the first platform and tell me how that goes.
 

2.  Everything should be plausible with the primary weapon.  I'm not saying it should be EASY, but rather, reasonably doable.  If you're stuck with the whip and maybe the throwing daggers for Death or something because you died, it shouldn't suddenly be near impossible to survive.

It is reasonably doable. You're just not gonna have a good time. Or you will if you're really good.

[Evan20000]

Even so, it still isn't realistic, lol.  As I said, you can change your moment in air in real life.

I'm convinced you've never actually jumped in your life now.

But that aside, if you're falling back on the realism argument for Castlevania of all things, I think it's fair to say that's an admission of defeat.

[Koh]

Oh come on guys, center of gravity, also known as center of mass, is one of the most basic gravity physics thing.  No one's saying you can land back on the cliff you just jumped off in real life...what's being said is you CAN change your momentum in midair, just by changing your center of gravity.  The forces applied to you by gravity will affect your velocity and torque.  Not to mention there's things like friction and air resistance, that, even if you don't get to turn around, you can at least slow yourself down.  All I'm saying is if they intended for it to be a realistic atmosphere, they certainly didn't do the physics right for that XP.

Edited by Koh, 21 August 2015 - 09:02 PM.

[Air Luigi]

I'm playing Simon Quest, my second play after 10 years... I'm playing the retranslation with the map.

 

I saved before the 5th mansion. Man... it's wasted potential everywhere ;_; 

 

I still don't like this game. It's not a masterpiece, it's not the worst game ever, it's just average. The hack made the game beatable without a guide and has a cool map, which is neat, but the game is still lackluster. The lies of the villagers are still there, TS, at least in my patch =O

 

Complaints:

*The idea of a open world Transylvania is cool, but the world design is a straight line with some branching paths that kills all the fun. It's super annoying to navigate the world if you get lost, specially because there isn't too much to find.

*If you miss a book with a clue, you are practically fucked, and some of them are easy to miss. At least one of the relics of Dracula spoils the locations, but you need to get to the third mansion.

*The enemies and bosses are weak, repetitive and easy...

*There isn't much strategy with subweapons, and most of them are useless.

*The game doesn't require any skill, it's super easy, the only point is to figure where to go.

*Even the ost feels a bit weak for a Castlevania game. The mansion music is awful, and gives me headaches. Bloody Tears isn't enough.

*The overall design of the mansions is boring, just spread holy water for all over the place.

*Grinding.

 

It has some interesting ideas (equipping Dracula relics), some cool backgrounds, day/night is a cool feature, Bloody Tears, but... no, this game will be always lackluster. There are much much much better exploration games in NES (Zelda, AOL, Metroid, Legacy of the Wizard, Battle of Olympus, Solstice, The Guardian Legend, Blaster Master...) Still, it has a unique charm and mood, and it worth a play if you are a real Castlevania fan, but just that.

Edited by Air Luigi, 21 August 2015 - 10:39 PM.

[Air Luigi]

I finished Simon's Quest. Now I want to nail a stake in the heart of the cartridge. What  a joke of game! Someone should hack the game and put the good Stan as the real final boss that this game deserves. I think Dracula played too many Wii games while waiting for Simon in this game, he was totally out of shape =(

 

It's a shame that a game with this potential feels so lazy and rushed. Why Konami, whyyyy? Well, at least we have a lot of memes -.-