Bloodstained RotN : Kouji IGA's new "Castlevania" game.

[Weak Boson]

Nobuya Nakazato has a special thanks credit in Ecclesia; it's tempting to think that his input had an effect on the game being much tighter and more challenging than previous similar entries, as well as the inclusion of the Training Area. Anyway, the two PS2 IGAvanias are pretty much definitive proof that Koji is clueless about the fundamentals of great action-adventure games and possesses limited talent as a creative overseer, aside from obsessively curating the series' story canon. Even there, he's sometimes dropped the ball, as Curse of Darkness completely failed to exploit its status as a direct sequel to CVIII.

For the record when it comes to be PS2 Castlevanias I feel like Curse of Darkness gets tarred with the same brush as Lament of Innocence too often. I am not a fan of LoI, but CoD is massively better: you have an arsenal of weapons comparable to the DS games; a new familiar mechanic which encourages you to try different weapons; a great "steal" mechanic where you could get rare items from enemies by parrying one of their special attacks (this gave boss fights in particular a lot more depth since you could chose to go for a quick kill or try the extra challenge of getting a one-off rare item); the map design while not as intricate as the 2D games, was not linear and there were places to explore and risks/rewards for doing so; there's also some great post-game content including optional areas and bosses as well as a really, really challenging new difficulty mode and Trevor as playable character.

While it's not perfect, I think it's pretty much everything a (3D) Castlevania game should be. Maybe IGA doesn't make the deepest games around, but he does know how to make something you can, how shall I say, sink your teeth into.

[Squire Grooktook]

I like how 5-6ish solid to excellent handheld games don't "prove" anything, but one or two ps2 games do. Exactly the kind of fallacies I'd expect from shitposting.

Eclessia was only marginally better than the past two excellent DS entries anyway, so Nazakato isn't an excuse for discounting those games.

Just get out.

Maybe IGA doesn't make the deepest games around, but he does know how to make something you can, how shall I say, sink your teeth into.

Yup. I'm not expecting anything more than a smooth controlling audiovisual tour with some fun boss fights.

I'm sure it won't be an arcade magnum opus like x68, but that'll be worth the price of admission and good fun.

If it REALLY improves on past games, maybe "rectangular room full of enemies" syndrome will diminish in favor of actual environmental hazards, and actually moving around the castle will be fun based on more than exploration. Won't hold my breath for this though.

[opt2not]

Insta-backed! I'm so hype right now I can't even put on pants.

[MommysBestGames]

time for the full fat experience again.

This is what I'm looking for. A big CV project, with a big team, for the big (well TV) screen. Backed the boxed version.

[Obscura]

I like how 5-6ish solid to excellent handheld games don't "prove" anything, but one or two ps2 games do. Exactly the kind fallacies I'd expect from shitposting.

I'd say the fact that the only "excellent" handheld Metroidvania is the one he didn't work on (Circle of the Moon) proves a lot.

The other portable games really aren't very good. Eclessia is the best of them, and it's just a mediocre platformer with some good boss fights. HoD, AoS, and PoR are just bad. I haven't played DoS, but I see no real reason to, given the two games it sits between, and the fact that neither of them was worth anything.

[BrianC]

The main characters give me the impression that the game may take after Ecclessia (especially Miriam/"not-Shanoa"), but I'll wait and see.

[Squire Grooktook]

I like how 5-6ish solid to excellent handheld games don't "prove" anything, but one or two ps2 games do. Exactly the kind fallacies I'd expect from shitposting.

I'd say the fact that the only "excellent" handheld Metroidvania is the one he didn't work on (Circle of the Moon) proves a lot.

The other portable games really aren't very good. Eclessia is the best of them, and it's just a mediocre platformer with some good boss fights. HoD, AoS, and PoR are just bad. I haven't played DoS, but I see no real reason to, given the two games it sits between, and the fact that neither of them was worth anything.

Disagree entirely.

They're excellent exploration based games. I'd say the DS trilogy is better than anything in the actual Metroid series that isn't Super Metroid or Zero Mission.

Level design? Nothing to write home about, yeah. But with the smooth controls, fun boss fights, good pace and map layout, and some fun abilities and enemy types to mess with, their ultimately enjoyable if not world breaking experiences. They aren't arcade style games and the focus really isn't on pure combat (not exactly compliments, heh, but still), so sub-par level design isn't as big an issue as it would be in something like a Classicvania.

Not masterpieces by any means, but very enjoyable games imo.

I don't think anything that falls into the Metroidvania camp could really be world breaking for me like x68 Dracula. Maybe if they had super long checkpoints ala Demon's Souls 15-20 minute stretches, than maybe they could nail the same arcade style/1cc sense of tension/excitement. But that's kind of a pipe dream.

[Austin]

Curse of Darkness came off as a half-assed effort to me. For every good aspect it had, there was something equally bad that completely negated the positive elements for me. For instance, the familiar system is really cool and adds replay value, but the long drawn-out hallways and weak enemies (moles with bows and arrows? Give me a break) is a drag to slog through. I understand that after complaints with Lament of Innocence, Curse clearly tried to copy more of SOTN's non-linear style, but I feel it ultimately fell flat on its face attempting to capture any of that game's charm (and effectiveness, for that matter).

I'll admit, I do want to play through the game again, if only to try my hand at that difficult secret tower. The first time I ran through the game though I had to literally force myself to complete it. That was the first Castlevania game (Legends aside) that did absolutely nothing for me.

[BrianC]

I only played a bit of curse of darkness, but I wasn't impressed with enemies that often backed up more than they attacked and the indestructable candles.

[Pretas]

I like how 5-6ish solid to excellent handheld games don't "prove" anything, but one or two ps2 games do. Exactly the kind of fallacies I'd expect from shitposting.

Lament and Curse were made with much bigger budgets on console hardware, and IGA still totally flunked them. In Lament, it's even completely pointless to refight enemies after doors have been unlocked, because there's no experience points. Curse is full of face-slapping silliness like prominent indestructible candles behind invisible walls, which makes one question Koji's former status as Keeper of the Castlevania Legacy. I hate to paraphrase a HG101 writer, but both of these games somehow managed to ignore every progression made within the 3D battle action genre since years before their release. Even Legacy of Darkness on the N64 holds up better, and feels more advanced in some ways.

If you need more proof of Koji's inadequacy as a creator when he's unable to lean on the crutches of the SotN template (not to mention reams of PC-Engine/PS1 art assets to copy-paste or rehash), there's NanoBreaker, his attempt at a Devil May Cry-type brawler that had absolutely nothing going for it other than comical amounts of blood. Considering that IGA has cited DMC1 as one of his favorite games, it's remarkable that his team failed to learn a single design lesson from it, or even to outright copy its elements.

[Squire Grooktook]

Lament and Curse were made with much bigger budgets on console hardware, and IGA still totally flunked them.

Which doesn't change the fact that the DS Trilogy made under him were all excellent games and his presence didn't magically ruin them.

Besides, this is not a 3d game. So how much he sucks at supervising a 3d game, or how much any previous team members sucked at developing one, is irrelevant. Whether a game made under him with less budget was better than a game made under him with more budget is also irrelevant and doesn't "prove" anything.

I don't look to Iga as a master designer. The games made under him have been mostly flawed but enjoyable members of a genre I only mildly appreciate. I expect more of the same from this. If (best case scenario) Inti chips in and fixes some of the things that pissed me off about the post sotn cv's (no moving while attacking, little or no environmental hazards), I'll be impressed.

If you need more proof of Koji's inadequacy as a creator when he's unable to lean on the crutches of the SotN template

Ironic considering that's exactly what this is.

This is as straight a "stick to the formula" project as you could get. An incompetent snes romhacker could probably avoid screwing up "make another cv metroidvania".


Missed this.

stuff

Sounds like your beef is more with Konami, not any CV team. Hell, it's probably the consumers fault that there were no 2d console Metroidvania's more than Konami. Seems like that became (mostly) financial suicide for (most) publishers during the ps2 era.

I mean hey, I'd like an arcade style Classicvania that combines Bloodline's agressive playstyle with Rondo's branching path's and style, and x68's devious level design and arcade level challenge. But I'm not going to hope a game fails and isn't made just because nobody wants to make that.

[JBC]

I can't think of an example from the PS2 era to back your statement.

[Strider77]

I like how 5-6ish solid to excellent handheld games don't "prove" anything, but one or two ps2 games do. Exactly the kind of fallacies I'd expect from shitposting.

such hatred...

[Obscura]

I like how 5-6ish solid to excellent handheld games don't "prove" anything, but one or two ps2 games do. Exactly the kind fallacies I'd expect from shitposting.

I'd say the fact that the only "excellent" handheld Metroidvania is the one he didn't work on (Circle of the Moon) proves a lot.

The other portable games really aren't very good. Eclessia is the best of them, and it's just a mediocre platformer with some good boss fights. HoD, AoS, and PoR are just bad. I haven't played DoS, but I see no real reason to, given the two games it sits between, and the fact that neither of them was worth anything.

Disagree entirely.

They're excellent exploration based games. I'd say the DS trilogy is better than anything in the actual Metroid series that isn't Super Metroid or Zero Mission.

Level design? Nothing to write home about, yeah. But with the smooth controls, fun boss fights, good pace and map layout, and some fun abilities and enemy types to mess with, their ultimately enjoyable if not world breaking experiences. They aren't arcade style games and the focus really isn't on pure combat (not exactly compliments, heh, but still), so sub-par level design isn't as big an issue as it would be in something like a Classicvania.

Not masterpieces by any means, but very enjoyable games imo.

I don't think anything that falls into the Metroidvania camp could really be world breaking for me like x68 Dracula. Maybe if they had super long checkpoints ala Demon's Souls 15-20 minute stretches, than maybe they could nail the same arcade style/1cc sense of tension/excitement. But that's kind of a pipe dream.

Being better than non-Super/ZM Metroid games isn't very high praise, when Metroid 1, 2, and Fusion were all irredeemable garbage. EDIT: And I'm not certain I'd rate PoR higher than Fusion.

But what exactly makes a game a 'good exploration game'? The graphics in those games are nothing to write home about -- they're freaking portable games -- so it's not like you're getting a gorgeous hiking simulator. There's very little danger, so you don't get the "Indiana Jones"-style excitement you'd get from the first Zelda game, or Gothic 2, or a Souls game. The lack of any puzzles beyond "lock and key" means you don't even get the excitement of discovery you'd get in a Link to the Past or an Ocarina of Time. And the core mechanical engagement isn't as much fun as in most Falcom games. And the worlds are never complex enough that simply finding your way through the maze is a challenge like it would be in Zelda 1 or Legacy of the Wizard or something.

I just don't see where any of the "Metroidvania"-style Castlevanias other than Circle of the Moon have anything at all to offer.

[Squire Grooktook]

I can't think of an example from the PS2 era to back your statement.

Gradius V was one of the biggest releases I can think of, and while it wasn't a failure, it didn't do particularly well. How many large budget console releases of these franchises did we see starting from that era? Just a few. It was starting to wane.

I remember reading interviews back in 2007 where developers were making statements like "I like the ds, it really looks like the last stronghold for 2d". Exaggerations, yes, but you can see where the tide was starting to go.

But what exactly makes a game a 'good exploration game'?

-offers quite a few paths to go down.
-Well paced, and no necessary backtracking or trodding chores (solid map layout)
-good soundtrack, and in OOE and HOD, good aesthetic and atmosphere in general
-smooth controls and mildly enjoyable combat (the rectangular room full of enemies syndrome is an issue, but many enemy types were decent fun to fight), DOS and OOE also offered a plethora of fun powers and abilities to experiment with throughout, keeping it fresh.
-Genuinely fun boss fights

Now if it was a legendary game, it would have environmental hazard based level design and lengthy checkpoints of a Souls game to make it truly exciting. But even without those, they're good games that I enjoy replaying every now and then. Dawn and OOE in particular.

I like how 5-6ish solid to excellent handheld games don't "prove" anything, but one or two ps2 games do. Exactly the kind of fallacies I'd expect from shitposting.

such hatred...

The statement just makes no sense. 5 games don't prove anything but 2 games of a practically different genre do? What?

There are genuine reasons to be skeptical of this. All the 2d CV games under Iga suffered from the same "rectangular room full of enemies" level design syndrome (even when they were trying to avoid it, as in HOD), so there's not a lot of reason to believe that this will be remedied here, unless Inti Creates takes it upon themselves to do so. The kickstarter itself is a bit questionable, with no gameplay footage, vague gameplay tidbits, strangely expensive stretch goals (2 mil for a boss rush? What?), no budget break down, and the unreal engine 4 evidencing that this will probably be ugly 3d graphics (best case scenario, maybe they'll do 2d character sprites and 3d background).

All of those are far more valid reasons to be wary of this than "Nanobreaker sucked", considering it was in a different dimension and a different genre, and who knows who even worked on it besides him. Same deal with the two ps2 CV's, and even the DS games. IGA was never the lead designer or programmer as far as I know, so this is pretty much a different team. Trying to trace obscure lines of developer/publisher influence across two different companies is not a valid reason, nor is it "obvious".

[CStarFlare]

I just don't see where any of the "Metroidvania"-style Castlevanias other than Circle of the Moon have anything at all to offer.

I loved Circle, but I'm having a hard time recalling what might put it above the others from an exploration perspective. (this is personal curiosity and not a challenge to your statement; this thread has me thinking of replaying one of the -vanias but I'm having a hard time deciding which one would be most worth my time.)

[Obscura]

From a purely "how many paths do I have open to me" kind of exploration that Squire Grooktook described, there's nothing special about CotM.

CotM stands above the others simply because it's far more functional as a platformer.

[Drum]

Climbing the vertical shafts in CotM was agonisingly tedious and recalled the OG Metroid in the worst kind of way - great platforming there. It's a 7/10 at best.

[JBC]

I can't think of an example from the PS2 era to back your statement.

Gradius V was one of the biggest releases I can think of

Oh I meant PS2 era Metroidvanias. I don't think any developers ever took the chance on them, at least not for consoles. Such a waste!

[Squire Grooktook]

Climbing the vertical shafts in CotM was agonisingly tedious and recalled the OG Metroid in the worst kind of way - great platforming there. It's a 7/10 at best.

CoM's triumph to me is similar to OoE. It's more consistently challenging overall, compared to the other Metroidvania's, especially the boss fights IIRC.

The level design, while not perfect, also feels like it has more actual thought put into enemy placement and diverse and tricky terrain than anything Iga was involved with.

[Leandro]

I loved Circle of the Moon. I actually finished it several times consecutively unlocking and playing all those modes, Warrior, Mage, Thief etc. My favorite in the series

[iconoclast]

Just checked the kickstarter and saw Classic Mode was added as the $2.5 million stretch goal:

Visible next in your Crystal Lens is one of our personal favorites: Classic Mode. This is a cool one, especially if you've been playing action platformers since controllers had two buttons: In Classic Mode, existing assets and screens from the game will be rearranged linearly, to reward timing and survival instead of backtracking and exploration.

IGA and company are still too early in the planning process to promise anything, but right now he's envisioning six punishing stages. In grand classic platformer fashion, you'll be weaker and the enemies will be stronger, and forget about saving yourself by grinding—no RPG elements here.

If you've always preferred your castles punishingly difficult, straightforward, and scrolling from left to right, this is the stretch goal for you.

I might actually back this now.

[trap15]

Aw shit son. Get in here BIL!

[Squire Grooktook]

I...almost orgamsed a little...

[BIL]

Aww sheeit, I've wanted something like that since SOTN. My interest was already piqued but I really might end up going for this now.

[system11]

Just back it, join us.. or die.

[BIL]

Just back it, join us.. or ̶d̶i̶e̶ ban.

Max effectiveness.

[KAI]

Stretch goal for 2D graphics fucking when?!

[Pretas]

They'll fuck it up. The stages and play mechanics have to be specifically designed for the traditional Castlevania play style from the start, or they'll just end up with yet another boring, disjointed Richter/Julius Mode.

I'd prefer they make another Training Hall with original stage designs, alongside another Large Cavern to push the combat system to its limits. Hell, even Portrait's 2P racing mode would be better than a bunch of random castle rooms slapped together in a cloying attempt to pander to old guard fans. IGA has no real experience designing a traditional 8/16-bit style platformer, no matter how much of a CVIII fanboy he is.

[Squire Grooktook]

They'll fuck it up. The stages...

They're making new stages for the mode.

Plus this is basically a new team (Inti) so there's no real basis for assuming that this will have the same result (on top of being a different idea altogether, Richter/Julius mode was just an alternate character to play around with and never remixed anything ever).

Actually come to think of it, Albus mode was really fucking fun.

Double Edit: Julius Mode in Dawn was quite fun also, thanks to the three characters to experiment with on the fly, and the more substantially challenging boss fights which more or less formed the meat of the experience.

specifically designed for the traditional Castlevania play style from the start

Who said anything about traditional Castlevania? Let us move while attacking on the ground, put more environmental hazards in, and we'll have an unofficial Mega Man Zero 5. Fine by me. The old control scheme in the Igavania's is close enough as is to that playstyle anyway. All they have to do is fix a few minor issues (move while attacking on the ground, more environmental hazards. Rogue Legacy showed it's perfectly easy to design Metroidvania stages like this, let alone repurpose them for a platformer) and I can forsee it working excellently.

IGA has no real experience designing a traditional 8/16-bit style platformer, no matter how much of a CVIII fanboy he is.

How do you know Iga is designing it, rather than just overseeing the project like he did for the DS/GBA games? How do you know how much he'll contribute to the project, considering nobody is entirely sure what he contributed to the DS/GBA games compared to the rest of the teams that worked under him? How do you know he'll be the one who does the level design? Or enemy placement? Or combat mechanics?

What constitutes a "fanboy" and why is Iga one, and where is your source for this?

How do you know who on the Inti team will be handling the level design and combat mechanics and what they'll decide or bring to it?

Where are you getting your information?