Dcubed Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 You'd take the views of Metro newspaper over IGN? I would
Retro_Link Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 Take IGN out of it then. I certainly wouldn't listen to a newspaper when it came to games reviews.
-Dem0- Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 (edited) Here's another, this time from eurogamer: "Stones, crenellations, laboratories! Castlevania, for all its moody horrors, has always been a comforting sort of experience, and while Mirror of Fate might willingly fumble the classic structure somewhat, it's still got a touch of that familiar vampire-hunting charm to it - a charm that comes to the rescue whenever the developer's invention or polish fall short. This 3DS outing can't match the smart assurance of the first Lords of Shadow, then, but it remains a decent action game with some lovely art to keep it chugging along. It's something of a makeweight, as handheld games far too frequently are - but there's just enough here to satisfy until the true follow-up to Lords of Shadows is ready." 7/10 http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-02-28-castlevania-lords-of-shadow-mirror-of-fate-review Edited March 5, 2013 by -Dem0-
Fused King Posted March 5, 2013 Author Posted March 5, 2013 As I suspected, this isn't a 'as soon as possible mush-have' for me, but will definitely be buying it down the line. Currently, I'm focusing more and more on older games in my backlog which have a low price point, for I am a poor student
khilafah Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 that IGN review was BS.. He just seems really pissed off that the 3DS hasnt got a traditional castlevania game. I am still getting this for sure..
Captain Falcon Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 (edited) You'd take the views of Metro newspaper over IGN? The guy who does the Metro reviews is a journalist named David Jenkins and they started doing reviews there when Teletext was shut down because they used to operate on there as GameCentral. Gamecentral itself was set up by then former, though now current again, editor of Edge magazine and whilst it ditched the frivilous humour than was synonomous with its teletext predecessor, Digitiser (someone here has an excellent quote from Mr Biffo in their sig), it kept the same idea of always telling it like it was. The fact that there was no way for companies to advertise on the medium meant they were free to say what they wanted and never have to worry about those back door antics. Worst came to the worst, publishers wouldn't send them games sometimes but that was normally when they were crap anyway. David Jenkins also used to write for the Ceefax equivilent before he joined Teletext and I always felt he was a bit of a soft touch with those reviews but since he swapped sides, he improved dramatically. Frankly, I hold his Metro reviews higher than any other publication except Edge who I place on an equal footing. Eurogamer comes in a distant third and everyone else is just there to give me something to read when I'm bored. I'm not saying I always agree with what he says but I certainly value his opinion over most others and it's easy to see the logic he used to come to his conclusion. Edited March 5, 2013 by Captain Falcon
Dcubed Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 (edited) I miss Digitiser so much That and Super Play were my bibles back in the day! Some of it has been archived on here... http://www.superpage58.com/ And here... http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.moleman.freeserve.co.uk/ But most of it had been lost to time sadly Edit: Oh there's a few pages archived on here as well, but it's not much... http://www.teletext.org.uk/index.php?cat=30_Archived-nbsp~Pages&page=40_Digitiser-nbsp~1995&highlight=Digitiser Edited March 5, 2013 by Dcubed
david.dakota Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 The guy who does the Metro reviews is a journalist named David Jenkins He also wears incredible socks.
Grazza Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 Digitiser was absolutely superb. I used to read Digitiser/GameCentral every day - the comedy characters, the News page, the reviews and the letters - there was something cool about having something to fiddle about with on the TV screen (I even took photographs when I had my letters published!) I often quite disagreed with their reviews, but I respected them as honest. That said, I wonder if there was a backlash at some point because they invented a character to review bad games! Nigel Humdrum, I think. As a very rough example, if a game had bad controls he'd say something like "The unresponsive controls are great, as they make it more of a challenge!"
flameboy Posted March 5, 2013 Posted March 5, 2013 I'm not very keen on this whole combo system and from what Nintendolife's review says it seems to be a huge part of the game.
Retro_Link Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Gametrailers Review - 6.8 http://www.gametrailers.com/reviews/hh0pvo/castlevania--lords-of-shadow---mirror-of-fate-review
nekunando Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 I think I've seen enough of this now to decide that I'm not particularly interested anymore
flameboy Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 I miss Digitiser so much That and Super Play were my bibles back in the day! Some of it has been archived on here... http://www.superpage58.com/ And here... http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.moleman.freeserve.co.uk/ But most of it had been lost to time sadly Edit: Oh there's a few pages archived on here as well, but it's not much... http://www.teletext.org.uk/index.php?cat=30_Archived-nbsp~Pages&page=40_Digitiser-nbsp~1995&highlight=Digitiser lmao at this "picture" of Violet Berlin of Bad Influence fame: I used to love digitiser! Hell teletext in general, I remember Summer Holidays browsing teletext before reruns of Gamesmaster. Anyone remember how in the holidays Channel 4 would get rid of Bamboozle and have a version of the popular show Knightmare.
Captain Falcon Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 (edited) I think I've seen enough of this now to decide that I'm not particularly interested anymore I kinda got the feeling you were already there a long time ago. So I spotted an IGN video over at GoNintendo where they try to explain why they disliked this game so much and it was basically 5 minutes of the reviewer and the new guy from 1up saying how it wasn't Symphony of the Night over and over. I certainly don't think it helped their cause and didn't state anything new besides what was in the review. I would have grabbed the link but it's not worth watching - I just thought it amusing the felt the need to do the video. I'm not a big Gamespot fan but they've given it a 7/10 and actually gave it the "Sharp Control" medal so clearly they had no issue with using the Circle Pad. Anyway, ShopTo have charged me for the game and it's now showing as in stock on their site so hopefully it should be sent out today. I'll be sure to give my impressions when it arrives for people still on the fence and who actually give a crap what I think (a very slim intersection I'm sure). Edit: and it's on it's way. Edited March 6, 2013 by Captain Falcon
ShadowV7 Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 This game just shows to me how bad or flawed reviews can be. IGN in particular aren't reviewing this game for what it is, just reviewing under the notion of this being, and wanting it to be a Metroidvania title and bashed it for not being that which has been pointed out, which it isn't really intended to be. So it's a shame to see folk who are impressionable to just shun thus after one, perhaps pretty flawed review, especially when other reviewers give a good idea of what you can expect and not compare nor force in their classic Castlevania views. Pretty much why I avoid reviews and dislike scores. People just cling to a low scoring review, perhaps not reading why that score has been rated as such nor bother with a review that highlights and praises the game. Score and boom. People can even like a game lower than 7/8, and dare say, disagree with a reviewer and his/her impressions, something they fault can me something you don't like or mind. A review should be giving a reader an idea or vision of the game of interest, a take on why they feel something falls short or a highlight, not forcing their wants or beliefs to compare it somethings it's not, and never set out to be that ends up wrongly devaluing a games image. Regardless was happy to see my e-mail of this being dispatched earlier this afternoon, only thing i'm not happy with is how this marks the start of a pricey gaming month
flameboy Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 This game just shows to me how bad or flawed reviews can be. IGN in particular aren't reviewing this game for what it is, just reviewing under the notion of this being, and wanting it to be a Metroidvania title and bashed it for not being that which has been pointed out, which it isn't really intended to be. So it's a shame to see folk who are impressionable to just shun thus after one, perhaps pretty flawed review, especially when other reviewers give a good idea of what you can expect and not compare nor force in their classic Castlevania views. Pretty much why I avoid reviews and dislike scores. People just cling to a low scoring review, perhaps not reading why that score has been rated as such nor bother with a review that highlights and praises the game. Score and boom. People can even like a game lower than 7/8, and dare say, disagree with a reviewer and his/her impressions, something they fault can me something you don't like or mind. A review should be giving a reader an idea or vision of the game of interest, a take on why they feel something falls short or a highlight, not forcing their wants or beliefs to compare it somethings it's not, and never set out to be that ends up wrongly devaluing a games image. Regardless was happy to see my e-mail of this being dispatched earlier this afternoon, only thing i'm not happy with is how this marks the start of a pricey gaming month Yes and No....I am not a fan of IGN's reviews at all and it's a shame writers I used to love are now stuck under their umbrella but I do think there are certain expectations when it comes to 2D Castlevania games. With the mainline console games long since taking a different turn (Castlevania 64 through Lord of Shadows demonstrating this) people have come to expect the handhelds to deliver that traditional experience. I am one of them if I'm honest. Having said that I've redownloaded the demo to give it a second shot.
Captain Falcon Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Yes and No....I am not a fan of IGN's reviews at all and it's a shame writers I used to love are now stuck under their umbrella but I do think there are certain expectations when it comes to 2D Castlevania games. With the mainline console games long since taking a different turn (Castlevania 64 through Lord of Shadows demonstrating this) people have come to expect the handhelds to deliver that traditional experience. I am one of them if I'm honest. Having said that I've redownloaded the demo to give it a second shot Which would be all well and good if the games Producer, who has been doing media circuit quite extensively, had said that they were trying to replicate that experience. But he hasn't said that at all. And at that point, judging this games worth as lower because it fails to emulate something it was never trying to emulate is wrong. You review it for what it is and what it was meant to be, not for what it isn't and was never meant to be.
flameboy Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Which would be all well and good if the games Producer, who has been doing media circuit quite extensively, had said that they were trying to replicate that experience. But he hasn't said that at all. And at that point, judging this games worth as lower because it fails to emulate something it was never trying to emulate is wrong. You review it for what it is and what it was meant to be, not for what it isn't and was never meant to be. I don't agree at all....I haven't kept up with the press on this at all. All I knew was it was a 2D Castlevania and like it or not that comes with that comes with certain expectations. Now I didn't pick up Lords of Shadows because I'm really not into God of War and when I played the demo it felt exactly like that. So it comes as a disappointment that thats what handheld/2D (2D not strictly true but yeah) has become and I had no idea until the demo. So you can certainly come into a review with expectations purely based on past experiences with handheld Castlevania games. They aren't reviewing how good a job the Producer did of telling us what this game is and isn't. Sure as gaming press they will keep up with this but that doesn't mean they can't not like the direction this iteration has taken. They are judging the game on it's merits as the latest in a long running franchise. It comes with this history and legacy whether the developers like it or not. Personally I don't like the combat, I don't like the QTE it's just not Castlevania to me, it's 2.5d GoW with a Castlevania skin.
nekunando Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 Personally I don't like the combat.. That was probably one of my main complaints as it didn't feel at all satisfying to me The original Lords of Shadow and the God of War games have failed to grab me because of this too.. and I kinda hate that the jump button is used as part of the combos. There were a couple of times in the demo I was trying to jump out of the way of an attack but he ended up pulling off some sort of move which left me vulnerable With that in mind and the fact that the platforming element didn't feel particularly tight, I'm not really sure how much faith I could possibly put in myself fully enjoying the final game.. I've mentioned before that I was in some ways interested in this Castlevania because it was a break from the traditional formula that has become somewhat stale after playing a fair few of them in recent years, so my complaints certainly aren't focused on not being another 'Metroidvania'. I'm also not judging the game based solely on the IGN review I did watch the review but it didn't really do anything to alter my thoughts of what I'd played myself.. and whatever reasons they had for giving the game a relatively low score, it's probably about time the whole industry started rating games more 'realistically', if you can call it that There are too many drastically inflated scores going around for everything..
EEVILMURRAY Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 I don't know about the Mirror - I've not seen it mentioned in any of the reviews I've read. The mirror has practically no involvement at all. You see it in a cutscene and then becomes a room on the map but it doesn't actually play a key role (when compared to a certain Ocarina for example). It's a wonder why they have it as a subtitle. I'm not very keen on this whole combo system and from what Nintendolife's review says it seems to be a huge part of the game. The combo system is OK but there's no point memorising most of it when a few choice moves do the job just as easily.
flameboy Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 The combo system is OK but there's no point memorising most of it when a few choice moves do the job just as easily. See that's part of the problem if you don't/can't learn the combo system over the course of a 10-15 hour game tedium can set in and it gets extremely boring. I'd rather a combat system that still makes you feel empowered.
Captain Falcon Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 Stuff I'm sorry but I just can't agree. By that reckoning, Resident Evil 4 could be called rubbish since it breaks away from all the previous Resident Evils, and the expectation that would come about by playing the first 4, and indeed some people hated it for that very reason, regardless of it's actual quality. If they took a second to look past the name, even they shouldn't have been so blind as think so poorly of it. And that would apply for any sequel that differs greatly from an established line of gameplay shown through a series. It shouldn't matter whether it's been publicised as one type or another when it comes to a review though - I brought that up because the reviewer should have been well aware not to expect a Metroidvania game as he claims to be the biggest Castlevania fan at IGN and specifically requested that he review the game despite being one of the Playstation editors so he will have been following it. But as I said, it shouldn't matter. He's reviewing this game and he only needs to talk about this game and I found the constant, needless comparisons did him, and his review, no credit. A game shouldn't get marked down for little exploration when it was never meant to be about exploring. It was a bad review - end of Discussion. Anyway, my copy turned up from ShopTo today - it included the 3 posters bonus. They came inside an A5 envelope and are A3 in size when unfolded and are of Simon, Alucard and Trevor. As for the game, I did the very short Prologue and have completed Act 1, where you play as Simon, to 100%. It's sort of strange after playing the demo because in that, you start at level 12 and have a lot of skills unlocked but you start at level 1 and don't have too many moves - the simpler combat at this stage is more more reminisant of the older games and I suspect some of people would have been happier if it never progressed much beyond it. You don't have that upward jump attack meaning you can instantly jump out of a strike which is kinda nice actually - shame they couldn't make combos toggle on and off. You also don't start with the Combat Cross so there is no swinging to be done until you find an upgrade which ultimately represents the bulk of the back tracking/exploring since you will see a lot of places you can't access at first. When you do get round to returning to those points, there isn't really much further to go beyond that point as once you've swung/grappelled, you reward is right in front of you and only just outside the range of the camera before hand. The fact they are only health/magic/sub weapon up and nothing more substantial makes them the feeling a touch hollow and not something none completionist should feel the need for. The scrolls make for good reading and one of them does explain why they all exists as they do. Backtracking didn't feel particularly painful, and there are a couple of warp points dotted around too. Even though most sections having a 3-4 entrances/exits the path through them is relatively linear despite them being a bit snakey so if you just keep goingeither left or right, you will get to where you want to be easily enough. The framerate is about the same as in the demo - it's consistant but a bit low. I think at one point it did hit something very close to 30fps but that was in a small room with nothing going on. The 3D effect is as good as it was in the demo and sometimes the camera swaps to an over the shoulder view as you slowly walk forward (think Metroid: Other M style) and it's a really good look with you getting a nice close up of Simon's character model and texture work. I'm currently playing on Hard and I don't feel the game is that difficult really - it took me a while before I actually got hit. On that setting though it only takes a few mistakes and you can die but one of Simon's magic spells really helps in that regard, if you remember to use it, and so I can't imagine anyone having any trouble on easy. I think there is some truth to the complaints about the act ending, so you swap character, just when you're finally getting used to using all the characters weapons/magic. It is a bit disappointing but now I'm looking forward to finding a bunch of new stuff as someone else. I guess it ultimately comes down to the brevity of the game. When I completed the act, I was at 97% percent but you have the option from the main menu to go back to previously completed acts as well as being able to carry on the story so I mopped up my missing parts. The game features 2 game save. The music is more of the same as seen in the demo. I like it, I know some don't, but I have noticed that some of the tracks like to repeat a bit from section to section. I'm hoping playing as someone else means I get to hear new stuff as I explore different places but those common tunes are what featured in the demo and given you played as a different character in a different part of the map, I suspect I'll be hearing them a thoughout the next act too. So yeah, I'm really enjoying it - certainly isn't a 4.7 game that's for sure - but if you hated the demo, it's difficult to see what the game would do to change your mind, so far, except for easing you into the combat instead of dropping you in it. If you've got questions I'll happily answer if I can
EEVILMURRAY Posted March 8, 2013 Posted March 8, 2013 For some reason ONM gave it 92%. A massive stretch towards a fisting of the game.
Dcubed Posted March 8, 2013 Posted March 8, 2013 Ugh. Gotta wait until Monday for this. Couldn't order it until today
flameboy Posted March 9, 2013 Posted March 9, 2013 I'm sorry but I just can't agree. By that reckoning, Resident Evil 4 could be called rubbish since it breaks away from all the previous Resident Evils, and the expectation that would come about by playing the first 4, and indeed some people hated it for that very reason, regardless of it's actual quality. If they took a second to look past the name, even they shouldn't have been so blind as think so poorly of it. And that would apply for any sequel that differs greatly from an established line of gameplay shown through a series. It shouldn't matter whether it's been publicised as one type or another when it comes to a review though - I brought that up because the reviewer should have been well aware not to expect a Metroidvania game as he claims to be the biggest Castlevania fan at IGN and specifically requested that he review the game despite being one of the Playstation editors so he will have been following it. But as I said, it shouldn't matter. He's reviewing this game and he only needs to talk about this game and I found the constant, needless comparisons did him, and his review, no credit. A game shouldn't get marked down for little exploration when it was never meant to be about exploring. It was a bad review - end of Discussion. Is the quoting somebody and replacing their words as "stuff" a thing you do or you trying to be insulting by claiming that my words don't matter? I think Resident Evil 4 differs in that they made changes that fans were out there asking for. Certainly in terms of controls and for the most part it reinvigorated and rejuvenated the horror genre with a slightly more action twist. It didn't fundamentally turn the series on it's head, merely refined it. (Granted in 5+6 they've taken these changes too far.) Whereas this shift in focus has completely changed the nature the Castlevania series, now it's focussed on the combat rather than the platforming/puzzles along with the awkward enemy positioning playing havoc with your navigation. I don't think there was anyone out there clamouring for Castlevania to acquire a combat system ala God of War. I'm a little miffed as to why you said it doesn't matter how it was publicised when you were the one claiming how the producer has done the rounds and people should know what to expect.
Recommended Posts