<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>When I say Heart and Soul of the series, I refer mainly to Castlevania III, but I will continue with that later:
The first Castlevania game is one I just got as a gift when I was a kid, I had no idea what the series was about or anything. Admittedly, when I first played it, I found it incredibly hard to survive for very long =P
Yet Castlevania drew me in like no other game I had ever played, at that age I think my favourite title was probably Captain Skyhawk (which was developed by Rare), but Castlevania was the first game I found which really drew me in; the second was probably Zelda. It took me a while to finish this game, as I recall, but even before I was done, I wanted more.
Now Castlevania II: Simon's Quest was the answer, and I remember just seeing it on the shelf and buying it right off the shelf. The game certainly had improved graphics over the original, but there were some problems: #1 the gameplay sucked, #2 the controls were horrible, #3 it just seemed like a rushed version of a game which was attempting to capitalize on a new style of games that was becoming popular, and sorry to say, Metroid, Zelda 2, Faxanadu, and others in the genre absolutely creamed it. The game did not really have the same grip as the first title, and even though it received a much greater amount of advertisement, I don't remember anyone who didn't see this as a failure. The reaction for this game was the largest I remember, larger than the one between Zelda 1 and 2 (which went from the successful overhead view to side scroller) and even larger than Mario 1 to Mario 2. A lot of people weren't happy with the game, including me. The only draw that the game had was that it had a bit of story to it which the first game lacked, however, like Zelda 2 in comparisson to the first, the story was too little and not even close to being significant enough to really take away from the fact that the game was repetetive and just plain sucked compared to the first. I also remember feeling a bit insulted by the difficulty level which made the game easy enough so that everyone could finish it (I took pride in being one of the only ones capable of finishing the first game, that game and Ninja Turtles); the only difficulty came from the fact that the controls were so bad. However, in a bit of defense for the game, it did have some of the best music, and it did have the ineresting time feature, during the Night things became more difficult, different enemies would appear, and the town would be filled with enemies.
Castlevania III: Dracula's Curse on the otherhand was when the series reached its peak, this game can also be considered the best game on NES. The level design remains to this day the best of the series. The game progression is also among the best; not only did it improve upon the original Castlevania (which was by far the better of the first two) but it heavily improved upon the non-linear style of gameplay found in Castlevania II, essentially it ttook all of the best things from the second game, dropped all the bad stuff, integrated into a game the style of the first one, and improved on that incredibly. The only downside to this game, initially, was that you didn't play as Simon Belmont (it was like playing Zelda without Link) but the new character, Trevor, soon found himself as an even more popular character than Simon. I remember just playing through the game and loving it after the first minute, and it just got better and better, I got a rush just from starting to play it, the only other games I ever got that kind of rush playing were Final Fantasy III, Ocarina of Time, and the beginning of Final Fanays 7 (when I first got it), and possibly Mario III. This game was really amazing, and it blew away anything and everything on the market at the time. One feature I really liked was that at the end of each section, you could choose your own path, you could go up or down. It also introduced the coolest characters ever in the series, Alucard and Grant (I remember Sypha being relatively useless and frustrating sometimes to play). You could acquire these characters by various means, the first one you get is Grant, the pirate, who can climb, now that was an unbelievably cool thing to do in games at this time; he could also change direction in mid-air which made things easier; Grant was the character I always used the most. Alucard could turn into a bat and made some areas of the game relatively simple as you could just fly through to the next level. This game also had story elements which trivialized the value of anything in Castlevania II. Not to mention that the graphics were damn cool for the time, probably the best on the system, and I am certain that the reason people liked Trevor better was because of the cape =P
Anyways, if you are a fan of the Castlevania series now, I think it is important that you go back and play the game that really made the series, Castlevania III, I think without it that there probably would be none of the other Castlevania games we have today, though the first one established the series, the second one did almost killed it, the third one threw it to the forefront of popularity among 2D sidescrolling games, and now the series remains at the top of that genre.
As for the 3D Castlevania games, I do not care what some reviewers say, Legacy of Darkness is a better game than Lament of Innocence, and from all of the stuff included in Legacy of Darkness, it is easy to see that obviously Konami invested a lot more into this one than any of the other 3D versions of the game. Still, Konami should stick to what works in the series, and that is a 2D sidescrolling Adventure.</div>
The first Castlevania game is one I just got as a gift when I was a kid, I had no idea what the series was about or anything. Admittedly, when I first played it, I found it incredibly hard to survive for very long =P
Yet Castlevania drew me in like no other game I had ever played, at that age I think my favourite title was probably Captain Skyhawk (which was developed by Rare), but Castlevania was the first game I found which really drew me in; the second was probably Zelda. It took me a while to finish this game, as I recall, but even before I was done, I wanted more.
Now Castlevania II: Simon's Quest was the answer, and I remember just seeing it on the shelf and buying it right off the shelf. The game certainly had improved graphics over the original, but there were some problems: #1 the gameplay sucked, #2 the controls were horrible, #3 it just seemed like a rushed version of a game which was attempting to capitalize on a new style of games that was becoming popular, and sorry to say, Metroid, Zelda 2, Faxanadu, and others in the genre absolutely creamed it. The game did not really have the same grip as the first title, and even though it received a much greater amount of advertisement, I don't remember anyone who didn't see this as a failure. The reaction for this game was the largest I remember, larger than the one between Zelda 1 and 2 (which went from the successful overhead view to side scroller) and even larger than Mario 1 to Mario 2. A lot of people weren't happy with the game, including me. The only draw that the game had was that it had a bit of story to it which the first game lacked, however, like Zelda 2 in comparisson to the first, the story was too little and not even close to being significant enough to really take away from the fact that the game was repetetive and just plain sucked compared to the first. I also remember feeling a bit insulted by the difficulty level which made the game easy enough so that everyone could finish it (I took pride in being one of the only ones capable of finishing the first game, that game and Ninja Turtles); the only difficulty came from the fact that the controls were so bad. However, in a bit of defense for the game, it did have some of the best music, and it did have the ineresting time feature, during the Night things became more difficult, different enemies would appear, and the town would be filled with enemies.
Castlevania III: Dracula's Curse on the otherhand was when the series reached its peak, this game can also be considered the best game on NES. The level design remains to this day the best of the series. The game progression is also among the best; not only did it improve upon the original Castlevania (which was by far the better of the first two) but it heavily improved upon the non-linear style of gameplay found in Castlevania II, essentially it ttook all of the best things from the second game, dropped all the bad stuff, integrated into a game the style of the first one, and improved on that incredibly. The only downside to this game, initially, was that you didn't play as Simon Belmont (it was like playing Zelda without Link) but the new character, Trevor, soon found himself as an even more popular character than Simon. I remember just playing through the game and loving it after the first minute, and it just got better and better, I got a rush just from starting to play it, the only other games I ever got that kind of rush playing were Final Fantasy III, Ocarina of Time, and the beginning of Final Fanays 7 (when I first got it), and possibly Mario III. This game was really amazing, and it blew away anything and everything on the market at the time. One feature I really liked was that at the end of each section, you could choose your own path, you could go up or down. It also introduced the coolest characters ever in the series, Alucard and Grant (I remember Sypha being relatively useless and frustrating sometimes to play). You could acquire these characters by various means, the first one you get is Grant, the pirate, who can climb, now that was an unbelievably cool thing to do in games at this time; he could also change direction in mid-air which made things easier; Grant was the character I always used the most. Alucard could turn into a bat and made some areas of the game relatively simple as you could just fly through to the next level. This game also had story elements which trivialized the value of anything in Castlevania II. Not to mention that the graphics were damn cool for the time, probably the best on the system, and I am certain that the reason people liked Trevor better was because of the cape =P
Anyways, if you are a fan of the Castlevania series now, I think it is important that you go back and play the game that really made the series, Castlevania III, I think without it that there probably would be none of the other Castlevania games we have today, though the first one established the series, the second one did almost killed it, the third one threw it to the forefront of popularity among 2D sidescrolling games, and now the series remains at the top of that genre.
As for the 3D Castlevania games, I do not care what some reviewers say, Legacy of Darkness is a better game than Lament of Innocence, and from all of the stuff included in Legacy of Darkness, it is easy to see that obviously Konami invested a lot more into this one than any of the other 3D versions of the game. Still, Konami should stick to what works in the series, and that is a 2D sidescrolling Adventure.</div>
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
