I don't think SotN had fewer backgrounds than any previous Castlevania games. All of the previous games were pretty short and could be beaten in one sitting. Except maybe for Castlevania 2, but that doesn't count as a real game.
Printable View
I don't think SotN had fewer backgrounds than any previous Castlevania games. All of the previous games were pretty short and could be beaten in one sitting. Except maybe for Castlevania 2, but that doesn't count as a real game.
I remember that (the greatest hits moniker). At the same time I recall the game being released in relatively low numbers and a definite lack of demand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russman
Certainly if it reached a million -- and by the given or typical criteria of greatest hits (it is a million, right?) one would assume it did, I absolutely grant -- it seems so obvious that we would have seen another 2D Castlevania on a major console due to such success. After all, it would have proven the continued mainstream viability of 2D as a mainstream product.
All this is to say that I'm confused.
And, as luck would have it (is a quick internet search luck?), I found raw numbers on SOTN from MagicBox:
PSX Konami Castlevania: Symphony of the Night 477,000
Well under a million units, but not at all bad either. Though I don't know if those are franchise-saving numbers, and it pretty much answers the question of why Konami would not be so eager to release another 2D iteration on current/next-gen console(s).
I know why SotN got the greatest hits packaging. Apparently the criteria for this was changed multiple times by Sony.Quote:
Originally Posted by 16bitter
Source: http://psx.ign.com/articles/091/091211p1.htmlQuote:
All of the games in the "Greatest Hits" line-up have a suggested retail price of $19.99 and have successfully met Sony's criteria for making it into this elite categorization. When this program first started, a sell-through of one million units was required, this was later adjusted to 500,000, and now it's handled on a case-by-case basis.
SotN was a sleeper hit on release, but it gained a lot of steam and popularity later in the Playstation's life where as the more action oriented (Although I blame the 3D more than the action) N64 titles sank into obscurity.
SotN ended up being one of those "rare" games that no one bought at release along with Final Fantasy Tactics that fans demanded later in the PSX's career which is why both ended up being reprinted, Xenogears also fits into this category along with a few others I can't think of right now.
It was pretty bad for collectors who sold their soul for copies of these games but it was great for everyone else.
To me that raises the question rather than answers it. That number has got to be way higher than what Castlevania 64 sold. So shouldn't it follow that they should revert back to what sold better? Legacy of Darkness was also a total flop, and I don't think Lament of Innocence sold as much as 477k either.Quote:
Originally Posted by 16bitter
The subsequent Castlevanias continuing the SOTN tradition have sold less than I expected, but apparantly Konami is pleased with the figures. They've sold better in North America than Japan.
North American sales figures:
Dawn of Sorrow... 164,000 sold as of November 2005
Aria of Sorrow... 158,000 sold
Harmony of Dissonance... 126,000 sold
From: http://www.rpgamer.com/editor/2006/q2/041706bb.html
Not sure about Circle of the Moon, but I'm assuming as a GBA launch title it's easily over 100,000. Still, these numbers are seemingly underwhelming.
Perhaps that goes against what I said earlier -- Metroidvania's nature may be a corporate strategy rather than an artistic pursuit.
Think about it. Develop a series of games that are designed in such a way that they welcome recycling of not only ideas but of base code -- thus limiting dev time considerably -- for hardware more than a generation behind the curve.
Combined, the ingredients give them an easy revenue flow from what amount to cheaply made yearly updates.
Thus the sales figures don't matter in a typical way thanks to the base audience they have for the product. They sell the same group of suckers a game they already own over and over again.
Madden's relatively poor old uncle.
It's a common strategy used by just about every franchise. Megaman for instance epitomizes it.
Konami could have made Castlevania III style games over and over and I would have been very happy. Give me a game that plays the same, but with new story, levels and enemies and I'm good. Just don't make me go through the same screen 60 times.Quote:
Originally Posted by 16bitter
SotN was catering to the RPG gamer. Japanese play more and have way more RPG's than the US market ever dreamed of. This was where the money was and has stayed unfortunately. Good business move by Konami, bad move for the series however.
I completely agree. With the occasional exception like Shenmue (or a real Phantasy Star), I'm not too fond of story-based games. I think gameplay should come first. I felt that gameplay came first in SotN, though. I think what they were doing is 1) trying to extend the overall length and 2) "reinvent" the series to attract new players since it was on a system that was not in any way related to the 16-bit or 8-bit generations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russman
I agree as well, also I've noticed that J-RPG fans also tend to be anime fans or vice versa, which I guess makes sense since J-RPG stories are usually the same type of stories you find in anime.
That being said I also find the gameplay to be where the meat is in SotN. The story just seems tacked on and the RPG elements don't get in the way of Castlevania undead-slaying fun.
As much as I enjoy the Metroid-infused gameplay of SotN and the recent handheld Castlevanias, there's one particular element solely missing from these games that for me defined the classic Castlevanias: challenge, in both gameplay and boss battles.
I'd love to see a blend of the two styles. Free-roaming exploration for the majority of the castle for item collection and stat development, but instead of boss battles taking place in a selected room to merely be stumbled upon, have them located at the end of a "classic" styled level that can be entered from a specific point in the castle, where the old Castlevania rules apply.
Circle of the Moon was pretty rough but maybe that's because I played it on an old GBA and couldn't see a thing.
Yeah, I played Circle of the Moon on my DS Lite the other day and the difference was incredible. Even Harmony of Dissonance, which I thought looked good on the GBA, was much better with a back-lit display.
But what would be the point of stat development at all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Drixxel
Make the castle easy 90% of the time, only to dump that whenever you're supposed to face a boss? Then what were you building your stats for in the first place?
Old school Castlevania is, like most games of its era, about the challenge. Today's Castlevania is absolutely hostile to challenge.
I don't think you can mix the two styles effectively -- not when they are so diametrically opposed.