Best 16-bit Castlevania

Bloodlines>Rondo?

Yes, it's another cross(oy!)-platform thread. In this case, because Konami had an aversion to marketshare and the obvious, particularly as relates to keeping the series alive in the West.

Point being that the four games (+X) are largely defined by hardware rather than series graduation, which means that, in some ways, the first 16-bit release is the most advanced.

Similarly, I think Bloodlines is the weakest because Konami either had the least interest or understanding of the hardware, making a poor match between the series and Sega branding. I think the game would have been better if it was less traditionally in the mold of Castlevania, and more Sega.

Dracula X? A good game, possibly hated because of its source. It's also an inferior follow-up to IV.

Rondo is seen as the Citizen Kane of the series, but I don't know if it defines it in such a way that it's actually superior to either IV or III.

This again? Did the other two identical topics get flushed away during downtime?

I'd say Rondo, then Bloodlines, then Castlevania 4, then Dracula X, and then the X68000 remake of the first game.

Rondo is just a classic. I'd say graphically it's the most appealing to look at too. Yeah it might not have as many colors as Castlevania 4, but it's more appealing to look at. A lot of 4's graphics just use colors for the sake of having more colors and not if it's really necessary or not. This results in sprites and backgrounds that tend to look like messes of color. Simon's sprite, certain enemy sprites, and item sprites tend to blend in too much with the backgrounds at times. None of the other 16-bit Castlevania games suffer from this problem.

Also Castlevania 4 isn't really a sequel. It's just a remake of the first Castlevania. So that makes it a bit of a waste of time if you ask me.

Bloodlines is ok and is an interesting title in the series with how it tries to tie in with the real story of Dracula. Since it's not a remake and tries to do it's own thing is why I rate it above 4, the X68000 remake, and the SNES port of Rondo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olls

This again? Did the other two identical topics get flushed away during downtime?

---

No, no. That was Sega versus Nintendo.

This is completely different. It's a craopy Sega Genesis release versus a multitude of platforms superior releases.

Cheap sociology: do Sega fanboys actually believe that Bloodlines is a great game, or do they merely argue for it in the Gog/Magog struggle with Nintendo?

OK.It isn't original. But if that's the concern -- as an analogue of 'new' -- then this entire site might as well be shut down.

What is a mediocre Sega Genesis release without a deluge of deluded fanboys?

I never played Bloodlines, Castlevania 4 or Snes Dracula X until this past year and I prefer Bloodlines. Haven't played the PCE Dracula X or the 68000 remake. I love the style of Bloodlines, the music, the game is never boring which is why I wish it had another big level. Castlevania 4 I found boring in a lot of parts, Snes Dracula X looks great and sounds great frustrated the hell out of me though.

A crappy Sega Genesis release? Are you out of your mind? Bloodlines is a great game. In fact, I think it's a lot tighter and more fun than Super Castlevania.

Rondo.

IV was really good, but Rondo just had a great atmosphere, that's more like.....well, Symphony. IV was kind of the pinnacle of the old Castlevania, while, Rondo was like a prelude to SOTN. Unfortunately, it was on the PC Engine, so a lot of it's graphics look simple. But the designs overall, are great. Too bad they couldn't have made a better port for the SNES, or even one for the MD.

I could never get into Bloodlines.

Can we please just ban 16bitter?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

Also Castlevania 4 isn't really a sequel. It's just a remake of the first Castlevania. So that makes it a bit of a waste of time if you ask me.

---

I think that's rhetoric: a talking point to discredit the game without considering its feature-set.

For being a retread and 'waste of time', the interesting thing is that it may have the most advanced graphical tech and gameplay of the bunch.

If the argument is really one of layout, well, there's a very notable difference between this game and the original as far as tone, FX and overalll design through those elements.

Ironically, this game is also known for "going too far" with its advancement of player abilities.

Quote:

---

Bloodlines is ok and is an interesting title in the series with how it tries to tie in with the real story of Dracula. Since it's not a remake and tries to do it's own thing is why I rate it above 4, the X68000 remake, and the SNES port of Rondo.

---

I think that Bloodlines is a game that doesn't go nearly far enough, failing as a traditional Castlevania release and not even attempting to be much of anything else.

Its period is interesting, but I think something more modern would have served the system and the series best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

Can we please just ban 16bitter?

---

At least you accept what you are.

But trying to get fanboys classified as discriminated-against minority is going to be a very tough battle.

Or do you still think that 'fanboy' is a distinct ethnic group?

Ok, I was going to say there was a recent thread, but it really wasn't super recent, but it was pretty long and was within the past year. Anyhow, we've argued this before.

http://www.sega-16.com/forum/showthr...vs.-Bloodlines

I say Dracula X followed closely by Bloodlines. Super IV just wasn't very interesting, and the other 2 lose points for being on obsucre systems that no one cares about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beigemore

Ok, I was going to say there was a recent thread, but it really wasn't super recent, but it was pretty long and was within the past year. Anyhow, we've argued this before.

http://www.sega-16.com/forum/showthr...vs.-Bloodlines

---

Rondo? X6800? Drac X?

Strike 1. 2. 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djshok

I say Dracula X followed closely by Bloodlines. Super IV just wasn't very interesting, and the other 2 lose points for being on obsucre systems that no one cares about.

---

That's pretty interesting. I don't know if I've seen anyone pick Dracula X before. Not as the best game of a generation.

I do like the game quite a bit. It has decent level design, a sometimes great look and music that rivals the CD version.

When I say 4 is a waste of time it's coming from my stand point of playing through the games. I didn't get into playing the Castlevania games until a few years ago. And when I beat the NES ones and got to the 16 bit ones I skipped 4 because story wise it's just a remake and would be a waste of time for me to play when I could just go straight to Rondo of Blood.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

When I say 4 is a waste of time it's coming from my stand point of playing through the games. I didn't get into playing the Castlevania games until a few years ago. And when I beat the NES ones and got to the 16 bit ones I skipped 4 because story wise it's just a remake and would be a waste of time for me to play when I could just go straight to Rondo of Blood.

---

So your argument is to ignore the game, and simply look at it through preconceived bias?

Got it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cowboyscowboys

I never played Bloodlines, Castlevania 4 or Snes Dracula X until this past year and I prefer Bloodlines.

---

The game only really does it for me in the second level. I think it comes together beautifully there, particularly the music.