SNES

[16bitter]

SF Kosmo goes into it in detail but their site seems to be seriously screwed up right now so I can't find the exact quotes.

If Treasure themselves can't be trusted, who can? Even with quotes, it seems we'd simply have competing statements from the same company.

[Obviously]

No, seriously. They started giving just any game that Treasure touched a flawless review and they were raving about Treasure's titles in every issue. Not all of Treasure's games deserve pure gold, Light Crusader for instance is a huge letdown.

I'm not saying that ALONE killed them, but it's an example of them not being very professional.

To be honest it's almost impossible to prove who worked for Konami on the game without the very employee who worked on the game himself saying it directly because Konami did and still does use psuedonyms in their credits.

It's entirely possible that one member of Treasure did work on Castlevania IV beacause they didn't leave Konami until 1992 and now that I'm looking into it again it seems like it's true but it wouldn't make it a Treasure game by a long shot. The members of Treasure never really made a Konami game together except for Gradius V.

[lordofduct]

I don't know, but that sounds like something Treasure would say...

Also... how could game fan already worship the ground Treasure walked on merely months after the release of their ONE AND ONLY GAME!


Although I will agree with the root of this debate. Castlevania IV or Contra or ANY Konami game is NOT a Treasure game... even if a bunch of them worked on it.

It's a fucking Konami game... Konami produced, Konami directed, Konami made the calls and the games were developed by Konami. The work of 1, maybe 2 or even possibly 3 guys from Treasure working on any of those games makes little signifigance to the entirity of the game.

We know and can admit that a lot of Treasures team began from people coming over from Konami and probably had their hands in a LOT of the games developed there.



And hey, what is wrong with praising Treasure? They made superb freaking games. A couple duds here and there (and everyone freakin' has a God damn dud) but in general they made GREAT GAMES!

[Dartagnan1083]

BTW, I guess by your standard this post makes you a...ahem...douchebag. Hey, you asked for it.

If I take this any further in this thread. . .feel free to call me a douchebag.
I should have already addressed every problem I have with Cv IV in this post

What I meant was if I mentioned Castlevania IV again directly and my problems with it. I did it so I wouldn't have to address my problems with the game again.

I did not reiterate my hate for it, despite what you may think. I was not asking to be insulted if I posted again, I was asking to be insulted if I explicitly bitched about Cv IV again within the thread (in which case I would have deserved it).

I was merely tearing appart your treasure innacuracies in that post. Because quite frankly, I don;t like the spread of false information if I can prevent it.
The link I provided would normally lead to the best Treasure site on the web. With in depth information that includes lists of who worked on what games before and after Treasure's formation.

[lordofduct]

civilized flame wars aren't as fun...

come on... someone say, "You teh gehz mang!"

[16bitter]

BTW, I guess by your standard this post makes you a...ahem...douchebag. Hey, you asked for it.

If I take this any further in this thread. . .feel free to call me a douchebag.
I should have already addressed every problem I have with Cv IV in this post

What I meant was if I mentioned Castlevania IV again directly and my problems with it. I did it so I wouldn't have to address my problems with the game again.

I did not reiterate my hate for it, despite what you may think. I was not asking to be insulted if I posted again, I was asking to be insulted if I explicitly bitched about Cv IV again within the thread (in which case I would have deserved it).

Actually, you were attacking CIV in a roundabout (i.e. you thought I was defending CIV through the Treasure connection) way again, which as far as I'm concerned fits the standard.

If you wanna play a semantic game to insult the same ware, I call that pretty douchie -- and you left the door open, so...

I was merely tearing appart your treasure innacuracies in that post.

So, where did you do this? Um, you didn't.

Because quite frankly, I don;t like the spread of false information if I can prevent it.

A man of the people. Inspiring.

The link I provided would normally lead to the best Treasure site on the web. With in depth information that includes lists of who worked on what games before and after Treasure's formation.

And how do you know this is any mroe accurate than other information, particularly info that comes directly from Treasure?

I could find contradictory evidence from other Treasure sites, as well as one of "the best" Castlevania sites on the net as to SCIV's creation.

So, I'd say it's up for debate.

[Dartagnan1083]

SFkosmo posts accurate information on games produced after treasures formation rather easily

this is because they record the end credits to every game treasure has developed, this goes for the pre-treasure stuff at as well. Sites on the Classicgaming network tend to do their research (unlike the mainstream media) to such a painstaking level that would out-nerd pretty much everyone here.

if you belive I was attacking it in roundabout. . .well, that's your bussiness.
Because I've already made myself as clear as could manage.

EDIT: The most probable cause for me to start this new thing was after I had attempted to get the discussion away from CvIV, you brought it back with a tidbit about treasure's supposed involvement as if I should suddenly be overcome by guilt for behaving the way I have been.
At least that's the way I interpreted it
I tend to be rather sensitive to something outright wrong being said in discussion, it's a quirk I have trouble controlling, particularly when I can't place the tone.

[16bitter]

SFkosmo posts accurate information on games produced after treasures formation rather easily

this is because they record the end credits to every game treasure has developed, this goes for the pre-treasure stuff at as well.

Proves nothing. As obviously said, credits don't necessarily tell us who worked on the game. Many people go uncredited in whatever field, or can work under pseudonyms.

Quotes as to Treasure staff being connected to CIV seem to have no bearing on your thinking. Which is odd. If you're about logic and accuracy.

So. Try again.

Sites on the Classicgaming network tend to do their research (unlike the mainstream media) to such a painstaking level that would out-nerd pretty much everyone here.

By looking at credits?

Having contact with the outside world -- including, you know, Treasure employees -- might actually be more helpful than nerdiness.

if you belive I was attacking it in roundabout. . .well, that's your bussiness.
Because I've already made myself as clear as could manage.

It's also your business, because you did it.

You felt the nead to not only attack the Treasure connection, but any idea that this meant it was a quality game as well. That was your point -- and connectively it means you were going after CIV. Simple. And douchie.

EDIT: The most probable cause for me to start this new thing was after I had attempted to get the discussion away from CvIV, you brought it back with a tidbit about treasure's supposed involvement as if I should suddenly be overcome by guilt for behaving the way I have been.

You're projecting. It was what I felt was a fun little fact, not any type of attack on you or your position.

But, by telling us you reacted in such a way, you make my point overt against you -- this was about CIV, as you state above. Which means you're a douchebag by your own standard. Thanks.

At least that's the way I interpreted it

Exactly. And you've now made my point for me, douchebag.

I tend to be rather sensitive to something outright wrong being said in discussion,

You've yet to prove that it's outright wrong.

it's a quirk I have trouble controlling, particularly when I can't place the tone.

The quirk appears to be more in line with misplaced arrogance than fact.

[16bitter]

No, seriously. They started giving just any game that Treasure touched a flawless review and they were raving about Treasure's titles in every issue. Not all of Treasure's games deserve pure gold, Light Crusader for instance is a huge letdown.

I'm not saying that ALONE killed them, but it's an example of them not being very professional.

Who in the video game mag industry has ever been that professional? I could point out biases all over the place.

As far as GF, they tended to lean in Sega's direction in the main. Especially early on.

That playing any role in the mag's death... I really don't think so.

Among their readerbase, I doubt many people were having conniptions because whatever Treasure game that appeared garnered a high score -- and I certainly doubt that it would drive many to cancel their sub or quit picking up the mag.

The "hardcore" generally have a hard-on for Treasure anyway, and that was GF's main readership. Which, truthfully, is probably why they died -- too many like-minds and not enough of the mainstream.

To be honest it's almost impossible to prove who worked for Konami on the game without the very employee who worked on the game himself saying it directly because Konami did and still does use psuedonyms in their credits.

It's entirely possible that one member of Treasure did work on Castlevania IV beacause they didn't leave Konami until 1992 and now that I'm looking into it again it seems like it's true but it wouldn't make it a Treasure game by a long shot. The members of Treasure never really made a Konami game together except for Gradius V.

One paragraph to the next, how do you know that Treasure members, plural, didn't make up the team chiefly in charge of CIV if you have no way of knowing specifically who was truly working on it as you also state? Come on.

I've heard that Treasure worked on it multiple times -- including from the Treasure president himself, though he never specified how many worked on it I fully admit -- and I see nothing that outright contradicts that.

Nor have I heard one thing that undermines that GF interview.

You say they were Treasure biased, but what does that have to do with what a Treasure member says in an interview with them? Does that mean that they attributed quotes to him that he did not make? If so, what proof do you have?

If not, what is your argument against the interview? Possible pseudonym-laden credits?

I can't imagine why the word of somebody who was at Konami and heads Treasure wouldn't be at least as good as some fanboys running a credit fetish site. Gotta love the idea of overzealous fans believing they can know more than the people actually involved and creating.

[16bitter]

1-UP:It was this restless sense of creativity that lead to Treasure's founding in the first place. In the early '90s, Maegawa and other future Treasure staff were working as game developers at Konami, which was well on its way to becoming the monolithic software mega-publisher it is today. Working on classic games like Super Castlevania IV (SNES), Contra III: The Alien Wars (SNES), Axelay (SNES) and Bucky O'Hare (arcade, NES), Maegawa and his colleagues began to chafe under the repressive yoke of Konami's management.

Gamespot:"Nintendo 64 Shooter from Treasure

Popular Japanese developer Treasure, known for developing Castlevania 4
and Contra 3 on the Super Nintendo for Konami and such titles as Gunstar
Heroes on the Sega Genesis and Guardian Heroes for the Saturn, is back
with a new title for the Nintendo 64. The company's second title for the
N64 will be a shooting title by the name of Bakuretesu Muteki Bangaioh
(the developer's first title was Yuke Yuke Troublemakers).

Gunstar Heroes fan site, from the classic gaming network: List of Games by Treasure

*Created by Konami, but purportedly with many of the employees that would later form Treasure.
Highlighted: are the games that I have had a chance to play and actually know something about.

*Contra (NES)
*Super C (NES)
*Castlevania (NES)
*Castlevania IV (SNES)
*Contra III (SNES)

Castlevania Realm: For those of you who don't know its history, you'll be interested to know that [Super Castlevania IV] was not created in-house by Konami; rather, it instead commissioned a smaller group of its independent programmers and designers to come up with a concept and make it all work. That group, which came out of nowhere to succeed big time in producing a hit, would later disassociate itself from Konami and become its own game-developing company called "Treasure." It was Konami's loss.

There are many, many more sources that state the same. The evidence has been pervasive and overwhelming in convincing me that Treasure did have something to do with CIV.

Hell, if I'm wrong, then it appears that Maegawa is or was wrong as well. But I've yet to see anything on this thread that contradicts my original point, or his statement.

[lordofduct]

sorry to bring semantics into this, but for something to be "outright wrong" means that it is something that is well known. If I said that the casing of the SEGA Genesis was green would be outright wrong. Someone stating something that you admit no one is 100% about the truth of the matter (who/when/where/what game different members of treasure worked on) along with your admittance that the truth isn't common knowledge means that his statement was not "outright wrong".

It was misinformation, media induced ignorance, pop legend/myth... but not outright wrong.

[ary incorparated]

Okay there where imployees at konami,from treasure,But if treasure overall has such uge quality,why cant they defeat konami in that state,Look at this comparison

Contra 3,Contra hard corps
Hardcorps slaughters the snes version,Maybe its because of the music,And the animations,Atitude that konami has,That why Treasure was pact in the wrong kind of games for them,Treasure omly does techno music and doesnt go for Double flip atitude,maybe thats what made contra 3 a shame even for a snes(who is supposed to be stronger)I think some megadrive can do better sometimes,because the megadrive runs faster and obvious can do more animating,which bring contra HC and Gunstar.there even was a battle between Gunstar heroes and contra Hard corps,While gunstar came out in 93 and Contra HC in 94,There was a extreme battle between which game could produce better,no probe for the genesis owner both games where on Genny so the gamer gets all the credit of Gunstar and Contra trying to improve that,so we got uge explosions and animations in contra to sett the battle aldo Gunstar was impressive,and had those thing,so konami trying to re do that style for competition and bringing atitude with the game.Now its a statement that Konami was contra,Treasure didnt do contra better(employees of treasure)and now days contra sucks.

[lordofduct]

no offense... but sometimes it is such a chore to read your posts bro

[Obviously]

I'm just going to agree to disagree with you because you seem to be getting a little steamed and I really have no hostile intentions.

I'm just trying to make you aware that there are some games out there that the gaming media have labled as Treasure involved really can't be proven one way or another. It's a company with a lot of myths surrounding it.

I DON'T know for a fact who worked on Castlevania IV, I've just been told that creditting Treasure for it is a mistake.

It is however proven members worked on Castlevania II, the most drastically different game in the series until Symphony of the Night (And different spins on classic gameplay fits the bill for Treasure), and since this is rarely mentioned sometimes I think it's how the whole "Castlevania IV was Treasure" rumor started.

[Dartagnan1083]

In respect to credits, I feel it does tell us who worked on what with some accuracy. . .since they had to have gotten paid for something. The media tends to make many mistakes, despite their various 'interviews'. . .one example would be the misconception that the Metal Gear franchise originated on the NES. It's FALSE, but it continues to be said by the mainstream media.

But yes, I did make your point because I was admiting to my own faults that I was not originally aware of when I posted my treasure response. At this point, I barely care anymore.