By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Castlevania: Lords of Shadow impressions

KillerMan said:

For the defense of GOW though this has a lot lower framerate. What I read from neogaf it seems that this runs with 25fps. GOW was 40-60fps usually. Still very beatifull game and looks a lot of fun. probably will pick this sometime as I love hack'n slash games.


Yes, the game does suffer from a lower frame-rare compared to GoW3.  It also lacks proper Anti-Aliasing.  But it still gets VERY close to Gow3 and U2 graphically. 

 

The game is still gorgeous.  On Chapter 2 right now, and the game certainly is a challenge on the Knight difficulty!

I'm enjoying every moments of it so far.  Graphics aside, I may like this Hack and Slash game more than GoW3!  The environements are so diverse, and so well rendered!  I just can't stop playing, wondering the kind of environment I'll play in in the next level. 



Around the Network
tuscaniman said:

One thing I have noticed so far is there definitely aren't near the amount of enemies that GOWIII has. They don't respawn over and over as much and not as many battles. As I said I'm not far into this game but either that is bad or good depending on how much you like to fight as opposed to checking out the scenery and exploring.

that sounds good to me

i'll definitely be having a look at this game,when i watched that long video of it it seemed to have a bit of everything in it which appeals to me as an adventure/slash type game



                                                                                                                                        Above & Beyond

   

Hynad said:
KillerMan said:

For the defense of GOW though this has a lot lower framerate. What I read from neogaf it seems that this runs with 25fps. GOW was 40-60fps usually. Still very beatifull game and looks a lot of fun. probably will pick this sometime as I love hack'n slash games.


Yes, the game does suffer from a lower frame-rare compared to GoW3.  It also lacks proper Anti-Aliasing.  But it still gets VERY close to Gow3 and U2 graphically. 

 

The game is still gorgeous.  On Chapter 2 right now, and the game certainly is a challenge on the Knight difficulty!

I'm enjoying every moments of it so far.  Graphics aside, I may like this Hack and Slash game more than GoW3!  The environements are so diverse, and so well rendered!  I just can't stop playing, wondering the kind of environment I'll play in in the next level. 

How many diffucluly levels are there and what is Knight?



@ Slimebeast: There is a total of 4 difficulty level, from easier to hardest: Esquire, Warrior, Knight.

The fourth difficulty level, Paladin, becomes available for a stage if you finish it on the Knight difficulty level.

 

The game is very challenging on the Knight difficulty level, but the experience is rewarding. ^^,



Has there ever been a game sequel which missed the mark that the franchise estabished? This is nothing like any castlevania...

Its not a bad game but its not really good either. Too many fucking interuptions. Cutscene, horse riding, tutorial, cutscene, patrick stewart reading a novel...just STFU and let me play! I hate it...2 hours in and I don't want to play anymore.

Also, as far as visuals are concened, they are good...but its due to static camera. Static camera = cheating the system and rendering only the angle which are in players field of vision.



Around the Network

"I'm assuming both versions of the game look identical or similar so if this is the case the 360 definitely can push God of War graphics."

umm yea, i wouldn't be saying stuff like that, PS3 fanboy's would go nuts simply you have no evidence since you didn't play the 360 version. 



Of Course That's Just My Opinion, I Could Be Wrong

disolitude said:

Also, as far as visuals are concened, they are good...but its due to static camera. Static camera = cheating the system and rendering only the angle which are in players field of vision.

Great graphics are great graphics.  Saying it's "only" due to some design choice is ridiculous.  That would apply to just about any console game.  BLA BLA BLA, Killzone is good looking, but it is so just because the environments aren't as big as Halo's, BLA BLA BLA, God of War III is the best looking game on console, maybe, but that's just because the camera is fixed, BLA BLA BLA, Uncharted 2 is awesome looking, but that's just because the levels are "corridors" like...

Cop out.

What counts in the end is that what you see on screen looks incredibly good.  No matter the design choice.

For example, Mario Galaxy and Kirby Epic Yarn are 2 extremely good looking game.  Because of their artistic direction.  Not because of the prowesses of their respective graphics engine , or other [technical] design choices.  Castlevania is just the same.  It looks damn good.

When I read a comment such as yours, I'm "reminded" that games like Shank or Shadow Complex are good looking games only because the camera is fixed and cheats the system by rendering only the angle (side view) which is in the player's field of vision.  ¬_¬  Kind of ridiculous, I know.



Hynad said:
disolitude said:

Also, as far as visuals are concened, they are good...but its due to static camera. Static camera = cheating the system and rendering only the angle which are in players field of vision.

Great graphics are great graphics.  Saying it's "only" due to some design choice is ridiculous.  That would apply to just about any console game.  BLA BLA BLA, Killzone is good looking, but it is so just because the environments aren't as big as Halo's, BLA BLA BLA, God of War III is the best looking game on console, maybe, but that's just because the camera is fixed, BLA BLA BLA, Uncharted 2 is awesome looking, but that's just because the levels are "corridors" like...

Cop out.

What counts in the end is that what you see on screen looks incredibly good.  No matter the design choice.

For example, Mario Galaxy and Kirby Epic Yarn are 2 extremely good looking game.  Because of their artistic direction.  Not because of the prowesses of their respective graphics engine , or other [technical] design choices.  Castlevania is just the same.  It looks damn good.

When I read a comment such as yours, I'm "reminded" that games like Shank or Shadow Complex are good looking games only because the camera is fixed and cheats the system by rendering only the angle (side view) which is in the player's field of vision.  ¬_¬  Kind of ridiculous, I know.


Ok, I'll agree, its a good looking game artistically and it looks "pretty"...but to be honest, Id much rather have camera control. Visual design choices like this impact gameplay greatly and there is something very...on rails-ish...when an action game has fixed camera angles.

Besides, my issue with this game are not from a technical side as technically it really isn't a bad game... My issue is that the only reason this game is "good" is because the money spent on production. Its medocre gameplay title patched toghether by an expensive production. I have yet to see single good gameplay idea thats not recycled from another game.



disolitude said:
Hynad said:
disolitude said:

Also, as far as visuals are concened, they are good...but its due to static camera. Static camera = cheating the system and rendering only the angle which are in players field of vision.

Great graphics are great graphics.  Saying it's "only" due to some design choice is ridiculous.  That would apply to just about any console game.  BLA BLA BLA, Killzone is good looking, but it is so just because the environments aren't as big as Halo's, BLA BLA BLA, God of War III is the best looking game on console, maybe, but that's just because the camera is fixed, BLA BLA BLA, Uncharted 2 is awesome looking, but that's just because the levels are "corridors" like...

Cop out.

What counts in the end is that what you see on screen looks incredibly good.  No matter the design choice.

For example, Mario Galaxy and Kirby Epic Yarn are 2 extremely good looking game.  Because of their artistic direction.  Not because of the prowesses of their respective graphics engine , or other [technical] design choices.  Castlevania is just the same.  It looks damn good.

When I read a comment such as yours, I'm "reminded" that games like Shank or Shadow Complex are good looking games only because the camera is fixed and cheats the system by rendering only the angle (side view) which is in the player's field of vision.  ¬_¬  Kind of ridiculous, I know.


Ok, I'll agree, its a good looking game artistically and it looks "pretty"...but to be honest, Id much rather have camera control. Visual design choices like this impact gameplay greatly and there is something very...on rails-ish...when an action game has fixed camera angles.

Besides, my issue with this game are not from a technical side as technically it really isn't a bad game... My issue is that the only reason this game is "good" is because the money spent on production. Its medocre gameplay title patched toghether by an expensive production. I have yet to see single good gameplay idea thats not recycled from another game.

It may not be innovative, I may give you that.  Although that opinion could change once I complete the game.
But like many games before it, it borrows great ideas from other titles and mix them together to achieve something that plays and feels great.  Maybe it's not your cup of tea, and nothing can change that.  But as someone who really enjoy that kind of game (action/hack and slash), the game does deliver.  The "expensive production" value is always a plus.  But this doesn't get in the way of the extensive battle system that feels really rewarding (at least on the Knight difficulty level).



Hynad said:

 

It may not be innovative, I may give you that.  Although that opinion could change once I complete the game.
But like many games before it, it borrows great ideas from other titles and mix them together to achieve something that plays and feels great.  Maybe it's not your cup of tea, and nothing can change that.  But as someone who really enjoy that kind of game (action/hack and slash), the game does deliver.  The "expensive production" value is always a plus.  But this doesn't get in the way of the extensive battle system that feels really rewarding (at least on the Knight difficulty level).


I love playing hack and slash games too but I won't lie... I enjoy ninja gaiden, DMC and Bayonetta a lot more than God of War style games. This is somewhere in between the 2 so I can find some enjoyment, but if only the game wouldn't interupt me every 2 minutes with a new cut scene... But my opinion on hack and slash games is not being discussed here.

All i am going to say is that Demons Souls is a better 3D Castlevania game than Castlevania Lords of Shadow. There is nothing here that remotely feels like casltevania.