Does anyone know what the sales expectations were for this, i mean i think its doing well in sales. in about 3 months its done over 0.5 mil and i think it will do about 1.5 mil lifetime. but is this a success for Konami, have they made profit from this. it seems like it will be the most successful Castlevania so far, but are the current sales good?

Say whatever you like about Rondo, but Symphony is when Castlevania became a Metroid clone, not before. The question of branching paths actually started in Simon's Quest, so that change was hinted at much earlier than Rondo.

You speak about the series as if there's a distinct mechanical continuity, but that's not true in that there are two; Classicvania and Metroidvania are essentially two different series with two different evolutionary paths.

And don't mistake me, either; I am deeply in love with Metroidvania, though I sang praises to all the dark gods that Order of Ecclesia was at least halfway a departure from the (staling) formula by way of reintegration of the importance of difficulty and good platforming. It wasn't exactly Dracula's Curse or Rondo of Blood, but it was nice, and stands up excellently next to any other game in the series (up to and including Symphony of the Night or Lords of Shadow).

Sidescrolling action Castlevania constitutes the first 11 years of Castlevania gameplay, not the first five, and Metroidvania constitutes the last 13. They share in roughly equal parts of the history of the series, and its roots is as a Ghosts and Goblins-style platformer with better controls. Trying to arbitrarily pick one as the "real" Castlevania is absurd, but it's not absurd to say that one tradition represents the series's roots and the other does not. Castlevania's soul is that of an action game, something that has never gone away, regardless of whether or not IGA turned it into Metroid for the better part of a decade.

On tha note, there's actually a third continuity of Castlevania mechanics, which exists in the 3D titles whether IGA worked on them or not. I'll agree with you that Lrods of Shadow doesn't easily fit into that continuity, but only because it's a lot more competently made in terms of mechanics (and writing, and level design, etc.).

I hope you will not take offense, but I have a very distinct rule of thumb when it comes to the claims of series integrity from the fans of a given series: one should not pay too much mind to a series die-hard when it comes to what is true to the spirit of a series or what makes for a "true" series game. I would not listen to KylieDog when it comes to Resident Evil (I know you understand this part), I would not listen to anyone on a Zelda forum when it comes to Zelda (I would expect you to not listen to me in this case since I am a remnant of one such Hell), and I would not listen to you when it comes to Castlevania. Fans of a series are often too tied into single development teams or development traditions, and deviation from formulas are seen as departures from the spirit of a series.

But that's not true.

The very first Castlevania was billed as a horror game but it was really a light-hearted romp through movie mosnter land, with many many many allusions to different classic western horror movie traditions that shaped the landscape of gothic horror at the time. It never took itself too seriously as a setting, instead focusing on excellent level design and excellent mechanics (even if they were derivative at the time).

Lords of Shadow is basically the same thing: billed as an action game in a horror setting, but it's ultimately a light-hearted romp through monster land, filled with literary allusions (the whole plot is one massive literary allusion), homages to other games (the entire segment where you first meet giant spiders is an homage to the Deku Tree in Ocarina of Time), and references to so much of nerd culture that listing all of them would take more time than I actually have. It never takes itself too seriously, instead focusing on excellent level design and excellent mechanics (even if they are derivative).

Lords of Shadow breaks away from the continuity of the design of the series to an extent, yes, but that doesn't mean it's not a Castlevania game, not when it delights so much in the spirit of the original game. It is fun, it is hard, its puzzles can have their solutions laid out for you if you don't feel like wracking your brain (which turns them into fun and hard platform segments), and it is an action game that initially seems derivative but blossoms into something with its own identity within a few hours of the game's beginning.

This may not necessarily be Castlevania at its best, and it may take clues from games in a way you don't enjoy (though I find it ironic how you have an avatar from the grandfather Metroidvania, in this case), but that doesn't detract from its status as a Castlevania game or as a damn fine game in general.

The "Reverie" and "Resurrection" DLC are supposed to come apart but both in early 2011. Reverie is due in February though.

i was turn off by the lack of a combo system and real exploration

I'm not sure what you mean by "lack of a combo system" - there is one.

thanks!

I think the combo system is okay. the problem is you cant finish you combos, especailly on bosses. and the other problem is they've assigned the dodge button to the same as the block button.

but when you get into it, you do forget about it tbh, and the buttons come naturally, so it is good, just not as good as say God of War, or Bayonetta.

i found the level design is perfect for exploration. i mean the levels arnt too big and their not to small. i dont have a probelm with it tbh. i dont need FF12 levels of exploration in this type of game.

@Khuutra

You certanly got your point across and explained well why you find lods of shadow worthy of a castlavania name. I really wish I could see it with your eyes, but sadly I don't see Castlevania when I play it.

When the series went from straightforward action to castle sandbox, all of the action gameplay elements stayed intact. Nothing was ripped out and replaced with Metroid elements. It felt like a natural progression with metroid ideas added on top of the existing formula. I never played the N64 ones (never had the system) but Lamenent of Innocence definetly felt like a Castlevania game, even if it borrowed elements from DMC. I just don't see this connection to any previous Castlevanias (action or Igavania) with Lords of Shadow when it comes to gameplay, story, characters, music...Its all new to the series, but not new to my gaming experience as I've seen it all before somewhere else.

I agree that Metroidvania formula is getting stale and in need of change (HD console DLC Metroidvania in glorious 2D could change my opinion tho, cause shadow complex was great)...but I certanly hope this is not the bluprint they use for the next 10 years in making console castlevanias.

Dude I am going to die if the DLC is another 10 hours together. Castlevania: LOS has got to be the longest Action/Adventure title in a while. LOL

These are perfectly fair points and I do not necessarily dispute any of them.

What I want to know is this:

In what respect does Lords of Shadow fail as a game in comparison to Lament of Innocence?

After that, where does it fail as a Castlevania in comparison to Lament of Innocence? Outside of the music I mean, because LoI's soundtrack was still superfly.