(08-14-2013, 11:31 AM)Koh Wrote: Is the message to take from that a game can be as stiff as possible, with bad jumping physics to boot, as long as the challenges are based around it? If that's the case, I'd say the Action 52 games are underrated.
What am I reading...?
You really can't compare classicvania mechanics with the mechanics found in broken games like A52. Classic-style Castlevania games don't allow for fluid movement but this doesn't mean they aren't fair- Most people can overcome them provided they have decent reactions and the ability to think. The physics are solid and consistent, and certainly not bad, as you would claim.
You see, Castlevania games tend to be very easy when you take away the stiff controls without making ajustments in other areas. Ever notice how the returning enemies in SoTN retained their Rondo of Blood tactics? The biggest factor in SoTN's low difficulty was that the enemies were, for the most part, completely and utterly outclassed. With the advantage of greater numbers and terrain, they would have proven a fair challenge for a classic Belmont but even given those things, they're no match for a more nimble hero like Alucard. Even in Order of Ecclesia, Shanoa's fragility is offset by how powerful she is otherwise. She's even more agile than Alucard and equally dangerous given the right glyphs, and wouldn't you know it, the enemies in her game still have yet to properly adapt to the hero they're suppoed to kill.
I think Koh is just mad because he can't handle games that are legitimately challenging :(
Quote: Not being able to steer yourself in the others, like the first 3 Castlevania games results in deaths that could have been avoided if the controls weren't so stiff, which is what I was talking about.
The idea is that the player is supposed to calculate and execute their jumps correctly. Almost like it's some kind of, interactive game, or something. Woah!