Quote:
Originally Posted by IMJ
That first Lords of Shadow game was one of the best games I've ever played.
|
I've heard nothing but great things. I think I still need to purchase some DLC before I actually play it, though. I forget why I didn't get around to it yet but I think that's one of the reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew NDB
It just struck me when they revealed LOS1 was a reboot. The up until then relatively faithful adherence to a timeline, a growing saga was -- I think -- one of the big boons to Castlevania fans. Now just throw it out the window? Not enhance it instead, or just play in an unexplored corner of it? Stupid. Needless.
|
I kind of get that, but I also get their reasoning. "We want to make this a big 'coming-out party' for the franchise, the first 'real' games in the series in a long time (read: The first non-handheld Castlevania games in about a decade or so). We want to attract the largest potential audience possible."
It would be kind of silly of them to insist that Xbox 360 and PS3 gamers, most of whom never even owned an NES or GBA and therefore never played any of the Castlevania games before, have had played the other games in the series. Forcing the storyline of LoS to fit in with a dozen games most of their audience hadn't ever played would have been needlessly limiting.
I'm a stickler for "canon" more often than not. But the fact that LoS ended up being the most financially successful game in the entire franchise kind of proves that they made the right decision. It was designed to be a jumping-on point for people unfamiliar with the franchise, and a lot of people were thrilled that none of the earlier games "counted" because they didn't feel like they were missing anything by jumping straight into that one.
I mean, I haven't played every single game in the series by far, but by that point where they were having some of the handheld games be set in the future and whatnot, one could seriously argue that the original canon had already become rather unwieldy and convoluted.