Forums > Submission Feedback > zippdementia's Castlevania: Symphony of the Night (PSN) review

I think it's useful for a reviewer to describe how well/not-well a game achieves its purpose, but that shouldn't dictate the score, as developers' intent doesn't necessarily correlate to how fun a game is. As Honestgamer pointed out, SOTN's purpose was in opposition to player expectations established by earlier episodes. I think it would be fair for someone to explain that SOTN accomplished exactly what it intended to, but still only scores a 5 or 6. That's how some people feel about the newer Resident Evil games -- which prompts the discussion of "when should one series end, and give rise to a new series with new expectations?"

//Zig

Not sure how to make a sig? While logged into your account, you can edit it and your other public and private information from the Settings page.

Its faults have been apparent since day one.....

What faults would those be? The lack of challenge? It's not that some of us don't care; some of us consider an easier game now and then a good thing, not a bad thing.

I'm not sure when it became such that a game is only good if it brings your blood pressure to a boil every five minutes.

I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?

:) ..about the gameplay. I really agree with zipp on this one. I'm put off by the way the review strips any mysticism away from the game and just places it there as a bunch of sprites that bark at you until you bash them with "magic stick". I mean, that's.. something you could say about many games, but honestly in this case it's actually true. Because that part dominates the game sooner or later.

Whether it's the weapons or the powers.. I got the time-stopping thing and a sword with ice or something like that, and just tore through an entire level that I'd been struggling with for hours. And it didn't feel satisfying in the end. I thought I should have managed to do it with the weapon and powers that I had - but since I had to replay the segment so many times, I was given a crutch of some kind to complete it (and just about every other level afterwards).

It's the same thing that made me hate Star Wars: The Farce Unleashed. In that game, you gain new experience after you die and replay the level. So if you die at the end of a level, you get more powers. And the result is that you either are woefully underpowered, or else you can plow through everything. This isn't good game-design.

--

..what's missing in zipp's review, imo, is appreciating that the gameplay actually can be pretty good. I spent a few hours with a sword and doing dodge-moves, climbing around and solving the mysteries of the castle *cough*... and that was kind of cool. The entire ice-cave in the castle dungeons was brilliant, imo.

Not sure how to make a sig? While logged into your account, you can edit it and your other public and private information from the Settings page.

My Lumites review or my Trackmania review are good examples of times when I may not have particularly enjoyed a game or been interested in its purpose and yet looked past that to its target audience and realized that, hey, these are pretty good games.

But for SOTN I feel like there's some major flaws that people are overlooking or just plain ignoring because it's shiny. I mentioned that exploration was the game's point in this thread and I also pointed out where I feel they failed in that. Super Metroid remains the best side-scroller exploration game. That one made me feel like I'd gone on an epic journey.

SOTN just left me feeling a little empty.

Part of what made Super Metroid work was the challenge. Unless you wait till the very end of the game, when you have the screw attack, finding and figuring out how to get to all the special items is a blast and quite tough. Also, that game is full of scripted sequences which make every moment feel important and unique (the lava battle with the beast down in Norfair, the entire ghost ship sequence, the journey into Maridia, starting on the shore of the wrecked ship, the opening destruction sequence, the end fight, the flight from Zebes, etc etc etc etc).

Note to gamers: when someone shoots you in the face, they aren't "gay." They are "psychopathic."

Eh, I find "Super Metroid" boring compared to SoTN. The pace really plods after a certain point, and the environments aren't half as cool as Castlevania. (Dank Caves vs. Castle. Castle wins.) I dunno about challenge either. My least favorite parts of Metroid, aside from wandering around with no idea of what to do, were having to retread an area after dying. I think these kind of adventure games have to walk a tight line between vigorous challenge and frequent discovery.

JOSEPH VALENCIA was able to build this sig IN A CAVE…… WITH A BOX OF SCRAPS!!

After careful examination of this thread and my review, I've decided not to make any changes to the review. I want to be clear that I haven't decided this out of a sense of self importance. Actually, much of what has been said here has been very good discussion and will all be useful information for me in future reviews.

But the key word there is future. I'm happy to let this review stand as a sign both of my experience of the game and my reviewing ability at the time of publishing it.

Taking the unpopular stand against anything is difficult. I've learned a lot from doing it this time and I thank everyone for the time they've taken to talk with me about the review and share their perspectives on how it could be improved. I'll use everything I learned from this experience in my next writing endeavor.

Thanks again, everyone. I really appreciate it.

Note to gamers: when someone shoots you in the face, they aren't "gay." They are "psychopathic."

One of my goals for the last few months has been to discover if that might be a MORE accurate viewpoint of games. After all, it doesn't hold true for everything. For instance, I'm playing through Silent Hill 1 for the FIRST TIME right now and it's great.

Yup, my first play of that was recent too - 2008 I think - and I loved it also. But that may have more to do with whether a game is timeless, and I'm not sure how possible it is for a developer to set out to make their game timeless. It feels like by definition, that's somethign that can only be told in hindsight.

I would disagree with that -- I think SOTN did go 100% on its purpose, that purpose being to "explore and discover". It was never intended to be a platformer. Since most of the game lacks any serious environmental hazards, it's safe to say that the clock tower was simply a nostalgic nod to previous episodes.

That makes sense to me. It seems to apply to the subsequent Castlevanias too (Circle of the Moon actually less so than the others), and what few areas *are* heavy on the platforming seem to do it as a deliberate break from the mold. The Clock Tower is the usual candidate, and Order of Ecclesia blatantly introduces difficult platforming in its optional lategame areas.

But the key word there is future. I'm happy to let this review stand as a sign both of my experience of the game and my reviewing ability at the time of publishing it.

Pretty much how I approach it. It sounds like bluster coming from someone who barely outputs reviews as it is, but I prefer to look toward newer projects than to touch up old ones even if they contain things I know I might do better now. I'll touch up typos, I'll do something about actually false info if I find out I was wrong on something, but the piece stands and I could adapt it a dozen times but I'd never be entirely satisfied regardless.

"Deep in the earth I faced a fight that I could never win. The blameless and the base destroyed, and all that might have been. -- GK"

Eh, I find "Super Metroid" boring compared to SoTN.

Indeed.

Clearly the best game of this type is Harmony of Dissonance.

I don't have to prove I'm refined - that's what makes me refined!

RotW-ish stuff: I can't add any game specific criticism, but I tend to come down on the side of not blaming the game for a potential ruining invincible moment/move. I think the player has a responsibility to resist that, or recognize when something messes up, or a solution ruins his appreciation of the game. I've seen this with Infocom walkthroughs on games I never got to play. I like them less than the games I did. In some RPGs where I cheated, or found a down-the-line cheat that could be used early on, I still found a lot of fun stuff to do. I don't think the game should be forced to defend against all instances of looking under the deck, and because of this, some good writing runs up against a wall and feels too focused on a smaller part of the game than it'd hope to.

My principal said, 'Emo, Emo, Emo.'
I said 'I'm the one in the middle, you lousy drunk!'
-- Emo Phillips

Well, I don't feel too sorry for SOTN. It's got a million reviews praising it.

Note to gamers: when someone shoots you in the face, they aren't "gay." They are "psychopathic."