Great review! How did you play it?
I went on a DS and GBA Castlevania kick last winter, and AoS was the final one I played (on an SP 001). I did play it when it was new, but it had been awhile. I'm not going to review it because it's so well trodden, but I did have some questions and thoughts.
Is this your first time through AoS and did you play SotN when it was new? Of the six Castlevanias on GBA and DS, Aria is the one I see the most compared to SotN and I think the player's opinion will differ heavily on what order they played it. SotN was groundbreaking and playing it was an awe-inspiring, once-in-a-lifetime experience. There was nothing like it. Now there's lots of stuff like it (especially with all the metroidvania-style indie games, largely inspired by Iggavanias), so Aria can't have the same impact SotN did on the player. I'd imagine someone playing SotN for the first time today after Aria, Hollow Knight, and a few others might shrug and say "cool music; but what's the big deal here?"
I found Aria somewhat devoid of challenge, largely because the breadth of souls leaves so many options. That's not a complaint though. Exploring the soul system was proportional to exploring the castle, since the player can steal a soul from basically every enemy so seeing a new enemy was exciting. I'm not really looking for a challenge in this style of game, I'm looking for something interesting to explore.
I agree that the castle is a bit too small, but that might be a credit to how good the game is--I didn't want it to end. I've never finished the Julius mode, but I appreciated that it was there. There's actually not much about Aria that I would change. The different areas felt connected and cohesive, there's a lot of secrets and variety to the ways you can play, and it's generally fun. It doesn't "captivate the imagination" like SotN does, but I'm not sure any game can really best the platonic ideal of SotN living in my memory of it anyway--probably not even SotN could meet those standards.
I went on a DS and GBA Castlevania kick last winter, and AoS was the final one I played (on an SP 001). I did play it when it was new, but it had been awhile. I'm not going to review it because it's so well trodden, but I did have some questions and thoughts.
Is this your first time through AoS and did you play SotN when it was new? Of the six Castlevanias on GBA and DS, Aria is the one I see the most compared to SotN and I think the player's opinion will differ heavily on what order they played it. SotN was groundbreaking and playing it was an awe-inspiring, once-in-a-lifetime experience. There was nothing like it. Now there's lots of stuff like it (especially with all the metroidvania-style indie games, largely inspired by Iggavanias), so Aria can't have the same impact SotN did on the player. I'd imagine someone playing SotN for the first time today after Aria, Hollow Knight, and a few others might shrug and say "cool music; but what's the big deal here?"
I found Aria somewhat devoid of challenge, largely because the breadth of souls leaves so many options. That's not a complaint though. Exploring the soul system was proportional to exploring the castle, since the player can steal a soul from basically every enemy so seeing a new enemy was exciting. I'm not really looking for a challenge in this style of game, I'm looking for something interesting to explore.
I agree that the castle is a bit too small, but that might be a credit to how good the game is--I didn't want it to end. I've never finished the Julius mode, but I appreciated that it was there. There's actually not much about Aria that I would change. The different areas felt connected and cohesive, there's a lot of secrets and variety to the ways you can play, and it's generally fun. It doesn't "captivate the imagination" like SotN does, but I'm not sure any game can really best the platonic ideal of SotN living in my memory of it anyway--probably not even SotN could meet those standards.
