(This is the 110th game in my challenge to go through many known games in chronological order starting in 1990. The spreadsheet/blog is in my bio.)
The Castlevania series is among the few series I'm looking forward to the most as part of this challenge, which is something I wasn't expecting to say after I had a bit of a falling out with Castlevania 3 you could say. But after Super Castlevania IV and Castlevania Bloodlines, you can definitely call me a Castlevania fan. I haven't played any other Castlevania games before in my life, so all of these releases are new to me. Does Castlevania: Dracula X deserve to be praised as highly as the previous two games I've mentioned?
Released in 1995 exclusively for the SNES, Dracula X is supposedly a remake for Castlevania: Rondo of Blood, which I didn't play yet (but should according to Castlevania fans everywhere) but based on what I've seen from Rondo of Blood, Dracula X looks like a lite version of it for some reason. The wikipedia entry for Dracula X does say that there were limits of the SNES cartridge format to think in mind as part of this port, so I'm assuming stuff was cut out here. With that in mind, remake seems like an odd term for this game. It seems like a port with updated visuals.
STORYTELLING/CHARACTERS | 2/10
The Belmont family v Dracula Round #854. This time it's Richter Belmont, who fights Dracula Reborn hundreds of years after Simon Belmont defeated him initially. Dracula lures Richter in by kidnapping his girlfriend and sister, who you can save in Dracula's castle, if you can find them. In Rondo of Blood, the sister I believe becomes a playable character when you find her, while here, only Richter Belmont is playable. That's pretty much it to the story, it's the same as with all Castlevania games up to this point pretty much. You just got Richter, who is added to the Belmont Clan of vampire/Dracula slayers.
GAMEPLAY | 14/20
Castlevania: Dracula X goes back to the two-directions only approach with Richter Belmont. There also is no other playable character, so you only have access to a character who feels lacking in ability compared to his relatives as a result. Richter brings something new to the table however, which is called "Item Crash", which is basically a super attack. Instead of using one heart to use your normal sub-weapon attack, you can use up many of them at the same time (I believe 10 are used for the axe Item Crash) for one attack that deals more damage. These attacks kind of felt weaker than I would have thought however.
As far as the weapons and sub-weapons go, Richter is equipped with the whip and the sub-weapons he can collect are the same that the other games have also had pretty much. Incidentally, enemies, both normal and bosses, are also re-used from other Castlevania games. Basically it's more 90s Castlevania, which fans will like and people who dislike Castlevania already won't.
There are a total of seven stages (perhaps more if you can find the kidnapped girls, I didn't find them), and each ends with a boss. Boss fights are pretty cool as per usual with the Castlevania series, at least in terms of design and variety in how you have to tackle them, but some of them are pretty unfair. The Dracula boss fight would have been impossible for me to beat if it wasn't for save states on my emulator. You have less than 10 platforms that you can stand on and pretty much every time you get hit, you will drop down into the pit and die. Considering that the final Dracula fight is hard enough usually, you definitely do not need this extra challenge. There also is just not enough space to reliably dodge the attacks and worst of all, Dracula has a targeted fireball attack that you can't reliably time against at all, so I pretty much had to be lucky whenever I whipped to hit the fireballs and make them disappear. Dracula's design was definitely hilarious (absolutely shredded and only wearing a thong) but in a positive way I'd say.
Among the normal enemies, I want to say fuck you to the spear-flipping soldiers who have stupid range and can seemingly block all sub-weapons.
Overall however, as someone who enjoys the Castlevania gameplay loop, this game has one of the more fun gameplay experiences you can have on the SNES (JRPGs excluded) and proves that the Castlevania formula alone can make your game at least somewhat enjoyable. There is the typical SNES / Castlevania / 90s gaming BS moments in this game here, but that's what you have to expect with all Castlevania games that released, at least up until 1995. I'll return to Castlevania with Symphony of the Night, which I've heard lots of positive things about, so maybe the BS meter is lower there.
MUSIC/SOUND/VOICE | 9/10
The Castlevania series seems to be one where songs are reused regularly and simply remixed in each iteration. As someone who loves Castlevania soundtracks, I'm actually fond of listening to the classics again after a while. Dracula X does have some new songs, at least I didn't recognize every single one, and the ones that were reused are great, so I'm not gonna complain. Whether this is your first or 5th Castlevania game, I'm sure you'll have a great time listening to the soundtrack here. Shoutout to Divine Bloodlines, the first stage song. Just fantastic.
GRAPHICS/ART DESIGN | 8/10
I really like the visuals in Dracula X. Backgrounds are detailed and set the atmosphere, there are some nice visual effects, enemy design is repeated from many other Castlevania games but looks good, environments are varied, and level of detail is pretty good overall. It's a step back from Super Castlevania IV, which is understandable for a glorified port like this, but it's still one of the more graphically appealing games for its time, both in quality and art design.
ATMOSPHERE/IMMERSION | 8/10
Atmospherically the game places itself right in the middle of all prior Castlevania entries. The gothic-medieval art style that Castlevania is famous for sets the scene in Dracula X just as it always has, and the soundtrack for Castlevania games are probably the best examples the 90s have for music that tells the player to go be a hero. Castlevania has the gameplay to pull the epic music off and not have it awkwardly run counter to the gameplay itself, even if Dracula X is not the prime example for this, but it still works well here.
CONTENT | 5/10
Dracula X's content is, based on my understanding, the same as in Rondo of Blood, just worse and with plenty of content cut. That's certainly a disappointment. The content in this game is certainly enjoyable enough, and the short length does not necessarily work in its detriment, the fact that the original was longer probably does. Because the way the game is set up, you constantly see unique areas and fight bosses pretty quickly after one another, so it flows pretty nicely, although bosses can ruin the fun for sure.
LEVEL/MISSION DESIGN | 6/10
Levels don't feel repetitive as far as the game itself goes, though obviously you've seen these designs in other Castlevania games already. The difference to a game like Super Castlevania IV is that the game lacks some of the more clever levels like those that made use of SNES' Mode 7. Other than that, you have the typical dangers and challenges to overcome, which is certainly still fun, and as mentioned, they always feel fresh because the number of stages and areas is not on the high side.
That said, some levels have entirely too many enemies that keep spawning and annoying you to no end and too many bosses are not well designed in terms of their fairness.
You can, however, find different routes that lead you to find two of the kidnapped individuals, and with that, find optional bosses, which is pretty nice.
CONCEPT/INNOVATION | 4/10
A game full of FMV scenes that is not a Night Trap-like game but rather a horror adventure game was conceptually unexplored at the time, and looking at how the game turned out, I don't think D managed to get it quite right. That said, I can tell that with the start of the 5th generation of consoles, experimentation is a big theme, so I can appreciate that about D, as well as the fact that it atmospherically did plenty right.
REPLAYABILITY | 3/5
There isn't as much replayability here as in previous Castlevania games. Only one playable character, no real multiple paths to use and not all that many sub-weapons to try. What you do have are 3 different endings depending on how many of the girls you find and a few optional bosses to fight, which adds some replayability.
PLAYABILITY | 5/5
Works well at all times.
OVERALL | 64/100
Castlevania: Dracula X is another enjoyable Castlevania game but two factors that work against it is that it is a remake/port of a superior game and that some of the bosses, especially the final one, are ridiculously hard. Overall though, if you don't go into this thinking it should be Rondo of Blood, the soundtrack and the typical Castlevania gameplay loop is still challenging and fun for at least a few hours.
The Castlevania series is among the few series I'm looking forward to the most as part of this challenge, which is something I wasn't expecting to say after I had a bit of a falling out with Castlevania 3 you could say. But after Super Castlevania IV and Castlevania Bloodlines, you can definitely call me a Castlevania fan. I haven't played any other Castlevania games before in my life, so all of these releases are new to me. Does Castlevania: Dracula X deserve to be praised as highly as the previous two games I've mentioned?
Released in 1995 exclusively for the SNES, Dracula X is supposedly a remake for Castlevania: Rondo of Blood, which I didn't play yet (but should according to Castlevania fans everywhere) but based on what I've seen from Rondo of Blood, Dracula X looks like a lite version of it for some reason. The wikipedia entry for Dracula X does say that there were limits of the SNES cartridge format to think in mind as part of this port, so I'm assuming stuff was cut out here. With that in mind, remake seems like an odd term for this game. It seems like a port with updated visuals.
STORYTELLING/CHARACTERS | 2/10
The Belmont family v Dracula Round #854. This time it's Richter Belmont, who fights Dracula Reborn hundreds of years after Simon Belmont defeated him initially. Dracula lures Richter in by kidnapping his girlfriend and sister, who you can save in Dracula's castle, if you can find them. In Rondo of Blood, the sister I believe becomes a playable character when you find her, while here, only Richter Belmont is playable. That's pretty much it to the story, it's the same as with all Castlevania games up to this point pretty much. You just got Richter, who is added to the Belmont Clan of vampire/Dracula slayers.
GAMEPLAY | 14/20
Castlevania: Dracula X goes back to the two-directions only approach with Richter Belmont. There also is no other playable character, so you only have access to a character who feels lacking in ability compared to his relatives as a result. Richter brings something new to the table however, which is called "Item Crash", which is basically a super attack. Instead of using one heart to use your normal sub-weapon attack, you can use up many of them at the same time (I believe 10 are used for the axe Item Crash) for one attack that deals more damage. These attacks kind of felt weaker than I would have thought however.
As far as the weapons and sub-weapons go, Richter is equipped with the whip and the sub-weapons he can collect are the same that the other games have also had pretty much. Incidentally, enemies, both normal and bosses, are also re-used from other Castlevania games. Basically it's more 90s Castlevania, which fans will like and people who dislike Castlevania already won't.
There are a total of seven stages (perhaps more if you can find the kidnapped girls, I didn't find them), and each ends with a boss. Boss fights are pretty cool as per usual with the Castlevania series, at least in terms of design and variety in how you have to tackle them, but some of them are pretty unfair. The Dracula boss fight would have been impossible for me to beat if it wasn't for save states on my emulator. You have less than 10 platforms that you can stand on and pretty much every time you get hit, you will drop down into the pit and die. Considering that the final Dracula fight is hard enough usually, you definitely do not need this extra challenge. There also is just not enough space to reliably dodge the attacks and worst of all, Dracula has a targeted fireball attack that you can't reliably time against at all, so I pretty much had to be lucky whenever I whipped to hit the fireballs and make them disappear. Dracula's design was definitely hilarious (absolutely shredded and only wearing a thong) but in a positive way I'd say.
Among the normal enemies, I want to say fuck you to the spear-flipping soldiers who have stupid range and can seemingly block all sub-weapons.
Overall however, as someone who enjoys the Castlevania gameplay loop, this game has one of the more fun gameplay experiences you can have on the SNES (JRPGs excluded) and proves that the Castlevania formula alone can make your game at least somewhat enjoyable. There is the typical SNES / Castlevania / 90s gaming BS moments in this game here, but that's what you have to expect with all Castlevania games that released, at least up until 1995. I'll return to Castlevania with Symphony of the Night, which I've heard lots of positive things about, so maybe the BS meter is lower there.
MUSIC/SOUND/VOICE | 9/10
The Castlevania series seems to be one where songs are reused regularly and simply remixed in each iteration. As someone who loves Castlevania soundtracks, I'm actually fond of listening to the classics again after a while. Dracula X does have some new songs, at least I didn't recognize every single one, and the ones that were reused are great, so I'm not gonna complain. Whether this is your first or 5th Castlevania game, I'm sure you'll have a great time listening to the soundtrack here. Shoutout to Divine Bloodlines, the first stage song. Just fantastic.
GRAPHICS/ART DESIGN | 8/10
I really like the visuals in Dracula X. Backgrounds are detailed and set the atmosphere, there are some nice visual effects, enemy design is repeated from many other Castlevania games but looks good, environments are varied, and level of detail is pretty good overall. It's a step back from Super Castlevania IV, which is understandable for a glorified port like this, but it's still one of the more graphically appealing games for its time, both in quality and art design.
ATMOSPHERE/IMMERSION | 8/10
Atmospherically the game places itself right in the middle of all prior Castlevania entries. The gothic-medieval art style that Castlevania is famous for sets the scene in Dracula X just as it always has, and the soundtrack for Castlevania games are probably the best examples the 90s have for music that tells the player to go be a hero. Castlevania has the gameplay to pull the epic music off and not have it awkwardly run counter to the gameplay itself, even if Dracula X is not the prime example for this, but it still works well here.
CONTENT | 5/10
Dracula X's content is, based on my understanding, the same as in Rondo of Blood, just worse and with plenty of content cut. That's certainly a disappointment. The content in this game is certainly enjoyable enough, and the short length does not necessarily work in its detriment, the fact that the original was longer probably does. Because the way the game is set up, you constantly see unique areas and fight bosses pretty quickly after one another, so it flows pretty nicely, although bosses can ruin the fun for sure.
LEVEL/MISSION DESIGN | 6/10
Levels don't feel repetitive as far as the game itself goes, though obviously you've seen these designs in other Castlevania games already. The difference to a game like Super Castlevania IV is that the game lacks some of the more clever levels like those that made use of SNES' Mode 7. Other than that, you have the typical dangers and challenges to overcome, which is certainly still fun, and as mentioned, they always feel fresh because the number of stages and areas is not on the high side.
That said, some levels have entirely too many enemies that keep spawning and annoying you to no end and too many bosses are not well designed in terms of their fairness.
You can, however, find different routes that lead you to find two of the kidnapped individuals, and with that, find optional bosses, which is pretty nice.
CONCEPT/INNOVATION | 4/10
A game full of FMV scenes that is not a Night Trap-like game but rather a horror adventure game was conceptually unexplored at the time, and looking at how the game turned out, I don't think D managed to get it quite right. That said, I can tell that with the start of the 5th generation of consoles, experimentation is a big theme, so I can appreciate that about D, as well as the fact that it atmospherically did plenty right.
REPLAYABILITY | 3/5
There isn't as much replayability here as in previous Castlevania games. Only one playable character, no real multiple paths to use and not all that many sub-weapons to try. What you do have are 3 different endings depending on how many of the girls you find and a few optional bosses to fight, which adds some replayability.
PLAYABILITY | 5/5
Works well at all times.
OVERALL | 64/100
Castlevania: Dracula X is another enjoyable Castlevania game but two factors that work against it is that it is a remake/port of a superior game and that some of the bosses, especially the final one, are ridiculously hard. Overall though, if you don't go into this thinking it should be Rondo of Blood, the soundtrack and the typical Castlevania gameplay loop is still challenging and fun for at least a few hours.
It is interesting that this exists, but it's not really good even ignoring that it's a simpler, more difficult version of a much better game. RIP to those who bought a cart on the aftermarket at its peak value looking to experience a rare Castlevania.
Another part of the 400 follower celebration, Dracula X, as I've been told, is much better in the famicom version and though the animation is as fun as Super Castlevania IV, but not as well polished and the fun wiggling with the whip is missing too. Something that remains missing in future games it seems.
Again it's fairly linear, apart from one area where I fell down and ended up in a whole new location. That said, there wasn't much else going on with this game tbh and though it's fun, it's not a impressive enough game to recommend picking up. At least, this version.
Gameplay + Stream
Again it's fairly linear, apart from one area where I fell down and ended up in a whole new location. That said, there wasn't much else going on with this game tbh and though it's fun, it's not a impressive enough game to recommend picking up. At least, this version.
Gameplay + Stream
Look how they massacred my boy (Rondo of Blood). This game has some terrible level design and what might be the worst final boss in the series. Just play Rondo of Blood its so much better.
It was pretty fun but has probably the evilest Dracula fight in the series. I couldn't beat it.
Completing this without savestates (and aiming for the best ending as well because of Death, but even without that) was HELL.
I recorded every time I played this game. One hour and 23 minutes to get through Stage 1 to Stage 5' (rescuing Maria and Annette on the way), spending a chunky 40-50 minutes approximately on retrying Stage 5'. 30 minutes of Stage 6 and failing to beat it on October 10. A total of 1 hour and 50 minutes
Then I played in two separate occasions trying to beat Stage 6 (and Death) again.
October 12 - 58 minutes
October 18 - 36 minutes
- And both came up unfruitful.
October 24 - 1h33min + 1h39min
It's 12am as of writing this which is why this might appear written at October 25, but I finished this session BEFORE 12am. But in any case, this fresh session...
Spent 1 hour and 33 minutes ONLY in the Stage 6 and Death fight, then 1 hour and 39 minutes repeating Stage 7 in order to beat Dracula.
This made for a game that I ended up playing for a total of 6.6 hours, and HALF THAT TIME WAS SPENT IN THE DEATH AND DRACULA FIGHTS.
This is a game that was clearly made to be difficult, very likely for Rondo players that thought that game was too easy (I think on both the Japanese name being "Akumajou Dracula XX" and the interview of the developer that stated Rondo being 5 times more difficult before being adjusted), and there's a lot of good that carries from Rondo (Item Crashes, Richter, the music) and even some of the first half does some few interesting ideas with their stages.
But it is limited in enemy variety because of the cartridge space, telegraphs less often enemies so it will be a lot of trial-and-error until you memorize certain stages (Stage 5' onwards for me), Death is a bastard and a half to defeat with how one of his attacks is unavoidable if you were too far from him before he executes it (the spinning one) unless you item crash for invuln, and Dracula is less demonic and more so of a CHEAP boss: It would be easier to keep track of the fireballs and whack his face in if it was on even ground, but the pits make it so that one wrong hit on the wrong side on the ledge means an instant death.
Oh, and RetroAchievements didn't recognize what I did today because apparently those cheevos don't unlock if you complete stages/clear the game from a password. Having gone through the entire game state-less and only reloading with my passwords when I didn't want to keep playing in one ginormous session because I was too angry only to result in that is...insulting. But not enough to deter me from the fact that I completed this forsaken game.
3 stars which I would say its...average or good? I say that if the difficulty wasn't so wack at the very end (Dracula pits), I would rate it higher, but it does comply with what some would expect to be a hardcore challenging Castlevania game that requires you to stay alert at all times and remember where to whip spawning enemies. And it has that cheeky pass of having half of Rondo's DNA with the presentation.
Not playing this ever again without savestates though. No way. Quoting @Gibdorf from their review:
"Watching the credits for this game and realizing there were no play testers made me the most vindicated I've ever felt"
And I didn't notice that myself (was too busy listening to victory music)...but that sure is insanely relatable right now.
I recorded every time I played this game. One hour and 23 minutes to get through Stage 1 to Stage 5' (rescuing Maria and Annette on the way), spending a chunky 40-50 minutes approximately on retrying Stage 5'. 30 minutes of Stage 6 and failing to beat it on October 10. A total of 1 hour and 50 minutes
Then I played in two separate occasions trying to beat Stage 6 (and Death) again.
October 12 - 58 minutes
October 18 - 36 minutes
- And both came up unfruitful.
October 24 - 1h33min + 1h39min
It's 12am as of writing this which is why this might appear written at October 25, but I finished this session BEFORE 12am. But in any case, this fresh session...
Spent 1 hour and 33 minutes ONLY in the Stage 6 and Death fight, then 1 hour and 39 minutes repeating Stage 7 in order to beat Dracula.
This made for a game that I ended up playing for a total of 6.6 hours, and HALF THAT TIME WAS SPENT IN THE DEATH AND DRACULA FIGHTS.
This is a game that was clearly made to be difficult, very likely for Rondo players that thought that game was too easy (I think on both the Japanese name being "Akumajou Dracula XX" and the interview of the developer that stated Rondo being 5 times more difficult before being adjusted), and there's a lot of good that carries from Rondo (Item Crashes, Richter, the music) and even some of the first half does some few interesting ideas with their stages.
But it is limited in enemy variety because of the cartridge space, telegraphs less often enemies so it will be a lot of trial-and-error until you memorize certain stages (Stage 5' onwards for me), Death is a bastard and a half to defeat with how one of his attacks is unavoidable if you were too far from him before he executes it (the spinning one) unless you item crash for invuln, and Dracula is less demonic and more so of a CHEAP boss: It would be easier to keep track of the fireballs and whack his face in if it was on even ground, but the pits make it so that one wrong hit on the wrong side on the ledge means an instant death.
Oh, and RetroAchievements didn't recognize what I did today because apparently those cheevos don't unlock if you complete stages/clear the game from a password. Having gone through the entire game state-less and only reloading with my passwords when I didn't want to keep playing in one ginormous session because I was too angry only to result in that is...insulting. But not enough to deter me from the fact that I completed this forsaken game.
3 stars which I would say its...average or good? I say that if the difficulty wasn't so wack at the very end (Dracula pits), I would rate it higher, but it does comply with what some would expect to be a hardcore challenging Castlevania game that requires you to stay alert at all times and remember where to whip spawning enemies. And it has that cheeky pass of having half of Rondo's DNA with the presentation.
Not playing this ever again without savestates though. No way. Quoting @Gibdorf from their review:
"Watching the credits for this game and realizing there were no play testers made me the most vindicated I've ever felt"
And I didn't notice that myself (was too busy listening to victory music)...but that sure is insanely relatable right now.
um remake de rondo of blood só que ruim lixo e ruim. em um mundo justo o turbografx teria descido tanto a porrada no super nintendo que eles não teriam outra opção senão renomear super mario world para super waluigi sexy time. eu não sei onde eu tô indo com esse exercício mental
Richter controls like a massive block of concrete and the level design is atrocious
I'm a huge fan of Rando of Blood, and had always heard horror stories about this version of it.
Overall, I don't think it's bad and I actually had more fun than I anticipated I would. But some it's level design is so rough.
A lot of vertical rooms with very uncertain enemy patterns. They love doing this thing where if you miss a jump, you have to go outside your current room and back around to get back to it, respawning all of the enemies and making the punishment much more annoying as a result.
I kept saying "wow this game is mean." Rather than feeling it was a more deliberate challenge they wanted me to figure out.
It's been a minute since I've played the original Rando, but I can't recall having that many moments like that.
I ended up using a few save states towards the end, just to save me the pain and time of retreading an entire stage to learn one obnoxious vertical section of the level design.
But the worst offender of this is the final boss. A shit show of a boss fight. Small hurtbox windows, a lot of RNG and littered with pits to, invetibility, get tossed into by some attack from offscreen you couldn't react to.
And that's just the first phase. The second phase is an onslaught of barley reactable projectiles. With such small platforms to keep yourself on, it makes almost impossible to get right your first time; meaning you're playing through that tedious first phase with each attempt to learn.
It's obnoxious and shudder to imagine that 10 year old kid in 1995 slaving over this for hours on a school night.
Even a perfect run of this fight on youtube takes 5 full minutes.
I absolutely did not have the patience for this,
Ended up amusing save states heavily, and felt extremely underwhelmed as a result.
Just a real wet fart to end the game on.
And the lack of Maria kinda stings. She is huge part of why I love that original game so much.
I guess that's why this game has this reputation, it doesn't do its own thing at all, so it just ends up being in the shadow of its older, cooler, brother.
Overall, I don't think it's bad and I actually had more fun than I anticipated I would. But some it's level design is so rough.
A lot of vertical rooms with very uncertain enemy patterns. They love doing this thing where if you miss a jump, you have to go outside your current room and back around to get back to it, respawning all of the enemies and making the punishment much more annoying as a result.
I kept saying "wow this game is mean." Rather than feeling it was a more deliberate challenge they wanted me to figure out.
It's been a minute since I've played the original Rando, but I can't recall having that many moments like that.
I ended up using a few save states towards the end, just to save me the pain and time of retreading an entire stage to learn one obnoxious vertical section of the level design.
But the worst offender of this is the final boss. A shit show of a boss fight. Small hurtbox windows, a lot of RNG and littered with pits to, invetibility, get tossed into by some attack from offscreen you couldn't react to.
And that's just the first phase. The second phase is an onslaught of barley reactable projectiles. With such small platforms to keep yourself on, it makes almost impossible to get right your first time; meaning you're playing through that tedious first phase with each attempt to learn.
It's obnoxious and shudder to imagine that 10 year old kid in 1995 slaving over this for hours on a school night.
Even a perfect run of this fight on youtube takes 5 full minutes.
I absolutely did not have the patience for this,
Ended up amusing save states heavily, and felt extremely underwhelmed as a result.
Just a real wet fart to end the game on.
And the lack of Maria kinda stings. She is huge part of why I love that original game so much.
I guess that's why this game has this reputation, it doesn't do its own thing at all, so it just ends up being in the shadow of its older, cooler, brother.
why
Imagine being a kid in the 90s wanting Rondo of Blood, but instead you get this
Visually and Sound wise better than Rondo, but it makes up for it by being terrible at EVERYTHING ELSE
Visually and Sound wise better than Rondo, but it makes up for it by being terrible at EVERYTHING ELSE
just play rondo of blood
It's been said a million times before, but it's true: this is simply just Rondo of Blood but much, much worse.
This game answers a question nobody asked: What if Rondo of Blood sucked?
the cool one with richter in it
Залупный Снесовский платформер 90-ых с дерьмовым управлением и самим перемещением персонажа. Мега простые боссы, ублюдские уровни и противники. Ну и последний босс-Дракула ваншотит, заставляя перепроходить весь уровень. Ваще огонь.
É uma bosta comparado ao rondo of blood mas ainda faz oq era esperado.
It's alright
It is wrong to say it's a lesser version of Rondo of Blood, while they are meant to be the same events, they are clearly very different games. What's not wrong is to say this game sucks.
The levels are frustating, with a lot of them being to corridors with enemies on the top who CAN attack you while you cannot. The screens barely flow into one another making it feel like you just teleported places. On the topic of screens, a few of them are lifted from older Castlevania titles and end up being ust worst version of those screens.
Richter controls terrible, he feels slow and heavy, and has really short invincibility frames, making it that you could get stun locked by some enemies.
On the topic of enemies, it has the worst Dracula fight of the Castlevanias i've played, just a bore.
With all that you could wonder why i didn't score the game lower? At the end of the day is still a Castlevania game, and has its good parts, when not being an extremely frustating game i had fun with it, as some parts of it display effort and competence, it's just a shame those parts are not that many.
The levels are frustating, with a lot of them being to corridors with enemies on the top who CAN attack you while you cannot. The screens barely flow into one another making it feel like you just teleported places. On the topic of screens, a few of them are lifted from older Castlevania titles and end up being ust worst version of those screens.
Richter controls terrible, he feels slow and heavy, and has really short invincibility frames, making it that you could get stun locked by some enemies.
On the topic of enemies, it has the worst Dracula fight of the Castlevanias i've played, just a bore.
With all that you could wonder why i didn't score the game lower? At the end of the day is still a Castlevania game, and has its good parts, when not being an extremely frustating game i had fun with it, as some parts of it display effort and competence, it's just a shame those parts are not that many.
Renders the original obsolete
Watching the credits for this game and realizing there were no play testers made me the most vindicated I’ve ever felt
While the graphics are arguably better than Super Castlevania IV, the combat in this is clunky as all hell and hard to master. The monster placement was more frustrating than in IV, with Knight's able to poke you from above with spears through floors (seriously, one time a knight was placed so haphazardly that it made it almost impossible to pass). The game also feels very short for a mainline release. This was definitely a step down from IV, hopefully later entries will be better.
If all you had was a Super Nintendo back in the day, this game would be alright. Now? Especially when playing it right after Rondo? Good lord. Slowdown when walking, anyone?
In all fairness, it's not like this game is a "lesser Rondo of Blood". There's tons of different things going on here, especially the levels. It's all new from what I could tell, but I didn't take all routes in the game so maybe there's some copy pasting, who knows.
Now, all Castlevanias have issues with enemy placement, it's nothing new. But MAN did Drac X give me a hard time with it; spears coming out the edge of the screen, bats cropping up ONE MILLIMETER before entering a door, the list goes on. Don't even get me started on those jumps where you have to be basically off the edge to land.
And how about that Death fight with the one move you're basically forced to Item Crash to avoid? Fun times. You know what's even more fun? A VERY slow, very tedious Dracula fight where you have like... A SECOND to hit his face before he disappears. Oh yeah, and make sure to wait until his "poofing in" animation is fully over, otherwise you'll be hitting jack and shit.
Unless you're going for a full series retrospective, don't bother. It's not the worst thing in the world, but I won't lie, it got me a bit tilted.
OH YEAH, no playable Maria. Immediate 0/5
In all fairness, it's not like this game is a "lesser Rondo of Blood". There's tons of different things going on here, especially the levels. It's all new from what I could tell, but I didn't take all routes in the game so maybe there's some copy pasting, who knows.
Now, all Castlevanias have issues with enemy placement, it's nothing new. But MAN did Drac X give me a hard time with it; spears coming out the edge of the screen, bats cropping up ONE MILLIMETER before entering a door, the list goes on. Don't even get me started on those jumps where you have to be basically off the edge to land.
And how about that Death fight with the one move you're basically forced to Item Crash to avoid? Fun times. You know what's even more fun? A VERY slow, very tedious Dracula fight where you have like... A SECOND to hit his face before he disappears. Oh yeah, and make sure to wait until his "poofing in" animation is fully over, otherwise you'll be hitting jack and shit.
Unless you're going for a full series retrospective, don't bother. It's not the worst thing in the world, but I won't lie, it got me a bit tilted.
OH YEAH, no playable Maria. Immediate 0/5
Es el peor de todas sus versiones. Hay muchisimos enemigos voladores (más de lo normal), y la batalla contra Dracula es un asco
Super Castlevania IV demostró que la SNES tenía capacidad para más
Super Castlevania IV demostró que la SNES tenía capacidad para más
Gets a surprising number of things wrong, and also manages to make me appreciate Castlevania IV more, which tells you how dire things must be. I don't even care about the comparisons to Rondo Of Blood; it's just not good. 4 "What Were They Thinking?!?"s out of 5
This is my favorite castlevania game HANDS DOWN BC ITS RICHTER!!!!!! (kidding)
but fr tho, i liked everything about this game.
The levels were fun and had a right amount of challenge to make it fun.
All sup-weapons have new abilites and an ultimate ability to use now which was really fun to experiment.
This is the easiest castlevania game so far with its bosses and im fine wit that because they were all great.
And THE MUSIC WAS FANTASTIC, the theme is a banger for sure.
Also to top it off, THERES REPLAYABILITY! The game has three endings and three potential routs to spend the rest of the game in.
but fr tho, i liked everything about this game.
The levels were fun and had a right amount of challenge to make it fun.
All sup-weapons have new abilites and an ultimate ability to use now which was really fun to experiment.
This is the easiest castlevania game so far with its bosses and im fine wit that because they were all great.
And THE MUSIC WAS FANTASTIC, the theme is a banger for sure.
Also to top it off, THERES REPLAYABILITY! The game has three endings and three potential routs to spend the rest of the game in.
"So let me get this straight, you think Dracula X is a really solid addition to the series?"
I do, and I'm tired of pretending it's not.
The music takes a hit from Rondo of Blood, obviously, but visually, it clears in pretty much every area. Some really nice pixel art in this game.
The controls are basically the same except you move a lot slower now, which I don't think gets in the way too much as you're gonna be jumping a lot, which retains a faster speed.
There are a couple screens I can't defend, but for the most part, the level design and enemy placements are perfectly fine and even interesting in my opinion, and there are fun speedrun tricks and various bits of tech to employ throughout all of the routes. The bosses are just as good as they are in Rondo, too, and I definitely prefer this game's Dracula fight compared to Rondo's boring one. Not to mention this game has the best power/usefulness balance in the subweapons out of any game in the series.
Dracula X is a fun time in my opinion. Tricky to learn, but feels great to master.
I do, and I'm tired of pretending it's not.
The music takes a hit from Rondo of Blood, obviously, but visually, it clears in pretty much every area. Some really nice pixel art in this game.
The controls are basically the same except you move a lot slower now, which I don't think gets in the way too much as you're gonna be jumping a lot, which retains a faster speed.
There are a couple screens I can't defend, but for the most part, the level design and enemy placements are perfectly fine and even interesting in my opinion, and there are fun speedrun tricks and various bits of tech to employ throughout all of the routes. The bosses are just as good as they are in Rondo, too, and I definitely prefer this game's Dracula fight compared to Rondo's boring one. Not to mention this game has the best power/usefulness balance in the subweapons out of any game in the series.
Dracula X is a fun time in my opinion. Tricky to learn, but feels great to master.
removal of anime cutscenes, no maria, worse levels overall, NO LEVEL SELECT and a weirdass dracula fight. Easily the way to experience richter’s tale.
Decepcionante, é a palavra que mais o define. Inimigos com padrões chatos em todas as fases, e desafios/segredos que não recompensam o esforço do jogador, além de uma das piores boss fights de todos os jogos que joguei apenas reforçam os defeitos desse jogo com tanto potencial perdido.
Basically an alternative version of Rondo of Blood made for a less capable platform, expect downgraded visuals and music, though both are pretty good on their own.
Not bad at all for a few stages, but then devolves into being one of the most frustrating games out of the Classicvanias and for no good reason either seeing how much more well balanced Rondo is, and it's not like that's a walk in the park either.
If you only have time to spare to either play Rondo or X definitely play Rondo, otherwise it may be worth to give this one a try too if you're curious about the differences between the two.
Not bad at all for a few stages, but then devolves into being one of the most frustrating games out of the Classicvanias and for no good reason either seeing how much more well balanced Rondo is, and it's not like that's a walk in the park either.
If you only have time to spare to either play Rondo or X definitely play Rondo, otherwise it may be worth to give this one a try too if you're curious about the differences between the two.