I don't have any opinions to share about Castlevania II: Simon's Quest that isn't shared between the hundreds of thousands of other people who have already thrown their two cents in over the years. It's a very ambitious game encumbered by baffling design choices, the poster child of "Player's Guide games." That said, I did beat it once without a guide, it is doable, not that I'd recommend you spend several hours in your inventory trying every item on every halfway notable landmark until something happens.
What am I trying to say with all of this? Hell if I know, I'm a terrible critic, probably something about how Draculavania 3: Castle's Curse is a great game because it came out after freaking Simon's Quest.
That's not fair, I don't mean to diminish how good Castlevania III is in a vacuum, it's just that it tastes that much sweeter coming off the heels of Simon's Quest, like the first bite of real food after spending ten years in the fuckin gulag sucking down slop. No, this is a proper follow up to Castlevania, one that takes the basic framework of that game and expands upon its mechanics in a way that feels like logical. The branching pathways and multiple character don't distract from what makes Castlevania work, they add to it.
Yeah, sure, there's some clunky levels, but most of the truly frustrating parts of Dracula's Curse can be subverted with the right character. The game highly encourages replays, and routing your way through subsequent runs is fun in a way that reminds me of Resident Evil. That said, I could understand if someone bounced off this game after their first blind run. There's no shame in that. Well, there's a little bit of shame. But that's ok, you like what you like, no one game is perfect for everyone. I'm not judging you. I think less of you, for sure, like I think you're weak, but don't beat yourself up over it, it's alright. You didn't unlock Alucard, I'm not sure how that's even possible, it's really quite impressive you played the game that bad, but the important thing is you played it your way. Idiot.
Hold on, what was I talking about?
Oh yeah, did you know they didn't put Grant DaNasty in the Netflix show? What a load of crap.
What am I trying to say with all of this? Hell if I know, I'm a terrible critic, probably something about how Draculavania 3: Castle's Curse is a great game because it came out after freaking Simon's Quest.
That's not fair, I don't mean to diminish how good Castlevania III is in a vacuum, it's just that it tastes that much sweeter coming off the heels of Simon's Quest, like the first bite of real food after spending ten years in the fuckin gulag sucking down slop. No, this is a proper follow up to Castlevania, one that takes the basic framework of that game and expands upon its mechanics in a way that feels like logical. The branching pathways and multiple character don't distract from what makes Castlevania work, they add to it.
Yeah, sure, there's some clunky levels, but most of the truly frustrating parts of Dracula's Curse can be subverted with the right character. The game highly encourages replays, and routing your way through subsequent runs is fun in a way that reminds me of Resident Evil. That said, I could understand if someone bounced off this game after their first blind run. There's no shame in that. Well, there's a little bit of shame. But that's ok, you like what you like, no one game is perfect for everyone. I'm not judging you. I think less of you, for sure, like I think you're weak, but don't beat yourself up over it, it's alright. You didn't unlock Alucard, I'm not sure how that's even possible, it's really quite impressive you played the game that bad, but the important thing is you played it your way. Idiot.
Hold on, what was I talking about?
Oh yeah, did you know they didn't put Grant DaNasty in the Netflix show? What a load of crap.