Castlevania Dracula X

[Anonymous No.7848151]

most people hate this game because they see it as a port of Rondo, but if they see it as a game of it's own instead of a port, they would see how amazing this game is, what are your thoughts on this one ?

[Anonymous No.7848156]

stop

[Anonymous No.7848158]

>>7848151
I like it better than Rondo and it's rather unsettling in its visuals, also it's hard. It's way up there on my list of great Castlevania games.

[Anonymous No.7848178]

>>7848151
Aspect Ratio

[Anonymous No.7848179]

>>7848156
why, these are just facts

[Anonymous No.7848185]

>>7848178
yeah, I knew someone would notice that, I'm playing on Retroarch at full screen, I don't like the 4:3 spect

[Anonymous No.7850448]

>>7848151
the best Castlevania on SNES. The first level with the burning village is the pure definition of kino. The music is amazing too. I don't get why people prefer the shitty Castlevania with the ugly graphics for SNES just because it isn't the same sprite as Rondo. It's a great game and hating on it is silly just to feel elite or something

[Anonymous No.7850491]

No cunny, no game. Simple as

[Anonymous No.7850516]

>>7850491
/tv/ is the worst board and at this point it’s not even up for debate.

[Anonymous No.7850524]

>>7850516
/pol/ is worse

[Anonymous No.7850534]

>>7850524
Is there really even a difference between /pol/ and /tv/ these days?

[Anonymous No.7850538]

>>7850534
It's easier to get banned on /tv/ for racism and that's about it.

[Anonymous No.7850793]

>>7850448
>The best Castlevania on SNES
That's not saying much

[Anonymous No.7850796]

>>7848179
Seems more like an opinion to me. A shitty one at that.

[Anonymous No.7850825]

I unironically like it more than Rondo. Better music, visuals, challenge, and controls. Rondo's control feels floaty compared to X, I can't explain it.

[Anonymous No.7850851]

>>7848151
Its okay. Its all we got in the USA at the time so I didn't mind it. I liked the SNES remakes of the Rondo CD tracks especially.

[Anonymous No.7851098]

>>7848151
Even on its own, it's on the lower end of the CV quality scale.

[Anonymous No.7851196]

>>7850516
Its a throwup between /tv/, /v/, and /pol/, for the good 4chan experience you really need to go to boards like this one where mods are stern about staying on topic but loose on how that topic is discussed.

[Anonymous No.7851206]

>>7850825
>visuals
It's been a while since I played but I remember the backgrounds being kind of gaudy and bloomed out compared to rondo's.

[Anonymous No.7851248]

the framerate sucks tho

[Anonymous No.7852360]

The Japanese name of the Turbografx-16 game is
>Dracula X

The Japanese name of Super Famicom game is:
>Dracula XX

Fact: ports don't have different names.

[Anonymous No.7853161]

I need to remake this webm because everyone always assume crouching has something to do with it

[Anonymous No.7853165]

[Anonymous No.7853170]

[Anonymous No.7853220]

I don't see it as a port of Rondo of Blood, rather as an alternative version. And the reason I don't like it is because I see it as a poor version of Rondo of Blood's gameplay.

1. The animation is worse, with less frames, making it clunky. Enemies also give less visual cues, since they also have less animation.
2. You can't cancel your movements: commitment is strict. In Rondo of Blood, I can whip while standing then crouch to hit low (vice-versa works too). This works wonders against the Axe Armors. Unfortunately, Dracula X gets rid of this.
3. There is less sub-weapons, they're also clunky to use.
4. Movement feels stiff. Almost like an intentional input lag was programmed into the game, I don't know how to explain. Stairs also become a chore again. In Rondo of Blood, you can easily jump onto and out of them. Not anymore.
5. Level design becomes too much claustrophobic. Not only your character is clunkier, you also have little room to maneuver.

Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad game, but it's a pretty odd one: coming from a CD game, you'd think Dracula X would retain the gameplay while butchering graphics and sound. It was the other way around: graphics and sound and truly great, but the gameplay was butchered. It puzzles me. If Konami could make the miracle of achieving such good graphics and sound, why did they fuck up with the gameplay?

[Anonymous No.7853271]

>>7848151
>most people hate this game because they see it as a port of Rondo
That is not why people dislike this game retard, people dislike this game because its gameplay is much worse than Rondo of Blood

[Anonymous No.7853330]

>>7853220
that's because DXX was a return to form. It's the CV sequel which plays the closest to CV1, except perhaps from 3.
You could copy paste your same list of arguments almost 1-1 with CV1 but nobody does that, because pretending to enjoy CV1 and shitting on DXX are both hip.

[Anonymous No.7853340]

>>7853330
>It's the CV sequel which plays the closest to CV1, except perhaps from 3.
That game without whip upgrades and has back flipping? No.

[Anonymous No.7853378]

>>7853340
We both know whip upgrades are a very minor part of Castlevania. I only remember a single instance in CV3 where you had to go through a meaningful stretch without a full whip after respawning from a checkpoint. If anything, Bloodlines utilized it the best.

[Anonymous No.7853382]

>>7853340
Yes. Even with that taken into account it plays closer to CV1 than 4, Bloodlines, or even the X68K game do. The subweapons is a testament to that: you get the very same ones as in CV1, nothing more (not counting the key since you're not really supposed to use it)

[Anonymous No.7853434]

>>7853330
That's fine. I don't pretend liking CV1. I'm a little past its heyday, so it didn't grow on me and I like other games more. But I get your point. Double standards happen and some people don't admit.

[Anonymous No.7853863]

>>7853165
Lmao I tried that but with no luck. Glad to see it's possible

[Anonymous No.7855232]

>>7853220
Especially agree on the movement. Coming from Rondo to Dracula X is tough for me because of how Ritcher just feel unresponsive in X.