Jump to navigation
Advertisement

Classic NES Series: Castlevania Review

GameBoy Advance Review by Kristan Reed

12 January, 2005

Considered as one of the all time great gaming series by the determined (and characteristically vocal) hardcore Nintendo throng, and for good reason after it firmly established itself among 16-bit gamers in the 90s with a series of quite stunningly well-realised whip-cracking platformers that are still gaining admirers thanks to the GBA. Its star may have fallen in recent years with the mainstream home console audience after some fairly insipid attempts to move the series into 3D (none have even coming close to making an impact in the charts in Europe, tellingly), but continued interest in the 2D handheld incarnations (including a newly announced Castlevania for the DS) have generated just enough interest to justify raiding the archives with this mid-priced re-issue. Finally the series aficionados can trace the game way back to its NES origins and see how it fairs in today's market. How kind time has been to the 8-bit version we were intrigued to find out, but we weren't expecting miracles.

In the first of the many Castlevania outings you control a whip-cracking vampire slayer by the name of Simon Belmont. A man on a mission to crack said whip against a whole castle full of deadly minions - giant bats, mummies, and assorted sentries, ghosts, and of course hideous bile spewing boss monsters, not to mention the prince of darkness Dracula himself - to present the kind of platform-centric title that would have been considered "challenging" even back in its own era, never mind in this more forgiving period of gaming.

Dracu-like

'Classic NES Series: Castlevania' Screenshot 1

As you'd perhaps expect, this is something of case study in fascist 8-bit side-scrolling platform-o-doom, that's was designed around the now-archaic principle that being incredibly challenging equalled gaming fun for all the family. The trouble was, only the most determined, skilled and patient gamers that ever lived could reasonably be expected to extract the entertainment provided. But to give Konami its dues, back in those days this kind of game design was basically par for the course and you simply knew you were in for a rough ride from the word go, and cut your cloth accordingly.

Fast forward eighteen years into a far less demanding era, where a broader, less skilful, less patient type of gamer expects to be effectively molly-coddled through most games, and something as extreme as Castlevania has numerous design issues that stand out like a beef burger in a Vegan restaurant. Castlevania certainly doesn't pull its punches with death practically omnipresent every half a screen, but this ought not to come as a huge surprise to most of us of a "certain age". European-based gamers, especially, who grew up in the early 80s will bitterly recall that even the most well-rated titles of that era were just plain hard work - even then.

Plucking a few epics out of the air at random such as Ultimate's classic UnderWurlde, and Odin's Nodes Of Yesod, and it was standard practice to offer limited lives, no continues, no save points, no checkpoints and in most cases not even so much as armour or an energy bar to fall back on. It was instant death all the way; and to complete games back then was feat of almost superhuman endurance. Castlevania has at least tempered the difficulty level with a few now-standard innovations, like an energy bar and a continue system. Added presumably to limit the frustration factor we even have a save system (which was absent from the NES original). But even with these welcome additions, for those of you that aren't well versed in the intense demands of games of this era you're still looking at a game that demands much repetition, precision jumping, unresponsive controls and a less than useful combat system.

When computers ruled

'Classic NES Series: Castlevania' Screenshot 2

Having missed out on the first generation of Nintendo hardware (largely as a result of them having a very limited presence in the UK in the '80s when it was all about Commodore, Sinclair, Amstrad and Atari) this was actually this reviewer's first ever incursion into the first Castlevania, and having sunk countless hours into it over the Christmas period, it's definitely the sort of game that will have even the most skilful retro-versed gamer screaming with rage within minutes. Every room is destined to have at least a few moments of life-sapping death lurking in it somewhere, and only sheer iron will and persistence will give you the faintest hope of getting very far.

Preparing for a thousand ways to dodge death is the name of the game. If you're not having your balls busted by some flying cretin leaping and swooping to meet your path, the chances are they'll pop out of nowhere and simply knock you to instant death instead. Annoyingly this usually means right back to the beginning of the game's current section, which could be four or more screens back. Repetition isn't so much of a problem until you inevitably meet a boss monster at the end of every third level, and at least for the first few occasions, that's a given. Your undoubted death at a boss stage forces you back three levels (about a dozen screen's worth of careful negotiation) with no progression possible until such a time as you're good enough to suss out the boss, in just one example of spirit-crushing game design.

Visually Castlevania's not something that's especially offensive, but neither was it ahead of its time. It doesn't help much that unlike the SNES, the NES wasn't an outstanding piece of technology even when it was released; it just did the job. It's pretty much exactly as you'd expect for an early-ish NES title with blocky, indistinct sprites with hardly any animation to speak of and predictably evil attack patterns that give the player very limited room to manoeuvre. Like most games of the era, every room is built with a series of platforms, mainly on a split level but never scrolling upwards. It's simple left to right (and vice versa) with the odd limited weapon upgrade (such as throwing stars, magic potions, throwing daggers and so on), and platforming that's about as basic and straightforward as it comes. Some might argue that it's got a seminal quality, but they're almost certainly recalling cherished personal memories. Nostalgia is a hard thing to argue with; until you revisit it.

Retro gaming at today's prices

The harsh truth is there were an enormous number of platform games of this wonderful era that we'd rather revisit; it's just most of the associated brands didn't live beyond the 8-bit era. Even back in 1986 demonstrably unfair progression systems were rife, so to a large extent you do have to take this kind of constant backtracking on the chin. But if any game dared appear like this today it would have no place in gaming. When we'd normally judge retro games they'd be comparatively so cheap to make a lot of the complaints ill-judged, but in our opinion when you're being asked to pay good money for something, you'd be foolish to consider Castlevania's merits in anything other than the harsh light of 2005. If you know what you're paying for, and know all about the original then fair enough, but otherwise don't say we didn't warn you.

As an example of typical 8-bit platforming, Castlevania is probably not all that representative. As a history lesson in how the series was originally conceived it's an interesting case study in how things used to be, but not all games were this evil - some were even more evil! We still suggest that arch Castlevania fiends check it out if they feel compelled to complete their collections, as once you get into the groove there is a degree of enjoyment to be had, but at least try it before you buy if you can. For anyone else, we recommend you do something less stressful. Like gardening. Or vampire hunting.

Advertisement

Are you excited about Classic NES Series - Castlevania on GameBoy Advance?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-17 of 17 in total

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
Blerk
12/01/05 @ 13:19
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Can I order the NES version from Simply Games?
boabg
12/01/05 @ 13:32
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I found this lurking in the loft the other day along with an extremely dusty NES.
bionutz
12/01/05 @ 13:56
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
why no mark? what would be the mark by today's standards?
krudster [mod]
12/01/05 @ 14:13
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Surely marking an old game is a futile excercise? If we scored them against new games it would be utterly unfair and misleading.
bionutz
12/01/05 @ 14:35
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Well, I think you should at least mark the gameplay, which probably since hasn't evolved too much in new games, methinks. Anyway, I refuse to buy a game that has no mark, it's like an essay on I don't know maybe academical discussion on current conversion of an old game, something that can be in practice ignored.
krudster [mod]
12/01/05 @ 14:40
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I think it's fair to assume that it wouldn't score very highly in today's terms, especially given the exceptionally high price. If someone released this game now as a serious standalone release (and it wasn't a nostalgia purchase) then it'd be laughed at. In terms of judging it against other retro games, and ignoring the price I'd probably give it a 7.
mattigan
12/01/05 @ 15:13
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I had this game back in the day, I don't remember it being that hard, until the last boss that is.
krudster [mod]
12/01/05 @ 16:09
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's not so much hard as just, well, petty. It's a memory game; constant trial and error, which is frustrating to go back to these days.
Daryoon
12/01/05 @ 16:15
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I don't recall it being 'hard' either. I mean you could probably complete the whole game in half an hour once you knew what you were doing, so making it any easier would mean most people would finish it rather quickly.
I always wonder - do our gaming skills get worse as we get older? As a 10-year-old I had no trouble with the so-called "hard" games such as Megaman/Castlevania.
kalel [mod]
12/01/05 @ 17:03
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I think its fair to give it a mark. It's been released today after all, on a modern system, albeit at a budget price, trying to appeal to modern gamers.

If they had given it a graphical makeover, but not changed the gameplay at all, would it deserve a mark then?
moggsy
12/01/05 @ 17:57
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
As a general point, I think not giving a game a mark is a good idea. Marks can be down to personal preference - a well written review reveals far more than an arbitrary mark. It also forces people to read at least the summary instead of just reading a mark and moving on.
krudster [mod]
12/01/05 @ 22:02
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The *facts* over here at least are that it established itself in Europe only once the SNES appeared. The NES sold zip all in Europe.
Frankypanky
12/01/05 @ 23:47
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I knew quite a lot of people with a NES back then actually. Including myself.
3william56
13/01/05 @ 05:34
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Considering we got the original Prince of Persia free with POP:SOT, there's just no excuse for this. As a hidden freebee in a new Castlevania game - nice. On it's own - it's just a fix for aging Ninty crack whores.

Some of these old games contained some cracking level design and ideas, and the gameplay mechanic isn't that bad even now, so releasing them is fine. IMHO the big killer is the control responsiveness. There's no harm in brushing that up to modern (or at least 16 bit) standards - or at least have it as an option for the non hardcore - so what if it makes it a bit easier.

I'm loving the side scrolly retro Captain Quark bits in R&C3. Again, if they're going to release a retro game on it's own, a quick makeover as another option would at least give modern gamers a starting point.
krudster [mod]
13/01/05 @ 09:20
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I wasn't stating that "I didn't care less", just that the games landscape for us (in the UK at least) were that these NES games weren't really on the radar. Few, if any high street shops sold them, there wasn't a magazine supporting them (apart from latterly The Games Machine, and that was three years after the NES came out) and if you could find in the really uber specialist shops them they were upwards of five times the price of other games, so no wonder they didn't fly off the shelves.

I *am* very interested in retro games, I have all my old games from almost 20 years ago (I sold my whopping Speccy collection, annoyingly), and I delight in these re-releases. I just find some of these individual re-issues overpriced and not even a very good reflection of the best games of their era.

And as many people have agreed, a score for something like this is pointless. Utterly nonsensical in a modern context however you position it.
Daryoon
13/01/05 @ 14:33
#16
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I knew about the old NES Castlevania games from Magazines such as Mean Machines and *gag* Total!

Plus Simon Belmont was in Captain N \o/
krudster [mod]
13/01/05 @ 22:57
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I agree with a lot of what you say, in as much that a lot of the mechanics have been carried over to the modern days games. Not sure I agree they've stood the test of time though - I think the only thing that is for sure is Nintendo has stood the test of time thus has the chance to re-issue these.

I'm glad old games get a chance to resurface overall because too many are lost never to return. My main dissatisfactions is really that they're not that representative of what was golden about that era and may well reinforce people's opinions that retro gaming is a pointless rose tinted waste of time.

It'd be like EMI re-releeasing some Herman's Hermits tracks as the best of the 60s 'classics' while The Beatles, Who, Stones and Hendrix lie around in the vaults. People who didn't know any better would wonder what on earth the fuss was all about.

Bottom line? There is a *lot* more to the retro gaming scene than these supposed 'classics'.

Comments: 1-17 of 17 in total

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

X View gallery