Bloodstained

Ohaiyo, Sup Forums!

Tell me how you hated the Bloodstained enemy demonstration update since you're a bunch of negative nellies.

Other urls found in this thread:

kickstarter.com/projects/iga/bloodstained-ritual-of-the-night/posts/1561937
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

You got a link so I can join the hate club.

kickstarter.com/projects/iga/bloodstained-ritual-of-the-night/posts/1561937

she is so cute, will there be alternate outfits? I didn't like the original very much, mainly because of that thing around her neck, its very weird, but shes so fucking cute roundy.

1st day buy for me.

I'm still worried about the game being shallow in terms of equipment / items and shit.
Having no Soul System is fine, another is to have a huge SotN map to backtrack and have no leveling, half a dozen weapons with fixed damage or some other gimping bullshit
and please don't shrink her boobs

>kikestarter

nice

wheres the male protagonist?

>have no leveling,
Wait what. Since when would there be no leveling? Or are you just speculating? It's been in all the CVs

Those don't look that bad honestly.

blonde without glass curse

Or rather *All the CVs IGA was involved in that were specifically Metroidvania and intended to use that type of system

I just know someone will pop in and say "HA HA LOI DIDNT HAVE A LEVELING SYSTEM BRO, NEITHER DID THE RONDO REMAKE" etc

>half a dozen weapons with fixed damage or some other gimping bullshit
Isn't there supposed to be a weapon upgrade system due to the crafting system mentioned where you get alchemical ingredients as drops and merge them with weapons to change them?

I'm just worried over the possibility, since nothing was revealed yet but Iga confirmed that Souls and other features like it weren't going to be featured.
>It's been in all the CVs
it could be like the classics in which you got those roman numeral tablets that temporarily increased your main weapon's stats
yes but I'm used to collecting a shitton of stuff in the DS games, so it would be boring to stick with just a few ones that change forms as you upgrade them

This ain't mighty number nope, the game development is going great

If they add something like the glyphs, that would be pretty great. We don't really a need a shitton of souls if you'll just end up using a handful of them most of the time, even though trying out new things is cool. The majority of the glyphs were hella useful in OoE and I found myself messing around with equipment and combinations more than in any other Igavania I played.

>it could be like the classics in which you got those roman numeral tablets that temporarily increased your main weapon's stats
IGA said early on the game is pretty much going to be what people expect design-wise with some variances on the systems used just as the GBA and DS CVs had, which means a leveling system should still be there.

Now how much of what is there is another matter. It's possible you or I or someone else could be disappointed in there not being enough weapons or armor or the like, but I'm pretty sure this won't be like some indie MVs where they didn't have some aspects SotN had or did them in a far different way. I doubt the level ups will be "perk based" like something like Ori and the Blind Forest was. It'll probably be good ol "random stats go up" like the Japanese (and I) love.

>OP's pic is actually in the featured fan-art section

That's where I found out it existed yes

>We don't really a need a shitton of souls if you'll just end up using a handful of them most of the time, even though trying out new things is cool.
that's the point. it was all optional and only a few were essential, the fun came from trying them out.
as for the glyphs, the same applies. people can stick with the Secare variants all the way through, just switching for Macir for the crab boss.

Glyphs were far more streamlined than souls though. There are a lot less and more were useful due to different niche situations they covered.

While I do like the idea of a game having an absolute ton of different weird attacks many people will never even see, I can also see the downside in that it uses time and effort that reduces the potential for other stuff the player is more likely to see. For example, given the choice between more enemies or more spells, I'd go more enemies, because it's more likely players will see each enemy a few times while with souls or subweapon combos (HoD), or spells/subweapons for Charlotte/Jonathan in PoR you're far more likely to get people picking a the few that are stronger and relying on those--therefore neglecting a ton of them.

> I can also see the downside in that it uses time and effort that reduces the potential for other stuff the player is more likely to see.
but that's not a zero-sum game. both SotN and the Sorrow games had their myriad weapons/souls while still having plenty of unique enemies
>you're far more likely to get people picking a the few that are stronger and relying on those
that's just a matter of stat balancing, not on amount of enemies and weapons

also, that mentality of being concerned over "reducing the potential for other stuff the player is more likely to see" is exactly what makes games streamlined and having no extra content in the first place.

>but that's not a zero-sum game. both SotN and the Sorrow games had their myriad weapons/souls while still having plenty of unique enemies
It always is--but the size of the pie you split up depends on how many staff you have in each area and that depends on the budget. So smaller pie games like PoR and OoE had to play it smarter. Games with far more budget like SotN could have a lot more unique stuff.

>that's just a matter of stat balancing, not on amount of enemies and weapons

You can't perfectly balance these things though due to the time in the game you get them being an additional factor--there has to be a progression, but without the progression being too steep as with something like Mandragora in DoS. One oversight spoils the soup.

I think streamlining as far as is mostly at issue when the content is streamlined out in favor of saving money for more marketing dollars or the like. If the money is spent wisely and honestly on a streamlined game, it will seem far more lengthy and robust during the first playthrough than it has any right being compared to something else with the same budget but poorly spent budget dollars. Will it lose some degree of "wow this is an obscure secret!" flair though in return? Yes.

>PoR and OoE had to play it smarter
they still had a lot of variety. glyphs worked like souls and PoR had a lot of charlotte's spells, not to mention the dual crushes and relics.
I don't see your point, skills don't take up the space of enemy sprites.
>You can't perfectly balance these things though due to the time in the game you get them being an additional factor
who said anything about balance being necessary? the fact a lot of the optional stuff in all the igavanias was unbalances was also part of the fun. SotN isn't ruined just because Crissaegrim and Soul Steal exist.

>kekstarter

>If the money is spent wisely and honestly on a streamlined game, it will seem far more lengthy and robust during the first playthrough than it has any right being compared to something else with the same budget but poorly spent budget dollars. Will it lose some degree of "wow this is an obscure secret!" flair though in return? Yes.
If you told me that Bloodstained dropped the modern CV style to go back to the old stage based model of something like Super castlevania Iv, I'd ask for a refund.
I enjoyed Lament of Innocence a lot, but there's a reason I can replay the portable metroid games and igavanias a dozen times over and don't get sick of them.

>Dullahammer
looks pretty cool to me

of course the streamlined game sounds so much better when you frame it as a perfectly executed project in favor of shitty useless optional content, specially when Igarashi-based CV games have so much optional content going for them.
Try picking out what's actually "essential" in order to finish any of these games and see how much gets shaved off. better yet, check a speedun on youtube. More than half of the entire game is skipped.

The jellyfish monster reminds me of these guys

>they still had a lot of variety. glyphs worked like souls and PoR had a lot of charlotte's spells, not to mention the dual crushes and relics.
There were still far less of those than soul animations in DoS though. Each enemy besides the passive souled enemies had to have them. If you didn't notice the drop in the amount, that's what they were aiming for, but there was a drop, especially in OoE.

>I don't see your point, skills don't take up the space of enemy sprites.
They both take manpower to create.

>who said anything about balance being necessary?

>>you're far more likely to get people picking a the few that are stronger and relying on those
>that's just a matter of stat balancing, not on amount of enemies and weapons

Overpowered spells/weapons devalue others obtained around the same time.

> SotN isn't ruined just because Crissaegrim and Soul Steal exist.

Crissaegrim is such a rare drop it probably didn't steal the show from other weapons acquired around the same time on too many people's playthroughs. Endgame superweapons are less problematic. But Mandragora in DoS stole the limelight from a lot of other bullet souls in DoS for many people and that was a shame.

And Soul Steal isn't really in the same class to crowd out weapons or subweapons since it runs on MP and can be used in conjunction with any weapon or subweapons you want. It mostly can only crowd out other spells and there aren't many spells in SotN.

>If you told me that Bloodstained dropped the modern CV style to go back to the old stage based model of something like Super castlevania Iv, I'd ask for a refund.

Except that isn't how it works as far as content--Metroidvanias are more content efficient than the stage model of CV games since you don't just go through the stage once and complete it, you can be required to backtrack through the areas again, extending play time. It just has a nice side effect of making the place you're in feel more organic and leads to the "let's explore over here since this isn't mapped out" moments while you're backtracking looking for the way forward.

It isn't about taking what is essential and cutting everything else. That's the western "MORE MARKETING BUDGET NEEDED, CUT EVERYTHING" method. It's about extending what is essential and even making that essential content more robust by having less reused enemies or the like, but leaving a bit of fat (weird hidden items and the like but not a HUGE glut of them) around that so there is some variance in playthroughs.

>There were still far less of those than soul animations in DoS though.
of course there's always going to be a different amount of stuff between the games. it'd be unreasonable to expect the exact same count on all of them.
>They both take manpower to create.
you're assuming they are all made by the same few guys in a specific department and take all the same time to produce.
>Overpowered spells/weapons devalue others obtained around the same time.
"around the same time" is subjective. at no point I've felt like balancing was completely broken during early game in any igavania. of course, by endgame there are loads of options, but by condemning this you're basically claiming all of them are bad then.
>rare drop / isn't really in the same class
these are just a few examples. there are so many things that make the game easier at any point, there's no need to pretend it's a perfectly tuned experience for each area.

>It's about extending what is essential and even making that essential content more robust by having less reused enemies or the like, but leaving a bit of fat (weird hidden items and the like but not a HUGE glut of them) around that so there is some variance in playthroughs.
you say so many words that don't mean much.
"it needs to focus on essential stuff, but optional content is important too. but not too much optional content, because essential content is more important because it's essential"
of course that's how it needs to be done, nothing new here. the point is, if you want a tightly designed streamlined castlevania, go ahead and play Rondo, SC IV, Adventure Rebirth or Lament of Innocence.
but Igavanias thrive on focusing in the optional stuff. like I said, cut any of them down to the bare "essential" path you must take to finish them and you end up with less than half of the entire game's content.

Stop shilling your pathetic turd.
You can put this shitty character on every meme you know, it still won't work.

>you're assuming they are all made by the same few guys in a specific department and take all the same time to produce.
No I'm not. But all those guys are paid with the same resource: money.

>"around the same time" is subjective.
Subjective to the person comparing Soul Y to Soul A, B, C, and D, and if too many people choose Soul Y then less reason for those to exist.

>at no point I've felt like balancing was completely broken during early game in any igavania.
It's less "completely broken" and more like "any rational player trying to use the best weapon/spell/soul/etc will use this for say 40 mins over the other options available during that period"

You kind of ignored the words which did mean something though, namely that Metroidvanias are more content efficient than standard CVs. Classicvanias aren't necessarily more streamlined but rather instead they just bleed far too much content on stage assets which are over once while Metroidvanias are able to organically reuse stage assets while backtracking and put extra work into experiential assets, namely stuff like more attacks and items.

>No I'm not. But all those guys are paid with the same resource: money.
and you're assuming this money won't be enough for them to keep an output similar to the games that have been made in the same model. the last one was Ecclesia and it covered all the bases (not on the same number, but still there was plenty enough). hell, even Lords of Shadow 2 had some stuff and backtracking going on.
>Subjective to the person comparing Soul Y to Soul A, B, C, and D, and if too many people choose Soul Y then less reason for those to exist.
again, subjective. my first run in Ecclesia was made mostly with Secare, Vol Secare and Melio Secare. less reason to use =! less reason to exist, by that logic all optional content is useless and we're back to classic CV, using the same old whip for the whole game.
>"any rational player trying to use the best weapon/spell/soul/etc will use this for say 40 mins over the other options available during that period"
hey, if you think having the best resource is enough and nothing else should exist, that's your call. but I'd rather have a packed inventory and try out different stuff sometimes.

I don't think OoE covered all bases, really. It was short on everything. Weapons, non-reused enemies, and area size as well as individual stage assets. PoR really went in the toilet with stage assets relative to size and made people criticize its copypasta rooms. There simply weren't enough stage assets to justify the size of the map and still keep the maps fresh and unique.

>again, subjective. my first run in Ecclesia was made mostly with Secare, Vol Secare and Melio Secare. less reason to use =! less reason to exist, by that logic all optional content is useless and we're back to classic CV, using the same old whip for the whole game.
No, the point was to keep Soul A, B, C, D and Y all balanced around the same level of power for the place in the game that you find them so that they all have a reason to exist. Not to cut Soul A, B, C and D because Y is too good.

>hey, if you think having the best resource is enough and nothing else should exist, that's your call.

Don't twist the point being made to say I'm advocating cutting the less powerful options since you're not doing anyone any favors by doing it. That was an argument for balancing things better, not removing the options.

>kuckstarter

I didn't ignore anything at all.
>Metroidvanias are more content efficient than standard CVs
>It's about extending what is essential, but leaving a bit weird hidden items and the like around that so there is some variance in playthroughs
these are the exact same thing as this
>extend what's important because it's essential and not focus so much in optional content.
the essential content in igavanias is exactly that adaptation to make the content that would otherwise be presented in a streamlined way in a classicvania, in a way that makes it enjoyable as you keep backtracking there.
and like I said, the optional content is also necessary; that's mostly because you won't be backtracking through all these stages just to kill these monsters again for no reason.

also, again you said a lot without saying much.
>Classicvanias aren't necessarily more streamlined but rather instead they just bleed far too much content on stage assets which are over once
the content is basically the same in igavanias. you could split up SotN into stages just fine based on each area, take out the different weapons and items and just put some platforms to reach the rooms that need the bat form.

Extending what is important means more enemy variety, making the game longer or giving you more meaningful options and less obscure ones most players will never see. Stuff like cutting the extremely rare drop weapons and souls. OoE generally already did this but had a smaller budget and was unable to make the game longer as a result or increase enemy variety. It did it purely as a cost cutting measure.

>the content is basically the same in igavanias. you could split up SotN into stages just fine based on each area, take out the different weapons and items and just put some platforms to reach the rooms that need the bat form.
That wouldn't be the same amount of content though because you would be removing different weapons, items, spells and such and not replacing them with anything.

>I don't think OoE covered all bases, really. It was short on everything. Weapons, non-reused enemies, and area size as well as individual stage assets. PoR really went in the toilet with stage assets relative to size and made people criticize its copypasta rooms. There simply weren't enough stage assets to justify the size of the map and still keep the maps fresh and unique.
there's only so much you can do on portables, tho. both games had strengths and weaknesses, but I consider them big enough for the overall experience.
>keep Soul A, B, C, D and Y all balanced around the same level of power for the place in the game that you find them so that they all have a reason to exist.
>Not to cut Soul A, B, C and D because Y is too good.
these are the same argument. if it's too strong, the others don't have a reason to exist and should be cut. and I say no, because I don't care that they are weaker. I want more options.
have you ever played luck mode in SotN? I can only keep using Alucard Sword for so long, despite its strength. shieldrodding Alucard's shield is also boring as hell if you're going through unexplored areas.
>Don't twist the point being made to say I'm advocating cutting the less powerful options.
"reason to exist" means exactly that, m8

>That wouldn't be the same amount of content
I was referring to the part about Classicvanias bleeding far too much content on stage assets.

It bleeds them because unlike Metroidvanias you do not backtrack through said stages.

>these are the same argument. if it's too strong, the others don't have a reason to exist and should be cut. and I say no, because I don't care that they are weaker. I want more options.
No it most certainly is not. Making Souls A, B, C and D better and thus up to the level of Y or nerfing Y down to their level is not the same as removing A, B, C and D.

>"reason to exist" means exactly that, m8

I'm saying you give A, B, C and D a reason to exist rather than cutting them because Y is too powerful.

>It bleeds them because unlike Metroidvanias you do not backtrack through said stages.
yet you're enjoying them all the same. in the case of igavanias, you aren't going through that area again just for the sake of having fun in the act of backtracking, but rather for the new assets that lie in optional routes.
>Making Souls A, B, C and D better and thus up to the level of Y or nerfing Y down to their level is not the same as removing A, B, C and D.
this makes variety irrelevant. the fun comes from their differences, not of having a dozen weapons that deal the same damage.
>I'm saying you give A, B, C and D a reason to exist rather than cutting them because Y is too powerful.
>Don't twist the point being made to say I'm advocating cutting the less powerful options.
I'm still having trouble seeing how the sentences "reason to exist" and "rather than cutting them" don't have the obvious meaning they blatantly show.

>this makes variety irrelevant. the fun comes from their differences, not of having a dozen weapons that deal the same damage.
The fun comes from different hitboxes, not from the damage numbers. You don't make 5 katanas all do the same damage, you make a larger slower hammer do more, medium speed lance do less and a faster sword do less, etc.

>I'm still having trouble seeing how the sentences "reason to exist" and "rather than cutting them" don't have the obvious meaning they blatantly show.
The meaning is that variety for variety's sake isn't good enough because most people will not use deficient attacks--you must balance to make the variety a preference thing and not a "well I'll try the Merman soul today because even though its crap it has a unique hitbox"

>The fun comes from different hitboxes, not from the damage numbers.
that's what I said.
in fact, SotN, Aria and PoR all had plenty of swords that already had a lot of variety, not to mention the other weapons.
>variety for variety's sake isn't good enough because most people will not use deficient attacks
that's really hard to determine in these games though, because there aren't that many things that are so far behing in usefulness during start-to-midgame as bad as the Merman soul.
of course endgame is another story, but by that time you'll already have seen most of what the game has to offer, unless you're running only through the "essential" parts and skipping all the rest.