Am I the only one feeling a bit disappointed?

Not demo related, just video footage related. As soon as they showed us the village, I went on using that as a referense using youtube dates. The others I used youtube dates too from them, since they hyped those areas I figured those dates were OK. I also asked around on discord about the date of the demo without any good answers.

Yeah but I imagine the VITA and SWITCH won't be on the same graphical level as the PS4/Xbox One/PC versions. Wasn't that the point originally? I think one of my early worries was the ports to those systems would make the devs go easier on the graphics of the higher powered systems. They reassured that they will make use of the more powerful systems as much as possible and the other systems won't have an effect on that. So post processing effects on consoles and less effects on the weaker systems seems inevitable.

Also, Mana confirmed there is those SOTN loading hallways in this game
"Another interesting fact is that the hallways will still include "loading" rooms in-between new areas. As many of you may know already, past Castlevania games had loading rooms in order for the system to load one area to the next. It wasn't intentional, but it gave the players the feeling of entering a new area without breaking the atmosphere. We wanted to keep this in Bloodstained even if it has seamless loading system."

Maybe in the less powerful systems they could utilize it FOR loading? That might allow them to cram more graphical effects into those ports... idk.

I'm sure the plan isn't to make them look worse and of course they're gonna try to make them look as close as they can possibility but the systems spec wise are worse and there will be some limitations I'm sure. If not then why do VITA games typically look worse when ported from PS3 or PS4? 

I mean, does Injustice on Vita look as good on that than it does on PS3? ( Armature did that port) Does Mortal Kombat (whatever version it was ) on VITA look as good as the Ps3 or PS4 version? I mean there will be some cutbacks.  Those are fighting games with two characters on the screen at once in a single stage at a time and they look worse. I mean just because visually it might not have every bell and whistle doesn't make it less of a game but people shouldn't expect less powerful systems to completely match more powerful systems UNLESS the team doesn't try to push the higher systems power on their game which is what worried me in the first place about porting it to VITA and Wii U. I wanted Bloodstained to be as nice looking as possible.

I don't mean this in any way to be rude, but I find the OP a bit ridiculous. I'd have been happy with CotM graphics. The game looks amazing. Sure, theres plenty of room for improvement but the game is still in development. Frankly, I'm shocked this game is even being made. I had given up on ever seeing another Igavania game ever. I'm still in awe that this game is even being made, let alone looking as good as it does in the recen E3 footage.

CastleDan I agree, I want Bloodstained to be the best it can be. I think that compromises might have to be considered, though. If there's a big, obvious visual aesthetic that the stronger systems can achieve that some of the others can't, it would be for the best to steer around that. A difference in quality of its appearance is one thing - such as what's commonly found in graphics sliders in PC games - but the implementation of something more like a 'feature' of the graphics that plays into the experience of the atmosphere (shadows, lighting differences, any extra post-processing feature) should be as common as it can be across all versions. The feeling you get as you're exploring the castles of these games is a huge part of the experience, as you well know, and I want everybody to get that as equally as they can.

So, bumps in quality, great, but hopefully not overly so and not in relation to implementation of things that change the overall aesthetic of what we see.

Let's dump the "ridiculous" talk, everyone. I get Estebant was making a joke, and I also see where Wissenschaft is coming from--I'd also be happy with just CotM graphics (and I rather liked CotM overall, too). However, a lotta folks like Aindriu have concerns about the game's atmosphere and aesthetic, and while I don't agree with everything in their analysis I think it does raise good points we should talk about. So yeah, we understand that no-one was intending to be rude or stifle discussion, so no-one's in trouble, this is just a friendly reminder But let's avoid words like "ridiculous" and concentrate instead on why we have the concerns we do (on one side) or why we like how the game's looking so far (on the other)

I believe the general PC version, which I believe is the core before being translated into consoles, are where it has it's peak in graphics. It will be same graphics or slightly below that, if the systems can't handle the effort. They could use less parallax (did I spell that right?) and such also to minimize effort if needed.

And if the systems can handle the core graphics, then by all means.

Another thought I have. When SotN came to Dreamcast, it had "MORE". Also some things were cut out in PSX, some of which didn't fit due to time restrictions but also disk-space.

When it comes to this on for example Vita, if that system can't handle the size (which will be FULL this time due to own time restricts made up by the developers, and the company as a whole), there might be things that are cut, or crunched / packaged as it works better on Vita.

I wouldn't think too much about this however. The way things are handled today are as follows: We want this, is it possible to use this on all platforms? Answer: No, Ok! We can try something else. Ok! - And after a while the original ends up in all platforms. No dumb PLUS version or COMPLETE edition will ever be a thing.

Something that is cool however is how the different platform / systems deal the extra contant. Modding will be a thing for PC-users however. Perhaps exclusivly over Steam, if this are a feature..

I can call a post or topic ridiculous without insulting the person. That is why I said its not my intention to be rude. I was making it clear I thought the OP topic was ridiculous, not the person who posted. This being the Internet, I have to bluntly state my intent so as to avoid misunderstandings.

Sorry for any confused I caused. gunlord500 is right, I should have just avoid using Ridiculous in the first place. I should have just said I think its a bit nitpicky to be disappointed over aspects of graphical quality for a type of game I thought was extinct just a few years ago.

Regarding the discussion about processing power and how the game should be prepared, if VITA should dictate the game's overall power and graphics or something else, just to give some light to the whole discussion.

I'm not a developer, but thanks to someone at this forum (lovelydumpling ) i discovered a tumblr where a game developer explains how development of games works (THIS ONE) i also had some minimal knowledge before that, among other things i've been researching for my own fun. So, reuniting all my knowledge (that is not much, mind you), i wanted to point out some concerns some people raised here:

DEVELOPING FOR A LOT OF PLATAFORMS / WEAKER SYSTEM DICTACTES EVERYTHING

---

It doesn't work like that. First of all, we need to understand how they decide something called "lead plataform". When a game is going to be developed for a bunch of different systems / plataforms, the dev team normally choose ONE plataform to be the "leading one". Everything will be built based on that plataform in particular and all other plataforms have to be able to handle the same assets, and they will push as hard as possible. If that cannot be made, they will simply downgrade those assets to fit the other plataforms.
The Lead plataform is normally the one the dev team believes will have the highest sales for the game in particular. The PC is a special case, because computers can be upgraded and downgraded. If there is time, the PC version is optimized (the game will be able to run at lower specs) and that is made to reach higher audiences, since not everyone has a powerful computer.
The Demo requires i5, for instance, but i was able to run it perfectly at a i3 computer.
The minimal requirements of games for computers are also based on that. Mostly, the dev team looks for the DirectX. The game dev team decides what version of DirectX their game will require to run. A hardware capable of running that DirectX will be able to run the game, most of time.
We don't know what lead plataform Bloodstained is being developed for, but i suspect it is either PC or Xbox One, due to the handy Xinput support from the start.
Either way, there is absolutely NO time to change that at the moment. The lead plataform the dev team selected to develop Bloodstained will remain the same now until the game is finished.
I highly doubt the lead plataform is VITA, through. 

As i said up there, i'm not a developer, i'm just a curious, so, i may be wrong on all that.