Non-spoiler CotM2 review/impressions

I'm still on the first episode, so I haven't made up my mind yet, but I've been surprised by how different each character plays so far. It's one thing to see it and another to actually experience it.

By the way, any inkling of how it's performing sales-wise, so far, purifyweirdshard  ?

Thanks for the non-spoilers. A sentiment I've heard out there is that this will be like Mega Man 10 compared to Mega Man 9, in the sense that, despite continuing on a retro revival, the reach will lessen because most people (i.e. general audience beyond hardcore Castlevania fans) will feel they already got enough of what they wanted for a "novel" retro experience with the first Curse of the Moon. Not sure how true or not this statement will turn out to be.

What I find funny is the notion that this is simply a "classic" Castlevania.

The original CotM was clearly inspired by Castlevania 3: Dracula's Curse, but that game was something of an outlier, in that it allowed you swap between two characters. It was only two, though, not four. No other 2D Castlevania - linear or otherwise - had this feature until Dawn of Sorrow, which upped the ante to three characters.

But unlike the Castlevania games that allowed character swapping, Curse of the Moon and its sequel in particular are completely designed around this feature.  Thus, it's not just a throwback; it's  an evolution. I don't remember playing an old-school Castlevania where you had to navigate a level by swapping between 7 different characters, giving you an incentive to think about when you should use each.

I don't know if it's ever been done before, but I've definitely never seen it done in Castlevania; and God, even though the graphics "look" retro, there's no way we would have seen anything like them on the NES/famicom.

They may well "feel" nostalgic, but these are brand new games, pure and simple.

dareka and purifyweirdshard All good points. And yeah, I was referring to that Venture Beat review, first and foremost. (Is it weird that Mega Man 10 left more of an impact on me than 9? While 9 may or may not have had a few more novel gimmicks, 10 somehow felt more ambitious/creative in its motifs and the visuals were more late NES than early NES.) I also noticed that CotM2 announcements weren't getting forum comments on sites like Anime News Network, though. (Albeit, that's not its target audience.)

I think design-wise, Castlevania III isn't very well understood by the media at large. What Castlevania III did was design a game around the idea that you could play and beat it as Trevor, same as Simon in Castlevania 1. That was goal number one, above the idea idea of branching paths or multiple characters. And you can quite comfortably do so with some practice. What the choice of Grant, Sypha, and Alucard brought to the table was options that "rewarded" you for trying different paths (you'd encounter a new helper character), changed up the built-in level-design experience, and allowed for difficulty variance. Grant's jumping/running agility and ability to climb walls meant easier platforming and the ability to sneak around certain obstacles (at the cost of attack strength). Sypha's magic meant decimating enemies and taking certain hazards (like rushing water or bone pillar emplacements) out of the equation in multi-hazard scenarios (at the cost of defensive endurance and the requirement to carefully collect and hold onto certain spells). Alucard's triple-shot could at times be useful for taking out enemies from angles without wasting hearts where they couldn't touch you, but his real strength came from the bat transformation, which makes tricky sections much easier to cross over in ways that even Grant can't. (At the cost of a larger target who requires hearts like crazy to be fully useful.) What's amazing is it did all this in a way that feels natural and unobtrusive. You almost don't even realize how much you're mixing up the gameplay experience, and you keep revisiting the game and finding it fun. The fact that there is a consequential choice of choosing each character in terms of what levels you explore and how you master them, and getting a different ending, makes the return trips meaningful.

I've played through Curse of the Moon with the mult-characters, but never got around to finishing Zangetsu's solo run. I was about a level away from doing so when difficult things in my life, including a Windows 10 update that more or less destroyed my computer, interrupted. I have a long to-do list with gaming, and finishing CotM and playing through CotM2 are on them; unfortunately, there are also a lot of complicated responsibilities I'm dealing with. But I just wanted to state something a little controversial in that, playing CotM1 and Castlevania III back-to-back, there's something not the same about CotM1. It's a smoother experience that feels more polished, but something about Castlevania III feels more "substantial." I haven't figured out yet if it's the difficulty level, the color palette, the too-obvious nostalgia nods (Gebel's bat transformation), the soundtrack, or if it's more to do with the core game design differences I noted above. Often, I think not sharing a life bar and getting so many chances and advantages without much disadvantage (Alfred's ice spell! Yikes!) sort of makes it feel like a game that's begging to be completed versus conquered. (Though it still has its significant challenges!) It sounds like COtM2 took more care in that area, so that'll be a good chance to see if that was what bugged me. And I use the term "bugged" lightly, because I really enjoyed my time with CotM a lot. A small thing worth noting: being able to swap characters faster is one of the first big improvements CotM made, but that was likely a technical update due to better hardware. Also worth consideration: I think CVIII's branching map versus CotM's branching levels is more exciting and rewarding from a total game experience standpoint. While seeing new parts of levels, and being rewarded by getting power-ups or avoiding tough spots is neat, making the choice of having access to an entirely new level trumps it, IMO.

I do think, in the back of my mind, there is a challenge CotM 1 & 2 face for me, which is unfair. I think there's a part of me that really wants a "Castlevania" game that builds off the 16-bit era in a really strong way, and this is a new franchise still establishing itself that is focusing on building up the 8-bit era.

Just finished the final chapter and all I can say is that the game was a blast. I really enjoyed how the game forces you to think about your choices before committing very much like the CV of days past with an audio and visual design that actually works.

Having played and beaten all 3 Bloodstained games now, part of me wishes for IGA to just ditch the 2.5D approach, at least for the next game, and to use and to build upon the assets created from CotM 1-3 (yeah I'm counting on a sequel) to create his first faux 8-bit Igavania with a 100% focus on fun and atmosphere.