This is sort of a rant-debate thread about Castlevania 2: Simon's Quest. Most people now who aren't over 30 know of this game through AVGN, and their opinion was formed purely based on his reviews. (And if you love video games, don't mind vulgar language, and don't know Angry Video Game Nerd, you should check him out.) So here's a rant to open up me wanting to hear your opinions on this game.
In 1987, it was a confusing game. The first Castlevania was linear, simple, challenging, and fun. Castlevania 2 suddenly brought items other than weapons, puzzles, dungeons, NPCs that spoke, and buyable whip upgrades. We all know about the crystals, the garlic, the bosses, and the useless NPCs. But what do we have that they didn't in 1987? Countless text and video walkthroughs, guides, secrets, FAQs, reviews, rants, emulators, save states, ROM hacking, and all of this available within ten seconds of searching.
The biggest reason to hate the game is "it's too cryptic and hard and not straight-forward enough." Well, yes, it was a problem, until we got the Internet. Personally, I knew the answer to every puzzle and how to get every weapon before I ever even played the game, because it was talked about so often. The bosses, yeah, they're weak and optional, save for Dracula. Castlevania 1 had better end bosses. But Dracula? Easier than you can imagine to beat without ever taking a hit. Yes, I mean the second form. Castlevania 2 Dracula, everyone complains about the exploitable Sacred Fire glitch. Castlevania 1, his "impossible" second form: exact same glitch is possible with Holy Water.
Zelda 2: The Adventure of Link is a game many people love. Except it's very similar to Castlevania 2. Changed the type of game, NPCs that are useless, optional bosses, cryptic and non-linear, and just like the garlic, what is the "Spell" spell for anyways? (Don't answer that, it's a rhetorical question.) Death Mountain is one of the hardest parts of the entire game, and it shows up way too early. Aside from having hard bosses, a different way to upgrade weapons, and a different map system, it's not dissimilar.
Is either game bad? No. Am I telling you AVGN is wrong? No. Does Castlevania 2 get too much hate now in 2011? Most definitely. Most of the people who complain about it are young, and grew up on games that are way too easy on the puzzles, such as Call of Duty (a game I like, but is also one of the easiest shooters). So, share your opinions on the matter, this is free to both long rants and short responses.
This is Egoraptor's Schpeal on the game. But I had played on this website called Console Calssix. Where you download a free trial, and you can play any NES, Atari, and Coleco game for free. You can get a pro account for $60 a year. But before watching this video, I played it. And it was terrible. I think Egoraptors' take on it is much better than AVGNs'. But mind the language, Egoraptor curses as much as someone breathes, pretty much.
Zelda 2: The Adventure of Link is a game many people love. Except it's very similar to Castlevania 2
Zelda 2 isn't a jumbled up, grey mess, doesn't require a lot of back and forth, and is insanely hard. You don't have to go to Death Mountain when it pops up (that's proven in your saying of it's non-linear, which it is non-linear). NPC's give you spells, others heal you and refill your magic, not exactly useless to me. Others are your way forward, all you have to do is talk to them. The two games are wildly different.
