Hot damn is Super Castlevania IV overrated

Henroid

chocobolicious wrote:

Because negative behavior is harder to support than positive behavior. Though admittedly all your 'support' has been simply opinion. I've not actually seen any factual comparison such as level layouts or actual verifiable mechanical gripes. Basically just, 'I think it sucks because it doesn't impress me' which is pretty difficult a platform to place an entire thread upon. It also sounds a lot like hating for the sake of it being a popular opinion, much like bringing up UN Squadron (Which was, in the end, a fantastic game and still fantastic.)

Okay but that works on praises for games too. It's all opinions.

I disagree with the "popular opinion" thing too. There's actual legit gripes clearly pointed out. I would argue it's easier to argue against negative opinions with sweeping generalizations / excusing / ignoring, which is the hip thing to do when it comes to contradictory opinions.

Dibbit

TheSonicRetard wrote:

I didn't pay attention to castlevania when it was new, so I don't know how my view can be labeled as sega-tinted. My impressions of the game are entirely based on modern reputation, and there are countless people who have told me, for years and years, that it's either one of the best in the series, or THE best in the series. I don't agree with either of those claims. As a tech demo, I might be more fogiving, but my main point of contention comes from not the game being bested by the PC Engine game, which came later, but by it being bested by Castlevania III, which ran on weaker hardware and was released years prior.

Actually, you did mention that in the OP, guess that didn't register.
So... those people were wrong, it's not the best Castlevania, but it sure was impressive when you saw it when it was new.
I guess that might stay with you. I know that I hold games dear that are objectively crap, but at the time.
(At the time I was probably dumber / less exposed to video-games)

Henroid

Zxerol wrote:

TheSonicRetard wrote:

Rorus Raz wrote:

I really don't see the point of a thread that is basically a polemic against one game. People are already getting short with each other.

But if this was a thread singing the praises of said game...?

It would be one thing if I came in here without any support for my claims. I think I've been thourough and detailed in my assessment. This shouldn't be a forum where all we do is praise games.

But why dude? This isn't a recent game where there's an active thread and you're discussing your opinions on the game or anything. This fucker is 20 years old. Why do you feel the need to start up a soapbox to tell everyone that, yes, this old ass game indeed does suck and everyone back in the day was totally wrong.

He just got the game. It has become relevant via recent events.

Rorus Raz

It turns out, TSR, that the manner in which one relays their message is often just as important as the message itself. Creating a general "Castlevania" thread in which you question the merits of a CV game will have a much more positive reception than a thread that says "This game is overrated." and you accuse people that like it of group-think, fanboyism, and so on.

Do I think your intent was to piss people off? No. Do I think this is a thread worth keeping afloat? No.