>/vr/ hate Castlevania 4 and X for SNES >/vr/ love Castlevania

>>4223271
Contrarians.

>all of /vr/ is one person

>/vr/ hate Dracula X
Says who? I think it's objectively better than Rondo of Shit.

>>4223284
He says because he's never played Rondo which aside from some graphical effects and some sound effects is superior in every way.

>>4223271
CV2 isnt shit, its translation is shit. It's not the best game but its not garbage.


64 is fun man

>>4223310
>64 is fun man
No it' not
Haven't you see AVGN?

Contrarians. And memers.

>what's the difference

>>4223271
>/vr/ love Castlevania 2 and 64
Yes but no...

SOTN > old retard vanias

>>4223271
As far as I know I'm the only one around here who really likes SQ and people usually call me weird for it.

N64 is probably the same situation with someone else.

I think with the other CVs the fans get into fights trying to convince others their choice is right so that leads to these huge flamewar threads.

I get why a lot of people didn't like Simon's Quest but I'm not interested in changing minds so it never turns into a big hubbub like it does over Rondo, Bloodlines, Super and Symphony.

>>4223283
This.

I dislike Castlevania 4 because its slow and kinda easy compared to the rest. I like Simon's Quest because it's experimental compared to the rest.

Easy.

>>4223327
>I can only parrot eceleb opinions. You have never played the game for yourself

The only one who actually hates CV 4 is Australia-kun, overall people like it, with some people saying it's not the best ever because of the "easy" meme (implying Rondo and Bloodlines aren't also easy, but you know how it goes, people always start arguing about whether Rondo or IV is harder, always the same).
But yeah, hate? Nah. Maybe it's not the favorite of everyone, but IV is far from being hated. SOTN gets far more shit. Basically, the more popular a game is, the more contrarians it'll get, this is always like this on the internet.
And I actually don't think a lot of people LOVE the 64 one, but many people acknowledge it's not even as bad as a lot of people (who most likely emulated the game for the first time recently) say, it's a competent 5th gen action-adventure game, it's not perfect, but has a lot of memorable elements that can make it likeable for people.
Anyway, Castlevania in general is a sensible subject. It's a very good series and everyone wants to impose their favorite over the rest. It just means it's a series with lots of quality entries.

I like Castlevania 64. Never even realized it was so unpopular until much later.
Castlevania 2 is not good and never was.

>>4223467
Simon's Quest isn't bad, but the fact that you have to eventually realize that you're going to throw holy water on every tile in the game is pretty lame.

>>4223271
The only actual good game you posted was Vampire's Kiss. 4, 2 and 64 suck monkey fuck.

Just wait until Bloodstained comes out.
We're going to see a massive uptick in people claiming that SOTN of the worst game ever, that no one ever liked Castlevania to begin with, that IGA shouldn't be considered a game developer at all, and that the only good Castlevania game was the first one.

>>4224064
That already happens here. /vr/ has a ton of SotN haters, they blame it for killing the classic formula.

>>4223304
Nobody that's played both would make that statement. He's also not without merit. Dracula X made the game not a joke and the level design is just far better. There are many more meaningful jumps, enemy placement doesn't encourage barreling through a level hitting enemies as they appear, and brings the controls more in line with, well the rest of the series.

As for which is better? I'm not going to get into it. But disregarding somebodies opinion outright is a bit much