Top
330°
8.0

Eurogamer: Castlevania: Lords of Shadow Review

Lords of Shadow is generous to a fault, bulking out its already lengthy campaign with fetch-quests and fiddly asides. While the 2D Castlevanias offer genuine intricacy, this game often resorts to padding – locking gates or busting door mechanisms a few too many times, and reusing a handful of its other tricks a little too regularly as well. In fact, it's one of those rare games which would be better for – whisper it – being a little shorter: Konami's medieval ramble is already sufficiently roomy without a handful of moments that are so clearly thrown in just to add a bit of time to the clock.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
The story is too old to be commented.
callahan092877d ago

"it's one of those rare games which would be better for – whisper it – being a little shorter"

Uh oh. I'm still getting the game because it looks awesome, but if they think it's *rare* for games to be too long, then I fear for myself, because I think nearly every game is too long. I prefer a distilled experience that I can go back to and enjoy again and again. Most games these days have a lot of filler that I just feel bored going through as if its a chore to get to the good stuff, and I end up never playing the game again because I don't feel like experiencing those parts again and because the over-long length kinda wears me out on the whole game. Many of my favorite games of all time can be beaten in a single session or just a couple of sessions.

Lucreto2877d ago

You would have hated Suikoden V as it takes 13 hours of play before the good stuff starts.

I prefer longer games to get my €40 out of it. I like the single player games so I need a lot of content.

Cloudberry2877d ago (Edited 2877d ago )

.
This time, it's too long, lol.

I don't mind if it's too long against the standard single player game walk-through.

JokesOnYou2877d ago (Edited 2877d ago )

"I fear for myself, because I think nearly every game is too long"

-Wow, really I feel just the opposite this gen, I even thought Reach ended to soon, I mean I love the story but at the end I found myself just wishing for about 1 more hour= 1 more stage to really put up an intense fight right before your desperate final stand(loved the last stage).

Alan Wake and so many other great games, including GOW3 which seemed really short to me, maybe some of this *special DLC is would have made alot of these games length feel perfect this gen, but whatever I've enjoyed alot of great games this gen as they are but almost all of them were a bit short imo, so I think I'll take my time and enjoy Castlevania...been waiting for a longer AAA SP experience, since rarely do I play them more than once or twice once I beat 'em.

JOY

The Maxx2877d ago

Always leave your audience wanting more.... ;)

callahan092877d ago (Edited 2877d ago )

See I thought Alan Wake was totally awesome, and I loved the core game there, the story was interesting too. But I definitely thought the game was way too long. It took me 16 hours to beat. I think that's just too long for that kind of game. I wound up feeling like it was getting repetitive. The only fight I liked in the entire last half of the game was the one on the stage. That was a kick-ass segment. But most of the stuff thereafter just seemed like the same fights over and over. Everything in the second half of the game that *wasn't* a fight was super-cool, but once it pit you back into those woods and had you fighting again, I just started to feel like I'd been there, done that and wanted to move on. If it hadn't been filled with repetitive portions, then I'd have gone back and played it again to experience total awesomeness again. But the game wore me out on its formula, so I haven't gone back yet.

I feel that it's better for a game to offer a distilled experience that's awesome at every moment than to just be long for the same of being long.

I love a game with serious shelf-life. A game that can keep me happy for a long time, that doesn't happen to be something I go through once and then just move on to the next thing. I want my money's worth for the long haul. I want it to be a game that I go back to over and over and over again years down the line. Something that isn't just one single 20-hour session that I play once and never again, but instead something that's maybe a 4 or 5 hour session that I go through 100 times throughout my life. Like Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, that's a great example of it. Like Super Mario World. Like Left 4 Dead. Each campaign takes about an hour. I must have gone through each of them 50 times or more. If they had been 5 hours each, I probably never would have played them again after the first time I beat them. They're a perfectly succinct, distilled experience with no filler. You can get in, have fun, and get out. And then I feel the need to do it again. And again. But almost nothing fits that bill.

Now, there are exceptions. There are plenty of times when a long game is just the perfect thing. Dragon Quest IX is a recent example for me. I've got over 220 hours into it and still haven't even bothered to beat the main story yet. It's a game that thrives on giving you the most out of one save file, one beginning that you just take with you forever, therefore a long playing time is very important. But not every game needs to be that.

TheLig322877d ago

How in the world did it take you 16 hours to beat Alan Wake. I collected every page, and thermos, and it took me 8.5 hours.

grailly2877d ago

I'm with callahan on this, so many games these days are way too long! especially rockstar games, and it's too bad, GTA and RDR have so many awesome moment, but I just got have trouble getting through them because of the very long, boring and repetitive middle parts.

I appreciate games that feel like they were all planned out from the start, Portal and braid are good examples of this.
I'm not saying long games are bad, far from it, but every type of game should have a fitting length. I still want to spend hours discovering GT5 and fallout: NV

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2877d ago
OneSneakyMofo2877d ago

Eurogamer and Edge - giving out 8s because the PS3 version is superior, looool.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2877d ago
Lucreto2877d ago

Can't wait to play it. It will be my first Castlevania game I have played.

I am still waiting for the European Special edition to be put on sale.

LightofDarkness2877d ago

If you're feeling it, and you enjoy retro games, I would recommend trying out some of the back catalogue. Get Castlevania, Castlevania III, Super Castlevania IV, Rondo of the Blood and Symphony of the Night. It is a creamy slice of gaming excellence (especially SOTN).

despair2877d ago

Going by eurogamer standards, this 8 is really a 9. And saying an enjoyable game is too long.....yea.