Lords Of Shadow 1 & 2 for the Wii U - Possible?

[gamerumble]

With Castlevania: Lords of Shadow Mirror of Fate coming to the 3DS, don't you think it's mandatory for Nintendo to release Lords of Shadow 1 and 2 for the Wii U? Is it possible for them to do so? As far as I know, these aren't exclusive titles.

[Koopzilla]

I would think so. Castlevania has traditionally done well on Nintendo systems, so it would make sense. Not to mention it would also make sense because we are getting the game that comes between the two. I wouldn't say it's mandatory though, video game companies often make odd decisions.

[KingBroly]

Why would you want Lords of Shadow 1? That game was terrible.

[Koopzilla]

Why would you want Lords of Shadow 1? That game was terrible.

Not saying I want it, just that i would make sense to put it out for Wii U. I have very little hope of the second one being any good either. But, I'll wait and see, since I didn't have any hope of the 3DS one being good after hearing it was being made by Mercury Steam. But, it is actually looking to be very good.

[gamerumble]

Why would you want Lords of Shadow 1? That game was terrible.

As said before, Lord of Shadows Mirror Of Fate will be on the 3DS. 1 and 2, I would guess is a connecting piece and I wouldn't want to buy a PS3 just for those games. It would be best in my situation if they will be on the Wii U.

[player value]

I would think so. Castlevania has traditionally done well on Nintendo systems, so it would make sense.

Sense and editors do not work together, in an other buisiness(car, phone, computer, clothes, movies) where people expect to make money it would but not when it comes to Nintendo home system! Konami and Capcom are the new SEGA, they hate our money and it's not going to change with the WiiU at all!
I would love it to but no hope.

[gtt]

Probably not.

And... why?

because I don't think they are willing to spend the money to port them. not until they think there will be significant return.

[Phant0mG4m3r]

No, because Kojima thinks Wii U is a "special case."
http://www.shacknews.com/article/72928/kojima-says-wii-u-a-special-case-requires-unique-software

[gtt]

No, because Kojima thinks Wii U is a "special case."
http://www.shacknews.com/article/72928/kojima-says-wii-u-a-special-case-requires-unique-software

which means shovel "side-story" gamez (the z is there on purpose)

[Mirr0rR3flection]

No, they won't bring them to the Wii"U". To them its not worth it.

[MoldyClay]

Of course it is possible. And money talks, and if the Wii U does well for 3rd parties, it will move to it. Wii did NOT work for 3rd parties, even though it sold a lot and was obviously in every home. The owners simply didn't want the games since they were either only into the motion games or Nintendo games, primarily.

Why would you want Lords of Shadow 1? That game was terrible.

Because you have way too high standards, evidently. Lords of Shadow was a great game and I loved every minute of it right down to completing the entire game 110%, including the DLC (which I got for free, because it was overpriced for what it is, and even I knew that).

Sense and editors do not work together, in an other buisiness(car, phone, computer, clothes, movies) where people expect to make money it would but not when it comes to Nintendo home system! Konami and Capcom are the new SEGA, they hate our money and it's not going to change with the WiiU at all!
I would love it to but no hope.

Oh man, remember when SEGA and Capcom totally support Nintendo consoles? Oh, but because it's not Sonic Generations on Wii/U or SSF4 on Wii, they must hate Nintendo.

The problem is the userbase on Nintendo platforms, not the companies going "LET'S AVOID THE MOST SOLD CONSOLE". From their experiences, most 3rd party games, regardless of quality, did not do that well on the Wii. They put out core efforts and they sold awful. And the biggest reason is the smaller core market on Nintendo platforms. A lot of the userbase is casual and the rest are Nintendo fanboys who say "good riddance" to 3rd parties and don't want their games because they aren't Nintendo and have unrealistic expectations of Wii versions of games and think that not having features the Wii can't do mean that they are always "gimping" it. The Wii was a bad console for the games that 3rd parties wanted to make, because it couldn't do them justice. It was a business decision that made sense. Even if they put their better games on Wii, I can almost guarantee a lot of them would've sold worse than the other consoles, even though the Wii had more owners.

No, because Kojima thinks Wii U is a "special case."
http://www.shacknews.com/article/72928/kojima-says-wii-u-a-special-case-requires-unique-software

You realize that Kojima didn't actually make Lords of Shadow and has nothing to do with Castlevania other than funding/getting Konami to let Mercury Stream make the game a Castlevania game, right?

And I am pretty sure he has nothing to do with the sequel or the 3DS game.

No, because Kojima thinks Wii U is a "special case."
http://www.shacknews.com/article/72928/kojima-says-wii-u-a-special-case-requires-unique-software

which means shovel "side-story" gamez (the z is there on purpose)

Or more importantly, games that make use of the console's controller instead of being a port of a game you're all butthurt about not having.

OH I DON'T WANT ORIGINAL GAMES. I WANT OLD GAMES FOR $60 I CAN BUY FOR $20 ON ANOTHER CONSOLE.

Everyone whines that people don't make good use of the Wii controller or the Wii U gamepad and then when someone's like IMMA MAKE A GAME UNIQUE TO THE SYSTEM. YOU KNOW. AN EXCLUSIVE (which everyone is pissed when it's NOT exclusive, like WiiFolder/BitBlock for example) everyone's like WAY TO NOT PORT OVER SOME OTHER GAME. NOW I MAD.

Grow up guys. Maybe he DOES mean making a side-story (you act like that's not all Kojima's games are right now), but wouldn't you rather a game that makes use of the controller in a unique way and shows the developer actually cared about what they were doing?

Or do you honestly want developers to just tack motion controls and a map or something retarded like ruining the interface of Batman on the gamepad, just so you don't feel left out?

Seems like you guys just want sh*tty ports with tacked on controls that weren't designed well.

[gtt]

Of course it is possible. And money talks, and if the Wii U does well for 3rd parties, it will move to it. Wii did NOT work for 3rd parties, even though it sold a lot and was obviously in every home. The owners simply didn't want the games since they were either only into the motion games or Nintendo games, primarily.

Why would you want Lords of Shadow 1? That game was terrible.

Because you have way too high standards, evidently. Lords of Shadow was a great game and I loved every minute of it right down to completing the entire game 110%, including the DLC (which I got for free, because it was overpriced for what it is, and even I knew that).

Sense and editors do not work together, in an other buisiness(car, phone, computer, clothes, movies) where people expect to make money it would but not when it comes to Nintendo home system! Konami and Capcom are the new SEGA, they hate our money and it's not going to change with the WiiU at all!
I would love it to but no hope.

Oh man, remember when SEGA and Capcom totally support Nintendo consoles? Oh, but because it's not Sonic Generations on Wii/U or SSF4 on Wii, they must hate Nintendo.

The problem is the userbase on Nintendo platforms, not the companies going "LET'S AVOID THE MOST SOLD CONSOLE". From their experiences, most 3rd party games, regardless of quality, did not do that well on the Wii. They put out core efforts and they sold awful. And the biggest reason is the smaller core market on Nintendo platforms. A lot of the userbase is casual and the rest are Nintendo fanboys who say "good riddance" to 3rd parties and don't want their games because they aren't Nintendo and have unrealistic expectations of Wii versions of games and think that not having features the Wii can't do mean that they are always "gimping" it. The Wii was a bad console for the games that 3rd parties wanted to make, because it couldn't do them justice. It was a business decision that made sense. Even if they put their better games on Wii, I can almost guarantee a lot of them would've sold worse than the other consoles, even though the Wii had more owners.

No, because Kojima thinks Wii U is a "special case."
http://www.shacknews.com/article/72928/kojima-says-wii-u-a-special-case-requires-unique-software

You realize that Kojima didn't actually make Lords of Shadow and has nothing to do with Castlevania other than funding/getting Konami to let Mercury Stream make the game a Castlevania game, right?

And I am pretty sure he has nothing to do with the sequel or the 3DS game.

No, because Kojima thinks Wii U is a "special case."
http://www.shacknews.com/article/72928/kojima-says-wii-u-a-special-case-requires-unique-software

which means shovel "side-story" gamez (the z is there on purpose)

Or more importantly, games that make use of the console's controller instead of being a port of a game you're all butthurt about not having.

OH I DON'T WANT ORIGINAL GAMES. I WANT OLD GAMES FOR $60 I CAN BUY FOR $20 ON ANOTHER CONSOLE.

Everyone whines that people don't make good use of the Wii controller or the Wii U gamepad and then when someone's like IMMA MAKE A GAME UNIQUE TO THE SYSTEM. YOU KNOW. AN EXCLUSIVE (which everyone is pissed when it's NOT exclusive, like WiiFolder/BitBlock for example) everyone's like WAY TO NOT PORT OVER SOME OTHER GAME. NOW I MAD.

Grow up guys. Maybe he DOES mean making a side-story (you act like that's not all Kojima's games are right now), but wouldn't you rather a game that makes use of the controller in a unique way and shows the developer actually cared about what they were doing?

Or do you honestly want developers to just tack motion controls and a map or something retarded like ruining the interface of Batman on the gamepad, just so you don't feel left out?

Seems like you guys just want sh*tty ports with tacked on controls that weren't designed well.

Hey, I'm with ya. I already have a gaming PC and ps3(eventually a ps4) for the titles I know won't be coming to the WiiU. I was just saying, that when someone says "unique experiences" or "special case" or "taking advantage of the unique opportunities" some other PR bullshit, that we all know what that means.

[KingBroly]

I'm sorry MoldyClay, but Lords of Shadow is a bad game with a bad story, bad characters, terrible storytelling, medicore combat, a subpar framerate to go with its' poor game mechanics and decisions.

To make matters worse, it's not a Castlevania game. And don't go off on this 'oh, you're angry cuz it's not Metroidvania or Castlevania 3' because that's not really why I say that. I say it's not a Castlevania game because there is no methodology behind its' game design. It's trying to take from other games without wondering what made its' predecessors what they were remembered for. How anyone can think THAT is a Castlevania game is beyond me. You want Castlevania? Go play Dark Souls and you will see what I'm talking about.

[J0RdAnN]

I enjoyed Lord of Shadows for what it was, it was my first experience with the GoW type game. I wouldn't be mad if 1&2 came to WiiU but then by your logic the Kingdom Hearts HD remakes should be on Wii U too..

[Devil_Rising]

Possible. But in my own personal mind, who cares? LoS sucks, and so naturally I couldn't give a crap less about 2, or the 3DS one either. The CV series, as much as I've loved nearly every installment (minus the PS2 and "of Sorrow" entries) of the once great series....ever since this LoS "reboot", not to mention that abortion of a "fighting game" on Wii, the franchise is pretty much dead to me.

Maybe someday, it'll pull a Dracula and come back from the grave, better than ever. But considering how Konami is these days, I highly doubt that.........

[MoldyClay]

I'm sorry MoldyClay, but Lords of Shadow is a bad game with a bad story, bad characters, terrible storytelling, medicore combat, a subpar framerate to go with its' poor game mechanics and decisions.

To make matters worse, it's not a Castlevania game. And don't go off on this 'oh, you're angry cuz it's not Metroidvania or Castlevania 3' because that's not really why I say that. I say it's not a Castlevania game because there is no methodology behind its' game design. It's trying to take from other games without wondering what made its' predecessors what they were remembered for. How anyone can think THAT is a Castlevania game is beyond me. You want Castlevania? Go play Dark Souls and you will see what I'm talking about.

The original games were remembered solely for being hard and spamming you with Universal monsters, and being all about TIMING. Then it became about Super Metroid with RPG elements. Lords of Shadow was neither of these, so that's all I can say about it not being what they were remembered for.

I'm not saying it was much of a Castlevania, but it was more of one than the post SotN games, unless we want to suggest Castlevania II was THE game to define the series.

For what it set out to do, being a new timeline and trying to be a 3D whip game, I thought it did fine. I had fun playing it, I liked Gabriel (until the DLC) and I didn't care for Zobek, but I liked Patrick Stuart. Yes, the characters were crap (implying any of the CV characters are any good), the story is a retread of generic predictability and the combat, for the most part, was button mashing (and yeah, it borrowed from multiple different games and merged them together), but I think people are losing sight of what makes a game fun if those ruined it for them. It's a game, and mediocre in every aspect or not, it was still fun, to me. It would be loads of fun to play with WM+ probably, though tiring most likely.

Obviously not everyone is going to like the game, but it isn't a bad game (or a great game) in any way. You just didn't enjoy it. That's your own problem, though. Most people who dislike it, however, dislike it because it's not the old games and only that. And then you have "IT'S A GoW RIP-OFF" because they apparently have a better idea for how a 3D Castlevania should work since 64/Legacy of Darkness, Lament of Innocence, Curse of Darkness and Lords of Shadow are all wrong.

If you want to be perfectly technical, the 3D Castlevanias on PS2 were actually similar to the 2D games, but everyone forgets/writes those off because "LOL 3D CASTLEVANIA".

Possible. But in my own personal mind, who cares? LoS sucks, and so naturally I couldn't give a crap less about 2, or the 3DS one either. The CV series, as much as I've loved nearly every installment (minus the PS2 and "of Sorrow" entries) of the once great series....ever since this LoS "reboot", not to mention that abortion of a "fighting game" on Wii, the franchise is pretty much dead to me.

Maybe someday, it'll pull a Dracula and come back from the grave, better than ever. But considering how Konami is these days, I highly doubt that.........

Konami *has* become idiotic as of late, but you're letting one game ruin the series for you? And the Wii Fighting game was by the same guy who made all the Metroidvania games, so that was before the reboot. You're calling the series dead, and next to no games have actually come out since the "turning point". Lords of Shadow ends with LoS2, so Mercury Stream is probably not doing anything after 2 and the 3DS game (which I honestly don't see how someone can dislike yet).

[Devil_Rising]

*ahem* I said the series is dead to ME. Specifically. Other people can enjoy this LoS garbage all they want. I don't care for the story, direction, etc. of this "reboot", thus I will not be partaking in it. And I know who was in charge of that Wii piece of blarg. He was also in charge of the PS2 ones I hated, and Aria and Dawn of Sorrow, which while they had good gameplay, I just didn't care for.

So I guess it's actually fair to say that I haven't liked any CV games really since the other GBA ones, and that Wii Ware remake. Either way, it's still dead to me. So I'm sad.

[MoldyClay]

*ahem* I said the series is dead to ME. Specifically. Other people can enjoy this LoS garbage all they want. I don't care for the story, direction, etc. of this "reboot", thus I will not be partaking in it. And I know who was in charge of that Wii piece of blarg. He was also in charge of the PS2 ones I hated, and Aria and Dawn of Sorrow, which while they had good gameplay, I just didn't care for.

So I guess it's actually fair to say that I haven't liked any CV games really since the other GBA ones, and that Wii Ware remake. Either way, it's still dead to me. So I'm sad.

I saw what you said. That's why I said 'let one game ruin it for you'. The dead part was continuing that. Had nothing to do with anything else.

[Hamr]

Obviously not everyone is going to like the game, but it isn't a bad game (or a great game) in any way.

No, he is right. Lords of Shadow is a certifiably bad game -- even aside from the pathetic difficulty levels, the terribad camera that wobbles even when standing still and is even worse in motion, the filler stages, the abundance of annoying QTEs, and the hilarious implementation of DLC. Technically speaking, there are certain unbreakable pacts that exist between player and software: the link between controller input and action output, the bond between what you are seeing and what is happening in the game, and the unspoken, sacred agreement that the coding itself will not work against the player.

Lords of Shadow violates those pacts.

There are parts of the game that make me question whether MercurySteam has ever even heard of QA testing.

Framerate: Atrocious. Maxed at 30 fps with extreme amounts of slowdown because it cannot even maintain that. Ridiculous input lag. Copious screen-tearing. Game will randomly develop a tendency to freeze every time an enemy dies.

Collision detection: Borked as hell. Gabriel manages to slip off platforms he is clearly standing on top of while and at the same time takes damage from ridiculous, enormous invisible enemy hitboxes that manage to hit him before some weapons are even swung in his direction.

Bugs: Outright glitches range from fusing with walls, becoming trapped in [url= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYTwkZiD4dA]uncancellable animations, getting stuck in floor, and falling forever. Not to mention the infamous bug that they had to patch because it would corrupt and delete your entire save — barrel of fun that one.

One's ability to find LOS 'fun' is less a reflection of the game's quality as it is of one's personal threshold for excruciatingly poor programming.

[KingBroly]

Lords of Shadow never hits 30 fps. It ranges between 20 and 25 fps, and that's a deliberate design choice by the developers. They went for that 'cinematic standard' of 24 fps.

The storytelling is abysmal. Telling you between chapters through wordy monologues by Patrick Stewart. You're told of things happening, but you NEVER see those things happen in-game. No special powers, no visual differences, nothing. Not to mention that I literally said to myself 'Patrick Stewart, please shut up.' You really have to screw up to get that to happen. In terms of storytelling, it falls below a game I will not mention, but I'm sure you've heard of it. At least in that game, you're given some kind of visual indicator, which is something that is beneficial to the medium. The storytelling in Lords of Shadow is that bad.

The amount of damage you do with the same attack is also inconsistent, in addition to not having a visual indicator that you're actually dealing damage. If you hit Light Attack 3 times in a row, you could deal 0, 18, and 3 in that order if unblocked and all connect. That's terrible. And the fact is that it happens in every single encounter. And the only reason you know this happens is because they give you the option to turn enemy health bars on. Otherwise, you wouldn't even know you're dealing damage at all because enemies don't stagger from your hits at all.

And then you have the nitpicks that just come up over and over again. Combined with the major problems, it's a bad game. And this doesn't even tell you the problem about the game's pacing, which is also bad.

[Hamr]

Lords of Shadow never hits 30 fps. It ranges between 20 and 25 fps, and that's a deliberate design choice by the developers. They went for that 'cinematic standard' of 24 fps.

Ha, I am sure that is what MercurySteam claims in their BS PR, but the actual performance tests do not lie. The range is a hell of a lot bigger than that, topping out in the low 30s and bottoming out in cutscenes at 15(!!) fps.

The storytelling is abysmal. Telling you between chapters through wordy monologues by Patrick Stewart. You're told of things happening, but you NEVER see those things happen in-game.

Speaking of the terrible storytelling, I like the part where the game ends and has full closure, and then the last scene abruptly jumps forward in time to a point where a bunch of major, out-of-nowhere plot developments have occurred, and there was no way to have predicted them because they (and the events leading up to them) occurred completely off-screen in the crummy DLC levels. No Picard-monologue, no creepy Gabriel self-narration, no context, no nothin'.

Spoiler:

No! said Gabriel, I must kill the demons!

No Gabriel, said Patrick Stewart, you are the demons.

And then Gabriel was a Dracula.

[KingBroly]

Now that I can explain, because it's probably the only thing I can explain:

Spoiler:

Wearers of the Lords of Shadow Mask ascend to Heaven while leaving behind their Shadow Self. This was discussed at the first major boss fight. So Gabriel becoming Dracula isn't all that shocking. But the futuristic part REALLY ticked me off

And then the DLC basically retconned it for no point whatsoever.

[Devil_Rising]

I'll take "Incomprehensible Plotlines" for $1000, Alex.

What is "The outcome of letting Kojima take over a franchise".

Correct!

[KingBroly]

Except that Kojima had no role in writing the game like he does with Metal Gear. He was merely a producer. I doubt he had any real involvement at all, and was just seen as a figurehead to sell the product through peoples' hearts and minds.

[MoldyClay]

Obviously not everyone is going to like the game, but it isn't a bad game (or a great game) in any way.

No, he is right. Lords of Shadow is a certifiably bad game -- even aside from the pathetic difficulty levels, the terribad camera that wobbles even when standing still and is even worse in motion, the filler stages, the abundance of annoying QTEs, and the hilarious implementation of DLC. Technically speaking, there are certain unbreakable pacts that exist between player and software: the link between controller input and action output, the bond between what you are seeing and what is happening in the game, and the unspoken, sacred agreement that the coding itself will not work against the player.

Lords of Shadow violates those pacts.

There are parts of the game that make me question whether MercurySteam has ever even heard of QA testing.

Framerate: Atrocious. Maxed at 30 fps with extreme amounts of slowdown because it cannot even maintain that. Ridiculous input lag. Copious screen-tearing. Game will randomly develop a tendency to freeze every time an enemy dies.

Collision detection: Borked as hell. Gabriel manages to slip off platforms he is clearly standing on top of while and at the same time takes damage from ridiculous, enormous invisible enemy hitboxes that manage to hit him before some weapons are even swung in his direction.

Bugs: Outright glitches range from fusing with walls, becoming trapped in [url= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYTwkZiD4dA]uncancellable animations, getting stuck in floor, and falling forever. Not to mention the infamous bug that they had to patch because it would corrupt and delete your entire save — barrel of fun that one.

One's ability to find LOS 'fun' is less a reflection of the game's quality as it is of one's personal threshold for excruciatingly poor programming.

For the record, DLC was never intended. MercuryStream thought the game was going to do bad and then Konami demanded they make DLC, so that's why it was so terrible. They have gone on record apologizing for the way it turned out because they literally had to rush it and it came out nowhere near as good as they had hoped. That's why the DLC makes absolutely no sense and isn't really that good. I only enjoyed it because I paid nothing for it and I enjoyed doing the crappy puzzles and boss fight. Everyone bitched about the boss fight being IMPOSSIBLE and it took me about an hour and a half at most to do on Professional, so I don't know what the problem was.

I experienced *none* of those glitches or the save corruption thing you mentioned (I own it on 360, not PS3). I got the game the Christmas after it launched, played through it in a few weeks and didn't play again until this year when the DLC went on sale.

Literally, I never had an issue with it "freezing" when playing or a majority of the issues you mentioned EXCEPT Gabriel falling off cliffs for no reason. I had that happen a lot. Respawn and slide back off and die. Then over and over a few times. Yes. Experienced that one.

Anyway, not sure what the beef was with difficulty levels or QTEs. Those don't necessarily make it bad. And I personally have no issues with framerate unless it's actually slowing down and unplayable, and I never experienced that in LoS. You make it sound like you were playing the Silent Hill HD Collection.

So yeah, I never had the code fighting against me. Not sure if because I played on 360 or what.

I'll take "Incomprehensible Plotlines" for $1000, Alex.

What is "The outcome of letting Kojima take over a franchise".

Correct!

You're like the people blaming Team Ninja for Other M's story/Samus.

Kojima didn't make Lords of Shadow. He just helped them. He didn't write the story or any of that.

Lords of Shadow never hits 30 fps. It ranges between 20 and 25 fps, and that's a deliberate design choice by the developers. They went for that 'cinematic standard' of 24 fps.

The storytelling is abysmal. Telling you between chapters through wordy monologues by Patrick Stewart. You're told of things happening, but you NEVER see those things happen in-game. No special powers, no visual differences, nothing. Not to mention that I literally said to myself 'Patrick Stewart, please shut up.' You really have to screw up to get that to happen. In terms of storytelling, it falls below a game I will not mention, but I'm sure you've heard of it. At least in that game, you're given some kind of visual indicator, which is something that is beneficial to the medium. The storytelling in Lords of Shadow is that bad.

The amount of damage you do with the same attack is also inconsistent, in addition to not having a visual indicator that you're actually dealing damage. If you hit Light Attack 3 times in a row, you could deal 0, 18, and 3 in that order if unblocked and all connect. That's terrible. And the fact is that it happens in every single encounter. And the only reason you know this happens is because they give you the option to turn enemy health bars on. Otherwise, you wouldn't even know you're dealing damage at all because enemies don't stagger from your hits at all.

And then you have the nitpicks that just come up over and over again. Combined with the major problems, it's a bad game. And this doesn't even tell you the problem about the game's pacing, which is also bad.

Most of these arguments seem to be technical things, implying that it's a badly put together game, which I can accept.

But I had fun playing the game, and didn't experience a majority of the problems, gameplay-wise, that you're both mentioning. Or didn't notice them, rather. And I didn't pay a whole lot of attention to how much damage I was doing. Didn't really care. And like I said, I apparently don't notice framerate unless it is awful or side-by-side a better running version.

Not gonna argue about the story. It wasn't well told at all. I still didn't hate the story. It was just badly conveyed and missing lots of things.