PCEngineFans.com - The PC Engine and TurboGrafx-16 Community Forum
NEC PC-Engine/SuperGrafx => PC Engine/SuperGrafx Discussion => Topic started by: Magister on February 18, 2017, 05:40:56 AM
Title: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Magister on February 18, 2017, 05:40:56 AM
Up until a few weeks, I owned every Castlevania game made EXCEPT Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo. I even own the arcade machine Haunted Castle, as painful as that game is. I guess the reason I was in no hurry to get my hands on Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo was either the price it was going for or that my Turbo Duo was broke for quite some time and had just forgotten about it.
After all this time, I finally got my hands on a copy and couldn't wait to play it. For years, all I heard was how much better it was compared to the SNES version. It was harder, the music was better, it was just an overall better game.
Well, I will say the music is better for sure. When you pit a CD up against a Cart, I would hope the music would be better on the CD. As far as being harder, I thought the game was too easy. Hell, I beat Dracula on the first try. The only thing I found difficult in the game was the damn collapsing bridge on Stage 7. It's the same BS they pull on the last stage of Haunted Castle. Almost impossible to not get hit. The secret areas weren't hard to find. I found myself going through the Alternate routes before the normal ones.
I'm not trying to compare the two games since they are almost completely different. But playing through Dracula X first and then going through Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo expecting it to be the same, just more of a challenge, I was bummed out. Love both games though.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Michirin9801 on February 18, 2017, 06:41:21 AM
Rondo is one of the only Castlevania games I've managed to beat, so I know for sure it's one of the easiest in the series, that said though I think it's the best in the series, it's got the most satisfying gameplay, the best level-design, some of the best graphics, I love the semi-linear structure of the game with the alternate paths, it's an all-around great time! I'm glad it was my introduction to the TurboGrafx...
As for Dracula X on the SNES, that was my first Castlevania game, I've played the heck out of it and I'm VERY nostalgic towards it, I can get to Dracula, but I just could never beat him, the gameplay is a little slower and more stiff, the graphics are, well, better in the first stage, a little unremarkable in the rest of the game in comparison to Rondo, but still really well-drawn, although it lacks some frames of animation... It's certainly A LOT harder than Rondo, and I personally think that it's the perfect 16 bit sequel to the original Castlevania on the NES, take that as you may... Also, the level design doesn't really hold a candle to Rondo's... But you see, the one thing I like better in SNES Dracula X than in Rondo of Blood is the sound and music... I've made it no secret that I'm very biased towards the Super Nintendo sound, I think it's the best-sounding game system there ever was (and most likely there ever will be), and Dracula X is one of the more impressive-sounding games on the system, the sheer quality of the samples being used is something else, and there was pretty much no loss in composition detail in the transition from CD music to the SNES, but the SNES somehow managed to sound considerably more hype and bombastic than the CD counterpart... You know how many times I've listened to the CD soundtrack outside of the game? Not even once... As for the SNES version? There was a time that I've listened to it almost every day, it gives me the chills and puts an ear-to-ear nostalgia grin on my face~
Of course this is all a matter of taste and one's own biases, but yeah, Rondo is better in pretty much every way, save for the sound and music which I like better in SNES Dracula X...
All that said though, my favourite version of Richter's Theme is this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hK9CsmhW6-w Which was arranged as a PCE chiptune ;3 (What can I say? I'm just a huge fan of chiptunes)
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Black Tiger on February 18, 2017, 06:44:09 AM
XX is more difficult to play because the gameplay and stage design/enemy placement is broken. You can get clipped and be juggled to death from full HP without any control over it. The designers didn't understand the game it was based on, nor the game they made.
You also haven't experienced the full game of Rondo if you only played through once. Some stages are more challenging than others.
If you were in no hurry to buy the best Castlevania game because of price, how the hell did you wind up with Haunted Castle, the 68K game, etc?
Quote
Dracula X is one of the more impressive-sounding games on the system, the sheer quality of the samples being used is something else, and there was pretty much no loss in composition detail in the transition from CD music to the SNES, but the SNES somehow managed to sound considerably more hype and bombastic than the CD counterpart...
XX's music may be above average as far as typical SNES sound issues go, but most tracks still have lots notes that are off, missing instruments, a noticeable number of derpy sounds, whistling artifacts, etc. Lots of it transitioned well, because it's simulating the simulated instruments of the original, but almost every track from Rondo is kind of broken or distorted one way or another.
The sound effects in XX suffered the most, using the usual methods to save on space, so that the music didn't could be as intact as it is. The few that there are were sped up and trimmed down so that they no longer sound natural and reverb and echoing stretch out several of them. Separate from the overall quality, it feels weird playing the game with most of the voices and sounds absent. The game kicking things off with Dracula chuckling as he forces out a long drawn out bubbly fart was not a good sign, but does prepare you for what to expect from the game.
Title: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Magister on February 18, 2017, 07:51:51 AM
If you were in no hurry to buy the best Castlevania game because of price, how the hell did you wind up with Haunted Castle, the 68K game, etc?
I'm not sure what you mean. When I got my hands on Haunted Castle($150), arcade machines weren't overpriced like they are now. The machine itself was in bad shape, which I scraped a long time ago. I have the PCB, NOS side art(which by the way people keep trying to buy it off me it seems I'm the only person that owns any) and marquee I plan down the line to makes its own dedicated cabinet for which it never had. Hell, I own Splatterhouse as well and only paid $130 for that BitD.
Like I said, I was in no hurry to get it since my Duo wasn't working for the longest time. Plus considering what I was making at my job years ago compared to the job I have now, I have more money to play with.
I completed Rondo of Blood 100%. It wasn't that hard of a game. None of the bosses were. Only level I had trouble with was Stage 7 in the beginning.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: gex on February 18, 2017, 08:50:57 AM
But you see, the one thing I like better in SNES Dracula X than in Rondo of Blood is the sound and music... I've made it no secret that I'm very biased towards the Super Nintendo sound, I think it's the best-sounding game system there ever was (and most likely there ever will be), and Dracula X is one of the more impressive-sounding games on the system, the sheer quality of the samples being used is something else, and there was pretty much no loss in composition detail in the transition from CD music to the SNES, but the SNES somehow managed to sound considerably more hype and bombastic than the CD counterpart... You know how many times I've listened to the CD soundtrack outside of the game? Not even once... As for the SNES version? There was a time that I've listened to it almost every day, it gives me the chills and puts an ear-to-ear nostalgia grin on my face~
Music wise, I enjoy the music from Bloodlines and Curse of Darkness. Game play wise, I hated Lament of Innocence.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Michirin9801 on February 18, 2017, 09:25:11 AM
Music wise, I enjoy the music from Bloodlines and Curse of Darkness. Game play wise, I hated Lament of Innocence.
The music in Bloodlines is fine, I don't remember Curse of Darkness though... My favourite Castlevania Soundtrack might actually be the Adventure Rebirth for the Wii though, now THAT's a good soundtrack if I ever heard one!
As far as Gameplay goes, I'm not a big fan of the Metroidvanias, and I have only played the N64 games as far as 3D Castlevania goes, and well, they were rubbish... (But to be fair, Legacy of Darkness was a step in the right direction) To me, real Castlevania is the classic linear stage-based style, I'll pick the worst linear Castlevania over the best Metroidvania any day...
Title: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Magister on February 18, 2017, 09:43:52 AM
Music wise, I enjoy the music from Bloodlines and Curse of Darkness. Game play wise, I hated Lament of Innocence.
The music in Bloodlines is fine, I don't remember Curse of Darkness though... My favourite Castlevania Soundtrack might actually be the Adventure Rebirth for the Wii though, now THAT's a good soundtrack if I ever heard one!
As far as Gameplay goes, I'm not a big fan of the Metroidvanias, and I have only played the N64 games as far as 3D Castlevania goes, and well, they were rubbish... (But to be fair, Legacy of Darkness was a step in the right direction) To me, real Castlevania is the classic linear stage-based style, I'll pick the worst linear Castlevania over the best Metroidvania any day...
I don't mind the Metroidvania games. They were fun for what they were. But I agree, I preferred the old style. Curse of Darkness was for the Xbox. You didn't play as a Belmont but as a Demon Forger. Music in that game was some of the best. Especially the music when you fight Trevor Belmont. http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/multi/mp3s4.htm#cod Loved the Lords of Shadow games. Second one wasn't as good as the first though. Just a shame about the direction Konami is going in. Makes me wonder about the future of Castlevania.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: gex on February 18, 2017, 10:55:32 AM
Eh i haven't played through it in forever, but i remember there were some levels with richter that i was never able to beat. But always playing with Maria makes the game a breeze
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: SuperDeadite on February 18, 2017, 04:40:29 PM
For what's it worth Haunted Castle is the broken version. The Japanese PCB (which is worth an INSANE amount these days) is much more fun, still unfinished, but actually fun.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Arkhan on February 18, 2017, 06:17:17 PM
But you see, the one thing I like better in SNES Dracula X than in Rondo of Blood is the sound and music... I've made it no secret that I'm very biased towards the Super Nintendo sound, I think it's the best-sounding game system there ever was (and most likely there ever will be), and Dracula X is one of the more impressive-sounding games on the system, the sheer quality of the samples being used is something else, and there was pretty much no loss in composition detail in the transition from CD music to the SNES, but the SNES somehow managed to sound considerably more hype and bombastic than the CD counterpart...
I'm glad you admit your bias towards the SFC, since objectively, it's not very capable compared to CD audio, lol.
You realize bombastic is sort of a negative word, right? I'm not sure if you'd really want to claim something is more bombastic while stating that you subjectively think it's the better OST, lol. Unless you really want to say that the SFC OST is more pretentious / overblown for no reason than the PCE CD one.
Anyways, this is confusing to me, since the SFC one is often using nearly studio-ish quality samples while the PCE CD is just using straight up high quality digital tunes.
There's nothing super chiptuney about the SFC soundtrack really, other than the jittery start/stop sample sound that you get with sample-based synthesizing, and the clippy sounding strings, which I do admittedly have a fondness for, having grown up with them.
Like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlayiIBH75o vs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRnxC4rmpgQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqWW0PTkjR8 vs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdU3A6siGFw
I think the litmus test for a CV soundtrack is to basically listen to Bloody Tears. I can't say the SFC one is bad, but, the percussion and legit pipe organing basically wins the war. That song has been dying to have real pipeorgans since it was composed and appeared in Simon's Quest.
It seems you like what lower quality audio and sampling synthesis produces over real instruments. That's fine, it is just odd to land at that as the personal preference for chiptunes. To me, SNES songs are barely chiptunes since they're so close to real instruments most of the time. (Like, FF4,5, and 6 OSTs for example)
I am pretty certain if I composed a song using studio stuff (some Roland synths and drum machines), and then took the composition, moved it to SFC, sampled the very same instruments, and played both back, you'd probably pick the SFC version even though it's just a goobered up version of the same song, right?
You're basically the younger, console-equivalent of the Amiga people, lol.
I think Rondo is probably my favorite Castlevania, along with SotN. The rest of the metroidvanias are pretty tedious, but SotN is pretty great.
The PCE one is a shining example of tight controls, thoughtful level design, and excellent sprite work.
The SNES one is a shining example of phoning it in. I'd take Super CV over Dracula X, any day of the week.
but I would take Bloodlines over Super CV.
I remember thinking Super CV was the tits until I rented Bloodlines and went "whoa".
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: MobiusStripTech on February 18, 2017, 11:34:55 PM
I can agree that I did not find Rondo to be overly hard, but honestly I am OK with that. I just genuinely enjoy the gameplay and the soundtrack is in my opinion one of the best there is. The game is easily my favorite Castlevania.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: fragmare on February 19, 2017, 01:53:24 AM
Rondo, hands down. Not that SNES Drac X is bad. Not at all, it's just Rondo is just better in just about every way (wavy fire effect aside). I have zero nostalgia towards either of these games. I didn't get a chance to play either until well into my adulthood. It basically boils down to Rondo being a 5-star game where as DracXX is a 4-star game. Back in the early 90s, when Konami went all out for a game, they went ALL-f*ckING-OUT. And for Super CV4 and Rondo they definitely went all out... for DracXX, not so much.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Michirin9801 on February 19, 2017, 06:53:31 AM
You realize bombastic is sort of a negative word, right? I'm not sure if you'd really want to claim something is more bombastic while stating that you subjectively think it's the better OST, lol. Unless you really want to say that the SFC OST is more pretentious / overblown for no reason than the PCE CD one.
I don't really see it as a negative description... I like my soundtracks to be high-energy and hype, and 'bombastic' is a word that fits the description...
Anyways, this is confusing to me, since the SFC one is often using nearly studio-ish quality samples while the PCE CD is just using straight up high quality digital tunes.
There's nothing super chiptuney about the SFC soundtrack really, other than the jittery start/stop sample sound that you get with sample-based synthesizing, and the clippy sounding strings, which I do admittedly have a fondness for, having grown up with them.
Well, let me put it this way: The SNES soundtrack sounds more like Video Game music than the PC engine soundtrack... The thing about the SNES is that it's the perfect mid-term when it comes to video game music, it's good enough to sound much more advanced than 'normal' chiptunes, but it still doesn't sound like 'real music' you see... It still has its limitations, it's only got 8 channels, 64kb of sound RAM and then there's the whole 'Bit Rate Reduction' thing, the low-pass filter and the infamous reverb, but within those limitations and quirks it still managed to produce absolutely incredible-sounding music!
The next obvious step up is CD audio (either that or MIDI, as in, samplers with no meaningful limitations), but by the time you get to CD audio everything is sounding pretty much the same... You can tell a song is a SNES song just by listening to it because the system still has an "Audio Identity" of its own, but when you move on to CD audio whatever song you put on it could be from anything... There are no more limitations, and thus no more "Audio Identity", and to me that means no more fun...
It seems you like what lower quality audio and sampling synthesis produces over real instruments. That's fine, it is just odd to land at that as the personal preference for chiptunes. To me, SNES songs are barely chiptunes since they're so close to real instruments most of the time. (Like, FF4,5, and 6 OSTs for example)
I REALLY do prefer that... And well, that technically still counts as chiptunes, because they're still being produced on-the-fly by some sort of soundchip, even if there's no real 'synthesis' involved... Heck, my 2nd favourite sound system (tied with the PC engine) is the Game Boy Advance! With that one you have to lower the bit depth of the samples in order to soft-mix more than one sample in the same channel, because you know, the GBA only has 2 sampler channels, and if you want stereo audio you have to pan each to one side and play the same thing in both channels and adjust the volume of each sample in each channel in order to pan stuff side-to-side... Other than that the GBA has the GB soundchip that it carried over for backwards compatibility, so GBA games often mix low-bit-depth samples together with GB chiptunes, and in my personal opinion, the lower bit depth of the samples makes them blend-in BETTER with the GB sounds than they would otherwise! To me, the GBA makes for the perfect mix of sampled music and stereotypical 8 bit music, they just fit together really well! To put it short: The GBA was the last game system with its own "Audio Identity", after it, everything sounds the same to me, and that's not a good thing in my book...
I am pretty certain if I composed a song using studio stuff (some Roland synths and drum machines), and then took the composition, moved it to SFC, sampled the very same instruments, and played both back, you'd probably pick the SFC version even though it's just a goobered up version of the same song, right?
You're basically the younger, console-equivalent of the Amiga people, lol.
I most likely would prefer the SNES one, but not just because of my bias, but because of the SNES's aforementioned quirks which give it its "audio identity"...
Also, the SNES is WAY better than the Amiga because of its 8 channels, no hard-panning and because of its almighty reverb ;3 (Yeah I know Capcom music on SNES often abused the reverb, but when used correctly that reverb is a god-send~)
I remember thinking Super CV was the tits until I rented Bloodlines and went "whoa".
Okay we stopped agreeing now >w> Bloodlines is really good, one of the best Genesis games, but I just don't think it competes with Super Castlevania IV... I think I like SNES Dracula X more than Bloodlines, although admittedly that has mostly to do with nostalgia (and that soundtrack), and I also like Castlevania Rebirth on the Wii better than Bloodlines, and that one has mostly to do with the soundtrack (Btw, that's what modern games SHOULD sound like, that and the Etrian Odyssey series are the prime examples) but I think I'd still pick Bloodlines over the NES and GB games... 16 BIT FTW!!
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Arkhan on February 19, 2017, 07:44:54 AM
bombastic kind of means "pretentious", so you're sort of saying the soundtrack is high and falootin' but meaningless? lol
Super CV IV vs. Bloodlines mostly boils down to if you want something a little newer/different, or a hopped up NES game. Bloodlines definitely kept the pacing/feel of the NES games more than Super did. Super sometimes is kind of slow going and odd. and the whip swinging was goofy.
I still like both of them and would recommend either to anyone...but, I prefer Simon's Quest over both of them, so don't listen to me.
As for audio identity and Super NES sound, I think Secret of Mana is the best soundtrack on the system, and it largely doesn't exhibit the "SNES sound identity".
The percussion quality in Secret of Mana is insane, and the sound design and composition used echo/reverb to their advantage, as opposed to just being some tacked on thing that makes it sound like the speakers fell into a fish tank.
Square games in general (Chrono Trigger, FF games) kind of didn't fall victim to the quirkities. A game like 7th Saga or like, Brain Lord from Enix sure did though. Unless you count Dragon Quest because it's just a friggin orchestral onslaught (but you still get that SNES quality string sampling, and organ noise).
I like a lot of SNES OSTs, but even at the time, some of the stuff it did was less than exciting at times. I often preferred the Megadrive or PCE game music because it wasn't trying to sound real and failing at it.
and then TurboCD and SegaCD shit all over all of it.
Everything post GBA sounding the same is more a by product of everyone for years *trying* to get to real instrument sounds, and finally being allowed to.... and then all buying the same friggin sound devices to record audio, lol.
If you listen to something like FF7 though, it's still using MIDI + instrument library. It's not CD audio. Some of those instruments are the same ones you hear in FF6, I think. You even get shit-tier sampled guitars for the boss battle music!
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Michirin9801 on February 19, 2017, 08:51:46 AM
bombastic kind of means "pretentious", so you're sort of saying the soundtrack is high and falootin' but meaningless? lol
If you say so, but I'd use the word "Pompous" to convey that meaning, not "Bombastic"... In my head "Bombastic" sounds like a mixture of "Grandiose" and "Explosive", but in a good way...
Super CV IV vs. Bloodlines mostly boils down to if you want something a little newer/different, or a hopped up NES game. Bloodlines definitely kept the pacing/feel of the NES games more than Super did. Super sometimes is kind of slow going and odd. and the whip swinging was goofy.
I still like both of them and would recommend either to anyone...but, I prefer Simon's Quest over both of them, so don't listen to me.
They're both really good at what each one tries to do, I just so happen to enjoy playing Super CV4 more, even if it's slower, it feels fresher, but I totally understand if you prefer Bloodlines, it's a spectacular game as well!
As for audio identity and Super NES sound, I think Secret of Mana is the best soundtrack on the system, and it largely doesn't exhibit the "SNES sound identity".
The percussion quality in Secret of Mana is insane, and the sound design and composition used echo/reverb to their advantage, as opposed to just being some tacked on thing that makes it sound like the speakers fell into a fish tank.
Secret of Mana is one of those games that I've always wanted to play, but just never got around to it... And well, listening to the soundtrack for the first time now, this doesn't really do the soundchip justice in my book >w> It's not bad, but seriously, the SNES can sound SO much better than this, including in games by square themselves, like the very ones you've mentioned, Final Fantasy and Chrono Trigger...
Unless you count Dragon Quest because it's just a friggin orchestral onslaught (but you still get that SNES quality string sampling, and organ noise).
That's EXACTLY the sound that I like! I think Dragon Quest is the best-sounding RPG series on the SNES, it's literally an orchestra being played on a 64k sampler, so it's got those signature SNES strings and organs, so it doesn't 'really' sound like an orchestra, it sounds like, for lack of better words, a Super Nintendo game!
Everything post GBA sounding the same is more a by product of everyone for years *trying* to get to real instrument sounds, and finally being allowed to.... and then all buying the same friggin sound devices to record audio, lol.
If you listen to something like FF7 though, it's still using MIDI + instrument library. It's not CD audio. Some of those instruments are the same ones you hear in FF6, I think. You even get shit-tier sampled guitars for the boss battle music!
I haven't really played much of any of the PS1 Final Fantasy games, I think they look like s*** with their yucky polygons and blurry pre-rendered backgrounds and FMV that totally don't go well together, and let's just say that "A good story" isn't exactly what I look for in my games, but I'm willing to give them a fair shot when I have the time and patience (which won't happen in a very long time for various reasons) But I do know that the PS1 soundchip is pretty much a SNES soundchip with 3 times the channels and maybe more RAM, and well, if you say that FF7 sounds like a SNES game then that's a plus in my book! That said though one of the reasons why I often prefer SNES music is BECAUSE it has less channels and less RAM! It's the limitations that give it its charm!
"Well, if you like it because it has less channels then why don't you like the Amiga? It has 4 channels!" Remember when I said the SNES was the perfect mid-term? Well yeah... I like it because it's not TOO limited that it restricts what you can do with it, but it's not SO advanced that you can just do anything with it, it's all a matter of finding the perfect balance! To me the ideal amount of sound channels is anything between 6 and 10, 6 is the bare-minimum and anything more than 10 I won't even bother using because I don't need it, but 8 is the exact middle of that! I can make a 6 channel song and have 2 free channels to play sound effects without cutting off the music! It's PERFECT! And well, the built-in reverb means that I don't have to use an extra channel to do, well, reverb, so I can fit in more detail in the composition without eating up more channels!
"Well if you like SNES music so much, then why do you only do PC engine music?" Because Deflemask is WAY better than OpenMPT, and the PCE is my very close 2nd place (tied with the GBA, I can't pick between the two)
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Arkhan on February 19, 2017, 10:34:38 AM
I don't think between the hourish or so after my post and the time you spent writing your own reply, you really had proper time to absorb the Secret of Mana soundtrack in it's entirety. It sounds like you just skimmed through it out of context, and nitpicked based off of personal taste formed around liking the loss of fidelity other games exhibit.
It's a very atmospheric setup, and makes better (read: intelligent) use of echo/reverb compared to a lot of games. Too many games just turned it on because it "did something". Like people who don't really understand how to use chorus/reverb effects with their guitar setups, and just crank knobs and have it sound like total dick.
The bass (especially the slap/synth style) and percussion (the double bass especially) sounds pretty top notch. The percussion is pretty killer.
SOM predated the other great non Uematsu stuff from Square. Bahamut Lagoon, CTrigger, and SOM2 all came later. Of the SNES era, I think Square and Enix basically owned the sound award (Check out Illusion of Gaia). Nintendo's games themselves weren't even as good sounding sometimes.
FF6's use of harpsichord/harp/horn noises basically rolled right over into PS1land, where they were then able to improve the string and percussion.
It seems you have a strange subjective liking of SFC based around the loss of fidelity. Fine by me, as long as you recognize it as such. Like all the C64 fans that are completely aware that some of the visuals in the C64 look worse than their Amiga counterparts, despite preferring them more.
I like the way Amiga often sounded as a result of this loss of fidelity. It gives it a strange charm. But, if OTHER Amiga games *didn't* have this issue, I tended to go "oh that sounds better".
This ones pretty good. It's also awful with headphones because Paula is a moron. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9waP16k72hE
I also enjoy these made up questions you've asked and answered yourself assuming I might ask them. I wasn't going to, lol.
Quote from: Michirin9801
I haven't really played much of any of the PS1 Final Fantasy games, I think they look like s*** with their yucky polygons and blurry pre-rendered backgrounds and FMV that totally don't go well together, and let's just say that "A good story" isn't exactly what I look for in my games
This made me LOL. The PS1 era stuff may look a little rough now, but some of that stuff was pretty ground breaking. The FF games were pretty brilliant with their use of pre-rendered BGs. It looks better on a TV with proper scanlining and scaling. I will fully admit some of that stuff looks really dumb on an emulator. Even the FF8 for PC looked funky to me. Play it on a CRT with composite, or RGB, and you will change your view I bet.
Seriously, the RPGs that used 3D environments back then lacked a lot of visual character by comparison. I am not sure what your FMV statement is either. The FMVs in something like FF8 were (and still) are pretty excellent, and fitting for the game.
Parasite Eve is another one that kicked ass.
Anyawy, you're right about the PS1.
PS1's sound is able to be done at a higher rate, with more channels, with more RAM as well. Plus, MIDI support. That's why the soundtracks in some games were often able to sometimes be mistaken as CD audio. It is basically a cracked out Super NES sound chip.
People who weren't too clued into how guitars actually sound thought that FF7 was a CD soundtrack.
as a complete aside,
f*ckkkkk yeah. best sampled OST ever.
how do you feel about the SFC version? I hate it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PbPMrNz3dE
it lost ALL of the atmosphere that it was supposed to be conveying.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Michirin9801 on February 19, 2017, 11:26:35 AM
I don't think between the hourish or so after my post and the time you spent writing your own reply, you really had proper time to absorb the Secret of Mana soundtrack in it's entirety. It sounds like you just skimmed through it out of context, and nitpicked based off of personal taste formed around liking the loss of fidelity other games exhibit.
It's a very atmospheric setup, and makes better (read: intelligent) use of echo/reverb compared to a lot of games. Too many games just turned it on because it "did something". Like people who don't really understand how to use chorus/reverb effects with their guitar setups, and just crank knobs and have it sound like total dick.
The bass (especially the slap/synth style) and percussion (the double bass especially) sounds pretty top notch. The percussion is pretty killer.
SOM predated the other great non Uematsu stuff from Square. Bahamut Lagoon, CTrigger, and SOM2 all came later. Of the SNES era, I think Square and Enix basically owned the sound award (Check out Illusion of Gaia). Nintendo's games themselves weren't even as good sounding sometimes.
Here's the thing, I probably WOULD like it better in-game with proper context, but yeah, you're right, I didn't really take my time to listen to it and appreciate what it does, I just listened to what you posted here and moved on... But seriously, out of context, I've heard much better on the system...
And speaking of Illusion of Gaia, all Quintet games for the SNES sound amazing! (I haven't played Terranigma though so I can't say, but I sure want to play it, but I only want to play it once I beat Illusion of Gaia) But seriously, Actraiser... Not only is that my favourite Yuzo Koshiro soundtrack bar-none, but that's one of the quintessential SNES soundtracks, that's the kind of sound I like to hear on the system!
And I totally get your argument on the reverb, you're absolutely right, but you see, even Capcom themselves got better at it overtime, Final Fight 3 is in my opinion their best work on the system (which to me means it's their best work ever ;3) and in that game they don't abuse the reverb nearly as much as in their previous works...
It seems you have a strange subjective liking of SFC based around the loss of fidelity. Fine by me, as long as you recognize it as such. Like all the C64 fans that are completely aware that some of the visuals in the C64 look worse than their Amiga counterparts, despite preferring them more.
I like the way Amiga often sounded as a result of this loss of fidelity. It gives it a strange charm. But, if OTHER Amiga games *didn't* have this issue, I tended to go "oh that sounds better".
This ones pretty good. It's also awful with headphones because Paula is a moron. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9waP16k72hE
You hit the nail in the head... I know that CD audio is """""Better""""" because it's higher fidelity and you can use it to make "real" music, but here's the thing, I don't care about "real" music, I like Video Game music, and while the SNES sounds a lot more advanced than its contemporaries, it still doesn't sound like "real" music, it sounds like Video Game music, but it STILL sounds more advanced than its contemporaries, so I like it more!
And yeah that sounds nice, too bad I only have headphones so the hard-panning does take away from my enjoyment a little...
I haven't really played much of any of the PS1 Final Fantasy games, I think they look like s*** with their yucky polygons and blurry pre-rendered backgrounds and FMV that totally don't go well together, and let's just say that "A good story" isn't exactly what I look for in my games
This made me LOL. The PS1 era stuff may look a little rough now, but some of that stuff was pretty ground breaking. The FF games were pretty brilliant with their use of pre-rendered BGs. It looks better on a TV with proper scanlining and scaling. I will fully admit some of that stuff looks really dumb on an emulator. Even the FF8 for PC looked funky to me. Play it on a CRT with composite, or RGB, and you will change your view I bet.
Seriously, the RPGs that used 3D environments back then lacked a lot of visual character by comparison. I am not sure what your FMV statement is either. The FMVs in something like FF8 were (and still) are pretty excellent, and fitting for the game.
Parasite Eve is another one that kicked ass.
I get that that stuff was mind-blowing at the time, but I'm a sucker for good 2D grafx and pixel art, and 3D doesn't appeal to me nearly as much... Also, one of the "various reasons" why I won't try the PS1 FF games in a really long time is because I 'want' to play them on my CRT TV on a PS1 (or PS2), but my CRT is broken right now and I have to go and get it fixed, and let's just say I'm not exactly in a hurry to get a PS1 or a PS2, there isn't much on either system that I REALLY want to play...
how do you feel about the SFC version? I hate it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PbPMrNz3dE
it lost ALL of the atmosphere that it was supposed to be conveying.
Now that's a soundtrack I really don't care much for >w> If we're talking about European soundtracks, my favourites on the SNES are Super Turrican and Top Gear 1 and 2, now THOSE are good soundtracks! (And speaking of European soundtracks, check out Iridion II on Game Boy Advance, it's one of the stand-out soundtracks on the system! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHvIWwbbugE&list=PLv0o9-RcygIBLmEtkJoM0xUs8M6XNbhAt&index=7)
Shadow of the beast is nice but... Not my style... I'll give you that the Amiga soundtrack is more 'atmospheric' but I legit prefer the instrumentation on the SNES... The only versions of the game I've played though were the TurboGrafx CD and the Mega Drive versions, and well, the CD soundtrack is nice, I actually like it better than all the others, but you know, exceptions exist, I can like a CD soundtrack better than its chiptune counterpart sometimes, case in point: the Dynastic Hero, I MUCH prefer its soundtrack to Wonder Boy in Monster World, the latter hurts my ears, and the former is soothing and nice~ But you see, all of the CD soundtracks I like better than their chiptune counterparts are on the PC engine CD, and it's not just because they're on PC engine and I'm a big fangirl, but because PCE CD soundtracks don't really sound like everything else out there, probably because they were made so much earlier...
And even then, I sometimes still prefer chiptunes over the CD audio of the PCE CD, like in the case of Dracula X and Asuka 120%, heck, I'd love to re-do the new songs from Maxima Burning Fest in the X68000 style and then replace the CD soundtrack with the X68000 one... Someday I will!
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Arkhan on February 19, 2017, 11:53:03 AM
The CD audio for SotB on PCE is basically the best version of the soundtrack. It's also the best playing version out of all of them, from a completely objective standpoint. At one point, I literally sat and played through every version of the game available to see what they all operated like.
All of the UpToJump ones automatically lose a lot of playability, Amiga included. There's also a weird delay in some versions (Amiga included) that makes attacking more effort than it should be.
The TurboCD and JP Megadrive releases provide the best experiences. The USA Genesis release was all screwed up, like when they put Turrican on TG-16.
A good Euro soundtrack for SNES to me was Wolfchild, but I thought the Megadrive version was the best of all of them.
That game in general was pretty good.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Michirin9801 on February 19, 2017, 12:29:03 PM
The CD audio for SotB on PCE is basically the best version of the soundtrack. It's also the best playing version out of all of them, from a completely objective standpoint. At one point, I literally sat and played through every version of the game available to see what they all operated like.
All of the UpToJump ones automatically lose a lot of playability, Amiga included. There's also a weird delay in some versions (Amiga included) that makes attacking more effort than it should be.
The TurboCD and JP Megadrive releases provide the best experiences. The USA Genesis release was all screwed up, like when they put Turrican on TG-16.
I'm glad I've picked the best versions I guess...
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Arkhan on February 19, 2017, 12:48:50 PM
Yeah... where some Turbo CD games just used like early 90s wank digital music that sounds like it belongs in an exercise video tape, SOTB used a thoughtful remastering and recomposition of all of the songs.
Note though, it also appears in the FM Towns version, and while that version looks a little better in the parallax department, it has slightly stiffer feeling controls, and that explosion puff they added to the enemies looks so tacky.
It somehow looks better when the enemies just boing off the screen.
SotB in general isn't even a fantastic action game. The whole thing is somehow excellent due to the overall atmosphere of the game. The gameplay itself is pretty mediocre.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: fragmare on February 19, 2017, 06:12:05 PM
Haha, SNES DracXX vs. Genesis Bloodlines is like the battle of the half-assed but still really good Castlevania games. I don't know if I have a preference there. I suppose I'd have to say Bloodlines just based on the fact it's all new content, compared to DracXX which is mostly recycled art/ideas.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Arkhan on February 19, 2017, 07:27:07 PM
Haha, SNES DracXX vs. Genesis Bloodlines is like the battle of the half-assed but still really good Castlevania games. I don't know if I have a preference there. I suppose I'd have to say Bloodlines just based on the fact it's all new content, compared to DracXX which is mostly recycled art/ideas.
Bloodlines also provides interesting characters to play as, and some more thoughtful level design.
and that sweet reflecty water effect.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: gex on February 26, 2017, 07:36:08 AM
But playing through Dracula X first and then going through Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo expecting it to be the same, just more of a challenge, I was bummed out. Love both games though.
Hey just curious. I recently played through rondo again for a 100% run, and i'm just curious how many deaths you had. I certainly don't think it's a ball breaking game, but i also don't think it's easy either. To me, compared to other action platformers released at this time i would say it's a tad harder than the average?? I found myself dying at least twice from the harder bosses figuring out their patterns. But I would definitely say it's subpar difficulty stacked up to the other games in the Castlevania series.
Sera was the only maiden i had problems finding, even though i knew where she was. Whenever i tried to break the blocks to get to her on the next screen, they wouldn't break. So i assumed i had to do something later in the level. After much back & forth i eventually found you have to break the top rock first, then work your way down lol. Something i totally forgot since my last play through
Title: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Magister on February 26, 2017, 12:16:56 PM
Hey just curious. I recently played through rondo again for a 100% run, and i'm just curious how many deaths you had. I certainly don't think it's a ball breaking game, but i also don't think it's easy either. To me, compared to other action platformers released at this time i would say it's a tad harder than the average?? I found myself dying at least twice from the harder bosses figuring out their patterns. But I would definitely say it's subpar difficulty stacked up to the other games in the Castlevania series.
Sera was the only maiden i had problems finding, even though i knew where she was. Whenever i tried to break the blocks to get to her on the next screen, they wouldn't break. So i assumed i had to do something later in the level. After much back & forth i eventually found you have to break the top rock first, then work your way down lol. Something i totally forgot since my last play through
I only died a handful of times. First time I died was fighting the dragon on the bridge. Just trying to get a feel for the game and getting down the right spot to be in when it does its wrapping itself around the bridge attack. First fight with Shaft was interesting. Having to fight 4 mini-bosses before fighting him gave me a little bit of trouble. Especially the Mummy. But for the most, I either took out a boss on the first or second try. Some were just down right too easy with the right Weapon Crash. As for levels, Ghost Ship and Clock Tower were the biggest pains. Clock Tower for the simple fact of the collapsing bridge with the damn bats coming at you from both ways. Wouldn't have been so bad if they didn't take two hits from the whip to kill.
Sera was the last one I found as well. The rest were pretty easy to find. But the stairway for Sera blended into the background so well, I over looked it the first time I checked out that area.
I enjoyed the game. I was just bummed at how easy Drac was. I would say the Rondo battle is second easiest to fighting Drac in Simon's Quest
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Winniez on March 02, 2017, 11:21:08 AM
I much prefer the PC-Engine version but I think the SNES/SFC version is a good game in its own right. Interestingly the Super Famicom game in a good condition CIB is almost as pricey as the PC-Engine version. For me neither game is worth it at their current prices although I would really love to own the PC-Engine Rondo some day.
Title: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Magister on March 02, 2017, 01:00:29 PM
What I want to know is why in all the other Castlevania games the pocket watch is useful in some parts of the game, but in Rondo the watch is pretty much useless? It doesn't stop everything like it does in the other games, only slows the enemy down. And the heart consumption for each use is a joke and not even worth it.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Otaking on March 05, 2017, 02:51:25 AM
Awesome to see these versus threads back again, I did a load years back. Why not add a poll so forum members can vote.
edit here's some of the old ones, I never locked the voting so you can still vote.
Dracula X (PC Engine) Vs Super Castlevania IV (SNES) http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=15745.0
Super Star Soldier Vs Final Soldier http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=15568.0
Gate of Thunder Vs Winds/Lords of Thunder http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=15639.0
Ys Book I & II (TGCD) Vs Zelda: A Link to the Past (SNES) http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=15766.0
PC Engine CD/TurboGrafx CD Vs Mega-CD/Sega CD http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=21193.0
Fragmare did a load too
Legendary Axe vs. Legendary Axe II http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=11121
Alien Crush vs. Devil's Crush http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=11460
Bloody Wolf vs. M.E.R.C.S. http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=15955
Blazing Lazers/Gunhed vs. Space Megaforce/Super Aleste http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=15934
Soldier Blade vs. Axelay http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=15966
3-way battle! Spriggan vs. M.U.S.H.A. vs. Robo Aleste http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=15924
Macross 2036 (PCE CD) vs. Macross Scramble Valkyrie (SNES) http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=16032
and
China Warrior vs. Getting kicked in the crotch http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=15886
Title: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Magister on March 05, 2017, 03:04:48 AM
Awesome to see these versus threads back again, I did a load years back. Why not add a poll so forum members can vote.
edit here's some of the old ones
Dracula X (PC Engine) Vs Super Castlevania IV (SNES) http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=15745.0
Yea, the poll thing is a good idea. Never thought about doing that. I just like to read people's opinions about the games more than seeing the popular vote.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: gex on March 07, 2017, 04:35:42 PM
I only died a handful of times. First time I died was fighting the dragon on the bridge. Just trying to get a feel for the game and getting down the right spot to be in when it does its wrapping itself around the bridge attack. First fight with Shaft was interesting. Having to fight 4 mini-bosses before fighting him gave me a little bit of trouble. Especially the Mummy. But for the most, I either took out a boss on the first or second try. Some were just down right too easy with the right Weapon Crash. As for levels, Ghost Ship and Clock Tower were the biggest pains. Clock Tower for the simple fact of the collapsing bridge with the damn bats coming at you from both ways. Wouldn't have been so bad if they didn't take two hits from the whip to kill.
Sera was the last one I found as well. The rest were pretty easy to find. But the stairway for Sera blended into the background so well, I over looked it the first time I checked out that area.
I enjoyed the game. I was just bummed at how easy Drac was. I would say the Rondo battle is second easiest to fighting Drac in Simon's Quest
Crazy that was your first dying, on the bridge. Dracula is stupid easy, even more so with maria; She just makes it embarrassingly easy. Actually, the whole game she makes embarassingly easy. I found those harlequin winged things in the clock tower stage are really difficult to pass without taking damage. And the Mummy, i still haven't found a way to defeat him without taking damage, not that i've experimented on it or anything. I'm sure there's a sub weapon/special attack that works well on him, like how the holy water special just obliterates the werewolf boss.
All the little shortcuts (not alternative routes) are very neat/well hidden, Like in the level Sera is on. If you cut one of those spiked balls in the upper half to the stage, it drops down below and opens up either a shortcut to the boss, or takes you directly to the next lvl (I forget which one). Or on the third level if you take the alternative path defeating that water dragon. Falling through the first gap on the bridge right after the sky colour changes takes you to an alternative level ending.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: schadenfreude on April 25, 2018, 10:00:54 PM
From internet research, I always thought the SFC Dracula X was simply a watered-down port of Rondo, but I played through it recently and felt like it was a brand-new game that recycled art, music, and sound assets from Rondo. It's like a budget remix of Rondo (made by game design college interns, I think). Does anyone have the story on why this game was made? Was it originally intended to be a straight port of Rondo, but then they decided to change it significantly to try to convince fans of the original to buy it too? I haven't found any information like interviews with the developers to confirm this.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: gilbert on April 26, 2018, 02:14:15 AM
Just my wild guess, though this is quite probably (one of) the main reason, that due to the failure of the TG16 in the overseas market there was no hope in exporting the game, so Konami just made a quick version of the game on a system marketable to other regions by reusing assets (just like how they ported Snatcher to Sega CD in foreign market instead of releasing the original game).
Super Valis is another similar example.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: VmprHntrD on May 09, 2018, 06:02:14 AM
Dracula XX is the SNES game, Dracula X is the PCE CD game. They're not meant to be the same, but two sides of the same coin, as XX is a side story style title. They mostly share the name, the general characters too, but outside of maybe some redrawn assets and redone audio they're two distinct games so they could peddle a solid Castlevania game on 2 popular formats. It's all unicorn farts when people attack the SNES title as just a watered down sad port as it's not.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: touko on May 15, 2018, 06:36:26 AM
Quote
This ones pretty good. It's also awful with headphones because Paula is a moron. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9waP16k72hE
This is really a bad exemple of what an amiga can do. A little exemple with shamber of shaolin, with his softsynth sound (not in real time) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anB2EPcYUg8
Or the first amiga module ever : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-koQLue6RE
With games and demos,there is a ton of impressive musics .
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Sarge on May 22, 2018, 08:48:21 AM
I like the SNES game, actually. It's certainly not perfect, but then again, neither is Rondo. I put them both in the 8.0-8.5 range; great games, but not my favorite of the series. Of the classic games, I think I lean toward the NES original and Super Castlevania IV, even if the latter feels like a bit of a one-off.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: lukester 3.0 on February 12, 2019, 10:33:59 PM
I'm just not a huge fan of Dracula X on the snes! For me, the level design is rather off-putting.
That said, as special as Rondo is, it is one of those true cinematic-quality platformers like Yoshi's Island, that I can only replay once every few years. I am much more likely to revisit Bloodlines or X68000!
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Winniez on February 13, 2019, 08:20:02 PM
Its a decent game in its own right but as Luke said the level design feels bit off. Inferior version of a better game, if you can even consider them related. Still a 16-bit Castlevania game is nothing to sneeze at.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Trevpwnsnoobs on February 14, 2019, 08:33:24 AM
Level design never felt like much of a problem for me, but i found the jumping rediculously clunky compared to rondo.. It feels weirdly scaled.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: Black Tiger on February 14, 2019, 01:10:20 PM
Drac XX didn't quite nail the controls/gameplay perfectly, but it's close enough that the stage design is what kills the overall experience. The layouts didn't take the actual gameplay into account and it seems like it was never play tested.
Stage designs and enemy/platform layouts were just arbitrarily sprinkled throughout and it leads to encounters ranging from awkward and uninspiring to getting clipped by an enemy and being juggled from full HP to death.
Add in inconsistent background art and random coloring overall which are very un-Dracula X/Castlevania.
It's weird when you look at the quality of something like the pixelart of Dracula's final form and how poorly other bosses turned out. It gives the impression that the project began as a game with a targeted standard but got switched early on to a rush jub to cash in before everyone had moved on to 32-bit games.
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: nicksama on January 16, 2020, 02:31:52 AM
chi no rondo all the way mates at least for me . Better music and the gameplay on the console is gorgeous !!
Title: Re: Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo (PC-Engine) Vs. Castlevania: Dracula X (SNES)
Post by: turboxray on January 23, 2020, 12:17:38 PM
I always felt like Dracula XX was a re-imagined version of Rondo, rather than a port. You know, that whole thing Battlestar Galactica did with its reboot. Dracula XX was just ahead of its time on the trend haha. Port, re-imagined, whatever you want to call it.. it's still weak, even more so given its release date. I'm sure people still find charm/value in it, but yes.. there's enough in common that you can still compare them hahah. I mean they have much more in common than Popful Mail on the PCECD vs SegaCD, imo.