This is the peak of Classicvania and probably my most enjoyed game of the franchise (second only to symphony of the night). It has everything, stunning visuals, great bosses, and elite gameplay.

(Ignore the timer, it was glitched out but still counting, somehow, then started counting normally?)

I don't think we can get anything better than this, 9.7/10.

Okay, so after every hit, he almost instantly teleports to where Simon is at. Meaning you'll want to be moving as far away from your previous position after every hit. Sounds simple enough, but sometimes this bastard will poke you with the trident anyway, even if you're darting the opposite direction instantly after you hit him. He does so much damage that you can't take more than 3 hits, so honestly, I think I'm just fucked.

I can't stop listening to this song!

This is how you do a waiting room.

It's the best. I'm right, you're wrong.

Let me preface this by saying that I did beat the game.

This review will also have spoilers for those who haven't played it.

If you want to play it yourself, then go ahead. I will not stop you, nor will I try to convince you otherwise. This is simply a review of a game.

If you disagree, feel free to leave a comment. And please don't downvote the post before reading it completely.

--------

A few years ago I started getting into Castlevania. I bought the anniversary collection and (with occasional save states) beat Castlevania, Castlevania II: Simon's Quest, Castlevania 3: Dracula's Curse, The Adventure (horseshit), Belmont's Revenge, and Bloodlines (my favorite classic Castlevania).

However, I didn't really touch IV. I'm unsure why. It didn't grab me in the same way that, for example, Bloodlines did. Maybe it was the fact it's a remake/retelling, the combination of "Super" prefix and number being redundant, or the visual appeal. I can't say for certain.

A long while later, AVGN posted his video on which Castlevania game is the best. He claimed, that, IV is the best. I wasn't in a position to disagree, as I had only ever played the first stage. But I was still intrigued. Was this game that I neglected really that good? (Spoilers: NO). So, I went into the game, expecting it to be good.

Now I have beaten it. It took me a few years to get around to starting it, but after playing for a couple of days, I managed to beat Dracula. Saying that I don't have strong opinions would be a lie.

--------

So, let me start with a few positives (or partial positives):

The grapple mechanic is better than in Bloodlines, which came out later, and, although it's still a little bit inconsistent, it was fun to swing around.

The graphics are great. Sure, Simon looks like a pencil eraser, but everything else looks fine. Though, I do have quite a few issues with the graphics. Mainly, a lot of times it was borderline impossible to tell enemies and the background apart. In other Castlevania games these kinds of NPCs would have borders, or bold colors. In this game that wasn't the case, and I died a lot from my eyes simply being unable to distinguish these aspects. There's also one level, the weird gold one, where it was incredibly difficult to comprehend what was going on. There was simply too much shit happening on screen. But, overall, the graphics are good.

The soundtrack is also good. Despite there only being four bangers (Simon's Theme, Vampire Killer, Bloody Tears and Beginning), the soundtrack is incredibly atmospheric and sounds like a real orchestra. Though, once again, I have issues. Why is Bloody Tears in this game? If this is a retelling of the first one, then why is a Simon's Quest song here? Same with Beginning. Why is a Dracula's Curse song in this game? And why is the section it plays in longer than the section with Vampire Killer?!

Generally, there were so many points in this game, where I audibly asked "Why?!" because of how ridiculous, stupid, unfair, and questionable it was. Let me give you some examples:

When you introduce a new gimmick, you should do it in a controlled and safe environment so the player can get used to it before being challenged. For example, in III, the weird seesaw is introduced in a safe area BEFORE throwing the player to their demise. In IV, moving grapple hooks are introduced. You think, "Oh, what a cool way to use this mechanic!" But then, right at the end of that obstacle, the game throws an enemy at you that will probably hit you and knock you into a pit. Completely unexpected.

The game also likes to introduce too many aspects at once. Take the previously mentioned golden level. There was so much happening at once, from the floor breaking, to the chests, to the exploding gold, pair that with the ghosts and annoying bat placement and you get a level that is designed to be infuriating. Or take stage B. It introduces the giant spinny wheel of death (why?), raising floating stones (why are they flying?), has enemy placements where enemies can just RANDOMLY DECIDE that you die (why?) and also stairs that fall (again, why?).

Moving from cheap deaths and annoying level design, let's talk about the bosses. There's only one that was kinda fun: Dracula. And even then, I didn't really enjoy it all that much (I will talk about the aspect of fun in a moment). None of the bosses were interesting, most of them can be cheesed and dodging was often times DISCOURAGED because you can outdamage them.

Infuriating level design aside, there's two gameplay mechanics that I am baffled are the way they are. These don't make me angry, instead they disappoint me. They are connected, but together make for an experience that simply isn't fun!

In Castlevania, usually, the sub-weapons serve different purposes. They're special weapons/spells/items that do things. And each one usually does something different. The whip is your main weapon and is usually short, but reliable (going off of other games). So, you have a reason to use other weapons, and even switch between them for different situations. In IV, the sub-weapons are tiny, and only the cross is good. And even then, the whip is straight-up better! The axe is tiny and sometimes refuses to hit multiple enemies. The holy water is also tiny and the flame doesn't do enough damage, plus it has abysmal range. The knife is the knife. After the cross, it's the second best simply because it's reliable and has long range. The cross is usable, but deals the same damage as the fully upgraded whip.

And here's where the second problem comes in. The whip is OP! When Simon is in the middle of the screen and the whip is fully upgraded, there are only three or four tiles left between the end of the whip and the border of the screen when swung. You literally don't need any more range. Oh, did I mention it does the same damage as the cross? Oh, did I mention it is OMNIDIRECTIONAL?!

There are so many enemy encounters that are clearly designed for Simon to fight on the same horizontal plane, but you can just hit them from below, diagonally, and it's hitbox is huge. The fact is, it's not that you don't need the sub-weapons, but they are completely redundant because of the whip. So why are they even in the game?

Bloodlines does this well. Not only are there two playable characters with different movesets (a whip and a spear), but the whip can't hit enemies two football fields away. The sub-weapons are huge, powerful, have their own abilities, and are useful in different situations. The whip is the general-use weapon, while sub-weapons fill other purposes. I would call that well balanced. IV is NOT balanced.

So, is that it? No. There's one thing that makes it even worse: the whip isn't even satisfying to use. It doesn't FEEL powerful, even though it IS. It doesn't make satisfying sound effects!

And I haven't even mentioned the limp gimmick. If you hold the attack button or press a directional key right after attacking, the whip goes limp and deals trash damage. It's almost never useful, but CAN be used occasionally to clear weak projectiles. However, this gimmick is actively a detriment. I have died so many times because I pressed a direction right as I whipped, causing it to go limp, deal zero damage, and let the enemy hit me.

In conclusion, the game has a lot of problems, incredibly questionable game design choices, horrible balancing, and simply isn't fun. I won't play it ever again.

--------

If you think this game is the best Castlevania, then there are only two reason I can think of. 1: you haven't played any other Castlevania games (except for The Adventure which is truly ass), or 2: you played it as a kid and nostalgia is talking. That's all I can think of. If I had to use a single word (other than "why") to describe this game, it would be: disappointing.

4/10.

Estou jogando Super Castlevania IV novamente e, como me lembrava, a curva de dificuldade do jogo aumenta significativamente depois de entrar no Castelo, tanto em termos de desafios de plataforma quanto na quantidade de inimigos, você também compartilha dessa opinião, ou é apenas falta de habilidade da minha parte?

As the title says, I've managed to complete Super Castlevania IV, after 2 days, a few rages and a ton of saves (on the SNES Mini). This was my first Castlevania game, and retro platformer, and let me be honest: I was not ready for how hard and punishing it could be. I knew game were generally more difficult back then, but it was still a shock. I did enjoy the music, the art style and the vibe but I don't know if I could learn to enjoy such a different experience from what I'm accustomed to in modern gaming.

Anyway, I just wanted to share these feelings and see if anyone else felt the same as me.

On another note, now I'm debating if I should also give Rhondo of Blood a try or jump straight to Symphony of the Night. 😃

I'm playing super castlevania iv at the moment and so far ive breezed through the bosses. Then I got to B-3 boss and I just can't do it.. i know what I need to do, i know the rhythm and move style of the boss but he always gets me when there is literally 1 square of health on him.. i think I must have attempted over 40 times now. Any pointers? Did anyone else have this boss as an issue ?

I hope you guys can see the inspiration, work is not finished

Castlevania IV's boxart is my favorite video game boxart, and also one of my favorite paintings.

It fits well on this button layout. I like how Simon's hand is "grabbing" a button. The White Dragon stretches behind all the movement buttons perfectly. I also really like the skeleton popping out from behind the top buttons, and there's also a hidden knight you can spot between the buttons on the middle of the controller

I remember playing this game as a kid and thinking Gaibon probably could have been made to be Dracula's second form in Super Castlevania IV. Granted he would need to be bigger, but I think he has a look and attack that is reminiscent of the second form Dracula had in the original NES Castlevania.

What's likely to happen?

I see many recommending this game as a starting point for the franchise, saying that it is a good introductory game and is much easier than other classicvanias but... I think differently.

Super Castlevania IV really is an innovative game with its new mechanics, but in my opinion, it is not easy. I've already finished Castlevania I on the NES, Simon's Quest, Dracula's Curse in all routes in the American version, Belmont's Revenge and even the X68K game. But Super Castlevania IV I never got around to.

This game is very cursed in terms of difficulty, the jumps are very precise, Simon is very big and the hitboxes are very poor, especially in the instant death parts. When Simon puts a foot in the water he dies, when a pixel from a ceiling's hitbox touches his sprite he is crushed to death, the spike traps move too fast for the character's speed, etc.

I reached the final stage in my last run, and almost reached the fight against Slogra, but I died in the part of the platforms that go up. This game is extremely boring and each phase of the castle is "finger-in-the-ass and screaming" as an expression from my country says.

If anyone has arguments to defend the game or even tips to help me beat it, maybe I'll make another post changing my opinion.

Although there was definitely some frustration towards the end of the game, it's a really big improvement on the first and third games. You can finally redirect your jump arcs and you have a lot more control over the whip in this game. You can also more easily use sub-weapons as it's left to a dedicated button.

However, there's a few things Castlevania 3 did do better than this game; that being the multiple playable characters and branching level pathes. Honestly, Castlevania 3 is an amazing game until the last couple stages where I just gave up due to how frustrating it was

Hopefully the next games can combine all the more ambitious elements in Castlevania 3, while keeping the superior gameplay from IV

Hello guys. I'm new to the franchise, and been playing the Anniversary Collection now. So far I have just beaten Super Castlevania IV, but I thought it was weird that the last game of the collection is from 1995 (Bloodlines). So I was checking the wiki and saw that in a small window of time in the 90s, both of the latest installments of the franchise were two DIFERENT remakes of the fist Castlevania, being Super Castlevania IV for the SNES and Castlevania (Chronicles) for the Sharp X68000.

Why they did that? lol

I have just finished Super Castlevania IV so as always, here's my foughts on it :

In term of gameplay, this one used the old formula of the first but with major additions like the whip that can go in a lot of direction and the fact that you can move during your jumps, which are game changer in a good way !

I wasn’t convinced for the music at the beginning until I heard those remixes of bloody tears and vampire killer, they are peak !

The visuals and sprite are insanely detailled and the graphisms are great, the snes really improved that !

For the bosses, I think they are the best yet, because the new capacities of Simon with the whip make the fights really better, with the bosses having some patterns to equilibrate the thing, making those fights cool and even epic for the final ones !

Honestly the only flaws that I can see about this game is that the difficuly is sometimes screwed up and it’s not very unique which is logic because it’s technicaly a remake of the first one (but much better).

So yeah peak game here, I fear a little the next ones beacuse they are the ones on gameboy, but I can’t judge them without playing them so stay tuned (it seems that they are short so I'll maybe do one post about the two games at the same time) !