Castlevania: Lords of Shadow (2010 Video Game) User Reviews

Castlevania comes to the PS3!

[Aaron1375 · 8/10 · 27 November 2013]

I got this game late in the game, well passed its initial release. Of course, not going to complain as I got it for like seven bucks new and I got a nice side benefit, which I will get into later. I enjoy Castlevania games, mainly those of the earlier consoles. This is my first 3D one I have played through, I have played a bit of one of the ones made for the N64 system. Suffice to say, I enjoyed it a good deal, though it could have used a few more Castlevania touches to it. Though, from the little I have played of the N64 one, this one does feel more like a Castlevania game than did that one. This one has a lot of elements from other games within it as I was playing it I felt God of War's influence, Dante's Inferno came to mind during the last chapter and Shadow of the Colossus certainly came to mind when I had to fight those Titan bosses! There is a bit of Castlevania in there though in that your weapon is a whip, your character a Belmont and during the music box stage you hear a familiar tune being played.

The story has Gabriel Belmont on a quest to rid the land of evil by defeating the Lords of Shadow. He first travels to a region dominated by werewolves, then an icy landscape inhabited by vampires and finally to the realm of dead where necromancers reign supreme. He must fight and kill those beasts he encounters, solve puzzles and try and reassemble the God mask and take back the land from the Lords of Shadow. However, he is also on a quest to try and revive his wife, taken from him by the evil forces that have taken the land. This is his main driving force. He is aided by an elderly knight by the name of Zoback and awesomely voiced by Patrick Stewart.

The game plays a lot like God of War as far as the combat goes. You will gain more powers and level ups as you progress through the game. There is also a bit of Tomb Raider in this one as you have to do a lot of climbing and scaling, trying to get to seemingly impossible areas and you also must solve a myriad of puzzles too. The level that feels the most like a Castlevania game is the land of the vampires as it is the only level where you spend a good deal of time within castles. It also just has a look of Castlevania more than other levels. I do wish there was more of a Castlevania feel at times, but the story kept me progressing through the stages.

So, the game for me was fun. I especially liked the ending as I so want to play the sequel now that comes out in March which is the side benefit of getting the game after it had been out for a while. I would have hated having to wait like four years to find out what was going to happen next. Admittedly though, there are questions I have about the ending as well. I think some of those are answered in some of the other Castlevania: Lords of Shadow games released on 3DS and other systems though. I have heard that this game was not originally intending to be a Castlevania game, though I am not sure how true this is. At times, I can see how it may not have been one and that perhaps they just gave the character the name Belmont, but so much of the story, especially the ending suggests it was a Castlevania game through and through. I know I enjoyed it and look forward to the next installment.

God of War for the horror fan

[darkphoenix-83164 · 9/10 · 18 December 2015]

Back when I got my first Xbox360 console (yes, little late to the game), this was one of the first titles I played on it. Let me just say that I went through a dozen or so games afterward before I found something that I enjoyed as much as this game. Having played God of War back in the day, I instantly recognized the similarities between the two games but it never felt plagiarized, instead it felt like the perfect gift to those of us who are more inclined to the darker genres. Not having played the other Castlevania games, I can't compare them at all, but playing this made me a bit sorry for missing them. As other reviewers have stated, you don't have control of the camera at all, which is a little jarring at first, but you get used to it and it's not such a terrible thing as everyone makes it out to be, because the camera is usually pointed right towards that gigantic Gothic castle or that eerie decrepit tower in the distance (for example), and it does a great job of showing you what you need to see, and there is much to be seen. The combat is pretty much GoW-fare, with Gabriel wielding a combat cross to battle all sorts of enemy types. The titan/undead dragon traversal were moments where my palms got sweaty as I clung on for dear life to giant animated stone giants that constantly tried throwing me off. The quick time events are a bit distracting but that's not so bad. The bosses are fun and the puzzles are challenging but not too difficult. Some may argue that this game is derivative and unoriginal. They might be right, but I have never had so much fun playing something so "unoriginal" and "derivative". And I liked the twist at the end after the credits... Nice little setup for the sequel, although not explained exactly how or why. One of the most gorgeous games that I have played, without a doubt.

A review 7 years too late but better late than never. LOS 1 is what LOS 2 should've been.

[angiris · 9/10 · 2 December 2017]

Castlevania Lords of Shadow 1 is a truly wonderful, Gothic adventure game that dabbles with both a dark and light universe.

A world that feels alive, beautiful and intriguing. A world where you play as Gabriel Belmont, a holy warrior set out to save his beloved, Marie.

Now. We all know what the game is about by now so I'll get to why Im reviewing this as well as the sequel after all these years.

After being hyped and wanting the sequel after completing this, loving it to death I began realizing some grim errors and amazing aspects in both games. Things that need to be called out.

What I found that made Lords of Shadow 1 so outstandingly impactful and epic in every sense of the word was its setting, its music, its beautiful combination of Gothic adventure, horror and action in locations and creative sequences that never once felt boring or lifeless.

Obstacles could occur, but not in the shape of losing immersion or sense of emotional connection to this adventure.

The game upon every mission start or completion would give you an impactful dialog, narration by Zobek ( Patrick Stewart) who'd explain every bit of lore to you, make you care and feel for the character.

The plot twist at the end, revelation of Gabriels most haunting action, let alone his dramatic change into Dracul was ever so powerful. But aside from that... the way the game ended left you feeling for the character. The tragic hero. Who saved everyone, including himself.

The 1st game left me feeling like a true hero in a cool, medieval fantasy world, fighting werewolves, trolls, beasts, vampires, massive stone elementals and more.

The level design was VAST. Lots of different zones, variation in enemy design, boss design, locations, settings, platforms, even nice advantages to upgrading your weapon.

It kept the game moving forward in creative, cool ways that never felt out of place. yet still allowed for wonderful variation and freshness.

Something I feel that Lords of Shadow 2 completely messed up. Looking back on the 2, I was much more hyped for Lords of Shadow 2 than I was Lords of Shadow 1. But the experience playing them, the joy, immersion, feel and love is a thousand times stronger with the 1st.

Because LOS 1 didn't break with my immersion and feel of the game after its 1st sequence. LOS 2 did.

Gave us the epic cinematic. Gave us the epic medieval, superbly executed boss fight versus the holy knight and the massive machine.

Only to throw us into a cool vampiric sequence where we feed on a bunch of humans only to NEVER do that ever again, not see ANY humans at all... for the rest of the game except for other Belmont warrior.

Only to establish a bleak, urban, lifeless, completely lacking in any form of enemy variant as well as level design, kind of game.

I simply don't understand how. You needn't take my word for it. Just watch the cinematics of them both on YouTube to get a quick idea.

LOS 2 never changes its formula... EVER. You're in a city or you're shortly in Castle Dracula. Thats it. You will backtrack constantly... you will find yourself in places you've been running past often. You will realize the world is very small. And this especially goes for Castle Draculas underground. The zones were never interesting outside of Draculas Castle which WAS OPTIONAL for the most part. The city was nothing but a big labyrinth of a ruin. And some consider that dark and vampiric. Its not. If you wanna see that done right, Watch Underworld. This reminded me more of Devil May cry than anything remotely vampiric. And Castlevania is NOT Devil may cry.

Its sad to me... when I re-watch LOS 1 only to feel like a true adventurer who's constantly moving forward, enjoying the constant, heroic and lively narration of Zobek, feeling like I'm truly achieving something.

Where as in LOS 2... all I remember is sneaking behind insta-fail guards or using my invisibility power to fall through vents or open doors.

Mechanical, cold, bleak, urban bull-crap. Mixed with Dracula who was so much cooler in the start, but who's amazing coolness simply cannot save the game from being so boring. No matter how improved the combat was.

LOS 1 was a true Gothic, romantic, horror adventure story. And a true favorite of mine. I wish LOS 2 had been the same instead of simply being dumbed down and simplified in favor of better graphics and more combat.

9 out of 10. Not perfect because the combat system wasn't really my cup of tea and the game was quite linear in level design. But its all made up for by its story, music, artistic levels, creativity and variation. Plus EXTREMELY well done characters and epic boss fights. Something the 2nd game managed to screw up except for the music which is simply sad when it had every chance to learn. WHen it had every chance to continue doing what its prologue had begun. Its very selling point.

A damn shame because Im a huge Dracula Enthusiast. But I cannot deny how terribly bored I feel playing LOS 2 compared to LOS 1.

Great game, horrible ending!

[chucknorrisfacts · 8/10 · 12 October 2010]

I'm a die-hard fan of the Castlevania franchise. You can imagine my excitement when I learned Konami was making a new game called "Castlevania: Lords of Shadow". I was stoked when I saw the first trailer for the game. Visually, it looked amazing. They also recruited some top-notch vocal talent in casting Patrick Stewart in a lead role.

I couldn't wait to get my hands on "Lords of Shadow" and on October 5, 2010, I finally got my chance. With game in hand, I raced home as fast as I could and couldn't get the game in my PS3 fast enough. Finally, the wait was over.

As I mentioned before, visually the game is very impressive and the voice acting is superb. However, I'd be lying if I were to say I was totally satisfied with the game. In fact, I would be lying if I were to say anything other than the fact I was a little disappointed in it. Now don't get me wrong, it's a fun game, but I think there were certain things that could have definitely used improvement. And before anyone accuses me of being an unappeasable fan, no game is perfect, but some are certainly better than others.

One major flaw I found in the game was the inability to control the camera. This was a major annoyance in "Castlevania: Lament of Innocence," too, but was fixed in "Castlevania: Curse of Darkness." My question is…How can "Lament" make a mistake with cameras that "Curse of Darkness" fixed and then "Lords of Shadow" repeats the same mistake as "Lament"? Gamers should be able to control the camera, especially in a game where it's important to be able to look around for various relics and such.

Also, why did they put the camera so far away from the character? This didn't just happen once or twice during gameplay either. It happened quite frequently. When you're having to jump between different platforms or trying to find hidden relics it does no good to have the camera pulled back so far the character looks like an ant on screen.

The puzzles in the game were very challenging. I think the solutions were far from apparent and unless you had some sort of helping hand from a strategy guide or walkthrough, you'd easily be toiling with some puzzles for at least a half-hour. Some puzzles were just fine, but some were pure hell.

For a Castlevania game, I didn't really feel like much time was spent in a castle. A lot of time was spent crawling around on the outside of various structures but not really indoors so much. This was a big disappointment for me, particularly when once I got closer to the end of the game and realized there wasn't a gigantic last castle to explore.

My biggest problem with the game was the ending.

The pre-credits ending was great…then we're "treated" to a post-credits cutscene that is an absolute blasphemy to this wonderful game series, and to a game that had been great up 'til that point. What happened that was so awful? As it turns out: Gabriel Belmont, the main character you've been playing as for the whole game, becomes Dracula. No, that's not a typo…a Belmont…becomes…Dracula. What the hell is that? And then to top it off they set the final cutscene in modern times. So, what do you think that means? I'll tell you what it means…If they end up making a sequel to "Lords of Shadow", it's going to have to take place in this day and age. A modern day Castlevania doesn't make any sense and goes completely against everything the series has worked so hard to establish. Horrible, horrible creative choice by the game designers.

They don't even show you how he becomes Dracula. Last we know for Gabriel defeats Satan (who ends up being the mastermind of the whole scheme the game is based upon) with God's help. However, it's too late for him to save his true love Marie. She ascends into heaven taking with her the God mask that as it turns out only allows people to see what things are like through God's eyes, and doesn't actually bestow any godlike powers. Gabriel and Marie say goodbye and he falls to his knees and weeps as the credits roll. That would've been a perfect tragic ending to the game, an ending that would've explained why the Belmont family might hold such a grudge against the creatures of the night -- although, I think the epilogue of "Lament of Innocence" was so much better. The ending to "Lords of Shadow" just doesn't make sense. How do you go from being God's helper to Dracula in the time it takes for the credits to stop rolling. How can they not offer an explanation or cutscene explaining such a dramatic change? It's pure crap. It's a crap ending and that's why I can't say I love the game. I had fun playing it, the gameplay was great, the story too, but the ending ruined it for me.

I didn't like the fact the game didn't have Dracula in it, either. Sure, "Lament of Innocence" technically didn't either, but they pulled it off a lot better and the ending was a hell of a lot more satisfying. I'm a sucker for a good ending. You can have a less than stellar beginning or middle, but if you bring it back in the end with a great ending, I'm sold. This, unfortunately, didn't happen here.

I don't know what to make of the game now. I would say I'd be able to fully enjoy it had I not seen the final post-credits cutscene. Now all I can think of is how if Konami makes a sequel, it's going to suck because they're going to want to make it in modern times. Way to ruin an otherwise great game, morons!