I dislike the term “Souls-like.” Not only does it force me to say “Souls” a lot in this review, but nobody seems to agree on what it constitutes. The roguelite Dead Cells, for example, is also considered a Souls-like…for some reason. Maybe it’s the high difficulty? The limited healing? Or perhaps the exploration? As much as I love the game, calling it a Souls-like seems like a marketing ploy by the devs. The Souls games have more than just those elements, such as high-commitment attacks, obscure side quests, an oppressive atmosphere, and more.

It seems as long as you have at least a few of the features that the Souls games popularized, your game is a Souls-like. But you know a series that has a lot in common with Souls that isn’t considered a Souls-like? Castlevania. The old-school games were brutally tough platformers that featured high-commitment attacks, oppressive atmospheres, and scarce healing opportunities. Symphony of the Night and its handheld successors added exploration, side quests, and RPG elements to the series, but they also ditched the methodical action and considerably lowered the difficulty. The higher challenge, whip-based combat, and tense platforming in Circle of the Moon on GBA was the only time Konami bridged the gap between the old and new Castlevanias. It was very flawed, but there was also nothing quite like it, until the arrival of the Souls games and the main subject of this review: Salt and Sanctuary.

I don’t just want to make another review reinforcing how similar Salt and Sanctuary is to Dark Souls. Sure, there’s a lot of valid comparisons to be made and I will bring them up later, but I want to bring light to why this game also feels like a true successor to old-school Castlevania. Most comparisons between Souls and Castlevania that I’ve seen reference Symphony of the Night, but the only features Souls borrowed from that game were the exploration, RPG elements, and variety of weapons. These features aren’t unique to Symphony, and they weren’t unique when it was first released. But that slow, deliberate combat from its platformer predecessors? That was special and it’s what Souls and every true Souls-like features in my opinion. Salt and Sanctuary is part of that group. It is as much a spiritual successor to Castlevania as it is a Souls-like.

Now for the game itself. It borrows from its inspiration very well. Every feature I explicitly mentioned in the first paragraph is present, so I won’t repeat them here. One of its new ideas are stone statues used to summon specific vendors at sanctuaries, which act like the bonfires in Dark Souls. These statues are fairly scarce, encouraging thoughtful decision-making as to what vendor you need at the moment. Should I summon a blacksmith to upgrade my gear? Maybe an alchemist to change my current weapon? Or maybe a sellsword to summon another player? There are eight types of statues that can be used and no more than four are allowed per sanctuary. However, once I realized I could group multiple vendors with the fast travel guides, the stressful decision-making was completely destroyed. They can warp you to any sanctuary you’ve visited. As a result, I was warping back to a select few sanctuaries over and over again to stock up on items or upgrade my equipment. No need to use any statues other than the ones for summoning guides. Or I could just use a calling horn to warp to any sanctuary where a guide was installed. The guides even sell these horns for dirt cheap, so why not buy as many as you can to fast travel at your convenience? I’m grateful I didn’t realize the sheer brokenness of calling horns until after I finished the game.

My suggestions for fixing this are simple. Limit fast travel to the sanctuaries where I placed guides and remove calling horns. I would then have to decide if installing a guide at my current sanctuary was worth it. By extension, I would be encouraged to use the other statues more often. I don’t think backtracking would have been negatively impacted all that much with these changes. The world is full of shortcuts back to previous levels and even if the backtracking was tedious, the level design pushes the player to explore areas in a mostly linear order. That is probably the reason there is no map, but I still think there should have been one because it’s much harder to remember the layout of a rectangular 2D world as opposed to a uniquely shaped 3D world like Lordran.

I wasn’t impressed with the covenant system. I chose to stick with my starting creed the whole playthrough because I correctly assumed breaking it would result in undesirable consequences. On a gameplay level, my choice didn’t affect me beyond a handful of sanctuaries preventing me from using elemental buffs for my weapon. I used those a lot, but if the intention was to challenge players that stick to one creed, Ska Studios needed to include more sanctuaries aligned with different creeds. Players would then have to make a choice. Either they stick to their creed and miss out on certain items or they change their creed to get those items, but face repercussions from their previous creed.

The missed potential is depressing because the statues and covenant system could have made Salt and Sanctuary rise above being a Souls and Castlevania (Soulsvania?) clone. It’s an extremely competent clone for something made primarily by one person, but it is a clone at the end of the day. I still had fun playing it and can easily recommend it to fans of its inspiration. Just don’t expect it to deliver an experience like those classics.