I'm very sorry if I offended you
No offense taken, really. It just appeared to me as if you disliked that people focused on the series' plots for no reason other than "I don't care for the plot, therefore you shouldn't also."
You are obviously allowed to play Castlevania for the plot, but subjective opinions aside, I still think it's very safe to say that none of the CV games have a particularly interesting or well crafted story - a majority of them don't even have any plot development at ALL that's not in the manual.
You can't really say "subjective opinions aside" and then lay down a subjective opinion. You dislike the story and think it's not well-crafted, and you're allowed to think so. But I don't think like this, and many more also don't. I'll leave this one aside since this will devolve into another converstation already present on this board and is not the focus of what we're discussing.
Are you seriously going to tell me that the story is the main reason why you play any Castlevania game? And do you seriously think making the story more and more convoluted and depending on other iterations of the series, is the way to bring back Castlevania and make the series strong again?
Again: I became a fan of the series because of the story. May make zero sense on your mind, but this is exactly because you don't care for the plot at all. And I started on the old ones, mind you. The ones where "the plot goes nowhere except on the manuals." The games themselves gave little plot development sure, but the plot development that was present on the manuals did positivelly affect the experience for me, and it only got better when this plot received bigger focus.
If someone gives me a Castlevania where the "plot" is an excuse to have someone trying to whip Dracula's head off, no problem, I'll play it and weight its strengths on this alone (Adventure Rebirth is my favorite on this regard). But if you give me a Castlevania where someone
actually spent their time writing a story so the scenario makes sense and is not simply a rehash of the same idea over and over (or explains why it's a rehash of the same idea), I'll like it much better. It'll
enhance my enjoyment of the product.
As far as I'm aware, the plot was never a major point of criticism. It's not something that, when removed, instantly increases the quality of the games. So again I ask: Why do you feel that the story is an issue? If you dislike it, it's not something that is detracting from your enjoyment of the gameplay, or is it? The story of LoS2 was shit-tier, and even so people criticize it mostly for the gameplay.
The story of Castlevania is a magical thing that, when it's good, it enhances the experience. When it's bad, but with good gameplay, nobody gives a shit. It's not something that makes the product worse if it's bad, for the majority.
The overarching plot of the series, to me, doesn't feel convoluted at all. I feel that the stories are actually fairly simple to comprehend, and pretty straight forward as they are, giving the series the ability to slightly spin its most basic premise (someone climbs there and whips Dracula's face) every time. And it surprises me how people want to simplify
even those.To me that sounds more like the wet dream of a fandom, than a realistic way to reinvigorate a game series.
I don't think of a plot in such a grand way as to "reinvigorate the series", and I don't think many do. But then again -- why keep it kindergarden level when you can go for something more involved that is actually well done?
When removing something doesn't change the equation but adding it makes it better if well done, what the hell is the issue on adding it, then? It's not like adding a plot to Castlevania actually shat all over it.
I get this funny impression that, while people defend that the plot isn't relevant, they are at the same time defending that Castlevania IS about having a barebones, writen-on-a-napkin plot. If it's not relevant, leave it alone for those who care about it, why the fuzz? When did the supposedly irrelevant story get on the way of your enjoyment of the gameplay?
I'm not saying the games shouldn't have a good story. In fact I would love to have more of a story, I just don't want to see it expand much further than the borders of the game in which it exists, and I don't want it to subtract from the flow of the game experience. Most CV games already do it like that.
Why?
I agree entirely with you that the story shouldn't detract from the game's flow -- it should be weaved intelligently through the gameplay and never force the rhythm of the game (once started) to come to a halt. You're sitting to PLAY the game, after all.
But then, this specific bit of "the story shouldn't expand further than the game it's in" is what I don't get. What will be the issue with the gameplay if the story expands beyond one game? If the story is good and is coupled with good gameplay,
why shouldn't it expand with further good writing and further good gameplay?
You fear that the writer will corner himself like IGA running out of spaces in the timeline to create games, is that it? If this is what you're afraid of, know that IGA thought gameplay FIRST, story SECOND, to the point of creating things like Harmony of Despair and Judgment -- two games that obviously don't have where to stand on the canon, but got made anyway because IGA wanted to experiment with gameplay ideas, and ended up giving them excuse plots just for formalities.
If the gameplay is good, fuck the timeline -- the game is happening. And, as far as I'm aware, IGA's plots never got in the way of the gameplay's enjoyment (but DID get on the way of people actually interested on the story from making sense of it).
What I'm saying is that trying to build further on the existing canon, and trying to take it to new places is only going to make the story more and more convoluted and cringeworthy. There's only so much you can do with what we have at this point.
Well, I'm not even saying the current canon should be used anymore. My argument hinges entirely on: If adding the story is not a problem and can increase the game's overall experience quality, why do you want to take the story factor away? Argumentum ad populum? I'm having a hard time understanding the "story for Castlevania is not relevant but it shouldn't be worked on." Either it's relevant or it's not.
If you want, you can just tell me "if you want a story go read a book" right now, and I'll leave you alone with no hard feelings.
TL;DR: The story isn't Castlevania's selling point. That said, when it's good it enhances the experience and is remembered. When it's bad, nobody uses it as determinant of the gameplay (the selling point). So, why apply even smaller focus on the story if it makes no negative difference?