Castlevania Dungeon Forums

The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Classic Castlevania Threads => Topic started by: suomynona on November 26, 2016, 07:20:15 AM

Title: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 26, 2016, 07:20:15 AM
I wan't to hear people's opinion on this debate of Aria of Sorrow VS Dawn of Sorrow

Personally, I prefer Aria cuz it has better music, much brighter graphics and KOJIMA ART!

Dawn was still a good game, but a missed opportunity with that damn seal, too dark graphic and god terrible artwork.
Only thing that DoS ever suppressed was Julius mode and Dance of Illusion composement (personal best ver)
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: X on November 26, 2016, 11:18:44 AM
AoS was the better game. But I'd want the graphical capabilities of DoS' characters, animations, backgrounds, effects, sounds, musical quality, etc. to be melded with AoS to bring about the best AoS game ever conceived. DoS was terrible for the repeating of AoS' many aspects.

The story really did nothing for me as it was all wrapped up in AoS.

I didn't like using souls to make weapons as it only prolonged the game in a rather bland and painful way. And since you can only collect one boss soul you would have to play through the game twice in order to craft every weapon possible. No thanks. Just let me find said weapons on enemies or in the castle.

I also didn't like the magic seal system using the stylus. A horribly executed gimmic that the game was better without.

I will give it to DoS for making a better designed Soma. His AoS outfit just didn't do anything for me. And it is something Dracula himself would not wear. He's not that kind of vampire.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 26, 2016, 05:06:39 PM
Yeah. Only good aspect of DoS's character design was the clothing choice. HoD proved that with Kojima art of DoS's Soma. I wouldn't complain about anime art style. It could have been good. But it was just bad. JUST BAD. If someone better, like artist for Final Fantasy 7 or Pokemon series was in charge I wouldn't complain.

Only if DoS had some kickass scenes like Julius fight in AoS... Menace was just plain weird. Villains were just boring. Bosses at least was quite cool like that Dio guy at clock tower
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Claimh Solais on November 26, 2016, 05:20:39 PM
AoS is a significantly better game. I'd pick the first one any day of the week over the second.

That's not to say that the second one is bad at all, though. Sure, it's got some crap, like:
-The story was a needless continuation to the otherwise perfect ending AoS had for the series
-The story itself was terrible, with all the new characters sucking really bad (well, aside from Dario. I actually liked him)
-The artwork being downgraded to what is famously referred to as "generic Saturday morning anime"
-The characters themselves being downgraded to what is "generic Saturday morning anime"*
-Terrible and needless implementation of touch-screen gimmickry (magic seals, ice breaking, etc)

* = Characters weren't deep or fleshed out in AoS, but at least they didn't have pointless quirks, like Hammer's weird and random schoolboy crush on Yoko. He mentioned being attracted to Yoko in AoS, but he was more smooth and mature about it, and the game didn't make a big deal out of it. DoS turned him into a real kid about it, and the game constantly brought it up to the point where it was annoying.

But it did have some cool stuff:
-Gameplay, aside from touch-screen gimmickry, was great
-Collecting multiples of the same soul powers up said soul
-Julius Mode having a story to it. Sure, it's barely there, but it sufficed and was pretty nice
-Julius Mode having two other playable characters to use
-Julius Mode having a leveling system, rather than just being the same throughout the game
-Larger and more varied environments
-Another excellent soundtrack

Overall, though, it felt like they were just doing a DS remake of AoS at first before changing it last minute to be a sequel rather than a remake. You're repeating a lot of the same stuff as you did in the original, albeit slightly changed, but the game's plot still revolves around mostly the same thing, along with the fact that you're doing a lot of the same stuff you did in AoS.

tl;dr - AoS is much better, but DoS wasn't too shabby.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 26, 2016, 05:31:56 PM
Agreed. This is my opinion of how DoS could improve

- KOJIMA ARTWORK (gotta put that in capitals man)
- Final boss at least something better then Menace (It's just shit u no)
- Better story, especially the storyline after Dario/Aguni fight (I really don't get why on earth Alucard said that "Mina is fake" thing. If u r Soma, would you believe that bullshit? Soma doesn't like Alucard in person anyway)
- Much kickass characteristics (Hammer and Julius. They were so much downgraded)
- Get the damn seal out

I aint have any complain on the gameplay, but 99% of complain is in non-gameplay, mostly around design and story.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 26, 2016, 07:01:40 PM
Are you guys serious that Soma's character and clothing design were better in DOS???
Superman boots and a Johnny Depp bob haircut> AOS' statuesque Soma who actually looked like Mathias with inverted colours and style? Yyyyyyea-FUCK NO..

AOS' artwork and character design (aside from Yoko's portrait where he neck and bust are way out of proportion) slays DOS 1,000 times. (awakened Soma did look a bit like Michael Jackson; see next point)
AOS has the superior narrative and a suspense/ thriller (Thriller...) aspect to the story which no Castlevania had previously done.
AOS is like Zelda OOT, it started the whole Souls system which was mimicked in DOS and later refined in OOE.
AOS' Castle has a better design (probably the best) imo.
AOS has the superior OST imo.

DOS has better graphics hands down.
DOS has some interesting and more challenging boss fights.
DOS has innovative exploration with Paranoia.
DOS' Julius/ Yoko/ Alucard mode feels like a whole new game, even with levelling up and boasting some new tracks.
DOS overall is the more challenging game and its weapon creation from souls means you can't run straight to one location and grab weapons like the Claimh Solais.

Both are damn good games, it would be very close. I would probably edge AOS slightly higher though as the artwork and musical score are a big part of the CV franchise.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Shiroi Koumori on November 26, 2016, 09:45:19 PM
Awww... it's hard to choose between the two. I like both soundtracks.
Gameplay wise, AoS is better and can be finished faster. Plus I still know the castle map even with years spent not playing the game.
As for the sprite work, I prefer DoS more. But for the portrait art, I'd go with AoS, duh.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: X on November 26, 2016, 10:41:03 PM
Quote
Are you guys serious that Soma's character and clothing design were better in DOS???

Character-wise? Not that I know of.

Taste in clothing? F**k yes. Boots aside, Some is better in his trench coat look then that feathery robe-like apparatus he sported in AoS. And I'll attest to that with a wooden stake through my own heart.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 27, 2016, 12:34:20 AM
DoS did better in recurring material. Its original source certainly lacked. Like it was successful because Aria was so good. If it was completely new, it would not been such a good game (not in context of gameplay). The original complement was mostly unnoticeable and the original characters were bit plain. But the remix of previous music and recurring AoS characters were still good (If there wasn't that damn artwork). It was good, but doesn't stands out like AoS.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: GuyStarwind on November 27, 2016, 12:48:17 AM
I do enjoy AoS more but as others have said DoS has its moments. I actually played Dawn first. I do have to admit I didn't care for them nerfing Julius so much on DoS but I fully understand why they did. But still old age must've caught up with him on his 56th birthday and that's why he's so slow and forgot how to do Omnia Vanitas and other cool moves. But I do love the Julius mode ending and wish they would just go with that. I know it won't happen but another Sorrow game where Soma gives into being Dracula and Julius and his buds have to stop him would be kickass.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 27, 2016, 12:52:56 AM
I do have to admit I didn't care for them nerfing Julius so much on DoS but I fully understand why they did. But still old age must've caught up with him on his 56th birthday and that's why he's so slow and forgot how to do Omnia Vanitas and other cool moves. But I do love the Julius mode ending and wish they would just go with that. I know it won't happen but another Sorrow game where Soma gives into being Dracula and Julius and his buds have to stop him would be kickass.

Quick reminder that Julius was born in 1980 and will be 55 years old in AoS. And he still kicked-ass in AoS and become so much of weakling in DoS is just unacceptable. Being one year older wouldn't make so much difference in age of mid-50s.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 27, 2016, 03:57:07 AM
Taste in clothing? F**k yes. Boots aside, Some is better in his trench coat look then that feathery robe-like apparatus he sported in AoS. And I'll attest to that with a wooden stake through my own heart.
https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette2.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fcastlevania%2Fimages%2F2%2F29%2FSomaDawn.jpg%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20080227203754&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcastlevania.wikia.com%2Fwiki%2FSoma_Cruz&docid=QhaBt0ErMNazXM&tbnid=RoOzL1FQzlprpM%3A&vet=1&w=800&h=1200&bih=741&biw=1517&ved=0ahUKEwjUtLTx78jQAhWLiLwKHXvyDG0QMwgdKAEwAQ&iact=mrc&uact=8 (https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette2.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fcastlevania%2Fimages%2F2%2F29%2FSomaDawn.jpg%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20080227203754&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcastlevania.wikia.com%2Fwiki%2FSoma_Cruz&docid=QhaBt0ErMNazXM&tbnid=RoOzL1FQzlprpM%3A&vet=1&w=800&h=1200&bih=741&biw=1517&ved=0ahUKEwjUtLTx78jQAhWLiLwKHXvyDG0QMwgdKAEwAQ&iact=mrc&uact=8)

https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2F8%2F88%2FSoma_Cruz_(Castlevania_character).gif&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSoma_Cruz&docid=zynoGIssOP2V4M&tbnid=tY_FjX4bKbkmoM%3A&vet=1&w=370&h=768&bih=741&biw=1517&ved=0ahUKEwjUtLTx78jQAhWLiLwKHXvyDG0QMwgeKAIwAg&iact=mrc&uact=8 (https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2F8%2F88%2FSoma_Cruz_(Castlevania_character).gif&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSoma_Cruz&docid=zynoGIssOP2V4M&tbnid=tY_FjX4bKbkmoM%3A&vet=1&w=370&h=768&bih=741&biw=1517&ved=0ahUKEwjUtLTx78jQAhWLiLwKHXvyDG0QMwgeKAIwAg&iact=mrc&uact=8)

We must be from different planets X.  ???

Although AOSoma looks a bit overly flamboyant he still has some life and charm to his overall appearance.

http://static.zerochan.net/Soma.Cruz.full.293071.jpg (http://static.zerochan.net/Soma.Cruz.full.293071.jpg)

DOSoma looks confused and from the 80's with shoulder pads like Diana Ross.

Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 27, 2016, 03:59:54 AM
https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette2.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fcastlevania%2Fimages%2F2%2F29%2FSomaDawn.jpg%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20080227203754&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcastlevania.wikia.com%2Fwiki%2FSoma_Cruz&docid=QhaBt0ErMNazXM&tbnid=RoOzL1FQzlprpM%3A&vet=1&w=800&h=1200&bih=741&biw=1517&ved=0ahUKEwjUtLTx78jQAhWLiLwKHXvyDG0QMwgdKAEwAQ&iact=mrc&uact=8 (https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette2.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fcastlevania%2Fimages%2F2%2F29%2FSomaDawn.jpg%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20080227203754&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcastlevania.wikia.com%2Fwiki%2FSoma_Cruz&docid=QhaBt0ErMNazXM&tbnid=RoOzL1FQzlprpM%3A&vet=1&w=800&h=1200&bih=741&biw=1517&ved=0ahUKEwjUtLTx78jQAhWLiLwKHXvyDG0QMwgdKAEwAQ&iact=mrc&uact=8)

https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2F8%2F88%2FSoma_Cruz_(Castlevania_character).gif&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSoma_Cruz&docid=zynoGIssOP2V4M&tbnid=tY_FjX4bKbkmoM%3A&vet=1&w=370&h=768&bih=741&biw=1517&ved=0ahUKEwjUtLTx78jQAhWLiLwKHXvyDG0QMwgeKAIwAg&iact=mrc&uact=8 (https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2F8%2F88%2FSoma_Cruz_(Castlevania_character).gif&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSoma_Cruz&docid=zynoGIssOP2V4M&tbnid=tY_FjX4bKbkmoM%3A&vet=1&w=370&h=768&bih=741&biw=1517&ved=0ahUKEwjUtLTx78jQAhWLiLwKHXvyDG0QMwgeKAIwAg&iact=mrc&uact=8)

We must be from different planets X.  ???

Although AOSoma looks a bit overly flamboyant he still has some life and charm to his overall appearance.

http://static.zerochan.net/Soma.Cruz.full.293071.jpg (http://static.zerochan.net/Soma.Cruz.full.293071.jpg)

DOSoma looks confused and from the 80's with shoulder pads like Diana Ross.

I think its because DoS artwork is so SO BAD. Take a look of HoDespair Soma and compare it with AoS Soma.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Claimh Solais on November 27, 2016, 05:59:20 AM
I think its because DoS artwork is so SO BAD. Take a look of HoDespair Soma and compare it with AoS Soma.

I agree with this. Taking his DoS outfit and putting it into a different artstyle really affects how it looks. The artstyle goes a LONG way in character design.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette3.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fcastlevania%2Fimages%2Fe%2Fe4%2FSoma_-_CHD.PNG%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20100826231939&hash=2e643f57c59bd9b533840d6e0fedb0a7)

His appearance in DoS applied to the Ayami Kojima art actually fits the overall feel of CV at the time better than his AoS outfit did. That's not to say I don't like his AoS appearance, though.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 27, 2016, 07:44:25 AM
I agree with this. Taking his DoS outfit and putting it into a different artstyle really affects how it looks. The artstyle goes a LONG way in character design.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette3.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fcastlevania%2Fimages%2Fe%2Fe4%2FSoma_-_CHD.PNG%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20100826231939&hash=2e643f57c59bd9b533840d6e0fedb0a7)

His appearance in DoS applied to the Ayami Kojima art actually fits the overall feel of CV at the time better than his AoS outfit did. That's not to say I don't like his AoS appearance, though.

I believe that this goes same with Yoko as well.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: theANdROId on November 27, 2016, 11:42:16 AM
I like both pretty equally I think.  I prefer the darker look and feel of AoS, but I just liked DoS (I don't know that I could pinpoint anything that I liked better).
I think DoS might have been better if it were more like an AoS 2:New and Improved.  Keep the overall look and feel (and probably just about everything else) from AoS, but make it a little bigger and deeper by adding some of the stuff from DoS.


I didn't like using souls to make weapons as it only prolonged the game in a rather bland and painful way. And since you can only collect one boss soul you would have to play through the game twice in order to craft every weapon possible. No thanks. Just let me find said weapons on enemies or in the castle.
What are you talking about?  It's been awhile since I've played either game, but I don't remember what you mean by this at all. :-S
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Claimh Solais on November 27, 2016, 01:53:38 PM
What are you talking about?  It's been awhile since I've played either game, but I don't remember what you mean by this at all. :-S

Weapon synthesis was a new feature added to the game. You could do it at Yoko's shop, exchanging enemy souls for new weapons. Some of these weapons, such as the Valmanway, required boss souls, meaning that if you want to collect every weapon and collect every soul, you're forced to play through the game multiple times or go through Boss Rush Mode.

That, and the fact that soul skills now level up, were the two new major features added for the soul system.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: GuyStarwind on November 27, 2016, 06:26:07 PM
Quick reminder that Julius was born in 1980 and will be 55 years old in AoS. And he still kicked-ass in AoS and become so much of weakling in DoS is just unacceptable. Being one year older wouldn't make so much difference in age of mid-50s.

Oh, I agree for sure. I was just being silly by saying he had a bad year. I'm about a 100% sure they only made him a weaker in DoS because they needed to make sure Yoko and Alucard had a chance to be used too.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 27, 2016, 08:04:01 PM
Oh, I agree for sure. I was just being silly by saying he had a bad year. I'm about a 100% sure they only made him a weaker in DoS because they needed to make sure Yoko and Alucard had a chance to be used too.

They nerfed him purely due to difficulty, plain and simple. Does anyone remember how hard you could troll with Julius in AOS? (It was Easy mode I tells ya)

There actually could be a reason for it. At the end of AOS Julius mentions that the Vk's power (rage) was fading. I don't see why it wouldn't come back if there was another Dark Lord on the brink of emerging (during DOS' events) however it may be the fact that because Castlevania itself was no longer there, this played its part. For a period of 30 or so years, Julius left the VK inside an eclipse sealed Castlevania to "weaken it"(English version's translation) so perhaps over time it's full unlocked power (as we see in POR) fades away without Castlevania's presence.

In another thread someone had also put forth a convincing theory that the Belmonts' blood and the eternal corridor's seal are what prevents Castlevania from re-appearing. So perhaps if it's not there, the full power (rage) isn't unlocked by default. (This could also make an interesting theory as to why Simon had to add power ups to the VK during Simon's Quest).

Anyways, as for Julius' physical form such as his weak superjump in DOS, there should have been a specific reason for it. But I'm glad it wasn't another AOS troll mode. 

Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 28, 2016, 01:03:09 AM
Weapon synthesis was a new feature added to the game. You could do it at Yoko's shop, exchanging enemy souls for new weapons. Some of these weapons, such as the Valmanway, required boss souls, meaning that if you want to collect every weapon and collect every soul, you're forced to play through the game multiple times or go through Boss Rush Mode.

That, and the fact that soul skills now level up, were the two new major features added for the soul system.

I think Weapon Synthesis is quite unnecessary cuz it requires some of rarest souls and even boss souls. I preferred where you can just get it and bam, its yours thing. Also, Clamih Solais (dunno exactly spelling but u get it), thinking all the trouble you have to go through to get it in DoS, is just not OP. It should be like Clamih Solais from AoS or Crissaegrim from SotN or even more OP cuz of increased difficulty. Also you can't get the Chaos Ring if you make the Clamih Solais or anything similar. That's just Bullshit.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 28, 2016, 01:08:30 AM
They nerfed him purely due to difficulty, plain and simple. Does anyone remember how hard you could troll with Julius in AOS? (It was Easy mode I tells ya)

There actually could be a reason for it. At the end of AOS Julius mentions that the Vk's power (rage) was fading. I don't see why it wouldn't come back if there was another Dark Lord on the brink of emerging (during DOS' events) however it may be the fact that because Castlevania itself was no longer there, this played its part. For a period of 30 or so years, Julius left the VK inside an eclipse sealed Castlevania to "weaken it"(English version's translation) so perhaps over time it's full unlocked power (as we see in POR) fades away without Castlevania's presence.

In another thread someone had also put forth a convincing theory that the Belmonts' blood and the eternal corridor's seal are what prevents Castlevania from re-appearing. So perhaps if it's not there, the full power (rage) isn't unlocked by default. (This could also make an interesting theory as to why Simon had to add power ups to the VK during Simon's Quest).

Anyways, as for Julius' physical form such as his weak superjump in DOS, there should have been a specific reason for it. But I'm glad it wasn't another AOS troll mode.

Can say that. This version was much like a throwback of Dracula's curse. Whilst I can say its even much superior then the main DoS, but some complains.
- Where's Grant?
- Y no stat screen? Its not that hard to program a extra stat screen IGA.
- At least allow us for potions. I still can't beat Soma for damn sake.

Julius is still cool, but I don't get why Julius is so much nerfed as of narrative settings, like he can't even defeat Dario.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: theplottwist on November 28, 2016, 01:19:28 AM
Julius is still cool, but I don't get why Julius is so much nerfed as of narrative settings, like he can't even defeat Dario.

He CAN defeat Dario. The issue is that he can't access the demon bound to Dario's soul, and thus, Dario's got unlimited stamina/firepower.

They basically cheated to make Dario defeat Julius. Remember: Julius can still destroy demons that needed seals to be destroyed without using seals at all. He destroyed them so fast they couldn't regenerate.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Shiroi Koumori on November 28, 2016, 01:22:52 AM
Can say that. This version was much like a throwback of Dracula's curse. Whilst I can say its even much superior then the main DoS, but some complains.
- Where's Grant?
- Y no stat screen? Its not that hard to program a extra stat screen IGA.
- At least allow us for potions. I still can't beat Soma for damn sake.

To answer 1 and 2:
Hammer was supposed to be Grant. But due to Konami, IGA was given way to small of a budget and way less time to finish the game. It is already good enough that IGA included a Julius mode given all the restraints he was facing.
For question 3:
No choice but to get better at the game like all the old school vanias.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 28, 2016, 01:30:02 AM
They nerfed him purely due to difficulty, plain and simple. Does anyone remember how hard you could troll with Julius in AOS? (It was Easy mode I tells ya)

There actually could be a reason for it. At the end of AOS Julius mentions that the Vk's power (rage) was fading. I don't see why it wouldn't come back if there was another Dark Lord on the brink of emerging (during DOS' events) however it may be the fact that because Castlevania itself was no longer there, this played its part. For a period of 30 or so years, Julius left the VK inside an eclipse sealed Castlevania to "weaken it"(English version's translation) so perhaps over time it's full unlocked power (as we see in POR) fades away without Castlevania's presence.

In another thread someone had also put forth a convincing theory that the Belmonts' blood and the eternal corridor's seal are what prevents Castlevania from re-appearing. So perhaps if it's not there, the full power (rage) isn't unlocked by default. (This could also make an interesting theory as to why Simon had to add power ups to the VK during Simon's Quest).

Anyways, as for Julius' physical form such as his weak superjump in DOS, there should have been a specific reason for it. But I'm glad it wasn't another AOS troll mode.

About VK's fading power, VK still held power even in the Belmont's exile during Leon's time to Trevor's time, which, (not considering Sonia cuz she's non-canon) the power did not fade away, actually, it became stronger. Also when the Morris' had the VK (Bloodlines and PoR), it was still as effective as. Even en Bloodlines, Castlevania was in its ruin then. Thinking that the Dracula is still around and dark power still lurking (like Celia) (also that Castlevania is technically still existing; just in the solar eclipse. If it was gone for good, we wouldn't be seeing AoS anyway) , I really don't think VK lost its power in any way.

Also, Julius' age don't matter, cuz like in AoS he was a kickass, and in Adventures, Christopher was narratively stronger then Soleiyu (or that is at least how I type it). Thinking of that, I don't think age doesn't matter for Belmont's thousand year-old vampire hunting. (We can say about Eric or Morris Baldwin, but they are nit Belmont, so hey ho!)
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 28, 2016, 01:34:46 AM
To answer 1 and 2:
Hammer was supposed to be Grant. But due to Konami, IGA was given way to small of a budget and way less time to finish the game. It is already good enough that IGA included a Julius mode given all the restraints he was facing.
For question 3:
No choice but to get better at the game like all the old school vanias.

Yeah. I get the point. I do agree, especially that Konami was and is a asshole. But,
1: Hammer's data was actually almost completed and it was in the game as dummy data
2: As I said, stat screen is quite simple to program
3: It is supposed to be MetroidVania and just a fan service throwback to CV3. So technically it is still MetroidVania. Also, it is more likely to get hit in Julius mode then CV3, so I think they should give the players some mercy.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 28, 2016, 01:43:38 AM
He CAN defeat Dario. The issue is that he can't access the demon bound to Dario's soul, and thus, Dario's got unlimited stamina/firepower.

They basically cheated to make Dario defeat Julius. Remember: Julius can still destroy demons that needed seals to be destroyed without using seals at all. He destroyed them so fast they couldn't regenerate.

Yeah, but like if Julius is THAT strong, why do they have to say he lost,? It could be like Celia made losing Dario flee, or at least a Stalemate. Julius' loss is unnecessary and much of hurt to character in par of Hammer's chase of characteristics.
That is my biggest complaint on story, other would be:
- The prologue just sound random. It could start like Soma getting a threat mail or Mina gets kidnapped or something.
- Arikado's speech to Soma in good ending route. Why would Soma believe that his dead girlfriend is actually fake, also he is in such rage, less likely to listen. My opinion is that Arikado instead should say that "If you become Dracula, that's not what Mina wants, that's what she wanted to prevent from happening." and then say that it was a trick.
- What's Menace? It's so random and weird, something at least like Dracula Wraith would be nice.

One word, its just bizarre.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 28, 2016, 03:36:03 AM
Good call with Grant/ Hammer Shiroi, beat me to the punch :)

About VK's fading power, VK still held power even in the Belmont's exile during Leon's time to Trevor's time, which, (not considering Sonia cuz she's non-canon) the power did not fade away, actually, it became stronger. Also when the Morris' had the VK (Bloodlines and PoR), it was still as effective as. Even en Bloodlines, Castlevania was in its ruin then. Thinking that the Dracula is still around and dark power still lurking (like Celia) (also that Castlevania is technically still existing; just in the solar eclipse. If it was gone for good, we wouldn't be seeing AoS anyway) , I really don't think VK lost its power in any way.

I think you're misunderstanding my comment in context to a few facts:

Re: LOI -  The Castle in LOI (although unconfirmed) is not considered to be the original Castlevania i.e. the one seen in Castlevania III. Because the VK was conceived at the time of LOI and Dracula didn't have 'his own Castle'. This would not apply. The VK's power (rage) could have faded after CVIII and become completely active again by CV1.

-Re: Bloodlines - True that when the Morris clan during Bloodlines had it, it was at Castle Prosperina, though Castlevania was never resurrected at this time and the game was made a long time ago.

-Re: POR - The Morris/ Lecarde descendants only unlock it when Castlevania has been resurrected once again.

-I never said the Vk was "gone for good"

-I never made the assumption the Vk's "power faded", I only assumed that the VK's power is its rage; Sara's rage from LOI.
 This is not an assumption as it is said at the end of AOS by Julius, I even recall a thread discussion (which I believe I started) where Shiroi translated this line in Japanese, and it was basically the same.*

*I reiterate, not saying the VK's power is completely gone, simply that it's rage has been quelled temporarily.

However, the Castlevania<>VK link is simply a theory. Given the context of what all the games have in common, it's Dracula's potential resurrection, or more specifically, the resurrection of the Dark Lord (which also covers Soma). Because of this, the VK's rage would still be at max during the events of DOS. Hence, why I stated initially prior to my theory that Julius was nerfed so hard to give his mode more difficulty - his super jump being nerfed is evidence of this, and the proof being that in Soma's mode Julius outright scales the entry to the castle with Yoko commenting that he was able to do it because, well "He's Julius"

Also, Julius' age don't matter, cuz like in AoS he was a kickass, and in Adventures, Christopher was narratively stronger then Soleiyu (or that is at least how I type it). Thinking of that, I don't think age doesn't matter for Belmont's thousand year-old vampire hunting. (We can say about Eric or Morris Baldwin, but they are nit Belmont, so hey ho!)
I literally never commented on Julius' age :-X
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 28, 2016, 04:29:22 AM
Good call with Grant/ Hammer Shiroi, beat me to the punch :)

I think you're misunderstanding my comment in context to a few facts:

Re: LOI -  The Castle in LOI (although unconfirmed) is not considered to be the original Castlevania i.e. the one seen in Castlevania III. Because the VK was conceived at the time of LOI and Dracula didn't have 'his own Castle'. This would not apply. The VK's power (rage) could have faded after CVIII and become completely active again by CV1.

-Re: Bloodlines - True that when the Morris clan during Bloodlines had it, it was at Castle Prosperina, though Castlevania was never resurrected at this time and the game was made a long time ago.

-Re: POR - The Morris/ Lecarde descendants only unlock it when Castlevania has been resurrected once again.

-I never said the Vk was "gone for good"

-I never made the assumption the Vk's "power faded", I only assumed that the VK's power is its rage; Sara's rage from LOI.
 This is not an assumption as it is said at the end of AOS by Julius, I even recall a thread discussion (which I believe I started) where Shiroi translated this line in Japanese, and it was basically the same.*

*I reiterate, not saying the VK's power is completely gone, simply that it's rage has been quelled temporarily.

However, the Castlevania<>VK link is simply a theory. Given the context of what all the games have in common, it's Dracula's potential resurrection, or more specifically, the resurrection of the Dark Lord (which also covers Soma). Because of this, the VK's rage would still be at max during the events of DOS. Hence, why I stated initially prior to my theory that Julius was nerfed so hard to give his mode more difficulty - his super jump being nerfed is evidence of this, and the proof being that in Soma's mode Julius outright scales the entry to the castle with Yoko commenting that he was able to do it because, well "He's Julius"
 I literally never commented on Julius' age :-X

Indeed. It is your opinion after all. All has different opinion. And the fact that VK theory is only a fan assumption, I personally believe that neither of us is right or wrong.

I personally think that Julius was nerfed because IGA wanted Julius to be like 'good ol' friend', also to make Soma look stronger and stuff alike. Whilst my theory of Julius' characteristic would be good for a character like Wind or Morris Baldwin, I think it is not what fans expect for a Belmont, yet the most powerful one.

Also I commented on Julius' age cuz that was what the story was going for that Julius is old and he is now weak.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 28, 2016, 06:44:06 AM
All has different opinion. And the fact that VK theory is only a fan assumption

Mate, this is not a fan assumption.
Opinions are based on both interpretation of facts and making assumptions. The difference between a well formed opinion and a random uninformed opinion = this: Your opinion means 5 parts of F-all if you're just throwing statements around willy nilly.

Back to the matter at hand it's all contained in this thread:

http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php/topic,8229.msg183115.html#msg183115 (http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php/topic,8229.msg183115.html#msg183115)

Some cliffnotes to save everyone (who cares) time in Chronological order:

Julius Belmont: You fought well. When we fled the castle, I felt the power from Vampire Killer fading away. I don't know what that means. But I won't have to do anything for the time being. -Best (canon) ending; AOS

Me:
"I'll try explaining it this way: the power of the VK is due to Sara's soul. The more rage that its soul has ie during a Dracula battle [at its maximum] the more potential or latent "power"[rage] dwells within the VK."

Shiroi translated the Japanese script as this:
Julius Belmont: "When I(we) escaped the castle, I noticed that the Vampire Killer has lost* its power."
"I don't know what this means but, it seems that I'm going to have some spare time."


Plottwist points out DOS' Library mode entry:
Vampire Killer:
A whip that destroys all that is associated with the dark creatures of the night.  As a result of an ancient blood pact, it can only be used by a Belmont.  Its power was temporarily weakened last year when Soma broke free of his destiny as the dark lord. However, its potent power has not been entirely lost.


Me:
"If its "potent power" wasn't completely active during DoS I then wonder if this is a canon explanation to why Julius was significantly nerfed between the two games."

This is explained in 2 games, it doesn't differ in the Japanese version, thus there was no poetic licence taken by English translators. I don't say this often or ever, but if your opinion differs to this then your opinion is fan fiction.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 29, 2016, 12:02:05 AM
Mate, this is not a fan assumption.
Opinions are based on both interpretation of facts and making assumptions. The difference between a well formed opinion and a random uninformed opinion = this: Your opinion means 5 parts of F-all if you're just throwing statements around willy nilly.

Back to the matter at hand it's all contained in this thread:

http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php/topic,8229.msg183115.html#msg183115 (http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php/topic,8229.msg183115.html#msg183115)

Some cliffnotes to save everyone (who cares) time in Chronological order:

Julius Belmont: You fought well. When we fled the castle, I felt the power from Vampire Killer fading away. I don't know what that means. But I won't have to do anything for the time being. -Best (canon) ending; AOS

Me:
"I'll try explaining it this way: the power of the VK is due to Sara's soul. The more rage that its soul has ie during a Dracula battle [at its maximum] the more potential or latent "power"[rage] dwells within the VK."

Shiroi translated the Japanese script as this:
Julius Belmont: "When I(we) escaped the castle, I noticed that the Vampire Killer has lost* its power."
"I don't know what this means but, it seems that I'm going to have some spare time."


Plottwist points out DOS' Library mode entry:
Vampire Killer:
A whip that destroys all that is associated with the dark creatures of the night.  As a result of an ancient blood pact, it can only be used by a Belmont.  Its power was temporarily weakened last year when Soma broke free of his destiny as the dark lord. However, its potent power has not been entirely lost.


Me:
"If its "potent power" wasn't completely active during DoS I then wonder if this is a canon explanation to why Julius was significantly nerfed between the two games."

This is explained in 2 games, it doesn't differ in the Japanese version, thus there was no poetic licence taken by English translators. I don't say this often or ever, but if your opinion differs to this then your opinion is fan fiction.

Get it. Maybe I needed more research on it. Sorry for underestimating u VK :)
However, this bring up to:
If VK was still powerful, how could Julius lose to Dario? I no its repetitive but I seek explanation plz!
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 29, 2016, 01:23:41 AM
Get it. Maybe I needed more research on it. Sorry for underestimating u VK :)
However, this bring up to:
If VK was still powerful, how could Julius lose to Dario? I no its repetitive but I seek explanation plz!

It's been since DOS was released that I've played it so I don't have every single detail fresh. However, the thing is - and this is the difference between AOS and DOS - that Julius could not seal the creatures the way that Soma could. Julius mentions to Soma that (canonically) he could destroy the monsters to the point where they couldn't regenerate. Although a normal person would not be supposed to be able to do this, Julius can. (The same way he's able to scale the Castle entry in DOS).

The best assumptions are that the VK for most of the sequence of events in DOS (until the Dark Lord candidates start rearing their heads), the VK's rage(latent power) was quite possibly
surpressed. This would have made it extremely difficult for Julius to destroy any monsters let a lone a Dark Lord Candidate (even with the VK's rage rising) as he could have been worn out from fighting hundreds of other monsters and having to destroy their remains. Soma on the other hand could simply destroy them once and seal them.

It is unknown how long Julius fought Dario for. There are assumptions that have to be made. For instance, the player (as Soma) only seals the bosses, but judging by what Julius says to Soma (from what I recall) in the canonical sense, each defeated creature would be sealed. Given Julius can't do this it takes an incredible amount of power to do what he does. Given Dario's example Julius may have been able to fight on par with Dario but been unable to subdue him and destroy his remains. Therefore after fighting a long arduous battle, Julius couldn't finish the job.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 29, 2016, 05:34:00 AM
It's been since DOS was released that I've played it so I don't have every single detail fresh. However, the thing is - and this is the difference between AOS and DOS - that Julius could not seal the creatures the way that Soma could. Julius mentions to Soma that (canonically) he could destroy the monsters to the point where they couldn't regenerate. Although a normal person would not be supposed to be able to do this, Julius can. (The same way he's able to scale the Castle entry in DOS).

The best assumptions are that the VK for most of the sequence of events in DOS (until the Dark Lord candidates start rearing their heads), the VK's rage(latent power) was quite possibly
surpressed. This would have made it extremely difficult for Julius to destroy any monsters let a lone a Dark Lord Candidate (even with the VK's rage rising) as he could have been worn out from fighting hundreds of other monsters and having to destroy their remains. Soma on the other hand could simply destroy them once and seal them.

It is unknown how long Julius fought Dario for. There are assumptions that have to be made. For instance, the player (as Soma) only seals the bosses, but judging by what Julius says to Soma (from what I recall) in the canonical sense, each defeated creature would be sealed. Given Julius can't do this it takes an incredible amount of power to do what he does. Given Dario's example Julius may have been able to fight on par with Dario but been unable to subdue him and destroy his remains. Therefore after fighting a long arduous battle, Julius couldn't finish the job.

Indeed. Even Simon Belmont can't do something of that scale. But I think that scene was unnecessary. If the mean was to make Dario look strong, maybe Dario could come and taunt Soma and teleport away. I doesn't make any sense, but better then seeing our kickass Belmont gets beaten. That was, I think was kind of insult to the Belmont clan, which is officially the strongest of Vampire hunters. Should have done something else than that.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 29, 2016, 06:22:17 AM
Indeed. Even Simon Belmont can't do something of that scale. But I think that scene was unnecessary. If the mean was to make Dario look strong, maybe Dario could come and taunt Soma and teleport away. I doesn't make any sense, but better then seeing our kickass Belmont gets beaten. That was, I think was kind of insult to the Belmont clan, which is officially the strongest of Vampire hunters. Should have done something else than that.

I grant you that's a matter of opinion which I'm sure some people would share, however, I personally don't rthink that's what was intended in this scene. Remember the library entry states that the VK powers were effectively "surpressed" after Soma defeats Chaos (although it's latent powers are not gone) yet despite the fact we have Dark Lord Candidates by the handful, there's nothing in DOS, including this scene, which as far as I recall specifically indicating that the VK's powers (rage) has begun flaring up again.

The whole scene imo is to re-emphasise that the quest is a job for Soma. It's debatable who is stronger, but Soma did gift on par (at least) with Julius in AOS and being who he is has capabilities that Julius simply doesn't have. This is important because otherwise the main protagonist should have just been Julius, particularly in AOS. (Julius, in this instance is at a massive handicap).

These are the facts: in AOS Soma accessed part of the Castle that nobody else but himself could, which he needed to do to access and defeat Chaos. In DOS Soma is the only one who can perform the seals which prevents the creatures from staying alive or regenerating. (The bosses get life back if it's performed incorrectly). The Sorrow series is the Soma Show starring Soma Cruz and featuring Julius and co, not the other way around.   

Edit: *"fight" on par with Julius, not 'gift'.... Wtff
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: X on November 29, 2016, 10:56:16 AM
Quote
Indeed. Even Simon Belmont can't do something of that scale.

I have to politely disagree. Simon Belmont is essentially Castlevania's Conan the Barbarian (whom simon is based off of in the artwork). And Dario is nothing more then a pyromaniac-happy punk who'd get his s**t kicked in by one of the most manliest Belmont's to have ever walked the Earth.

Quote
If the mean was to make Dario look strong, maybe Dario could come and taunt Soma and teleport away. I doesn't make any sense, but better then seeing our kickass Belmont gets beaten. That was, I think was kind of insult to the Belmont clan, which is officially the strongest of Vampire hunters. Should have done something else than that.

I definitely agree with this. There were other ways to make Dario a real threat without having to relegate Julius Belmont down to the weak, middle-aged man stereotype (another reason why IGA's writing doesn't sit well with me in terms of the Belmonts). However Belmonts don't need the VK to do their job, but it makes doing that job easier. They have that mystical power in their blood that allows them to subdue the darkness. The VK is simply the cherry on top of an already epic cake. You'll notice in all the other games that the Belmonts don't just use the VK, they also use basic everyday weapons, like the axe, knife, boomerang (not counting the stopwatch or holy water as those are more magical). These basic weapons shouldn't do squat against the hordes of powerful undead and ancient mystical monsters, but they do. They do because those sub-weapons were being used by a Belmont. A Belmont with a mystic power flowing through his veins that can enhance any basic weapon to harm extra-ordinary threats. There was no excuse for Julius to lose to Dario. It was poor writing that was not thought out as well as it could have been.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 29, 2016, 02:55:12 PM
I have to politely disagree. Simon Belmont is essentially Castlevania's Conan the Barbarian (whom simon is based off of in the artwork). And Dario is nothing more then a pyromaniac-happy punk who'd get his s**t kicked in by one of the most manliest Belmont's to have ever walked the Earth.

Chronically, Simon is quite middle of the Belmont tier (Juste, Richter and Julius is stronger), but if I think of some kickass Belmont, I instantly think of Simon. Even if that was not correct in term of chronology, it was kind of emphasis for me. Also, I wrote that in context of 'Even if you are the stronger guy on Earth, you can't fight an invincible enemy forever. You have to lose eventually, unless the enemy's invincibility is gone.' But doesn't change that scene was completely unnecessary!

Also, I think this talk of 'AoS or DoS' veered of so much to 'Julius is weakling?'. So, Enough talk! Let's talk something that relates to the topic!
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 30, 2016, 06:00:09 PM
There was no excuse for Julius to lose to Dario. It was poor writing that was not thought out as well as it could have been.
X, this is why I kept referring to DOS' library that plottwist pointed out long ago. The VK's power (rage) "faded" after AOS even though its latent power did not. However if it's power did not return this is ground enough for him not to defeat Dario (Dark Lord Candidate) imo.

Look at it this way, in comparison to Julius, Leon has mystical blood but couldn't defeat Walter with the Whip of Alchemy, but he could with the VK (optimal rage). It doesn't make him a weakling, it doesn't take away from his physical abilities (in game or other), but he doesn't have the capability.

I see the VK's rage having faded = Whip of Alchemy, and Walter was just a vampire (although a powerful one at that) he was not a Dark Lord Candidate.

So, Enough talk! Let's talk something that relates to the topic!
AOS>DOS  :P
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 30, 2016, 07:34:43 PM
X, this is why I kept referring to DOS' library that plottwist pointed out long ago. The VK's power (rage) "faded" after AOS even though its latent power did not. However if it's power did not return this is ground enough for him not to defeat Dario (Dark Lord Candidate) imo.

Look at it this way, in comparison to Julius, Leon has mystical blood but couldn't defeat Walter with the Whip of Alchemy, but he could with the VK (optimal rage). It doesn't make him a weakling, it doesn't take away from his physical abilities (in game or other), but he doesn't have the capability.

I see the VK's rage having faded = Whip of Alchemy, and Walter was just a vampire (although a powerful one at that) he was not a Dark Lord Candidate.

But still, Julius was able to defeat Soma in Julius mode. If the VK did not have its power, Julius would not be able to defeat Soma, who is much more powerful then Dario.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on November 30, 2016, 08:01:52 PM
But still, Julius was able to defeat Soma in Julius mode. If the VK did not have its power, Julius would not be able to defeat Soma, who is much more powerful then Dario.

Julius mode is not canon, Julius doesn't seal bosses etc.

You're forgetting that Julius, Yoko and Alucard are all fighting Soma in that mode also, just as Trevor, Alucard, Sypha and Grant are in CVIII - if you want to make that comparison.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 30, 2016, 08:43:13 PM
Julius mode is not canon, Julius doesn't seal bosses etc.

You're forgetting that Julius, Yoko and Alucard are all fighting Soma in that mode also, just as Trevor, Alucard, Sypha and Grant are in CVIII - if you want to make that comparison.

Well, Julius mode is like alternative route instead of non-canon. So, it is still a canon, at least I consider it as.

Also, unlike PoR, there is only one hunter at the time, so I can say that if I play only as Julius, Julius alone defeated Soma. It doesn't make sense in form of story, but in the sense of gameplay, it's possible to say that.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: theplottwist on November 30, 2016, 08:55:24 PM
Well, Julius mode is like alternative route instead of non-canon. So, it is still a canon, at least I consider it as.

Also, unlike PoR, there is only one hunter at the time, so I can say that if I play only as Julius, Julius alone defeated Soma. It doesn't make sense in form of story, but in the sense of gameplay, it's possible to say that.

Thou shall not judge the story by the gameplay. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GameplayAndStorySegregation)

DOS Julius Mode says Julius is fighting alongside Alucard and Yoko. It doesn't really matter if he was fighting alone, gameplay wise. And it does make sense for him to have company, since the VK is weakened. Remember Aria? He fought Somacula alone in the bad ending, and the VK's power was still full.

You can traverse the entirety of CVIII without ever picking up any partner -- the story is that the four of them destroyed Dracula together.

So, true, in the gameplay sense you can say that. But you can't evoke the gameplay to measure plot feats on most cases (in special when the plot contradicts the gameplay), because you'll end up with a bunch of inconsistencies like the one just now e.g. Julius' VK is weakened yet he can defeat Somacula alone. This is a contradiction solved by the plot, not the gameplay, therefore you're talking oranges and Zangetsu is talking apples.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on November 30, 2016, 09:51:21 PM
Thou shall not judge the story by the gameplay. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GameplayAndStorySegregation)

DOS Julius Mode says Julius is fighting alongside Alucard and Yoko. It doesn't really matter if he was fighting alone, gameplay wise. And it does make sense for him to have company, since the VK is weakened. Remember Aria? He fought Somacula alone in the bad ending, and the VK's power was still full.

You can traverse the entirety of CVIII without ever picking up any partner -- the story is that the four of them destroyed Dracula together.

So, true, in the gameplay sense you can say that. But you can't evoke the gameplay to measure plot feats on most cases (in special when the plot contradicts the gameplay), because you'll end up with a bunch of inconsistencies like the one just now e.g. Julius' VK is weakened yet he can defeat Somacula alone. This is a contradiction solved by the plot, not the gameplay, therefore you're talking oranges and Zangetsu is talking apples.

I do know that gameplay does not link to the story. But it wouldn't make any narrational sense that a Belmont would be defeated by mere Dario. In LoI, Leon declared: "From this day on, the Belmont will hunt the night forever!" Also, Julius was able to defeat the strongest version of Dracula. Christopher, being a more weaker side of Belmont was still able to defeat Dracula even when his son became a grown-up. Also with Simon in CVII (I'll bring it up later).

About his companions, I think Alucard and the Belnades' are more of helper throughout the quest, rather then part of actual sealing of Dracula. Only Belmont's are able to seal Dracula with full power. And in CVIII, Dracula indeed had its full power. Also notable is that Simon, with a fatal illness and completely on his own, was still able to defeat Dracula, all by himself. So, if a 'chronically weaker' 'dying' Belmont was able to not only defeat, but collect his remains and defeat Draclua alone, I think age is not an excuse to make him lose to a weakling who doesn't even have the full power. I know that Julius would not be able to defeat him, but correct representation of a Belmont power would most likely to lead to Dario's retreat or a stalemate.
Now that I explained that Julius is strong enough to defeat Dracula on his own, I will explain that Alucard and Belnades is not up to the challenge (sorry Alucard :P). In both Alucard's appearance with a ally Belmont, Belmont was who was praised as destroyer of Dracula. In SotN, Alucard did not defeat him, but he persuaded Dracula with Lisa's words to make Dracula retreat on his own will. Technically Alucard never completely defeated Dracula on his own. Also, Yoko stated that Belnades fought alongside Belmont, but she never said about Belnades directly destroying Dracula with his complete power on her won. So, my argument is that all other companions in the series might be a great help, but the VK and Belmont(also the Morris') is the main of the show.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: theplottwist on November 30, 2016, 10:10:55 PM
I do know that gameplay does not link to the story. But it wouldn't make any narrational sense that a Belmont would be defeated by mere Dario.

I mean, I agree with you that it's kinda silly. But, as people told here: Julius has a weakened Vampire Killer, and the demon granting Dario with power is beyond Julius' reach. He can't defeat a demon he can't touch.

Quote
Only Belmont's are able to seal Dracula with full power. And in CVIII, Dracula indeed had its full power.

This is incorrect. Dracula didn't possess his full power on Castlevania III and Trevor still needed help. This is confirmed to be the case on Castlevania: Judgment:

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FnbCVpL8.png&hash=1ff82774d4572d9ad9fd22b2d3768e85)

Quote
Also notable is that Simon, with a fatal illness and completely on his own, was still able to defeat Dracula, all by himself.

Explained on the official guide to be possible because Dracula, too, was severelly weakened from being revived with only one of his relics.

Quote
So, if a 'chronically weaker' 'dying' Belmont was able to not only defeat, but collect his remains and defeat Draclua alone, I think age is not an excuse to make him lose to a weakling who doesn't even have the full power. I know that Julius would not be able to defeat him, but correct representation of a Belmont power would most likely to lead to Dario's retreat or a stalemate.

Unless the stars are right (Demon beyond reach, Whip weakened) then I think this is debatable.

Quote
In SotN, Alucard did not defeat him, but he persuaded Dracula with Lisa's words to make Dracula retreat on his own will.

Also incorrect -- Alucard did indeed best Dracula in battle, albeit a weakened one. On the japanese script Dracula specifically wonders how it's possible for him to be bested by Alucard, who tells him that his will to protect his mother's memory gave him enough strength.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on December 01, 2016, 12:16:34 AM
I mean, I agree with you that it's kinda silly. But, as people told here: Julius has a weakened Vampire Killer, and the demon granting Dario with power is beyond Julius' reach. He can't defeat a demon he can't touch.

This is incorrect. Dracula didn't possess his full power on Castlevania III and Trevor still needed help. This is confirmed to be the case on Castlevania: Judgment:

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FnbCVpL8.png&hash=1ff82774d4572d9ad9fd22b2d3768e85)

Explained on the official guide to be possible because Dracula, too, was severelly weakened from being revived with only one of his relics.

Unless the stars are right (Demon beyond reach, Whip weakened) then I think this is debatable.

Also incorrect -- Alucard did indeed best Dracula in battle, albeit a weakened one. On the japanese script Dracula specifically wonders how it's possible for him to be bested by Alucard, who tells him that his will to protect his mother's memory gave him enough strength.

Well, about Dracula's power in CVIII, because Dracula's power is a growing thing. In context of post-CVIII (like SotN), it wouldn't be full, but in time of CVIII, it was his strongest, not being defeated yet. Alucard (post-SotN i guess) meant that he wants to fight the most powerful yet Dracula (most likely to be Dracula in Umbra) because SotN Dracula didn't have complete power.

Yes. I now see that Dracula was weakened as well, but almost dead Simon vs weak Dracula: kinda equal match, huh?

About Alucard and Dracula in SotN, yes, Alucard still defeated him technically, but if Dracula was utterly destroyed, Dracula would not be able to have a conversation with Alucard, probably be destroyed immediately, like how he just bursts into flame in other Castlevania games. Also, it was one of weak appearance of Dracula with irregular revival, not the regular 100-year revival.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: theplottwist on December 01, 2016, 12:31:47 AM
Well, about Dracula's power in CVIII, because Dracula's power is a growing thing. In context of post-CVIII (like SotN), it wouldn't be full, but in time of CVIII, it was his strongest, not being defeated yet.

This is partially correct. According to the first Castlevania manual, Dracula's magic grows stronger with each revival, meaning that he quite possibly was much more powerful by Simon's time than by Trevor's. But there is a catch here...

Quote
Also, it was one of weak appearance of Dracula with irregular revival, not the regular 100-year revival.

Dracula's reviving interval doesn't appear to be a main factor on his strength. The amount of human misery does, actually. IGA explained on an interview that the 100-years cycle is not as important as everyone believes, being humans "faith in God" the main factor. True enough, the manual for the first Castlevania spells outright that the 100-years revival cycle is a myth created by the people. The manual for X68000 goes further, saying that not even these people believe this cycle to be true.

It's possible that the 100 years interval coincided with the amount of time it took for the people to forget their faith and become corrupted, thus bringing Dracula back and spawning the legend.

Quote
but if Dracula was utterly destroyed, Dracula would not be able to have a conversation with Alucard, probably be destroyed immediately, like how he just bursts into flame in other Castlevania games

This... Doesn't make much sense. Dracula's been shown to hold a longer conversation after being overpowered multiple times besides SotN. On Rondo he does this, on Curse of Darkness, on Portrait of Ruin. In CVIII it's implied he did this too, since he still was around long enough to speak a curse.

I think the SotN case is just the same. it's only Dracula giving his final words.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on December 01, 2016, 03:15:24 AM
I'll keep it short since I'm on mobile.

Don't judge story by gameplay because it's not rational; thank you plottwist.
Furthermore Trevor and 3 other people defeat Dracula in CV III. This mode of switching players is based on CV III. POR is irrelevant because it's the exact same scenario, switch between 2 characters, but canonically all the protagonists are fighting together.

C4 I'm not really fussed if you believe the non-narrative endings to be canon, but there's only one REAL ending for each game. The reason I don't consider what I believe are "non-canon" endings (the ones which don't continue the story) to be canon is that you have to then consider every non-canon ending to be canon. The only time I consider this is if a plot/ narrative/ timeline can actually continue (see my signature) OR when the plot makes sense and stops the player from doing what they shouldn't be able to do i.e.
- Sisters mode in POR is canon, they can't beat Brauner and the story doesn't allow it.
- Richter and Maria mode in POR is non-canon for obvious reasons.
- AOS' Somacula ending is non-canon because then DOS can't happen.

As for my final say on the Julius/ Dario debacle, first of all its canon, so we all need to get over it. Secondly, using a VK with little to zero power(rage) is like using the whip of alchemy. Leon wasn't weak, but he couldn't beat Walter. Death got rid of Walter in 5 seconds, and with the VK at full power, Leon was able to beat Death. The truth and the canon shows us that the VK's state makes a huge difference to the state of a Belmont's power. The VK was left in Castlevania to weaken the entire damn Castle, that's overly substantial power. Facts>emotion when it comes to rationalising narrative.

This brings me to the next point that compared to AOS, the plot in DOS well it sucks. Soma nearly becoming the Dark Lord is a fair plot point, but a lot of the story is reaching; Julius<Dario, The Castle bring a carbon copy of Castlevania (despite people pointing out it may be LOI's Castle), Dmitri and the whole Menace scenario, the narrative was not as good as AOS. They wanted to make another Sorrow title, and however the plot unfolded it would have probably been weaker than AOS imho.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on December 01, 2016, 03:53:37 AM
I'll keep it short since I'm on mobile.

Don't judge story by gameplay because it's not rational; thank you plottwist.
Furthermore Trevor and 3 other people defeat Dracula in CV III. This mode of switching players is based on CV III. POR is irrelevant because it's the exact same scenario, switch between 2 characters, but canonically all the protagonists are fighting together.

C4 I'm not really fussed if you believe the non-narrative endings to be canon, but there's only one REAL ending for each game. The reason I don't consider what I believe are "non-canon" endings (the ones which don't continue the story) to be canon is that you have to then consider every non-canon ending to be canon. The only time I consider this is if a plot/ narrative/ timeline can actually continue (see my signature) OR when the plot makes sense and stops the player from doing what they shouldn't be able to do i.e.
- Sisters mode in POR is canon, they can't beat Brauner and the story doesn't allow it.
- Richter and Maria mode in POR is non-canon for obvious reasons.
- AOS' Somacula ending is non-canon because then DOS can't happen.

As for my final say on the Julius/ Dario debacle, first of all its canon, so we all need to get over it. Secondly, using a VK with little to zero power(rage) is like using the whip of alchemy. Leon wasn't weak, but he couldn't beat Walter. Death got rid of Walter in 5 seconds, and with the VK at full power, Leon was able to beat Death. The truth and the canon shows us that the VK's state makes a huge difference to the state of a Belmont's power. The VK was left in Castlevania to weaken the entire damn Castle, that's overly substantial power. Facts>emotion when it comes to rationalising narrative.

This brings me to the next point that compared to AOS, the plot in DOS well it sucks. Soma nearly becoming the Dark Lord is a fair plot point, but a lot of the story is reaching; Julius<Dario, The Castle bring a carbon copy of Castlevania (despite people pointing out it may be LOI's Castle), Dmitri and the whole Menace scenario, the narrative was not as good as AOS. They wanted to make another Sorrow title, and however the plot unfolded it would have probably been weaker than AOS imho.

Yeah. Let's just end this Julius debate. This took this AoS vs DoS debate to something completely different.
(click to show/hide)

Now lets just talk about how s*itty the DoS plot is!
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Aceearly1993 on December 01, 2016, 03:49:55 PM
I like the two games equally. DoS has More sequence break warp glitch and soul exceed stuff that limited its replayability, but I never care since it was still fun to find out every bit of data-processing mess and glitched souls/weapons/equipment
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Crescent on March 13, 2017, 05:22:11 PM
I really don't like Soma and his friends and all of this "japanese castlevania story", but I must say AOS hands down. Better atmosphere, better gameplay, better art, better music, etc.

I had a blast with AOS when I first played it but with DOS, a very different story. I find the anime style of DOS absolutely atrocious, and the villains were extremely weak.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on March 23, 2017, 10:33:40 PM
Dawn's soundtrack is actually pretty good. It's definitely above average for Yamane's compositions. Granted, its weak points are VERY weak, and much more noticeable, but I think the soundtrack is a solid B grade in the scheme of Yamane's work. Aria's is better, imo, but I don't feel that we should trash EVERYTHING that Dawn of Sorrow did just because it's overall a weaker package. Dawn did a lot on the gameplay front REALLY WELL, and the soundtrack is a big part of that success.

That being said, Dawn has without a doubt the most forgettable villains in the series history, ones we only remember in an ironic fashion resulting from how forgettable they otherwise would have been.

Which is a shame, as Celia could have been a really awesome non-action big bad who could have gotten Soma to question his morality with words, and Dario and Dmitrii both have some very brief moments that hint at the quality writing we could have gotten from them. It suggests far deeper characters than we got, and I think that describes just about everything the game did wrong -- none of it is TERRIBLE by itself, but when it's so similar to such a stellar predecessor, the spots where they pulled their punches in development become that much more obvious and glaring.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on March 24, 2017, 01:57:04 AM
Dawn's soundtrack is actually pretty good. It's definitely above average for Yamane's compositions. Granted, its weak points are VERY weak, and much more noticeable, but I think the soundtrack is a solid B grade in the scheme of Yamane's work. Aria's is better, imo, but I don't feel that we should trash EVERYTHING that Dawn of Sorrow did just because it's overall a weaker package. Dawn did a lot on the gameplay front REALLY WELL, and the soundtrack is a big part of that success.

That being said, Dawn has without a doubt the most forgettable villains in the series history, ones we only remember in an ironic fashion resulting from how forgettable they otherwise would have been.

Which is a shame, as Celia could have been a really awesome non-action big bad who could have gotten Soma to question his morality with words, and Dario and Dmitrii both have some very brief moments that hint at the quality writing we could have gotten from them. It suggests far deeper characters than we got, and I think that describes just about everything the game did wrong -- none of it is TERRIBLE by itself, but when it's so similar to such a stellar predecessor, the spots where they pulled their punches in development become that much more obvious and glaring.

I actually do believe Celia was a good character as an antagonist and I liked her design, as opposed to Dario and Dmitri (both terrible designs). The fact Soma never got to fight her was an interesting twist, it was unexpected and left her abilities shrouded in mystery. She wasn't as good a character as Graham, but still decent.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on March 24, 2017, 04:45:00 AM
I actually do believe Celia was a good character as an antagonist and I liked her design, as opposed to Dario and Dmitri (both terrible designs). The fact Soma never got to fight her was an interesting twist, it was unexpected and left her abilities shrouded in mystery. She wasn't as good a character as Graham, but still decent.

True. It would be cool if Soma fought Celia in the throne room instead of fighting Dario second time, like Graham. But then they have to change stuff around (the [spoiler alert] at the garden or how they will alter Aguni battle to fit Celia, or how Menace will come around). Still would be an interesting alternation.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on March 24, 2017, 04:03:50 PM
While Menace was an interesting concept, his design and boss fight were just so...  bland. The boss fight against him in Harmony of Despair was pretty fun though.

But as he ended up excecuted in Dawn, I think he could have been cut entirely. If ever there had been a moment for Soma to confront Dracula in SOME FORM, that was it and the opportunity went utterly wasted. I wished Soma had faced a Dracula Wraith like Juste did -- it would have served as a call-back and a physical reminder to Soma of what he is in constant danger of becoming. The "Dawn Wraith" could have been able to use all (or simply most, for balance reasons) of the abilities that Soma could collect to really hammer home that point. And for Soma (who has only ever heard about Dracula and never seen any of his handiwork firsthand because he's just too young for that) to face something approaching what Dracula was in his heyday that also wears the shape and face of Dracula and then realize that he is at all times just one or two bad steps removed from that would have probably been downright terrifying. Like, he already would have known the threat a Dark Lord presented, but after that, he wouldn't just know. He'd understand as well, and it would have been a great way to segue into a third Sorrow game in which Dracula and Soma's natures finally came into "true conflict".

Having written that... wow. Menace really deprived us of an awesome potential third game storyline just by existing as the final boss.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on March 24, 2017, 04:41:04 PM
@superc4 The thing they should've included was a Celia battle in the non canon ending and that would've made me happy (like fighting the sisters in PoR instead of saving them)

@TBA I disagree, as much as Menace wasn't the absolute best boss we've seen, Soma is Dracula, so that doesn't work. This was made blatantly clear. He also defeated "The Chaos Creature" (before everyone starts reminding one another that he didn't defeat Chaos itself) severing the link between Chaos and himself (Dracula), which is the closest we were going to get to what you're describing.

The way in which they could've bullshit-ingly spun a mirror match with Soma, in my mind is by fenagling the mirror component of the story (like they did with Dario and Paranoia). However, the Julius ending already has a Soma battle, so meh.

All in all I didn't love the design of the menace, but thought it was cool that it was more like fighting a Titan. It reminded me of the Kid Icarus GBC's final boss. 
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on March 24, 2017, 05:18:57 PM
Soma isn't strictly Dracula though. He's the potential Dark Lord and he is a reincarnation of Dracula, but the games make great pains to call out his similarities to pre-desperation Mathias rather than post-Transformation Dracula. This doesn't make him "Dracula", it makes him (potentially) next in line for the role Dracula operated in. If he must be one or the other, Soma is Mathias returned, not Dracula returned.

But we also see he's a very different person; this is what sets him apart from Graham, Dario, and Dmitri. Those three operated under the (somewhat sketchy) logic of "I was born the day Dracula died, therefore I must/am destined to become the Dark Lord" , very much enslaved by their supposed origins. Soma exists as a foil to that. He really is no-kidding destined to that role (as much as anyone can possibly be, at least), yet his rejection of that destiny is what keeps him from assuming it.

Soma isn't Dracula at all; he's lived none of Dracula's life (frankly, from what we can see, his life isn't even slightly similar), shares none of his memories, has none of Dracula's personality, and rejects all calls to be what Dracula used to be. Ultimately, that last bit is all that stands between him and an evil life. But even if he WERE to assume that role, Soma wouldn't magically become "The Dark Lord, Dracula". He'd be "The Dark Lord, Soma Cruz". He's very much his own person, and in many ways, this is entirely what his story revolves around.

So I say all of that to reiterate that him confronting Dracula in some form would have been more appropriate from a storytelling standpoint than Generic-Looking Giant Corpse Monster. It also would have been a more interesting boss fight. In its own way, Menace attempts to accomplish that same warning-end about losing control of one's self/powers, but fails to tell it as well as a direct confrontation between Soma and the very image of his Evil Destiny would have.

In my opinion.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on March 24, 2017, 06:16:19 PM
Soma isn't strictly Dracula though. He's the potential Dark Lord and he is a reincarnation of Dracula, but the games make great pains to call out his similarities to pre-desperation Mathias rather than post-Transformation Dracula. This doesn't make him "Dracula", it makes him (potentially) next in line for the role Dracula operated in. If he must be one or the other, Soma is Mathias returned, not Dracula returned.

Graham Jones: So we meet again! I'm glad to see you're unscathed.
Soma Cruz: Good to see you, too. Uh... I've got something I want to ask you.
Graham Jones: Sure, go ahead.
Soma Cruz: Someone told me that YOU are to inherit Dracula's powers...
Graham Jones: I take it that lady from the church told you that, didn't she?
Soma Cruz: It's not true, is it?
Graham Jones: The term 'inherit' is incorrect.
Soma Cruz: It's true then!
Graham Jones: I was born on the very day that Dracula was destroyed... So, in short, that means that I AM Dracula!

Soma Cruz: And the person who destroyed Dracula in 1999 was...
Julius Belmont: Yes. It was me... but there were others who assisted me...
Soma Cruz: So, if Dracula is revived again, just as it is written in the prophecy...
Julius Belmont: Then I must destroy him! It is my destiny.
Soma Cruz: You haven't met a man named Graham yet, have you?
Julius Belmont: Graham? Oh, you mean that missionary, right? I met him a little while ago. But when he saw my face, he turned and ran.
Soma Cruz: He told me that he was Dracula.
Julius Belmont: I did sense Dracula's powers at work within him... but it's difficult to believe that he's Dracula... rather... I think... No, forget it. It is nothing more than a hunch.
Soma Cruz: Huh?
Julius Belmont: Assuming that he is Dracula, I won't be able to kill him yet.

Normal Ending

Soma Cruz: And the castle... is the castle still in the eclipse?
Genya Arikado: Yes. It awaits the coming of its new master. Someday, someone will assume the form of Dracula again.


Graham Jones: I can't believe it... How did YOU come to possess those powers?
Soma Cruz: What do you mean by "those powers"?
Graham Jones: I'm Dracula. And you're not the one!

Graham Jones: Nooo! this cannot be!!! Does this mean that I'm not Dracula?!

Soma Cruz: Finally... I clearly understand... everything. I am...Dracula.

Genya Arikado: This castle is a product of Dracula's magic. It's a spiritual world. My point is this... a stream of chaos exists within this castle as well. There is a place where only you, Dracula, can go. That's where the chaos is!

Julius Belmont: So you were the one. I didn't want to believe it was true...
Soma Cruz: It's true. I am Dracula. But I'm not what you think I am!
Julius Belmont: I must destroy Dracula at any cost. That is my destiny.

Mina Hakuba: Everyone remaining in the castle combined their powers to contact you.
Soma Cruz: Does that mean they all know... that I'm Dracula?
Mina Hakuba: Yes... Arikado told us everything...

Good Ending

Yoko Belnades: Hello, Soma. Congratulations. I've got another job that I must attend to, so I have to go now. When I heard that YOU were Dracula, I was shocked.

In short you certainly talk some shit, I suppose that's better than eating it.

So I say all of that to reiterate that him confronting Dracula in some form would have been more appropriate

No. Soma is Dracula as evidenced by the script.

In my opinion.

Your opinion is he's not Dracula, so it doesn't work.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on March 24, 2017, 06:50:53 PM
I'm gonna summon PlotTwist for this as he can explain it far more eloquently than I.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: theplottwist on March 24, 2017, 06:56:06 PM
Zangetsu that's too literal even for me, man.

Aperture didn't deny Soma is Dracula, he's talking of something else:

Soma isn't strictly Dracula though. He's the potential Dark Lord and he is a reincarnation of Dracula, but the games make great pains to call out his similarities to pre-desperation Mathias rather than post-Transformation Dracula. This doesn't make him "Dracula", it makes him (potentially) next in line for the role Dracula operated in. If he must be one or the other, Soma is Mathias returned, not Dracula returned.

He's talking conceptually, not literally.

Soma is Dracula, that's undeniable. But he's only "Dracula" because that what's the evil package was called/known by when he died. If Dracula were called "Nosegoob the Happy Clown", Soma would be Nosegoob the Happy Clown reincarnated, despite the fact that he'd not be an actual clown or be as unfunny like Nosegoob was. What Aperture is drawing a parallel with is [Dracula the Demon King], or as he calls it, post-transformation Dracula.

We know that Dracula, at this stage, is not a single entity. So, although Soma is the reincarnation of Dracula's soul, Soma is not the reincarnation of Dracula [the complete entity], and therefore not the same exact entity that was defeated in 1999. Soma really is someone of his own, which is outright explained by Julius after his boss battle, when he quite clearly says he feels "Soma" inside well... Soma:

JULIUS: ... When I fought you, I felt the evil spirit within you. But there's  more... I also sensed Soma's spirit. And that's more then enough to stop me.

After the battle with Graham, the dark lord's evil spirit, and Soma's own spirit are struggling for the control of Soma's body.

Soma has two of the most important parts (Dominance, the soul of Mathias/Dracula), but he lacks the Demon King's will (the evil spirit) which was born from Dracula and the chaos of mankind. This evil spirit and Soma's soul are as much Dracula as each other--incomplete halves. And as we see by the bad ending in Aria and scripts, Soma does become THE Dracula if the evil will overtakes him. One of the lines you posted, even, has the key to this explanation:

Soma Cruz: It's true. I am Dracula. But I'm not what you think I am!

What does he mean here, then? Is he Dracula or is he not? Easy: He is "Dracula" the individual, but not "Dracula" the entity.

In short: While its correct to say Soma is Dracula reincarnated, it's only so because the owner of the soul Soma has now was called "Dracula". It's a matter of semantics.

This whole confusion is due to how Castlevania understands "spirit". Someone's soul is one thing, but their spirit is the person itself, their conscience and their own will. The soul is the engine, the body is the car, the spirit is the driver. The body is irrelevant (as the series has shown, Dracula can pretty much overtake people's minds and bodies if the conditions are right), but Dracula THE Dracula needs the engine and the spirit to be whole. If Dracula is to be complete, the evil spirit must kick Soma's from the car and take the wheel.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on March 24, 2017, 10:06:03 PM
I'm gonna summon PlotTwist for this as he can explain it far more eloquently than I.

Lovely, didn't know we had the "phone a friend" option.

@Plottwist It's unfortunate you believe it's too literal, I know Soma =/= The Dracula that lived from prior to 1094 - 1999, nor the "entity" Dracula in the way you have explained and that's not what I was saying. I'm well aware the title of being "Dracula" is a matter of semantics, just as Graham believed he was Dracula.

I was making a point that by the same token that Bloody Aperture is saying "He's not Dracula(definition not withstanding)"
he's also saying that Soma is "Mathias returned" etc, which is also not relevant to anything being discussed. Is he? YES/ NO - It doesn't matter, it's not relevant to the discussion. The discussion was about Soma had become "Dracula" i.e. The Dark Lord, etc.

So I say all of that to reiterate that him confronting Dracula in some form would have been more appropriate from a storytelling standpoint than Generic-Looking Giant Corpse Monster. It also would have been a more interesting boss fight. In its own way, Menace attempts to accomplish that same warning-end about losing control of one's self/powers, but fails to tell it as well as a direct confrontation between Soma and the very image of his Evil Destiny would have.

Soma already had this battle with "Chaos", which prevented him from becoming "Dracula". it's exactly why he had to stop the flow of Chaos. A "Dracula" entity is not going to take physical manifestation in this context and/ or set of events, because the entire point is to pass the torch to the next Dark Lord.

Granted as I stated, they could spin the narrative in another direction, but they exhausted that option already in AoS.

This is one of the reasons I prefer AoS over DoS. As much as I like DoS, AoS was the first Castlevania to do a lot of things exceptionally with both the narrative and character development. 
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: X on March 24, 2017, 11:29:16 PM
'spirit' and 'Soul' are the same thing. Just different names to describe the same non-corporal entity (Though 'spirit' can be used to describe other things like energy). Soma is Dracula, no question there. But reincarnated into a new life. There is no evil entity separate from Soma's soul/spirit. There is the chaotic influence that will push Soma to darkness as he was before being killed permanently, but it is in no way a separate spirit. Soma is complete. He just doesn't have the influential driving force directing him to do evil things because, as mentioned before, he is living a new life. Whatever chaotic energies he had as Dracula were scrubbed out of him prior to him reincarnating as Soma. God gave him a fresh start so to speak. This is how I understand the Soma/Dracula situation. At least in my own head.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on March 24, 2017, 11:38:01 PM
'spirit' and 'Soul' are the same thing. Just different names to describe the same non-corporal entity (Though 'spirit' can be used to describe other things like energy). Soma is Dracula, no question there. But reincarnated into a new life. There is no evil entity separate from Soma's soul/spirit. There is the chaotic influence that will push Soma to darkness as he was before being killed permanently, but it is in no way a separate spirit. Soma is complete. He just doesn't have the influential driving force directing him to do evil things because, as mentioned before, he is living a new life.

That in a snapshot is how I've seen it, and more succinct than I could've been in describing it.
It's why Soma goes to sever the flow of Chaos, and why he's not literally fighting an entity in the form of Dracula.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Dracula9 on March 25, 2017, 07:32:33 AM
It's why Soma goes to sever the flow of Chaos, and why he's not literally fighting an entity in the form of Dracula.

I mean Graham's fight is pretty much a Dracula form only with a brighter outfit and an intestine half-boob angel gemini instead of rawrgh bat-dragon.

Lovely, didn't know we had the "phone a friend" option.

Hey, it's fair. When in doubt, get the canon literalist.

@Plottwist It's unfortunate you believe it's too literal, I know Soma =/= The Dracula that lived from prior to 1094 - 1999, nor the "entity" Dracula in the way you have explained and that's not what I was saying. I'm well aware the title of being "Dracula" is a matter of semantics, just as Graham believed he was Dracula.

I think he was more drawing reference to you quoting all the dialogue mentioning the name. From an in-universe perspective, nobody in Aria (possibly not even Alucard) knows about Mathias or the events that made him evil. The entity/person/demigod/whatever to them is simply "Dracula." Soma could be Mathias' soul reincarnated all day long, but as far as everyone else knows/cares, he's Dracula.

I was making a point that by the same token that Bloody Aperture is saying "He's not Dracula(definition not withstanding)"
he's also saying that Soma is "Mathias returned" etc, which is also not relevant to anything being discussed. Is he? YES/ NO - It doesn't matter, it's not relevant to the discussion. The discussion was about Soma had become "Dracula" i.e. The Dark Lord, etc.

Soma already had this battle with "Chaos", which prevented him from becoming "Dracula". it's exactly why he had to stop the flow of Chaos. A "Dracula" entity is not going to take physical manifestation in this context and/ or set of events, because the entire point is to pass the torch to the next Dark Lord.

Actually, I would argue that it is relevant to the discussion. Sure, the canon endings for both Aria and Dawn are the good ones in which Somacula doesn't happen, but consider the bad ones.

Look at the bad ending in Aria--Soma, the established reincarnation of Dracula/Mathias' soul, "dies" after the Chaos power within Graham goes apeshit and enters his being. He then becomes Somacula. In a very blase sense, we can look at the in-game "death" as the death of Soma as a consciousness, and the Chaos takes over and we get Somacula. Pretty strong parallel to Mathias losing the internal battle against darkness, I think.

Can also spin it as Soma absorbing Graham's soul when the latter dies (nothing really stating for sure one way or the other that this happens, though we see in Dawn that Soma can indeed take in a human soul), and with Graham being a DLC who most definitely has the darker qualities and mindsets of DL Dracula it could be interpreted that the reincarnated Mathias/Dracula soul (sans evil parts) blends with the DLC soul (with evil parts) and boom, the two are one again and it's Dark Lord round 2.

Now if we look at Dawn's bad ending (which I think is definitely the stronger parallel), what happens? Soma's love interest is, as far as he knows, tragically killed before he can do anything to save her. This pushes him over the edge and the darkness takes over. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Whether or not we consider Soma's reincarnated soul (heh, pun) to be Mathias does indeed have some degree of relevance, as considering that possibility adds a whole new depth of weight to the Somacula endings and Soma becoming the Dark Lord. As Aria stresses considerably, Soma seeks to turn the Chaos faucet off at its source so that Dracula (the dark lord/entity) cannot be reborn, suggesting that the well-established cycle of rebirth and bloodshed could return with him. Since that's suggested, it does well to consider the Mathias possibility, as the conditions for Soma's two turnings to darkness have some pretty heavy parallels to the situations which made Dracula what he became all those centuries prior.

This is one of the reasons I prefer AoS over DoS. As much as I like DoS, AoS was the first Castlevania to do a lot of things exceptionally with both the narrative and character development. 

Damn skippy. Though I do give Dawn a few more points in the "why Soma goes Turbo" department. I like the twist of tragedy in grief sending one over the edge, rather than simply "welp, you "died" and the Dark Side took over."
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: theplottwist on March 25, 2017, 01:38:04 PM
Lovely, didn't know we had the "phone a friend" option.

To be fair, I was already typing my response when he called. You guys are way too fast for me.

I think he was more drawing reference to you quoting all the dialogue mentioning the name. From an in-universe perspective, nobody in Aria (possibly not even Alucard) knows about Mathias or the events that made him evil. The entity/person/demigod/whatever to them is simply "Dracula." Soma could be Mathias' soul reincarnated all day long, but as far as everyone else knows/cares, he's Dracula.

Exactly this.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: theplottwist on March 25, 2017, 01:57:07 PM
'spirit' and 'Soul' are the same thing. Just different names to describe the same non-corporal entity (Though 'spirit' can be used to describe other things like energy).

OK this actually isn't generally right. Using "soul" and "spirit" interchangeably is a relatively new thing, starting mainly with Augustine's line of thought.

For a great long time of human philosophy/theology, spirit, soul and body were understood as three separate pieces of a being: Psyche, Pneuma and Soma. This was called Tripartide Anthropology, and comes since ancient Greek times. Forward time a little, and you see early Christianity adopting it to explain what is God breathing into the clay model to create man. Soul is literally treated as the "power source" of a human, while spirit is one's mind, consciousness, will, personality, basically what makes a person unique, intellect-wise. It's the self. The meanings of "Pneuma" and "Psyche" were exchanged in many interpretations (Psyche meaning "Mind" or "Soul" depending on what author/philosopher you're reading). But the concept is generally similar across time, and hasn't been abandoned. Today you have both suporters for the tripartide and bipartide views.

I'm fairly certain Castlevania is drawing from this concept because, if it weren't obvious already, we have a literal Soma, with an entity dubbed "evil spirit" fighting Soma's own spirit to take over.

Later today I'll create another thread talking of Soma and the evil spirit (with evidence), because the thing is huge.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on March 25, 2017, 01:57:55 PM
While this has been a fascinating discussion that I'm more than happy to see continue, I do want to return to my original comment (which Zangetsu-san seems to have taken in a completely different direction).
I reasoned that Menace, being a form take by all the merged evil souls that Dmitri had absorbed with his duplicated Power of Dominance, would have made more storytelling sense assuming the shape of a ghost of Dracula.

Not actual Dracula.

Just a ghostly image of him. Who also hits pretty hard.

Like this guy.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette1.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fvillains%2Fimages%2Fb%2Fb3%2FDracula_Wraith.png%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20120420135521&hash=c8bb7a06527d53e1dbbecd76f8c68c0e)

My logic is that, as Menace is made by essentially locking the souls of evil monsters which would be serving the Dark Lord (if one currently existed) in a box until they merge and explode back out, from a pure relevancy-to-Soma's-character-arc viewpoint, it would have made symbolic sense for Menace to be in the shape of the previous Dark Lord. It could have been justified in all sorts of ways by the development team.
No matter how one slices it, a giant corpse monster doesn't really represent anything. It just sort of is.
I would have preferred that Soma faced something more symbolic of what he's fighting every day to not be.

You may now resume your discussion about who is a reincarnation of whom and Dark Lords and stuff.


[Entirely Parodical EDIT]
[because I got a good chuckle at the thought]

How not to be a dark lord: the answer to that is a terribly interesting answer that involves an almost Jedi-like adherence to keeping oneself under control and finding ways to be true to yourself in a way that doesn't encourage the worst parts of you to become dangerously exaggerated and instead feeds your better nature. Also, protip: don't fuck with Alchemy or strike up any deals with ancient Japanese Shinigami gods no matter how tempting the deal or how suavely dressed the Shinigami is.

How not to be a giant corpse monster: Um... don't become a giant corpse monster. Seriously, don't even vaguely hang around smaller corpse monsters. You just can't afford that risk broski.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on March 25, 2017, 06:43:47 PM
Those are sound points D9, thank you for expanding on the Mathiesque idea.
The parallel of DoS Soma seeing Mina killed and being pushed into Dark Lordism also reiterates something of interest, that the unfavourable/ less complete multiple endings are actually 'canon' but only in the sense that they never get to happen. (Well at least not all of them, depending on one's own headcanon and so forth)

The discussion has taken an interesting turn. I still stand by AoS>DoS, though given the choice and time I will try DoS as I've not played it as much. (Death was much more badass in DoS)
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: Shiroi Koumori on March 25, 2017, 11:09:16 PM
[Entirely Parodical EDIT]
[because I got a good chuckle at the thought]

How not to be a dark lord: the answer to that is a terribly interesting answer that involves an almost Jedi-like adherence to keeping oneself under control and finding ways to be true to yourself in a way that doesn't encourage the worst parts of you to become dangerously exaggerated and instead feeds your better nature. Also, protip: don't fuck with Alchemy or strike up any deals with ancient Japanese Shinigami gods no matter how tempting the deal or how suavely dressed the Shinigami is.

This is gold! Thanks for making me LOL.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: X on March 25, 2017, 11:33:05 PM
Quote
OK this actually isn't generally right. Using "soul" and "spirit" interchangeably is a relatively new thing, starting mainly with Augustine's line of thought.

For a great long time of human philosophy/theology, spirit, soul and body were understood as three separate pieces of a being: Psyche, Pneuma and Soma. This was called Tripartide Anthropology, and comes since ancient Greek times. Forward time a little, and you see early Christianity adopting it to explain what is God breathing into the clay model to create man. Soul is literally treated as the "power source" of a human, while spirit is one's mind, consciousness, will, personality, basically what makes a person unique, intellect-wise. It's the self. The meanings of "Pneuma" and "Psyche" were exchanged in many interpretations (Psyche meaning "Mind" or "Soul" depending on what author/philosopher you're reading). But the concept is generally similar across time, and hasn't been abandoned. Today you have both suporters for the tripartide and bipartide views.

That is interesting to read about. But for me as I grew up with the bipartide meanings (without even knowing it) soul and spirit are pretty much the same thing. At least for me.

Quote
Later today I'll create another thread talking of Soma and the evil spirit (with evidence), because the thing is huge.

This I have no doubt.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on March 26, 2017, 01:22:56 AM
Those are sound points D9, thank you for expanding on the Mathiesque idea.
The parallel of DoS Soma seeing Mina killed and being pushed into Dark Lordism also reiterates something of interest, that the unfavourable/ less complete multiple endings are actually 'canon' but only in the sense that they never get to happen. (Well at least not all of them, depending on one's own headcanon and so forth)

The discussion has taken an interesting turn. I still stand by AoS>DoS, though given the choice and time I will try DoS as I've not played it as much. (Death was much more badass in DoS)

I think DoS is more open ended then other games because we don't have a sequel. Unless Igarashi stated that True ending is the canon, I think both ending will work, especially with Julius mode.

Which comes in my mind, this could been an alternate dialogue... if they had rights which they never could.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: theplottwist on March 26, 2017, 02:31:43 AM
I think DoS is more open ended then other games because we don't have a sequel. Unless Igarashi stated that True ending is the canon, I think both ending will work, especially with Julius mode.

The game does have a sequel, actually: The novel.

So you could say Igarashi did state what is the canon ending of DoS. And it's the one where Soma defeats the cult.

(Death was much more badass in DoS)

Fam, one doesn't simply ignore that huge-ass double-bladed scythe from AoS.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: suomynona on March 26, 2017, 02:58:44 AM
The game does have a sequel, actually: The novel.

So you could say Igarashi did state what is the canon ending of DoS. And it's the one where Soma defeats the cult.

Fam, one doesn't simply ignore that huge-ass double-bladed scythe from AoS.

Oh. I thought that DoS was the latest CV game as for timeline. Thanks. Also, Death comes way too early and smashes anyone ill-equipped in AoS.
Title: Re: AOS or DOS?
Post by: zangetsu468 on March 26, 2017, 06:24:25 AM
Fam, one doesn't simply ignore that huge-ass double-bladed scythe from AoS.

Haha I am in no way disrespecting the mega-scythe, and I can't speak for others, but for myself even in hard mode of AoS Death is swiss cheese.  8)
AoS' Death is one of my top 3 preferred designs and attack patterns though.