Topic: We voted for the wrong guy? IGA

[X]

And then we have people like Grant, Sypha and Eric Lecarde (Again, before IGA) - Were they Belmont descendants? They sure killed Drac on a number of my playthroughs though, and none of them used the vampire killer.

Gameplay-wise Grant and Sypha can kill Dracula, but story-wise they only assisted Trevor as he killed Dracula. Eric Lecarde, like John Morris is a descendant of the house of Belmonts so the ability to kill Dracula flows within his veins. However Eric's interest in hunting the evil with his friend was not to kill Dracula, but to kill Elizabeth Bartly (Bathory) due to a personal tragedy involving his Love Gwendolen. So story-wise for Bloodlines Eric goes for the countess while John tackles Dracula.

[thernz]

Even if Dracula was only vulnerable to the Vampire Killer, he still would have been plummeted a dozen times.

So he's still pretty much a lame-o.

[Neobelmont]

And yet the vampire killer was never necessary to defeat Dracula in any of the games. Why have a story about a whip that's the only weapon that could kill Dracula when in reality, you can kill him with axes, knives or whatever you see fit? If the vampire killer was that important to the creators of the original Castlevania games (Before IGA), surely they would've made Dracula invulnerable to everything but the whip, in-game too, not just in the story. At least in Zelda you NEEDED silver arrows.

And then we have people like Grant, Sypha and Eric Lecarde (Again, before IGA) - Were they Belmont descendants? They sure killed Drac on a number of my playthroughs though, and none of them used the vampire killer.

I don't know everything about the Castlevania storyline though. Maybe I got things wrong. Maybe IGA is guilty of everything. I, however, feel that the original games left the story-line wideopen for interpretations.

I still feel that it comes down to the whip story wise,but then again maybe it was just lazy game design to be able to beat drac.

[kingu]

while i cherish the vampire killer myself, the major concern for story here is tragic.

[Sinful]

You know, I just realized; If IGA's fav vania game is CIII, why the heck hasn't he followed up on it by now already?! Something just don't add up?

No it's probably because the whole 'IGA hates Belmonts/Whips/MEEEEEEEEE' is very dumb, maybe?

I can say the same thing.

Regardless, it's not just the whip that IGA changed. He changed the series way too much. And too much is too much. I'm sorry if this upsets the IGA fanboys and all, but the classic vania fans aren't happy either.

But yeah, IGA went on to do the vania series, only instead of building upon the series, he totally took in in the wrong direction. If your gonna do this, at least make some classic vania games, alongside the spinoff Metroid style games, too. But no, it seem he wants nothing to do with what the vania series was about. He's only concerned about his baby. The SotN baby. If you adopted a bunch of kids, and then all of a sudden you had your own, you'd naturally favour your most. So yeah, I've already said this in my first post. And IGA is only human. But it's so not fair for those that have been with the series since the start (even the videogame nerd who is a massive vania fanboy, admits that why SotN is great and all, he still much more prefers the classics. And why not, that's what got him into the series).

Okay, seriously, everyone in favor of dumping Sinful in their ignore list say "aye".
And in case you didn't get the hint the first time, Sinful: you're an annoying dick.

Hey, call it a skill. No need to get your feathers all ruffled up for. And besides, I've made very good points in many of my posts... Too bad most will never get them do to blind hate towards me & what I like. But whatever, that's life (some are for me, most are against me).

But I say grow up and quit being such a baby. "Oh Sinful is hurting my feelings. Oh let's gang up on him and pretend like it's grade/high school all over again." Wow, and you say I'm a dick?


And so what what if I put the blame on blind fanboy-ism? It's usually the case. You mean you can't see this?

[thernz]

sotn comes out and is critically acclaimed. afterwards, chronicles and legends are both released and both relatively tank.
then cotm comes out and sells a million.

konami probably saw those exploration games as the life of the party and green-lit those instead.

eventually, iga and his team were able to convince konami to create the dracula x chronicles (he had been wanting to release rondo in the states since forever). and it probably was intended as a way to prove that the older mold was still fashionable.

and later down the line, rebirth comes out due to the very fashionable trend of pumping out retro coolies. seems pretty clear to me, there was an effort to release those older types of games.

meanwhile, the exploration titles became to slowly sell less and less. and with judgment's abysmal performance, gabriel belmont punches through a wall and claims the throne of castlevania while harmony of despair becomes a little project for iga to sing his swan song...

rip


I doubt it's entirely IGA's fault. He doesn't green-light his own projects, the suits at top do. A lot of the time in interviews, he liked to say how he'd like to do this or that, such as release Rondo in the states which he eventually did after a REALLY LONG TIME. He might be the one who's procuring the budget and doing the pitching, but look.

If he did pitch mostly the exploration titles, it's because, it was reasonable and safe. Yet even then it's evident he wasn't content to make the series stagnant. He actually pitched more daring things, ignoring their final products were all of flimsy quality. Lament of Innocence, for instance, wasn't even supposed to have exploration elements. Those were only put in after pressure from the suits. The guy even wanted to do Gradius and Contra, but that never happened either. Well, heh, he got into Otomedius.

Hell, in all these games, IGA's just been a producer who at most can offer suggestions and what to change when it comes to the game's actual development, which the team can actually ignore at times. Go blame the directors or designers. It's pretty evident that by the DS titles, he had to start asking for lower and lower budgets even with the exploration titles, citing the sprite and background reuse. He was pretty much already digging at the bottom of the barrel to get his babies made.

It's doubtful that he has as much control as you think he does. He's just a leaf blown in the wind like Gabriel...

You might not have liked how much he distilled the franchise, but that's pretty much why the series had any sort of presence in the 2000's. The series had already lost its intrigue before SoTN. It was SoTN and his and KCEK's later releases that kept the series afloat.

[Flame]

Lament of Innocence, for instance, wasn't even supposed to have exploration elements. Those were only put in after pressure from the suits

that would explain a lot actually.

[Sumac]

But on the other hand, PoR's Dracula was the first Lugosi-type we had in quite some time, Chronicles notwithstanding. Even the KCEK games used SotN's Drac.

Well, still, in game he looked like a colourfull SOTN edit. 

Speaking of Nathan, I'm surprised nobody brings him up or Reinhardt when they bitch about nobodies defeating Dracula, but bring up Jonathan. I guess because they have a whip, even if it's not even the vampire killer?

I think its because COTM is not regarded as canon and Reinchardt was supposed to be Belmont in the begining of development, so technically he could be counted as "would-be" Belmont. And CV64 / LOD doesn't counted as canon too.

the novel itself if I recall, has Olrox as the villain, trying to take over the void of power Dracula left behind.

I bet it would make a better plot for the game, then actual DOS story.

Lament of Innocence, for instance, wasn't even supposed to have exploration elements. Those were only put in after pressure from the suits

Well, if that was the case, then it sure makes some things quite clear.

[Lumi Kløvstad]

Reinhardt was supposed to be Belmont in the begining of development, so technically he could be counted as "would-be" Belmont. And CV64 / LOD doesn't counted as canon too.

I remember hearing that the Schneider family was descended from the Belmonts, just as the Fernandez family was descended from the Belnades/Vernandes family.

[BingleGod]

"There's a tendency among the press to attribute the creation of a game to a single person," says Warren Spector, creator of Thief and Deus Ex.

[RichterB]

Castlevania: homogenous or amorphous? And how much?

This is a historical point that has twisted the conversation over the years. Look at it this way: CVII: Simon's Quest was radically different than Castlevania 1, and it remains more or less by itself in the franchise in terms of game design. Despite its flaws, it stands out as something distinctive and interesting in the franchise. Now, SotN, when it was by itself as the only "Castleroid," really stood out as an interesting alternative presentation of Castlevania. It had some tangential roots in Simon's Quest, but was very different in how it was more overtly inspired by Super Metroid. Nevertheless, it worked as a one-off like Simon's Quest.

The reason this happened was because of the lack of an "overseer" in Castlevania. It didn't allow any one style to take root over the franchise's core identity established in CV1; rather, it allowed various rifs on the idea, sometimes very similar, sometimes very different, but always interesting. Super Castlevania IV, Bloodlines, and Rondo all share paternal DNA, but are vastly different creatures in visual style, level design, graphics, etc within a span of a few years. Each team gave their all to their particular vision. The same could be said for the N64 games, which were only made because the lack of an overseer, resulting in two games that pulled from various disparate elements of the series that were vastly different from the latter 3D games. (Despite their lack of recognition, they essentially were what Mario 64 was to Mario). We would have never known that style of a 3D Castlevania was possible if LoI had been the first 3D release. (Conversely, if Mario 64's changed but respectful game design had not been accepted because it wasn't identical to 2D Mario, we never would have had the Mario Galaxy games).

Anyway, IGA kept the series going, and tried to link it all up story-wise, but this resulted in a far more constrained view of Castlevania that began to look at SotN as the paternal DNA, when it was more like a recessive gene that was meant only to pop up from time to time. I read a Nintendo Power interview from circa 2005 where he talks about innovation in gameplay over improved graphics. He meant well, but his innovation came to mean gimmicks on top of a SotN base. On the one hand, even though budget was an issue, Castlevania: The Adventure Rebirth was an intriguing if limited entry made on a shoestring budget, I'd bet. So I can't fully use budget constraints as IGA's main issue. On the other hand, IGA lamented the loss of popularity for earlier Castlevanias, which is one of the reasons he put out Castlevania: Chronicles on PS1. It's confusing. But by and large, it doesn't usually work to keep one person in charge of something for too long. (As much as Hideo Kojima impressed with MGS 1 and 2--since then, it's been a mixed bag that's been more focused on early Cold War imagery rather than near-future stealth).

Whatever the case, Castlevania has hit a huge identity crisis. Many people, especially in the media, had decided nothing but the SotN style will do. In the meantime, the divisive over-saturation of that style led to a slow process of disinterest. Combined with multiple failures in 3D in a 3D-obsessed industry, and it was decided that Castlevania had to be drastically reimagined in a reboot. Rather than paternal DNA from CV1 or SotN, it was decided that a Chimera of popular or acclaimed modern action video games would do the trick: God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, and Uncharted. Now, where they got the idea that an aesthetic based on things like Lord of the Rings, Van Helsing, and Underworld was a solution to making the visuals relevant, I'm not so certain on that logic. But I digress. By my logic of a lack of an overseer being good, LoS, much as I hate to say it, can be accepted as a one-off. But to make it the new "paternal DNA" definition of Castlevania, is a danger that threatens the franchise's future. Because you're starting with a base product that is further and further away from Castlevania's identity.

[Sinful]

IGA missed to me missed the whole point of what made Castlevania gaming good. Instead of keeping the gameplay, design, and difficulty balance simple and tight. He went the complete opposite. Tossed in way to many variables that made it impossible to salvage anything in that department.

I just watched the Videogame's Nerd Castlevania marathon, again. And due to this topic the ending of the final episode stuck out this time even more, and he said it best. (The part about "there's so many variables here" and up until the end of the video... but start with part 1 if you've never seen it)

AVGN CastleVania Part 4 - Cinemassacre.com

Course, I don't completely agree with the Nerd, as for me even Super Castlevania complicated things too much too with the whip everywhere idea (to me, Bloodlines was the best evolution of the 16-Bit vania games. Combining the best of bother worlds: Both the classic NES vania games and the SNES SCIV game.... Plus Bloodlines introduces enough new things while still feeling like the great classics of past).




Sigh. This series is so messed up now... I only hope more vania games like Rebirth (downloadable with aim to please retro vania fans) come out still... Course it would be nice for a real reboot that brings back the series to it's former glory, and by combining past games like CIII, Bloodlines, XX, and Rondo to make the ultimate linear mutipath vania game with a ton of levels too (and don't forget about extra difficulty levels & loops)... yes, I'm dreaming here.

[RichterB]

Sigh. This series is so messed up now... I only hope more vania games like Rebirth (downloadable with aim to please retro vania fans) come out still... Course it would be nice for a real reboot that brings back the series to it's former glory, and by combining past games like CIII, Bloodlines, XX, and Rondo to make the ultimate linear mutipath vania game with a ton of levels too (and don't forget about extra difficulty levels & loops)... yes, I'm dreaming here.

As far as Rebirth goes, it would be amazing to see a Belmont's Revenge Rebirth that utilizes all the resources available, as I conceived in this thread: http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php/topic,2620.msg47278.html#msg47278

But Sinful, I wonder what you'll think of KCEK's two N64 3D entries. There's a bit of a learning and pacing curve to them...but I'd say about 3 levels of each provide their basic flavor (with some of the latter levels building on the mixture of action-platforming and structured exploration of the earlier levels). The AVGN wasn't totally fair with them, IMO.

A much fairer review (albeit it spoils about half the levels and cut-scenes) is this one done in 2011: RetroSnow: Castlevania (Nintendo 64) Review (Here, the reviewer, who ranks Rondo and Bloodlines as his favorites, says he ranks CV64 in his top 5 for the series, and thinks it is underrated).

As I look at other reviews about CV64 and its reimagining, Legacy of Darkness, even though I like some aspects of the former, I might have to give the latter the better position on my list in the future.

[Neobelmont]

As far as Rebirth goes, it would be amazing to see a Belmont's Revenge Rebirth that utilizes all the resources available, as I conceived in this thread: http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php/topic,2620.msg47278.html#msg47278

But Sinful, I wonder what you'll think of KCEK's two N64 3D entries. There's a bit of a learning and pacing curve to them...but I'd say about 3 levels of each provide their basic flavor (with some of the latter levels building on the mixture of action-platforming and structured exploration of the earlier levels). The AVGN wasn't totally fair with them, IMO.

A much fairer review (albeit it spoils about half the levels and cut-scenes) is this one done in 2011: RetroSnow: Castlevania (Nintendo 64) Review (Here, the reviewer, who ranks Rondo and Bloodlines as his favorites, says he ranks CV64 in his top 5 for the series, and thinks it is underrated).

Way too funny I watched that review a couple of days ago, but you forgot too mention one review Richter b and that was k-wings review

Season 3 Playback Castlevania: Legacy Of Darkness Review

[RichterB]

Way too funny I watched that review a couple of days ago, but you forgot too mention one review Richter b and that was k-wings review

Season 3 Playback Castlevania: Legacy Of Darkness Review

Ha-ha! Yes! I just saw this one, too! And while I wish it showed a few more levels (and had better brightness/contrast settings), it does one of the best jobs in video form of showing the full extent of what KCEK did and planned (as it talks in depth about the beta version and dropped design ideas, like whip swinging over gaps and an even bigger game world). I guess one thing it fails to mention is that the CV64 levels have been remixed in design, so you're not truly getting CV64 and LoD in one game, as the reviewer says. But yeah, beware of spoilers, anyone who hasn't played these games. And WOW, I am reminded of how epic the multiple Dracula battles are.