Topic: The Mother of All Castlevania Timelines

[theplottwist]

I'd like to see Konami's official pre-IGA timeline in there since they got pretty much everything else.

As far as I'm aware, there isn't such a thing as an official pre-IGA timeline, as in "including everything done previous to IGA's timeline was revealed". They simply appear to not have cared about this.

The games with canon connections (if you can call it that) are CVIII, The Adventure, Belmont's Revenge, CV, Simon's Quest and Rondo of Blood. What they all have in common is the explicit mention of Simon Belmont having existed at some point, referring to CV.

I can't list that because that would be redundant to IGA's timeline as he already listed them on their intended order. There is the largely accepted idea -- given all the evidence -- that Christopher was intended to be Trevor. Not even that would be enough to change this pre-IGA timeline because the first Castlevania says Christopher defeated Dracula a hundred years prior, and CVIII's intro says that its events happen "more than a 100 years" prior to Simon, meaning that it still comes before The Adventure.

Then you have Bloodlines and the CV64 games, which are loosely connected to the classic canon by mentioning a previously existing "Dracula vs Belmont" legend. I can't go and put those games into a "pre-IGA" timeline when I have no idea if they are even meant to be sequels at all to the initial games, instead of being sequels to this "Dracula" legend.

What came after the initial games listed above were games with no apparent intention to be sequels (to specific games) at all. About Bloodlines there is no clear official statement, but Igarashi DID say that the 64 games are being treated as their creators intended -- meaning that they are not meant to belong into a connected timeline (except between themselves, for obvious reasons).

Then...

Probably the most interesting timeline of them all because it's really difficult to tell what the original intented connenctions between the games were.

Or if there even IS an official timeline at all. The initial games were sequels and prequels to Simon's story, and that was it. That's the closest thing to a pre-IGA "canon" that we can observe (which is not to say I'd not like to know if there IS this timeline, though).

So, again, the making such a timeline would be more a confusing hassle than actually serve its purpose (be easy to grasp). It would include stuff such as giving long-winded explanations about how Christopher and Trevor were likely meant to be the same character previous to IGA's interference. On top, of course, of placing LoD/64 and Bloodlines in it without a explicit connection with Simon, as the others have.

EDIT: I should mention I AM aware that CV64 and LoD came after IGA became the Castlevania-man. When I say these games are "pre-IGA" I mean "pre-IGA TIMELINE", not "pre-IGA development".

[Inccubus]

I don't have a quote for this, but I distinctly remember reading an interview where the director, Victor Rodriguez, stated that Desmond was Simon's father. Then again from what I read on wikipedia (o_O), the game's plat and characters went through a lot of changes during development.

[zangetsu468]

Just one question: why is Order of Shadows after Castlevania/Simon's Quest, even in an alternate timeline?  For it to take place in the 'late 1600's' it would have to be before Castlevania/Simon's Quest, or be alternate to the events of those games.  Or is that because there was nothing to actually say what date Haunted Castle took place in?  I'm just remembering a previous conversation we had about Order of Shadows and its 'timeline' placement in this thread:  http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php/topic,8587.0.html

My theory is that because in OOS you only fight old man Dracula and the Castle itself remains standing after he is defeated, it was only the Guardian of his sleeping Spirit (referenced in CV64/ LOD) that was defeated. The same things happens in the non-canon endings of the 64 games.

[Guy Belmont]

Wow that's really fantastic I can't believe this is not official, so id say calling this the mother of all timelines is more then a fair title description.

 I mean when I saw this I really thought this was something that Konami had released recently. But no, and I really like the professionalism and dedication to your work by Adding the LOS timeline too. As most don't bother with it as they don't consider it as anything to do with CV. again really good work. And thank you for your work as its really nice to have something that you can just look at when you need it, and its soo in-depth.

I'd like to see Konami's official pre-IGA timeline in there since they got pretty much everything else.

Yes I agree  but the prob is that The classic timeline really contradicts one another  Yes   there was parts that kept from game to game That's what was so great about IGA he fixed thing and made things work.


But what would be great if someone could try to  put the  classic timeline together


as there was all that with the Legend of Christopher, and yes I know we had  the Legend of Christopher in the IGA timeline but Trevor  seems to have replaced him as the big figure of the clan, But there may have meant to have been a Belmont before Christopher  as the first game speaks of Dracula  being resurrected once before, so someone had killed him before Christopher.

and we also learn about the  tower of Colbert, its  ashame there was not more of that.

 (this could be just another name for the one of the count's castles, but I think its unlikely as  his castle and the tower are talked about separately) and we find out that back in Christopher's day the count was a evil sorcerer and not a demon/Vampire, and I'm not sure if he was one when  Christopher fought him.  I thought he was as he preformed Dark rituals and gained powers but on the flipside when you fight the count in The Legend of Dracula.

You see his necklace flash when ever he attacks, and it looks like that he draws the power from his necklace. Something I find  note worthy  to point out is that,
in The Legend of Dracula II,  his powers seem to have gotten stronger  becoming a full vampire as he does not have the Necklace.

But I doubt it as 1, he uses The Crimson Stone and The Ebony Stone In IGA's timeline. Although I always thought that it was more of a merging thing so both stones became one, and then they became part of his soul.

So like even if you knocked him out,  you couldn't  take it off no matter how hard you tried. As its a part of him now, in form of a necklace. And that's its down side,  as its on, display  so one can attack it.

sort of like his greatest  strength is also his greatest weakness but yeah that's just my take on it.

And 2 that he later in the boss fight he becomes a bat.

But   something else comes to mind, in CV3 the count uses a staff to battle not his usual  first form way of Fighting. So  to me it looks like they trying to  match up the story from The Legend of Dracula to fit in with there story. The count,  Evil sorcerer turned Vampire.

It would be nice to work on something like this, trying to make the older timeline whole.
 
What would be great is if there was a Eng CV site that had all Jp stories and other stuff, some where that one could look anything up, like.. "hmmm what was the Japanese story to CV1, I'll just go and look it up"  that be something id like to do if i knew how to make a website... and I could translate . But it be great if Plots timeline could be in there.

[aensland]

As far as I'm aware, there isn't such a thing as an official pre-IGA timeline

Google Dengeki N64 1999 vol2, that's the closest thing to an "official" pre-Igarashi canon timeline

[X]

Or if there even IS an official timeline at all.

There was. It was featured in the Dungeon's pages before IGA put together his official timeline (which then prompted the Dungeon's pages to be updated). I do believe that CV Legends was the latest game produced by Konami at the time when it was drawn out. And Konami's official timeline did not extend past CV Bloodlines since Aria of Sorrow had not been conceptualised yet. Neither had Lament of Innocence for that matter. And I think I still have those old CV timeline pages printed off somewhere. I'd have to look around for them.

[coinilius]

Thanks for the answer on the reasoning behind the OoS placement, plot

[theplottwist]

There was. It was featured in the Dungeon's pages before IGA put together his official timeline (which then prompted the Dungeon's pages to be updated). I do believe that CV Legends was the latest game produced by Konami at the time when it was drawn out. And Konami's official timeline did not extend past CV Bloodlines since Aria of Sorrow had not been conceptualised yet. Neither had Lament of Innocence for that matter. And I think I still have those old CV timeline pages printed off somewhere. I'd have to look around for them.

But was it official?

Like, I'm aware there was a number of timelines before, such as:

Google Dengeki N64 1999 vol2, that's the closest thing to an "official" pre-Igarashi canon timeline

But as Aensland said, that doesn't appear to actually be KONAMI's words.

If you locate that one you mean, point me to it, please.

[Nagumo]

Google Dengeki N64 1999 vol2, that's the closest thing to an "official" pre-Igarashi canon timeline

The IGA timeline was actually created during the development of SotN. The earliest publication of this timeline that I'm aware of is from 1997.

and we also learn about the  tower of Colbert, its  ashame there was not more of that.

This is actually a mistranslation. It's supposed to be the "Carpathian Tower" (a reference to the Carpathian mountains). In the manual of the MSX version of Akumajou Dracula it's stated that this is the last stage of the game. So it refers to the tower in which Dracula resides.     

[X]

The IGA timeline was actually created during the development of SotN. The earliest publication of this timeline that I'm aware of is from 1997.

Then maybe this is the timeline I was thinking of. But it doesn't make sense since CV Legends was counted as part of the timeline and IGA retconned the game.

[Nagumo]

Then maybe this is the timeline I was thinking of. But it doesn't make sense since CV Legends was counted as part of the timeline and IGA retconned the game.

It sounds like you're thinking of this timeline (from 1997):

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/castlevania/images/b/b9/Konamimagazinevolume03-page071.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120421141929

[X]

Possibly. But I'm not sure.

[AlexCalvo]

Awesome job man.  One critique I would say is that I think the classic games should exist in more than just the Iga timeline.  I think it is safe to assume that in the 64 games for example, that at least the NES games Are considered Canon.

A definite example of this is Legends clearly existing in a world with Cv3, and SoTN too, probably more.

But that is being really nit picky. I like it a lot man.

[Nagumo]

A definite example of this is Legends clearly existing in a world with Cv3, and SoTN too, probably more.

The director of the Legends actually came out and said Legends existed separately from the official timeline and that there was no connection. Frankly, that explains a lot. I believe there were some shenanigans with Legends being on the timeline regardless of what the director said, but this can be explained by the fact that KCEK threw all the games in the series together on one timeline without any regard for conflicts. It was mentioned on the old official website that some games in the timeline "might be gaiden".

[AlexCalvo]

I think game developers words only go so far.  This is actually a great example of a point I've been wanting to make for a little bit of time.  I don't think developer interview should be considered as rock solid to the Canon as what is in game.  For example, if a game came out that contradicted something Iga said in an interview, I wouldn't really lose any sleep over it.  It's great supplemental information, but not even close to the relevance of what appears in game, everything said in an interview is fair game to disregard if/When a new developed takes on the series, and I wouldn't consider them doing so to be retconning.

By the same token I think it's a little disingenuous to make claims like that Legends wasn't meant to be in the same world as other games in the series.  Anyone who plays it and knows the series can see how it obviously calls back to previous games in the series(in a pretty inconsiderate/contradictory manner, but that's immaterial to the point).  Alucard's presence and look confirm this, regardless of what the director said later to try and justify his games continuity errors.

If Iga were to come out and say for example that AoS was not meant to be part of the timeline it would change literally nothing about the fact that it was.  I guess my point is that just saying something doesn't make it true, even for the directors/developers.  Especially given how fickle so many seem to be after the fact.