Topic: Help me win an argument with a random guy on Facebook

[Lumi Kløvstad]

So I'm having an argument with the absolute worst kind of person: a random johnny know it all on Facebook who insists that Circle of the Moon and the N64 games were "retconned" by Iga (they weren't, because iirc they weren't considered part of the timeline to begin with). He also has this really stupid idea that Nathan Graves is somehow Alucard's son (with Maria. Ugh.).

Dungeonites, bretheren, kinsmen, soldiers for the cause:

Help me defeat this uppity stranger.

Give me the evidence I need to prove him wrong on both counts!

Interviews, quotations, magazine clippings, etc. Open the vaults, and let pure knowledge and truth shine through this day.

[Gaawa-chan]

Alucard wouldn't breed.  He considers his own bloodline cursed and so if he wanted children, he'd adopt.

[Guy Belmont]

Right This is from the 20th Anniversary Timeline poser.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-H4_aBKdDWpY/Uyc2SYZQs5I/AAAAAAAACLc/Obb8-Pe5ytM/s1600/timeline-side2.jpg

https://imgur.com/a/GmoXjwu this one is from the Plot twist

and The N64 games are on there however CoM is not. so NO way could   Nathan Graves  Alucard and Maria kid.


and COm i read was never ment to be part of the main canon, it was just ment to its own minni story.

This from PoR Castlevania 20th Anniversary Portrait of Ruin PreOrder Bonus.

This is a real Timeline not fan made, so he can't chuck that at you. and as CoM is  not on here, he is very wrong.

[Lumi Kløvstad]

and COm i read was never ment to be part of the main canon, it was just ment to its own minni story.

Got anything I can cite on that?

[AlexCalvo]

Sadly I think he's right about the N64 games.  They were clearly at least nebulously connected to the series, with mentions of Belmonts, Belnades, and previous Dracula ressurrections.  Also costume references to Simon and Maria.  I don't think they really cared too much about any kind of canon, but it was certainly set at least roughly in the universe of the previous games.  It only really conflicted with SoTN, which had been released while it was in production, and Iga's timeline's established year for Rondo, which also was decided while 64 was already being made.

[Guy Belmont]

Got anything I can cite on that?

https://imgur.com/a/GmoXjwu I was dinging in to my Folder and I found this ones from the  the Plot twist

[Lumi Kløvstad]

https://imgur.com/a/GmoXjwu I was dinging in to my Folder and I found this ones from the  the Plot twist

Wonder if our esteemed Canon Literalist has anything more like that squirreled away...

[Guy Belmont]

Wonder if our esteemed Canon Literalist has anything more like that squirreled away...

I'd PM as he has  a ton of this stuff. hes been VERY helpful to me, when i needed to find stuff out. and often or not i find interveiws that he's up loaded.  he has saved me many a time.

[DragonSlayr81]

Sadly I think he's right about the N64 games.  They were clearly at least nebulously connected to the series, with mentions of Belmonts, Belnades, and previous Dracula ressurrections.  Also costume references to Simon and Maria.  I don't think they really cared too much about any kind of canon, but it was certainly set at least roughly in the universe of the previous games.  It only really conflicted with SoTN, which had been released while it was in production, and Iga's timeline's established year for Rondo, which also was decided while 64 was already being made.

There is one thing I don't understand in some of the CV lore. There cases where a Belnades descendant is said to be specifically a descendant of Sypha Belnades. Wouldn't that mean they are also a descendant of the Belmonts too? They stress they are descendants of Sypha, but unless Sypha had a child before meeting Trevor, they couldn't be. Sure, the could be related as distant, DISTANT cousins (descending from Sypha's brothers or sisters), but NEVER be descendants of Sypha herself. The only descendants of Sypha, are also those of Trevor, meaning all the Belmonts known from Christopher to Julius, as well as the Morris, Lecarde and Renard clans(which likely branched out of the main Belmont lineage throughout history, though still retain some of that Belnades magical prowess).

[BLOOD MONKEY]

but why does it matter

[theplottwist]

Ok. First of all I should inform you that the majority of all people that I met that insisted on that (emphasis on the "that I met") was due to a burning hatred of IGA. They believed IGA to be arrogant, his games to be soulless, so you have to consider that this person might not accept the evidence, as flat out solid as it may be. I have come across some people that no matter how much evidence I presented, they insisted on the opposite and double-backed on their belief stronger than before.

If this happens, don't be rude. Just move on and let them be. And, again, this might not be the case here, the dude might just concede. I'm just speaking from personal experience of meeting a ton of people with this thought process, and the resulting fight is never worth it. You're already calling the dude "the worst kind of person, a know-it-all" and some of us (including me and you) are probably seen as one of these by some people.

CIRCLE OF THE MOON:

Konami Magazine (Vol 20, March 2001) released together with Circle of the Moon (March 21, 2001), says:

ぞの最新作となる本作のストーリーは、今までのベルモント家やモリス家とは異なる時間軸で流れていく。だが、そこで描かれる新たな物語は、紛れもなくドラキユラと人間の戦い。

"The story of this latest work flows on a different timeline from the conventional Belmont and Morris families'. However, the new story unfolding here is unquestionably a fight between Dracula and humans."

Pretty much as final as it can be.

This is a long time before IGA said anything. This is not "IGA" speaking proprietarily, it's Konami, and most likely the Kobe team behind this game, but that's assumption on my part. The assumption does, however, line up with what IGA said later: That Circle of the Moon is not canon because its developers intended for it.

And be prepared for it to be raised that "IGA hated the game" when IGA was, in fact, speaking from developer position. In other words: He had to point the flaws on the last work and highlight the enhancements on the new instalment. He did it to CotM, he did it to himself. And he did it because he had to get the new stuff sold. "IGA called it shit" is not a valid argument (besides I seem to have read him praise the game, but I can't quite recall where now. Nonetheless, it is true IGA criticized a number of things in it).

CASTLEVANIA 64/LOD:

This one is more complicated. There is a majority of evidence against it being canon but, at some point in the past, it was a much muddier subject, with it appearing in certain Japanese timelines and not others. The consensus back then was not as clear as Circle.

As per IGA statement, it was the intention of the devs for it to not be canon. Despite people squinting at the claim, I'm pretty sure IGA knows an ocean's worth of information more about this than us. Hence, I think it's safe to go from his word. Besides, the game itself presents information contradicting past titles, one contradiction being Dracula somehow existing on a period that Rondo claimed he didn't.

About that Gamestop Portrait of Ruin timeline: Doesn't exist in Japan. Contradicts ealier and future statements. Contradicted Japanese timeline kept up to date at the time (notice the distinct lack of 1820, 1830, 1844 and 1852 entries around 2006 and 2007, but the addition of the "1944" entry. This persisted forever, until the site died.).

Although the timeline is reliable on certain places, it SURE AS HELL is not concerning the inclusion of both CV64 and Circle (hell these games contradict even each other!).

He also has this really stupid idea that Nathan Graves is somehow Alucard's son (with Maria. Ugh.).

Convoluted out-of-character theories aside, I'm pretty sure they aren't his parents lol

but why does it matter

Same I always say. It doesn't matter, people have this impression that if a game is not canon it "means less" and this is just not true at all. Circle is a great game, canon is irrelevant to its merits. Same for LoD, which has the best Dracula intellect-wise on my opinion (the canon would have more to GAIN from having this smart of a Dracula in it, and I still am content that it isn't canon).

I've seen a few people argue that "Castlevania story is irrelevant" and, in the same breath, call bullshit on these games not being canon. Son, you can't hold that story is irrelevant then throw a fit that "the story is not canon." Oh well, we all are passionate on our own ways I guess.

[Guy Belmont]

but why does it matter

Well then if you going to say that then why does anything matter?

what a dumb thing to say.

And sorry  putting that forward. As it may have weaken your argument, thank goodness for plot coming in, I had no idea it was flawed, sorry.

[TheouAegis]

Sypha could have had a kid before Trevor. She worked for the church. Lots of horny priests in the church. 

[AlexCalvo]

How do the 64 games take place in a time Rondo said Dracula was inactive when they take place after Rondo?  And remember Rondo and many of the other games were never given an exact year where they took place until SoTN was made, which was during the production of 64, so the whole "100 years I've been dead" or whatever doesn't really mean anything... I mean what is the point of saying a game is non canon when it fit perfectly into the canon as it was at the time, with no contradiction, with direct references to important aspects of the series...

Also, who was said to be a direct descendant of Sypha?  I remember seeing members of the Belnades clan, but no mention of a direct line from Sypha.

[Dracula9]

Sypha could have had a kid before Trevor. She worked for the church. Lots of horny priests in the church. 

but her name's not timmy