Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: Nagumo on November 15, 2013, 11:13:38 AM
-
To clarify the topic title, does Castlevania need another creative mind post Lords of Shadow who takes full control of the franchise for a certain period of time? Or would you prefer a return to the old model where everyone does whatever the heck they want?
Both approaches have their pros and cons. If only one person is calling the shots the series has a clearly defined set of aesthetics, an overarching narrative, and a good idea of what to expect quality wise. On the other hand, the series might become stale or you might not like the approach and get stuck with it for quite a while. Letting multiple people take turns might be very refreshing and innovative, but might make the series look indecisive on what it wants to be or result in strong fluctuations in quality.
Your thoughts regarding this topic, if you please.
-
No thank you, people get full of themselves with time (you can see that even in Alvarez after only 3 games). What we need is a single writer a la Amy Henning in the LoK series to keep the vision coherent, but various teams and producers.
-
Does the series need another IGA? I say yes.. mainly for the fact that we need another producer that shared Koji's distinct passion (not necessarily vision) for the series, most notably the classic titles. An individual that respects the past by including the elements that made it great, while at the same time experimenting with new gameplay ideas that don't interfere with the overall experience. Someone that understands the importance of Castlevania's music and aesthetic. I feel the best approach would be for Konami to pick someone or a core group of individuals that can make great 2D games, games that echo both classic & metroidvania styles. A cohesive but non-overbearing narrative should be included, meanwhile larger studios can handle the grandiose 3D, non-conventional titles. That way no one is really stepping on each other's toes, they can take reference to one another if they wanted but not be restricted to what the other studio is doing. After all, stand-alone titles are no stranger to Castlevania. I believe they [MercurySteam/Konami] discussed this idea before.. why they haven't pursued it I have no idea.
Other than that, I also liked IGA's personality. In my opinion, he was a quirky, savvy, likable guy; he would carry around his whip & wear his hat at almost every Castlevania event. He gave autographs, answered questions about the series' history without being disrespectful or offending anybody (for the most part). It may not seem important but I believe the series benefitted from IGA's character and demeanor; it set him apart from other mundane producers, which in turn gave the saga it's own unique view among the public. I know this is subjective but this is how I feel. Cox to me is just a boring guy, personality-wise. He's just there to do his job & that's it. He'll arrive at the office, tell his subordinates what & what not to do, and leave a couple hours before everyone else. IGA seemed like he wouldn't mind sticking around after all the business is done & just bullshit with his coworkers about stuff, Castlevania or otherwise, and pay for dinner while telling silly anecdotes about his childhood growing up in Japan. Totally unfounded, I know, but this is just my personal impression lol
By the way, I'm back :) Here to end the borrowed time you've all been living on *Bane voice*
-
I'd also choose a completely different especialized team for 3D and 2D with separate storylines and stuff.
-
Letting Castlevania experiment with different developing teams is certainly an appealing idea, but it's not a truly viable one in the long run. It's always nice to see fresh air breathed into a long-standing series; you certainly can't expect a genre to survive without a steady current of new ideas, and I've got nothing against hiring new faces to drive the old boat. But there's a point after which a franchise will need a certain sense of direction, and certain amount of consistency, to move forward. In other words, there's a point where you can no longer expect everything you throw at a franchise to stick -- and where letting producers do "whatever they want with it" might lead it even farther astray. Someone will be needed to preserve the overall form and coherence of the series, lest it become shapeless and empty like so many others already have.
Crisis has put it quite aptly:
Does the series need another IGA? I say yes.. mainly for the fact that we need another producer that shared Koji's distinct passion for the series, most notably the classic titles. An individual that respects the past by including the elements that made it great, while at the same time experimenting with new gameplay ideas that don't interfere with the overall experience. Someone that understands the importance of Castlevania's music and aesthetic.
Still, I'm a bit more skeptic regarding "separate 2D/3D teams" matter. If we're looking for that perfect blend of classic standards and modern innovation, then cutting the franchise in half won't exactly do it much good. We need someone who cares enough about Castlevania to bring both sides together, to cross an uncomfortable divide -- so we certainly don't need for that separation to become permanent.
While it's true that the current state of affairs is pointing towards that solution as most feasible, I don't think it is one that should be adopted for too long a time.
What we need is a single writer a la Amy Henning in the LoK series to keep the vision coherent, but various teams and producers.
Legacy of Kain. Such a great series, but look at what's happening to it now.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/424304/blog/from-the-grave-video-of-axed-legacy-of-kain-surfaces/ (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/424304/blog/from-the-grave-video-of-axed-legacy-of-kain-surfaces/)
All that's left of it today is that ridiculous F2P "Nosgoth" spin-off that's in development for PC. Why, Square Enix? Is there truly no hope left for the series? Must it go down the F2P MMO road? >:(
Anyways, your "single writer" idea isn't a bad one at all. Though it all depends on how deeply he'll be able to influence the series.
PS: Nagumo, if you're also asking whether IGA should return, then my answer is a definite yes.
-
No. No more IGA's. That kind of thing grows stagnant.
-
Legacy of Kain. Such a great series, but look at what's happening to it now.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/424304/blog/from-the-grave-video-of-axed-legacy-of-kain-surfaces/ (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/424304/blog/from-the-grave-video-of-axed-legacy-of-kain-surfaces/)
All that's left of it today is that ridiculous F2P "Nosgoth" spin-off that's in development for PC. Why, Square Enix? Is there truly no hope left for the series? Must it go down the F2P MMO road? >:(
Yuu know what happened? Yep, Amy Henning left Eidos, and now she's responsible for the writing and directing of 4 little games.. The Uncharted Trilogy and The Last of Us.
Man, the thing's I'd do for Amy to take a shot on Castlevania.
-
Im in favor of letting other teams take a stab at Castlevania just as long as they know what they're doing.
And IIRC, every Castlevania team has been different from the last anyway, so it wouldn't exactly be a new thing.
-
Insane egocentric guy with a stupid cowboy hat and a superiority complex that drives him to pick and choose when other peoples' games "count" in "his" overarching canon?
No, Castlevania will be fine without another one of those guys.
-
I personally think that Castlevania should have a lead individual. Someone who can keep the series on course through every game. But not outright take the lead from everything to the story to game play style. He/She just needs to be there to make sure things are in place and not getting out of hand. The other aspect of this is to bring back multiple teams. One team can do their game, then the next time another team can do it. But the lead person would keep track of the teams and let them know what will work with the previously established story and what will not work. This way we can hopefully avoid any severe plot holes and contradictions, and keep things fresh, innovative and interesting. I wouldn't want IGA back nor someone like him, but a person whom is more open-minded and accepting then he was.
-
If you mean "IGA" by "director for 1-3 games", like Alvarez, then yes. But not more.
-
The series needs me
so that I can put a bunch of pixel art tits, dicks, and butts in it.
All Castlevania needs to succeed.
Don't believe me? Look at Symphony of the Night. Had tons of that shiz and 12-year-old me's mind (and wad) was blown.
Everyone's favorite game for a reason.
-
The series needs me
so that I can put a bunch of pixel art tits, dicks, and butts in it.
All Castlevania needs to succeed.
Don't believe me? Look at Symphony of the Night. Had tons of that shiz and 12-year-old me's mind (and wad) was blown.
Everyone's favorite game for a reason.
LOL! The only CV title to ever escape North American censorship.
-
No thank you, people get full of themselves with time (you can see that even in Alvarez after only 3 games). What we need is a single writer a la Amy Henning in the LoK series to keep the vision coherent, but various teams and producers.
I kinda noticed that too with Alvarez. That kinda arrogance never gelled with me. Kinda like that Tameem guy from Ninja Theory.
-
No thank you, people get full of themselves with time (you can see that even in Alvarez after only 3 games). What we need is a single writer a la Amy Henning in the LoK series to keep the vision coherent, but various teams and producers.
Lol, it didn't even take Alvarez 3 games.
But in some ways I can understand why directors and producers feel the need to boast. At the end of the day they're selling their baby and a piece of themselves, and if you don't believe that it's a good product, then what are you doing with it? Especially where reboots are concerned, when there's a guaranteed tsunami of older fans trash-talking you at every turn, you need encouragement from somewhere. (Not that I agree with absolutely everything LoS does.)
Anyway, I liked having IGA around, as he pumped out a good amount of quality games, but it'd be better if Castlevania kept changing hands. I'd still like IGA to do a 3DS game though.
-
I am partial to IGA's personality, I think he is a nice guy and is more approachable than Cox.
As for the series, I'm in the maybe corner. It is nice to have a Mr. Castlevania, but it would also be difficult on the guy who has to shoulder the responsibility for the series for a long period of time and draw the ire of fans.
-
Personally I like Iga. Are all his games great? No. However, they were fun. Anywho for the topic at hand I'm not sure. I liked Iga but I admit I was getting bored with playing as a non Belmont character as the main role. Now I'm not saying I don't mind non Belmont characters but to me Belmonts are the main characters of the series and should be the face of the series, not Alucard or Soma. Personally I just want someone to make a Castlevania that sticks to what makes Castlevania what it's known for. I understand people have different views but there are certain themes that should not be messed with.
All I want is a CV where I'm a Belmont that makes his way through a huge castle that at the end is a giant epic fight with Death and after that Dracula. Of course I want candles, hearts, sub weapons, wallmeat, etc. Is that so much to ask for?
-
All I want is a CV where I'm a Belmont that makes his way through a huge castle that at the end is a giant epic fight with Death and after that Dracula. Of course I want candles, hearts, sub weapons, wallmeat, etc. Is that so much to ask for?
Yes.
-
All I want is a CV where I'm a Belmont that makes his way through a huge castle that at the end is a giant epic fight with Death and after that Dracula. Of course I want candles, hearts, sub weapons, wallmeat, etc. Is that so much to ask for?
For an indie game today, it's okay. For a new game in a 25-year-old series, maybe a bit too much. ;)
-
I like the idea of giving a certain team/producer 2 or 3 games to work on then moving on to another team/producer. I think it keeps things from getting stale and makes it so that there are different approaches being used. Too much of one thing is why IGA's games got kind of uneven. That and he spent years trying to recreate his greatest hit, SoTN.
-
Personally I like Iga. Are all his games great? No. However, they were fun. Anywho for the topic at hand I'm not sure. I liked Iga but I admit I was getting bored with playing as a non Belmont character as the main role. Now I'm not saying I don't mind non Belmont characters but to me Belmonts are the main characters of the series and should be the face of the series, not Alucard or Soma. Personally I just want someone to make a Castlevania that sticks to what makes Castlevania what it's known for. I understand people have different views but there are certain themes that should not be messed with.
All I want is a CV where I'm a Belmont that makes his way through a huge castle that at the end is a giant epic fight with Death and after that Dracula. Of course I want candles, hearts, sub weapons, wallmeat, etc. Is that so much to ask for?
I only agree with this if they give the Belmont something other than a whip. Then, the next main character could be Shit Belmont for all I care. I'm just tired of the fucking whip gameplay. If they have to drop the Belmonts for me to have different weapons in the game, then fuck the Belmonts.
-
Right. Because there aren't enough games out there already where you fight with a sword.
Whip combat is what makes Castlevania unique. The only mistake konami made with the whip was stepping backwards after expanding on it in CV4.
-
Right. Because there aren't enough games out there already where you fight with a sword.
Whip combat is what makes Castlevania unique. The only mistake konami made with the whip was stepping backwards after expanding on it in CV4.
I don't care. Give me a choice. It was good for 5, 6 titles. After they introduced multiple types of gameplay, I want to choose how I play, if I can.
That's why multiple characters are still important to me. They should make a game without a main character, just a main history that changes if you choose a different character. Bloodlines, Dawn of Sorrow, LoD... they should take cues from themselves.
-
I only agree with this if they give the Belmont something other than a whip. Then, the next main character could be Shit Belmont for all I care. I'm just tired of the fucking whip gameplay. If they have to drop the Belmonts for me to have different weapons in the game, then fuck the Belmonts.
I say keep the whip for those who want it in. However, I'm ok with another weapon if the player so chooses.
-
So pretty much a Jonathan Morris-esque character but a lot less annoying. I still believe a multi-weaponed Belmont fighting a new vampire lord a century after LoI would be a great game.
-
So pretty much a Jonathan Morris-esque character but a lot less annoying. I still believe a multi-weaponed Belmont fighting a new vampire lord a century after LoI would be a great game.
Yep. Pretty much.
-
Personally I like Iga. Are all his games great? No. However, they were fun. Anywho for the topic at hand I'm not sure. I liked Iga but I admit I was getting bored with playing as a non Belmont character as the main role. Now I'm not saying I don't mind non Belmont characters but to me Belmonts are the main characters of the series and should be the face of the series, not Alucard or Soma. Personally I just want someone to make a Castlevania that sticks to what makes Castlevania what it's known for. I understand people have different views but there are certain themes that should not be messed with.
IGA himself stated in an interview these other characters provided the gameplay with more diversity due to varied and multiple forms of attacking. Honestly I don't concern myself with characters or timeline/ plot so much if a 2d Castlevania is well executed in terms of gameplay and being enjoyable and challenging in the right ways.
All I want is a CV where I'm a Belmont that makes his way through a huge castle that at the end is a giant epic fight with Death and after that Dracula. Of course I want candles, hearts, sub weapons, wallmeat, etc. Is that so much to ask for?
Battle of 1999, that's all anybody wants.
-
Battle of 1999, that's all anybody wants.
Yes.
Sigh... but when will we be ever given that game? :(
-
Yes.
Sigh... but when will we be ever given that game? :(
Probably never. But if someone did decide to take a crack at it then there would be those out there that feel it has not lived up to their expectations. A game that does not yet exist except in concept and back story has grown so much in people's minds that it could be anything. And if it's not what you were expecting then you'd be very disappointed. IGA should have made it the instant he mentioned it. That was one of his biggest mistakes.
-
I only agree with this if they give the Belmont something other than a whip. Then, the next main character could be Shit Belmont for all I care. I'm just tired of the fucking whip gameplay. If they have to drop the Belmonts for me to have different weapons in the game, then fuck the Belmonts.
I'm all for a few innovations in the weaponry department, but I don't want that trademark whip gameplay taken away. It's what made Castlevania unique in the first place.
And, after all, every CV game in the series' history has had a whip-wielding hero lying about. Let's not break with that tradition.
So pretty much a Jonathan Morris-esque character but a lot less annoying. I still believe a multi-weaponed Belmont fighting a new vampire lord a century after LoI would be a great game.
I loved the versatility you were afforded as Jonathan, in PoR; when you come down to it, he's one of the most well-equipped CV heroes out there. His weapon/subweapon arsenal was considerable, even by CV standards, and it came along with a substantial skill mastery system. If you count Charlotte's spellcasting abilities, you've easily got one of Castlevania's most diverse combat systems. Best of all, Jonathan could still wield his trusty whip, as if he'd done so all his life -- PoR introduced some nifty whip variants, the likes of which I haven't seen since (Nebula, anyone?). And you almost wouldn't be bothered with any weapon once you'd unlocked the VK.
Though I'm a bit less enthused by the dual-character layout. Sure, it adds that little bit of novelty, and it's definitely a great concept -- but the way it was executed, I felt as if I were playing only half a character at a time. I would have loved it if all of PoR's abilities could have been concentrated into a single hero.
Yes.
Sigh... but when will we be ever given that game? :(
Well, we can write to Konami (but they won't answer). We can start up a petition (but they won't care). So here are the better alternatives:
We could bombard their servers with requests, hack into their systems, and implement subtle modifications into their website's structure so that Konami employees will be tricked into thinking that 1999 game is underway.
OR!
We could hire a special strike team to land into Konami's Japan HQ and hold its executives hostage until 1999 is made. Fight the power!
... Well, maybe not.
So why don't we, uh... pray? Well, who knows if it will be effective? We can always try...
Ooooh! Actually, I've got it now. Here's an even better one: we should... wait! Yes, that sounds just like it. We shall sit around, twiddle our thumbs, do absolutely nothing, and just hope that IGA (or someone who cares enough about the original timeline to do anything about it) puts the 1999 plan in motion again. Somehow.
Haha! That's right. That'll do it. I'm a genius. 8)
-
After the journey we experienced with IGA, a fresh director/writer working with the series is a great start. But another IGA? I dunno, those were different times, but seeing how LoS may be turning even more heads, anything is possible.
Hmm I had no idea Amy left Eidos. Wow I would love to see her take on CV lore ;D
-
I'm all for a few innovations in the weaponry department, but I don't want that trademark whip gameplay taken away. It's what made Castlevania unique in the first place.
And, after all, every CV game in the series' history has had a whip-wielding hero lying about. Let's not break with that tradition.
POR proved you can have both the whip wielding protagonist and variety with weapons/attacks. There's plenty of room to accommodate gamers with different tastes, using another weapon isn't a dealbreaker to the story imo. Why not a whipsword that retracts and can be used as both or for long range/ short range combat etc
I loved the versatility you were afforded as Jonathan, in PoR; when you come down to it, he's one of the most well-equipped CV heroes out there. His weapon/subweapon arsenal was considerable, even by CV standards, and it came along with a substantial skill mastery system. If you count Charlotte's spellcasting abilities, you've easily got one of Castlevania's most diverse combat systems. Best of all, Jonathan could still wield his trusty whip, as if he'd done so all his life -- PoR introduced some nifty whip variants, the likes of which I haven't seen since (Nebula, anyone?). And you almost wouldn't be bothered with any weapon once you'd unlocked the VK.
That's true, and unlocking the VK was satisfying upon defeating the VK's memory. That + Death/Dracula were two of the best Boss battles in CV ever.
Though I'm a bit less enthused by the dual-character layout. Sure, it adds that little bit of novelty, and it's definitely a great concept -- but the way it was executed, I felt as if I were playing only half a character at a time. I would have loved it if all of PoR's abilities could have been concentrated into a single hero.
Did you play the game on the absolute hardest level? I can guarantee there are areas you need to switch between both and you'll only be using one at a time. Granted Jonathan is more useful, but Charlotte is necessary for a few parts (Sanctuary for one) and transforming into animals. (to obtain Sanctuary)
Well, we can write to Konami (but they won't answer). We can start up a petition (but they won't care). So here are the better alternatives:
We could bombard their servers with requests, hack into their systems, and implement subtle modifications into their website's structure so that Konami employees will be tricked into thinking that 1999 game is underway.
OR!
We could hire a special strike team to land into Konami's Japan HQ and hold its executives hostage until 1999 is made. Fight the power!
... Well, maybe not.
So why don't we, uh... pray? Well, who knows if it will be effective? We can always try...
Ooooh! Actually, I've got it now. Here's an even better one: we should... wait! Yes, that sounds just like it. We shall sit around, twiddle our thumbs, do absolutely nothing, and just hope that IGA (or someone who cares enough about the original timeline to do anything about it) puts the 1999 plan in motion again. Somehow.
Haha! That's right. That'll do it. I'm a genius. 8)
Yeah the hype for 1999 is dead right now. I would still welcome that game, but it needed to be a part of the Sorrow series, it's been too long.
-
Yeah the hype for 1999 is dead right now. I would still welcome that game, but it needed to be a part of the Sorrow series, it's been too long.
I honestly don't think that the 1999 game could really be apart of the Sorrow series since Soma isn't in the Demon Castle War. He was still his original incarnate; Dracula. While it has some of the 'Sorrow' characters such as Julius and Alucard, the Sorrow games are known for featuring Soma as the protagonist. I would consider Soma to be the main point of the sorrow games themselves. If he's not in there, it's not a Sorrow game.
-
POR proved you can have both the whip wielding protagonist and variety with weapons/attacks. There's plenty of room to accommodate gamers with different tastes, using another weapon isn't a dealbreaker to the story imo. Why not a whipsword that retracts and can be used as both or for long range/ short range combat etc
Aria of Sorrow had a whip sword that I'd always loved to use -- it was a bit slow, but it boasted an impressive attack range and was Soma's most whip-like weapon in AoS. A pity I was forced to shed it when better weapons became available; it was incredibly fun to use.
DoS did offer a line of chain whips, but they weren't as interesting as AoS's; they were your simple, short-ranged, average-powered weapons, and their animations looked like extendable tree branches. Understandably, it wasn't quite as captivating.
Now, Order of Ecclesia is one game which suffers from a serious whip deficiency. Shanoa's arsenal was otherwise pretty substantial, but neither she nor Albus were allowed to wield a whip! Blasphemy! Still, it felt as if some core CV mechanic had gone amiss.
That's true, and unlocking the VK was satisfying upon defeating the VK's memory. That + Death/Dracula were two of the best Boss battles in CV ever.
I've known better ones, but I'll admit the double D combo was pretty sleek. 8)
That fake Richter battle was annoying as hell, though.
Did you play the game on the absolute hardest level? I can guarantee there are areas you need to switch between both and you'll only be using one at a time. Granted Jonathan is more useful, but Charlotte is necessary for a few parts (Sanctuary for one) and transforming into animals. (to obtain Sanctuary)
Using Sanctuary to purify Eric's daughters almost requires you to main as Johnny to ward the sisters off while Charlotte's spell charges. And you can still transform into a toad/owl as Jonathan (R button). In the end, these features feel more gimmicky than not -- after all, why couldn't Jonathan learn the purification and morph spells himself? Charlotte is meant to mix up the gameplay a bit, and while she sometimes succeeds in doing so (you'll sometimes need to fight alongside her, especially with the lv1 cap), her integration into the formula ends up feeling a tad too artificial at times.
I honestly don't think that the 1999 game could really be apart of the Sorrow series since Soma isn't in the Demon Castle War. He was still his original incarnate; Dracula. While it has some of the 'Sorrow' characters such as Julius and Alucard, the Sorrow games are known for featuring Soma as the protagonist. I would consider Soma to be the main point of the sorrow games themselves. If he's not in there, it's not a Sorrow game.
Agreed. Sorrow is Soma. 1999 is something else.
(insert cool design)
Castlevania DCW -- Demon Castle Wars
OR
Castlevania 1999 -- The Final Confrontation
OR
Castlevania -- Dawn of the Dark Eclipse
OR
Castlevania -- The End of All Things (with deep philosophical implications)
OR
Castlevania WARZZZ -- F2P MMO!!!!!!!!! (Oh please no)
-
I'm kinda glad for anyone that adds another installment to the series. Even if they sometimes turn out a little weird, I don't feel like any have been too off the wall. Someone with a passion for it who'd be true to Castlevania form would be great, but I'd take a weirdo here and there over nobody at all.
-
Pandemic Entertainment, Killer Experience (Peke) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2a3OAmqEEY#)
-
Aria of Sorrow had a whip sword that I'd always loved to use -- it was a bit slow, but it boasted an impressive attack range and was Soma's most whip-like weapon in AoS. A pity I was forced to shed it when better weapons became available; it was incredibly fun to use.
Yeah that weapon was awesome, I'm glad it was thrown in to harken back to Classicvania
Now, Order of Ecclesia is one game which suffers from a serious whip deficiency. Shanoa's arsenal was otherwise pretty substantial, but neither she nor Albus were allowed to wield a whip! Blasphemy! Still, it felt as if some core CV mechanic had gone amiss.
I disagree with feeling the core mechanic was missing. I played both games recently and as much as I like the whip in POR, the gameplay didn't feel as finished to me, it was a bit more rigid with character movement, dashing and so forth. Shanoa's attacks were so varied that the whip range was covered, but I understand the point of the gamer missing the act of whipping as it really is like no other.
There was never going to be a whip because neither the Belmonts (nor their family extensions; Morris' etc) were protagonists. Until the player completed the game Albus was also the pseudo-antagonist. However, they could have given Albus a straight flame attacked which threw back to the flame whip of Castlevania II, that would have been cool.
I've known better ones, but I'll admit the double D combo was pretty sleek. 8)
That fake Richter battle was annoying as hell, though.
Aside from Dracula X for the SNES final boss, I'd say Double D's was top 5 easily :)
Other bosses I'd probably rate are Julius in AOS, Death in DOS, Dracula in COTM, The Creature in AOS, SOTN/Nocturne Galamoth was fun, I have to say I didn't mind Dracula in COD either.
Really? I thought beating the whip's memory on the hardest level was so satisfying. I had to max out my Axe, after that it felt rewarding to use :P
Using Sanctuary to purify Eric's daughters almost requires you to main as Johnny to ward the sisters off while Charlotte's spell charges. And you can still transform into a toad/owl as Jonathan (R button). In the end, these features feel more gimmicky than not -- after all, why couldn't Jonathan learn the purification and morph spells himself? Charlotte is meant to mix up the gameplay a bit, and while she sometimes succeeds in doing so (you'll sometimes need to fight alongside her, especially with the lv1 cap), her integration into the formula ends up feeling a tad too artificial at times..
Not so much, the easiest way for myself to beat the sisters is play as Charlotte, stay to the right of the screen, make Jonathan stand about 3 character spaces to the left of you, start charging Sanctuary, call him back when the sisters approach, release Sanctuary. This takes about 10 seconds in total, I'm sure there are other ways to do it but this I found as the easiest; no need to use Jonathan there at all.
I don't think there are times you pretty much ever need them both on the screen in Lv 1 Hard unless
A) it's for platforming elements which are few, or
B) team special attacks like 1000 blades or the very first team attack which you can use to dodge Dullahan's heads (which kill you in one or two hits)
Only issue I had with the having more than one character gameplay is that DOS Julius mode did it better than POR. The dynamics were different (only one person on the screen at a time) but it felt like their abilities were much more useful and varied.
Agreed. Sorrow is Soma. 1999 is something else.
My bad, I didn't think of that - Soma should be in the Sorrow series. I always felt there could have been one set after DOS, problem being where do they push the story after you've just played through a replica of Castlevania?
I had also hoped 1999 would be a 2d game, but if they actually had made it I have a feeling it would have been a console game. I'm sure Saint Germain also alludes to this battle after COD's ending.
-
My bad, I didn't think of that - Soma should be in the Sorrow series. I always felt there could have been one set after DOS, problem being where do they push the story after you've just played through a replica of Castlevania?
Ahahaha! They bring it back to Transylvania. Oh just read the novel continuation of the story. (click my signature)
-
I'm sure Saint Germain also alludes to this battle after COD's ending.
He does in fact suggest about traveling to a time where humanity and Dracula have a final showdown. But I never really saw any purpose or use for the St. Germain character in the series. CoD didn't really need him as he was so lose in the plot. Kinda like Mathias was in LoI except St. Germain had more screen time and dialogue.
-
He does in fact suggest about traveling to a time where humanity and Dracula have a final showdown. But I never really saw any purpose or use for the St. Germain character in the series. CoD didn't really need him as he was so lose in the plot. Kinda like Mathias was in LoI except St. Germain had more screen time and dialogue.
Umm you know Mathias is actually Dracula, I don't see how he fits loosely into LOI's plot, he's the main antagonist after Walter Bernhard.
St Germain has relevance, for one thing his character (a bit like Dracula) goes beyond a historical figure and to its own discourse(s) of NewAgeism/ contemporary Urban Myth. To this day people still claim Saint Germain exists and he could be hundreds of years old. The relevance of Saint Germain to the CV universe particularly to do with themes of Alchemy (which LOI touched upon) are as follows:
He claimed to be the son of a Transylvanian Prince,
It is rumoured these abilities were inherited in Transylvania
He is thought to be a Master of Spirituality and Alchemy (hence his longevity which ties back to eternal life; the ultimate realisation of alchemy referenced in LOI, as well as his ability to manipulate time, levitate, teleport, so forth)
He is associated with the coming of New Astrological Ages i.e. his reference to the final showdown between Dracula and humanity was referencing the coming of the Age of Aquarius
He is known as an 'Ascended Master' and makes reference of something to the effect of the Masters 'not allowing him to interfere any further' after his final encounter with Hector
He parallels and later juxtaposes Zed>Death as part of COD's narrative
I always personally believed that the unseen Sage Eneomaos who was had knowledge about devil forging (and alchemy in general) was SG himself
-
St. Germain should've replaced Aeon in Judgment. The game might've been slightly more entertaining.
-
St. Germain should've replaced Aeon in Judgment. The game might've been slightly more entertaining.
Yes. That would have made more sense for me.
-
Yes. That would have made more sense for me.
Really? I'd always felt as if Aeon was the only well-designed character in Judgment.
I actually wouldn't mind seeing him appear in future games; though St. Germain comes first, of course. But I'd certainly love to see our time traveling pair return to Castlevania -- and better together than not.
-
Really? I'd always felt as if Aeon was the only well-designed character in Judgment.
I actually wouldn't mind seeing him appear in future games; though St. Germain comes first, of course. But I'd certainly love to see our time traveling pair return to Castlevania -- and better together than not.
Well I agree with others that Saint Germain would have made more sense considering he was in the last 3D castlevania game before Judgement.
His story as a time traveler should have been expanded upon in that game, Aeon really was not needed when you already have a time traveler in your timeline.
And to make it worse, they did not even bother having him make a appearance in that game nor did they even mentioned him.
I just think it was a missed opportunity.
But even with his inclusion it still would not have been enough excuse what was wrong with Judgement, but like crisis said it would have made it a bit better in my opinion.
-
Well I agree with others that Saint Germain would have made more sense considering he was in the last 3D castlevania game before Judgement.
His story as a time traveler should have been expanded upon in that game, Aeon really was not needed when you already have a time traveler in your timeline.
And to make it worse, they did not even bother having him make a appearance in that game nor did they even mentioned him.
I just think it was a missed opportunity.
But even with his inclusion it still would not have been enough excuse what was wrong with Judgement, but like crisis said it would have made it a bit better in my opinion.
Agreed, I thought the same thing when I'd heard of another time traveller. Saint Germain with all his references to mastering alchemy was better suited to a time traveller's position. Although even though Judgement can't theoretically be canon, I suppose Saint Germain's interference is limited by higher powers where as Aeon seems to be just roping warriors in from different eras into one place? (I have the game but never played it much tbh)
Time travel has always intrigued me, so has the fact that Castlevania Resurrection would have had Victor and Sonia who were from different eras come together.
-
Time travel has always intrigued me, so has the fact that Castlevania Resurrection would have had Victor and Sonia who were from different eras come together.
According to what I've gather up about the backstory of CV: Resurrection, victor Belmont was the only one to time travel. Sonia Belmont on the other hand was 'Resurrected' from her grave hence the title of the game.
-
My bad, I didn't think of that - Soma should be in the Sorrow series. I always felt there could have been one set after DOS, problem being where do they push the story after you've just played through a replica of Castlevania?
There's a novel that was only released in Japan, that took place after Dawn of Sorrow. The main character of it was Curtis Lang, who was Julius Belmont's apprentice. I think Julius was passing the whip onto another family since the Belmont lineage kinda ended with him, being too old to have children or something.
But yeah, that was a third entry into the Sorrow series, but it was a Japan-only novel. Which sucked. I wanted to read it, but I can't find any good translations anywhere.
Also, why do people think that the battle of 1999 has to be a full-blown war? Castlevania III was referred to as a war in Curse of Darkness, but we saw what that looked like in the end. The battle of 1999 could still be the Castlevania we know and love and not have to involve armies and such into the gameplay. Only the story. The game itself could still focus around Julius.
-
Also, why do people think that the battle of 1999 has to be a full-blown war?
there are several enemies in AoS that are undead soldiers/generals and their description reads "soldier that marched to his death in the Demon Castle War"
also a few items/armor with the description saying they were used in the Demon Castle War
evidence such as this strongly suggests there was some type of military presence alongside Julius _____ Belnades _____ Hakuba and Alucard
-
there are several enemies in AoS that are undead soldiers/generals and their description reads "soldier that marched to his death in the Demon Castle War"
also a few items/armor with the description saying they were used in the Demon Castle War
evidence such as this strongly suggests there was some type of military presence alongside Julius _____ Belnades _____ Hakuba and Alucard
But it by no means needs to be part of the gameplay in any way. It could still be a Classic/Metroidvania adventure without the need to occupy locations with soldiers and other stuffs.
-
Also, why do people think that the battle of 1999 has to be a full-blown war?
But it by no means needs to be part of the gameplay in any way. It could still be a Classic/Metroidvania adventure without the need to occupy locations with soldiers and other stuffs.
At this point in time I don't think it's possible to separate the 'War' theme from the Demon Castle War. It's obvious in the story that a very large military presence was needed to contain the outflow of Dracula's forces. Some soldiers would have been sent on infiltration missions to scope out the areas surrounding Castlevania, but then they lost their lives doing so. The military would not be taking any chances with Dracula's army of the undead, and would be using the latest in military technology and weapons in order to stop them, or at least halt their advancements. In this case the war theme is unavoidable for this particular game story. Otherwise it's just not the Demon castle war or the battle of 1999.
-
Maybe it'll be a Castlevania presented in a style similar to Modern Warfare or one of those other war games.
(I really hope not...I'm terrible at those, and practice doesn't seem to help. :-S Besides, that just seems to me like it would totally ruin Castlevania!)
-
There's a novel that was only released in Japan, that took place after Dawn of Sorrow. The main character of it was Curtis Lang, who was Julius Belmont's apprentice. I think Julius was passing the whip onto another family since the Belmont lineage kinda ended with him, being too old to have children or something.
But yeah, that was a third entry into the Sorrow series, but it was a Japan-only novel. Which sucked. I wanted to read it, but I can't find any good translations anywhere.
Translation by Shiroi Koumori was exhibited on May 15, 2013.
http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php/topic,6118.0.html (http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php/topic,6118.0.html)
And, Julius whip and Curtis whip is another whip.
-
Also, why do people think that the battle of 1999 has to be a full-blown war? Castlevania III was referred to as a war in Curse of Darkness, but we saw what that looked like in the end. The battle of 1999 could still be the Castlevania we know and love and not have to involve armies and such into the gameplay. Only the story. The game itself could still focus around Julius.
Well Trevor said something to the effect of "Many Brave Warriors fought in that battle..." I suppose many can be 4, and if he did mention the term war, in that context he's referring to the war between Dracula and Humanity.
The Story would most likely focus on Julius in any case, more than likely with Alucard's involvement (he was there at the first battle, I'm guessing he'd be there at the last) a member of the Belnades family and Mina Hakuba's father.
However, something interesting springs to mind.. there's some unused file in AOS called HAMMER. It's believed hammer was going to be a third playable character, likely thought to be Grant Danasty's CV III counterpart - the way Julius is Trevor's and Yoko is Sypha's. Perhaps this character would have had some kind of leading role to do with Military involvement, since Hammer was in the Military.
But it by no means needs to be part of the gameplay in any way. It could still be a Classic/Metroidvania adventure without the need to occupy locations with soldiers and other stuffs.
Indeed, there may be lots happening in different parts of the Castle, but this doesn't need to affect the player. Nobody knows how extensively Armed Forces were actually involved in any case.
According to what I've gather up about the backstory of CV: Resurrection, victor Belmont was the only one to time travel. Sonia Belmont on the other hand was 'Resurrected' from her grave hence the title of the game.
I didn't know about Sonia being supposedly resurrected.. Interesting.. Kind of like Altered Beast "..Rise from your grave" :P
-
Maybe it'll be a Castlevania presented in a style similar to Modern Warfare or one of those other war games.
(I really hope not...I'm terrible at those, and practice doesn't seem to help. :-S Besides, that just seems to me like it would totally ruin Castlevania!)
I don't think it would ever be like that. At least not without the mass cries from disillusioned fans at having been betrayed by Konami for the last time. Far worse then what LoS did. And you'd most likely be playing the role of Julius Belmont and he's no military combatant. He's a Vampire Hunter and uses the Vampirekiller to kill the undead. He doesn't need firearms.
-
Translation by Shiroi Koumori was exhibited on May 15, 2013.
http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php/topic,6118.0.html (http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php/topic,6118.0.html)
And, Julius whip and Curtis whip is another whip.
I'll take a look at it. And yeah, I wasn't sure whether or not they were the same whip.
-
Julius still has the Vampire Killer with him during the events of the novel.
Curtis has a weaker whip since he is still in training.