Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: Nagumo on February 24, 2011, 02:20:06 AM
-
Am I the only person who always found this to be an odd aspect of Castlevania's continuity?
For example there is Rondo of Blood and Dracula X, and they both tell the story of how Richter defeated Dracula in 1792 but the two games are nothing alike. Dracula X even condradicts with SotN in a few places yet both games are part of the timeline.
How does that work? Do you just have to pick and choose?
You have the same situation with the many reinterpretations that Simon's adventure got, as well as CV: The Adventure and Rebirth. I know it's just a minor gripe but I never liked how they just throw their hands up in the air and let you figure out how this could possibly make sense.
Anyway, what do you guys think?
-
I thought Haunted Castle's "retelling" was pretty funny. You can even see the intro as a reference/homage to Ghosts 'n Goblins.
I would assume Adventure ReBirth retcons Adventure continuity-wise (not like it had any compelling story to begin with). My guess for the reason for all these reinterpretations was because different programming teams were being shuffled back then, so they each had their chance to make a unique version of events.
I wonder how a "retelling" of Simon's Quest would work? It'd most likely be an entirely different game.
-
There's been so many retellings of the original CV that I'm used to it. They're just different versions of the same game even though some of them (SCV4) are really quite unique. Dracula X was simply a SNES port of Rondo. It's story wasn't as good nor as loaded with characters like Rondo was, but graphically it was superior over Rondo. Even some of the SNES sound effects topped the ones in Rondo (Richter's whip sound effect).
-X
-
Am I the only person who always found this to be an odd aspect of Castlevania's continuity?
For example there is Rondo of Blood and Dracula X, and they both tell the story of how Richter defeated Dracula in 1792 but the two games are nothing alike. Dracula X even condradicts with SotN in a few places yet both games are part of the timeline.
How does that work? Do you just have to pick and choose?
You have the same situation with the many reinterpretations that Simon's adventure got, as well as CV: The Adventure and Rebirth. I know it's just a minor gripe but I never liked how they just throw their hands up in the air and let you figure out how this could possibly make sense.
Anyway, what do you guys think?
For the most part, they're just different versions of the same story. Dracula X had superior graphics but the level designs and music suffered. I mean look at the fire visuals in the background of the first level of Dracula X. Imagine those type of effects in Rondo.
-
Yeah, I know they are different takes on the same story, but I don't really know any other series (not necessarily video games) that have done this. Though usually there was a reason for them doing it. The team that made Dracula X having licensing issue for example.
-
The team that made Dracula X having licensing issue for example.
Is this why we didn't get Rondo the first time, because of licensing issues? Both games were made at Konami so that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. What were those idiots thinking?!?
-X
-
There was some confusing legal gibberish or something so they said screw it and made an entire different game.
-
Dracula X Chronicles > Rondo > Castlevania X
Super Castlevania IV > Castlevania Chronicles > Castlevania (NES) > Vampire Killer > Haunted Castle
Castlevania Rebirth > Castlevania Adventure
Symphony of the Night ---PSP > PS1 > Saturn
Aria of Sorrow > Dawn of Sorrow (yes I know they're not the same game --close enough IMO)
Also Dracula X Chronicles > all the other remixed games