Castlevania Dungeon Forums

The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: theplottwist on January 27, 2017, 12:37:29 PM

Title: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: theplottwist on January 27, 2017, 12:37:29 PM
I might have done a similar thread before but I don't remember, so here I'm again.

I come to break the "I'll defend what IGA did to the series" streak I'm known for, to speak about something that IGA did (or didn't do, in fact) that really bothers me -- not using the Nazi theme on Portrait of Ruin.

So IGA goes to the lengths of placing a Dracula resurrection in 1944, the climax of Nazism and the Second World War, but does a plot that has nothing to do with it. Nothing. Not even the villain's background has anything to do with the WWII (but with WWI instead). One of the lowest points of humanity and one of the greatest displays of human cruelty and malice, but lol nope. Have a vampire painter instead.

The only thing the WWII has to do with the plot is Brauner using the souls of the dead to revive the castle offscreen. That's it. That could've been accomplished by literally any other plot device, as the series does on other games, and no difference would be felt.

IGA could have done literally anything, from using a villain who IS a Nazi and "wants Dracula's power to win the war", to using a soldier fighting the Nazis who got lost, to using a dude who is a former Nazi that rejected Hitler's ways, to using freaking zombie soldiers referencing the current ongoing war, but no. There is not a single significant thread connecting Dracula to the war.

Is it a low-hanging fruit? It is. Nazis have been explored over and over by fiction. Hellsing has Dracula AND nazis trying to return. But bear with me here: Dracula is called "the root of all evil", he feeds off of human chaos, you do a story about him during the same time of a genocide caused by human prejudice and power corruption, and you can't bother to draw a SINGLE clearer connection between both?

Plot-wise, for me, Portrait of Ruin is the biggest miss on the entire series. Had IGA moved the plot one or two years fowards, and I wouldn't complain one line.

I'm not even saying the plot it has is bad. It sets out to accomplish one theme (the meaning of "Family") and it does it. What I'm saying that you can't go to a restaurant specialized in Brazilian cuisine, and ask for goddamn Sukiyaki. You can eat Sukiyaki another time, but if you go to a Brazilian restaurant, try making an effort to eat Feijoada.

I have some ideas of why this could've happened. Maybe IGA thought this was too sensitive of a subject to delegate to "lol WWII is Dracula's fault because he's eeeeeeevil", or maybe he didn't want to represent anything nazi or war related on the game itself, or maybe even he thought the series had already done something like this (Bloodlines) and didn't want to repeat it. But I dunno. We'll probably never know what he had on his mind here.

EDIT: I also should mention the castle was revived in 1942, and destroyed in 1944. The castle stood there TWO YEARS, basically all through the most relevant part of the WWII, and nothing was done with it WWII-related.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: redrum on January 27, 2017, 04:53:08 PM
Brauner "lost his daughters in the war".  that's the only thing i can think of it having to do with WWII...
i guess it's more that they wanted to expand on the mythos of Bloodlines and WWII was the biggest event to happen during the time period of Morris/Lecarde's immediate descendants.  from what i understand, the japanese usually tend to avoid nostalgia about that period for the most part, which (apart from nintendo's censorship) may explain why there aren't any direct nazi references within the castle itself.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: theplottwist on January 27, 2017, 05:08:31 PM
Brauner "lost his daughters in the war".  that's the only thing i can think of it having to do with WWII...
i guess it's more that they wanted to expand on the mythos of Bloodlines and WWII was the biggest event to happen during the time period of Morris/Lecarde's immediate descendants.

That was WWI actually.

Quote
from what i understand, the japanese usually tend to avoid nostalgia about that period for the most part, which (apart from nintendo's censorship) may explain why there aren't any direct nazi references within the castle itself.

Them being on the side of the Reich may have something to do with it.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Aceearly1993 on January 27, 2017, 05:24:58 PM
My thought is the development team really don't want to add more "political sensitive" elements in the plot or game itself.

https://tcrf.net/Castlevania:_Bloodlines
They almost did a Zeppelin airship in Bloodlines but eventually scrapped it for Frankenstein's monster, the worst replacement for a lost stage ever. Maybe the censors are really aware of political elements in video game logic but most players didn't care about it seriously.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: X on January 27, 2017, 06:09:05 PM
It was a huge miss in terms of plot. I agree wholeheartedly. If the castle was brought fourth a year or so after 45' then it wouldn't have been such a big deal. But in 1944? It should have had at least something to do with the Nazis. Hitler was hardcore into the occult. He sent members of his Riech society all over the globe, delving into ancient civilizations and recovering artifacts that were considered sacred or holy. He was after Anything, ANYTHING, to help him rule in a Nazi dystopian world. If Castlevania had risen in 42' and fell in 44'? There's absolutely no way the Reich society would have missed that. They'd be all over it like flies on s**t. Hitler, I believe, would also be very familiar with the legend of Dracula and his magical chaotic castle, and would also attempt to utilise it for the success of the third Reich. But it never happened. Instead we have a rather weak story into about WWII and that's it for the connection. Such a wasted opportunity.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Ratty on January 27, 2017, 07:09:59 PM
Remember that Japan and Germany were allies in WW2, while Japan had been with the winning side (against Germany) in WW1. And WW2 is not ancient history, there are still some veterans kicking around. It's not like in the English speaking world where you can shoot Nazis in a game, feel good about it and not have to think about it so much. I like Portrait of Ruin and its story, and given the sensitive nature of subject I wouldn't be surprised if a direct order came down from the heads of Konami to NOT allude to it in any way.

PS- Let's not forget that war ended with two atomic bombs being dropped on Japan, which still causes cancer in citizens generations later. Again, sensitive subject.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on January 27, 2017, 07:22:03 PM
Agreed. We need Nazis in Portrait of Ruin.
But, in 1944, Romania was a warfront and there would be bombs and shells dropping everywhere. Two "Kids" and a unarmed priest simply does not walk in. Also, If they're least of British or American, they would be never be allowed onto enemy soil. Romania was cleaned of Nazis only in 1945.

Most disappointing thing is boss for Sandy Grave. There is plenty of other Egyptian bosses you can think, even Yugioh characters. Alongside with Succubus series, definitely one of the worst character design in Castlevania
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: KaZudra on January 27, 2017, 07:23:30 PM
US History 101: Come in at the ass end of WW2, then claim to be the ones who kill Nazis just to pass time.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: SecretWeapon on January 27, 2017, 09:07:55 PM
A part of me believes IGA originally wanted more involvement but was forced to cancel that

-------------------

Astarte is like the only memorable boss in PoR. Get a grip. The Succubus are always memorable, just not super hard
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on January 28, 2017, 12:41:16 AM
Astarte is like the only memorable boss in PoR. Get a grip. The Succubus are always memorable, just not super hard

For me, those kind of character is unnecessary for series like Castlevania (well, unnecessary in general gaming). I always hated Succubus, making the series sexual and shit. I'd rather have Yugioh Character (God cards) and Doppleganger respectively for Astarte and Succubus (as a SotN boss).

Also, Astarte is memorable for making Jonathan useless and Charlotte useless as well. So not a good mean of memorable.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on January 28, 2017, 04:02:13 AM
I think the whole entire dilemma came down to two things, one which was sensitivity and the other was probably the budget. The whole point of Bloodlines was that you were travelling across Europe, this could have opened some interesting avenues for POR, but the "Portrait" theme completely threw this element out the window. It was basically Castlevania's twist on Mario 64. Even with this, some additional exploration to the portraits themselves could've been better i.e. The "Nation of Fools" where you fight the Legion (a cluster of dead/ undead bodies/ souls) which look much like the effects of a holocaust, would have been an interesting theme to explore. The same goes for a school of witchcraft, albeit to a lesser extent. As for a Pyramid, and an old cityscape, maybe a little less relevant.

As soon as I found out the whole thing was set in Dracula's Castle, with areas only accessible via portraits, I knew there'd be no WWII story tie-in, which is fine, but why not set the game at any other point in history? This is why I'm saying it's a budget thing, there's no reason to do this unless there was direction with the story which then had to be omitted.

The other reason I keep stressing the budget is Richter Belmont. His was actually my favourite fight in the game, and I loved that Jon faced the VK's memory. However, the fact that there's even a Richter/ Maria mode and the previous known Belmont to use the VK just happens to be Richter, in hindsight that additional game mode and Richter himself was probably an afterthought added in to mask what may have otherwise been a mode with John Morris and Eric Lecarde. (This makes sense as there was already a sister's mode where the player couldn't access potions, weapons, use items, etc). I think if Richter was never going to be a playable character, Jon would have simply fought the "VK's memory" who would've been any given Belmont's silhouette, and why not?? This would have left room open for more CV games to fit in between ROB>>>POR.

I love POR, but the game reeked of budget cuts. At least the main boss fights were really cool imo.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: SecretWeapon on January 28, 2017, 05:20:08 AM
I'd rather have Yugioh Character (God cards) and Doppleganger respectively for Astarte and Succubus (as a SotN boss).

I'm glad you don't work in games then lmao
------------------------------

As i said before, i wouldnt be surprised if the original story draft had actually WWII involvement. The elements are there.

-Brauner is a german name
-The Castle stood up during the height of the war
-Stella and Loretta are italian names (Italian-named sisters subjugated by the German named vampire, clever hah)
-There are references to elements involved in the war, such as London (13th Street), Germany itself/The Holocaust (Nation of Fools/Burnt Paradise), Nazi magic artifact hunting (The Egyptian stages), paranormal obsession (the Witch school stages) and art theft (the portraits themselves)

I can imagine an early plot going something like: Brauner a leader of the Thule Society uses the power of dead souls to raise Castlevania and become a vampire. With it's power he supports the Nazi efforts with monsters (thus the war reaching it's height) and making portals between the Castle and target locations to directly send them. The rest would be pretty much the same, the only thing i'm not sure how to add is the portrait/artist thing in Brauner bossfight (but it could be that he's also an artists and ordered the art thefts)
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on January 28, 2017, 05:32:16 AM
I'm glad you don't work in games then lmao

Excuse me but can u tell me what that means?
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: X on January 28, 2017, 10:17:20 AM
Quote
I can imagine an early plot going something like: Brauner a leader of the Thule Society uses the power of dead souls to raise Castlevania and become a vampire. With it's power he supports the Nazi efforts with monsters (thus the war reaching it's height) and making portals between the Castle and target locations to directly send them. The rest would be pretty much the same, the only thing i'm not sure how to add is the portrait/artist thing in Brauner bossfight (but it could be that he's also an artists and ordered the art thefts)

I don't see Brauner as the leader of the Thule society as we already know who that is; Rudolf von Sebottendorff, but I can definitely see Brauner as being one of the more prominent members. Hitler himself eventually becomes the leader of the Thule society by the other representatives, and he transforms them into what we now know as the Nazi party. I like your idea however. PoR doesn't change much, but there is a greater connection to the WWII elements.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: chainsawmidget on January 28, 2017, 10:34:42 AM
Using Nazi's could even give Jonathan and Charlotte a darker reason for being there to begin with. 

Maybe they didn't choose to go there.  Some Nazi commander heard rumors of their families powers, rounded them up, and sent them in to clear the path for them.  It would explain why they're so ill-equiped for the job at the beginning. 

Then you could put a group of Nazi's stationed at the entrance blocking you from leaving.  They might not be strong enough to claim the castle for themselves, but they can certainly put a bunch of bullets in two kids that won't listen.  Perhaps even one of the Nazi's is able to read certain runes or give you some kind of solutions for puzzles you couldn't get past otherwise. 

Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on January 28, 2017, 10:54:44 AM
Excuse me but can u tell me what that means?

It means that "lol I wanna put Yu-Gi-Oh God Card characters into a game that has nothing in common with Yu-Gi-Oh besides an Egyptian setting because I don't like what exists there currently and shoehorning in deific characters from a completely different series and time period is obviously a fantastic idea and wouldn't cause any sort of continuity or plot-quality issues whatsoever" is the kind of idea an eleven-year-old fanboy of a TCG series comes up with because he thinks his card games are the greatest thing ever conceived and tries to insert them into anything else regardless of whether it even makes sense or not.

Oh, and just for the record--an ancient Egyptian-esque setting doesn't mean fucking Yu-Gi-Oh characters are "better." You do realize that they made a solid 90% of that shit up for the series, right? Slifer's a six-hundred-degrees-of-separated reference to Osiris and named after a 4Kids employee, Obelisk is a generic anime spikey buff dude named after a pointed monolith, and Ra is a barely-accurate representation of said god's ba, which was essentially a phoenix--ain't shit related to the actual deity that has anything to do with dragons as most of the world represents them.

Meanwhile, Astarte is the Hellenized name for Ishtar, a deity directly associated with sexuality and war, and who also was worshiped throughout Egypt once the Levantines showed up there.

Wonder which of the two has more genuine ties to ancient Egyptian cultures, the actual goddess from actual sects being represented as a highly attractive female warrior who clearly uses her sexuality to charm the male character, or the big OP god-monsters who stand as distant bastardized references to actual elements of that same culture? Hmmmmm, such a tough call, that.

That's what Weapon means by that--it's an idea rather clearly based out of personal preferences and seeming fanboyism rather than actual attempts to reference actual mythology as the series has always done.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: SecretWeapon on January 28, 2017, 02:32:14 PM
I don't see Brauner as the leader of the Thule society as we already know who that is; Rudolf von Sebottendorff, but I can definitely see Brauner as being one of the more prominent members. Hitler himself eventually becomes the leader of the Thule society by the other representatives, and he transforms them into what we now know as the Nazi party. I like your idea however. PoR doesn't change much, but there is a greater connection to the WWII elements.

Yeah that's why i wrote "A leader" instead of "THE leader"
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on January 28, 2017, 04:56:20 PM
(thus the war reaching it's height) and making portals between the Castle and target locations to directly send them. The rest would be pretty much the same, the only thing i'm not sure how to add is the portrait/artist thing in Brauner bossfight (but it could be that he's also an artists and ordered the art thefts)

Hitler was also an artist, but he didn't paint with blooooOOOoood!!!

One of the Nazi's is able to read certain runes or give you some kind of solutions for puzzles you couldn't get past otherwise.

Just no.. First of all, we all saw how Puzzle of Fate (Trevorcard's campaign in MoF) as well as the original LOS1 was hampered by puzzles. Puzzles don't belong in Castlevania, Castlevania is about platforming, action, combat and pacing. Some simple but effective puzzles that are built into the gameplay mechanics can work, such as the
(click to show/hide)
or the mechanical gears in SOTN's clocktower, but that's it.

Secondly, no one should take advice from Grif, the unusually helpful and friendly Nazi. That's gaming promoting bad behaviour through gaming.

What would have been cool is if there were some Nazi soldiers as enemies in the main Castle hub, between the portraits (rather than Skeleton archers and the like), and I don't see why there wouldn't have been, as POR actually created a fair few sprites such as Zombies and Ghouls. The presence of the soldiers may have also explained why there are undead Zombie Soldiers in AoS, which would have been a nice tie in.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: X on January 28, 2017, 05:18:54 PM
Quote
Yeah that's why i wrote "A leader" instead of "THE leader"

My bad  ;D

Quote
Hitler was also an artist, but he didn't paint with blooooOOOoood!!!

Maybe not that we currently know of  :-X
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: chainsawmidget on January 28, 2017, 06:11:53 PM
Quote
Secondly, no one should take advice from Grif, the unusually helpful and friendly Nazi. That's gaming promoting bad behaviour through gaming.
I never said he was helpful and friendly.  he's one of the guys holding you at gunpoint in a haunted castle.  It's just that he could actually be some expert in the field of paranormal research and is only telling yu this so you can complete the objectives for him. 
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on January 28, 2017, 10:04:10 PM
It means that "lol I wanna put Yu-Gi-Oh God Card characters into a game that has nothing in common with Yu-Gi-Oh besides an Egyptian setting because I don't like what exists there currently and shoehorning in deific characters from a completely different series and time period is obviously a fantastic idea and wouldn't cause any sort of continuity or plot-quality issues whatsoever" is the kind of idea an eleven-year-old fanboy of a TCG series comes up with because he thinks his card games are the greatest thing ever conceived and tries to insert them into anything else regardless of whether it even makes sense or not.

Oh, and just for the record--an ancient Egyptian-esque setting doesn't mean fucking Yu-Gi-Oh characters are "better." You do realize that they made a solid 90% of that shit up for the series, right? Slifer's a six-hundred-degrees-of-separated reference to Osiris and named after a 4Kids employee, Obelisk is a generic anime spikey buff dude named after a pointed monolith, and Ra is a barely-accurate representation of said god's ba, which was essentially a phoenix--ain't shit related to the actual deity that has anything to do with dragons as most of the world represents them.

Meanwhile, Astarte is the Hellenized name for Ishtar, a deity directly associated with sexuality and war, and who also was worshiped throughout Egypt once the Levantines showed up there.

Wonder which of the two has more genuine ties to ancient Egyptian cultures, the actual goddess from actual sects being represented as a highly attractive female warrior who clearly uses her sexuality to charm the male character, or the big OP god-monsters who stand as distant bastardized references to actual elements of that same culture? Hmmmmm, such a tough call, that.

That's what Weapon means by that--it's an idea rather clearly based out of personal preferences and seeming fanboyism rather than actual attempts to reference actual mythology as the series has always done.

All right, get this, but I would prefer Castlevania over Yugioh. So don't call me a Yugioh fanboy. It's one of my minor hobbies. Castlevania would be one of my major hobby.

First of all, 4kids ver is shitty butchered version like SNES Rondo. You really should see original JP version to say anything. Also, I only want to change the Sandy grave boss because Astarte is one of most shittiest Castlevania boss, not because I wan't to squeeze Yugioh into this. I would leave others out. Also, Sandy Grave boss has nothing to do with plot of the game and I would put this as a crossover of two series rather then squishing this into the plot line. Astarte would be nice for a random mediocre anime game, but not CASTLEVANIA!

Also, Castlevania doesn't need to be that accurate with history (like Charlotte's kind of miniskirts weren't invented till 50s and it would be a better idea to wear loose pants), also, bad-ass looking powerful god monsters are more suitable for a "boss" then a... sorry, but
(click to show/hide)
I think bit of creative looseness would be allowed to make this whole lot better. Also, Konami has rights for both, so there wouldn't be a problem. Also, if this doesn't work, they could use some other powerful-looking (actual) Egyptian gods like Sun god Ra, Death god Osiris or Guardian Deity Horus, anything but a fxcking Sex god Astarte!
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: SecretWeapon on January 28, 2017, 10:36:38 PM
I saw that coming Dracula9. See why i didnt bother replying now? Leave the cattle talking alone
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on January 28, 2017, 11:21:32 PM
I never said he was helpful and friendly.  he's one of the guys holding you at gunpoint in a haunted castle.  It's just that he could actually be some expert in the field of paranormal research and is only telling yu this so you can complete the objectives for him.

It still doesn't make sense that they're holding Charlotte and Jonathan in the Castle. Charlotte's spells could easily wipe out a horde of enemies as it does in the intro, her and Jonathan can kill a fused version of Death and Dracula The Lord of Darkness, but some Nazi's are too much? (and why are 1000 Nazi's holding them there again?) The two ideas are just like chalk and cheese, there needs to be more of a tie in to the plot itself. If Brauner was a Nazi - i.e. the equivalent of CV's Hitler, the way Dracula = CV's Satan - and he sent his soldiers through the Castle to search for powerful artifacts that could help him (say the orbs that you get from defeating the bosses) then these two ideas would make sense. Again if Brauner = Hitler and he was causing the flow of Chaos to increase by sending his soldiers to different parts of the world by using Castlevania's power (subverting the power to the throne room) opening portals/ portraits to those parts of the world in order to storm and massacre his enemies (Nation of fools, Burnt Paradise) or gather occult information/ artifacts (Witch's University/ Egyptian Pyramids) then we're getting some kind of synergy with all of those themes. However, all we get are loose if any explanations at best, and those portraits are spaces that are imbued with the artist's intent.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on January 29, 2017, 04:12:11 AM
I saw that coming Dracula9. See why i didnt bother replying now? Leave the cattle talking alone

Yeah. Starting to doubt that profile age.  :P
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: aensland on January 29, 2017, 01:43:10 PM
Astarte would be nice for a random mediocre anime game, but not CASTLEVANIA!
But Portrait of Ruin is both a mediocre anime game and a Castlevania game

Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: SecretWeapon on January 29, 2017, 03:11:12 PM
I would have loved Ayami doing DoS/PoR art of only to see how would she have designed a non-succubus female villain.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on January 29, 2017, 07:03:11 PM
But Portrait of Ruin is both a mediocre anime game and a Castlevania game

But PoR's not supposed to be mediocre Anime game! Anime style's one of the worst factor of PoR! I expected Kojima Ayami art or at least similar. Was there any boss like that in Castlevania 1 or 3?
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on January 29, 2017, 07:07:06 PM
Yep, because games made almost 20 years apart are exactly comparable.

Keep making a monumental fool of yourself, bro. You're not convincing anyone of shit.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on January 29, 2017, 07:20:23 PM
Yep, because games made almost 20 years apart are exactly comparable.

Keep making a monumental fool of yourself, bro. You're not convincing anyone of shit.

Also, actually found out that Harmony of Dissonance (2002) doesn't have straight-out sexualized characters (there IS siren and witch, but this version is not much as more recent games). Lawl.

Again, what I want is to pull out sexualized characters out of the series, not squeezing in stuff I like!
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on January 29, 2017, 08:44:02 PM
Vampires as subject matter are inherently sexual in nature, since they're human carnal desires to the extreme.

Still not convincing anyone of shit, and now you're moving the goalposts from "INSERT YUGIOH BECAUSE ACTUAL RELEVANT GODDESS IS A WHORE" to trying to act like a champion of stereotyped gender roles (despite almost all sexualized female demons in CV being sexualized because they're inherently related to sexuality, but facts and common sense don't seem to be your thing).

But by all means, hit up Konami and IGA and present this "argument" to them. I'm sure they'd drop everything and agree with you immediately.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'll be exiting this conversation after this post since it is abundantly clear you don't care about anything other than shouting your opinion regardless of how much objective information contradicts it, and I've indulged your dumb argument too long already.

(https://cdn.meme.am/cache/instances/folder402/400x/56217402.jpg)
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on January 29, 2017, 10:51:54 PM
Vampires as subject matter are inherently sexual in nature, since they're human carnal desires to the extreme.

Still not convincing anyone of shit, and now you're moving the goalposts from "INSERT YUGIOH BECAUSE ACTUAL RELEVANT GODDESS IS A WHORE" to trying to act like a champion of stereotyped gender roles (despite almost all sexualized female demons in CV being sexualized because they're inherently related to sexuality, but facts and common sense don't seem to be your thing).

But by all means, hit up Konami and IGA and present this "argument" to them. I'm sure they'd drop everything and agree with you immediately.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'll be exiting this conversation after this post since it is abundantly clear you don't care about anything other than shouting your opinion regardless of how much objective information contradicts it, and I've indulged your dumb argument too long already.

(https://cdn.meme.am/cache/instances/folder402/400x/56217402.jpg)

OK. I just want to say that there can be a non-sexual female boss in the game. Someone like fake Sypha or Loretta would be just fine. Also, Konami would put sexualized characters just to make the game sell more, not with any other relevant reason (that's the whole aim of that damn pachinko). When Konami was all fine and good, there wasn't much of sexualization.

My point is to change sexual characters, not put Yugioh characters. I said "even Yugioh characters", I said that as "even characters from Kid's TV show would be a better idea then a wxxre". Like that Elgiza monster could be a boss, or some other Egyptian gods/goddess (as I said, gods like Seth, Osiris, Horus, Ra, Isis, Thoth) could take the role. Also, one thing, you could be a bit more nicer to other people in the community rather then being rude. Simple life advice.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: chainsawmidget on January 31, 2017, 07:43:25 PM

Quote
OK. I just want to say that there can be a non-sexual female boss in the game.
There can be.  Nobody is saying otherwise.  It's just that isn't the ONLY option. 

Quote
Also, Konami would put sexualized characters just to make the game sell more, not with any other relevant reason
Absolutely nobody bought the game just because there was one scantily clad Egyptian Goddess in it.  Nobody.

Quote
When Konami was all fine and good, there wasn't much of sexualization.
Medusa has appeared topless since Haunted Castle.  Her topless apperances include such classics as Castlevania III and Super Castlevania.  Succubus appeared topless and bottomless in Symphony of the Night. 

These games are considered by many people to be some of the best in the series. 

Quote
My point is to change sexual characters
Why?  The games have the classic universal monster horror characters, the giant monster horror characters, the mythological horror characters, the 80s slasher style horror characters, cryptid monsters, monsterous animals, monsterous people, yet drawing on the sexual horror characters is wrong? 

The idea of fatal beauties, monstrous temptresses, seduction and perverse pleasures are about as common to vampire lore as turning into a bat. 
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on January 31, 2017, 09:14:40 PM
There can be.  Nobody is saying otherwise.  It's just that isn't the ONLY option. 
Absolutely nobody bought the game just because there was one scantily clad Egyptian Goddess in it.  Nobody.
Medusa has appeared topless since Haunted Castle.  Her topless apperances include such classics as Castlevania III and Super Castlevania.  Succubus appeared topless and bottomless in Symphony of the Night. 

These games are considered by many people to be some of the best in the series. 
Why?  The games have the classic universal monster horror characters, the giant monster horror characters, the mythological horror characters, the 80s slasher style horror characters, cryptid monsters, monsterous animals, monsterous people, yet drawing on the sexual horror characters is wrong? 

The idea of fatal beauties, monstrous temptresses, seduction and perverse pleasures are about as common to vampire lore as turning into a bat.

Yeah. Nobody bought the game for that sole purpose. However, even though the game is not like pachinko Castlevania, they always put a sexual character in cuz that's one of the sales point. Like Quiet for example in MGS4. No fans wanted her in (thinking only of her clothing and Konami's reason behind), but the general liked it. So on.

With Medusa, nobody sees her as deliberately sexualized characters. It's just one of the monsters. My point is that rid the deliberately sexualized characters like Succubus, not just-a-female-monster. Also, Succubus ruined half of my Symphony experience.

My point is that sexualized female characters doesn't have any point being on the Castlevania series. You can simply change it to something powerful (either male or female), like some kind of occult monsters and for instance, god of evil Seth.

Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: chainsawmidget on January 31, 2017, 09:41:56 PM
Quote

My point is that sexualized female characters doesn't have any point being on the Castlevania series.
You haven't given any actual reason why they don't belong other than the fact that you just don't like them and you have ignored all the reasons they do. 

Let's just say that one of the two of us is wrong and move on. 

So anyway ... Nazis. 

You think vampire Nazis would work better or zombie Nazis?

Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: X on January 31, 2017, 10:56:13 PM
Quote
You think vampire Nazis would work better or zombie Nazis?

The did the vampire Nazis in Hellsing.

Quote
My point is that rid the deliberately sexualized characters like Succubus, not just-a-female-monster. Also, Succubus ruined half of my Symphony experience.

According to mythology, a Succubus is supposed to be overly sexual. An Incubus is the same thing except the male version. It would not be a succubus unless the creature was portrayed in a sexual manner. Many legends and myths of female monsters, demi-goddesses, etc. were done in a time when there was no stringent religious patriarchy condemning nudity (or womenhood for that matter). To me, not showing the truth about these mythical female monsters is a travesty to mythology, history, and humanity's many cultures. The human body, be it human, monster or otherwise, is an art form of creation, and should not be viewed as something to be feared or scorned. Konami's pachinko slots are definitely cashing in on the sexual themes--no question, however I look at the actual CV games themselves as something else entirely.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on February 01, 2017, 02:00:40 AM
Quote
You can simply change it to something powerful (either male or female), like some kind of occult monsters and for instance, god of evil Seth.

Sutekh was a balancing force to Horus and more on-par with Loki or Anansi until Egypt was invaded multiple times by neighboring countries and assimilated many of their values and his negative traits were particularly villified, especially by the Greeks who up and decided he was also Typhon, and suddenly boom he's demonized into a god of evil. Kinda like how the common image of Satan came from Baphomet.

Learn your shit before you pontificate it, please. Using a Hellenized name and citing the invasion-changed mythos like it's the original...what a joke.

_______________________________

Nazi zombies...vampire zombies...

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.kym-cdn.com%2Fentries%2Ficons%2Foriginal%2F000%2F006%2F759%2Fboth.png&hash=ec4cf2f7352bb6c7ab297862cbf3b155)

Hungry for brains and pointy teeth to do it with? Zombie heads with little bat wings flapping around? Can you imagine the terror of rapid flapping and moaning approach from the distance?
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 01, 2017, 02:15:23 AM
There can be.  Nobody is saying otherwise.  It's just that isn't the ONLY option. 
Absolutely nobody bought the game just because there was one scantily clad Egyptian Goddess in it.  Nobody.
Medusa has appeared topless since Haunted Castle.  Her topless apperances include such classics as Castlevania III and Super Castlevania.  Succubus appeared topless and bottomless in Symphony of the Night. 

Exactly. Since when is the Astarte artwork more sexual than SOTN Succubus, and which pixel do you see her nipples on...?
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on February 01, 2017, 02:23:37 AM
Since women are supposed to be beautiful pure innocent little maidens and anything sexual relating to them at all is bad and evil and must be stopped.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on February 01, 2017, 02:35:47 AM
Sutekh was a balancing force and mostly heroic/neutral until Egypt was invaded multiple times and assimilated and his negative traits were particularly villified, especially by the Greeks who up and decided he was also Typhon.

Learn your shit before you pontificate it. Using a Hellenized name...what a fucking joke.

Alright. Straight from Wikipedia
Quote
Set /sɛt/ or Seth (/sɛθ/; also spelled Setesh, Sutekh, Setekh, or Suty) is a god of the desert, storms, disorder, violence and foreigners in ancient Egyptian religion. In Ancient Greek, the god's name is given as Sēth (Σήθ). Set is not, however, a god to be ignored or avoided; he has a positive role where he is employed by Ra on his solar boat to repel Apep, the serpent of Chaos. Set had a vital role as a reconciled combatant. He was lord of the red (desert) land where he was the balance to Horus' role as lord of the black (soil) land.

In Egyptian mythology, Set is portrayed as the usurper who killed and mutilated his own brother Osiris. Osiris' wife Isis reassembled Osiris' corpse and resurrected him long enough to conceive his son and heir Horus. Horus sought revenge upon Set, and the myths describe their conflicts. This Osiris myth is a prominent theme in Egyptian mythology.

Seth was called Seth in Ancient Egypt (also Suketh, Setesh ext.), not Greeks. Yes. He was vilified later, and the Greeks played a lot of role on it. But it wasn't by Greeks at the very start. It was with with Egyptians which is an anger towards a invader who claimed himself of Seth (also can put that in the story, like Jonathan's cleansing a once-good god which turned into monster with the evil power of whoever). If that does not work, we can put anything, anything but damn Astarte(the true intention of putting that heart attack is so obvious)! Hell, even can put Elgiza monster there as a boss!

Also, my reason for ridding out sexualized characters is that (well, I don't like sexualized characters personally, and I think that sexual theme is what's ruining Japanese gaming industry (least not for Nintendo), but) it doesn't fit with Castlevania. If you see early games, you wouldn't see any deliberately sexualized characters until Rondo with the lady on a skull (Carmila, I believe to be). You see, most of... those games are considered perfect. Nobody condemns on it with character designs. Also, The theme running in Castlevania is: "Belmont/Alucard/Soma or whoever beating crap out of intimidating monsters and pushing evil Dracula/Chaos and ext. to its doom" or "Badass Gothic Horror Action Game". Well, does the Succubus fit in the category of "Badass" or "Intimidating"? If done right, female characters can fit in the series like SotN Maria or CV3 Sypha. Why is that so hard? Also, I started to hate sexualized characters when I heard about Pachislot and Pachinko. Let's take Sypha for example and compare that with Dracula's curse version. Which do you think is better for Castlevania? Answer is already there.

P.S. Mr/Ms/Mrs Dracula9, could you be nice to other people please?

Back to Nazis. My opinion is for Vampires. Cuz, Hitler and Nazis were alive/existing and well. So why would they want to turn themselves as Zombies? Vampires have stronger power and a thinking brain then brainless zombies, only problem being not able to go out in the sun. Still, it would be a good idea to have Vampire Nazi generals and Zombie Nazi soldiers.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 01, 2017, 05:53:44 AM
Also, my reason for ridding out sexualized characters is that (well, I don't like sexualized characters personally, and I think that sexual theme is what's ruining Japanese gaming industry (least not for Nintendo), but) it doesn't fit with Castlevania. If you see early games, you wouldn't see any deliberately sexualized characters until Rondo with the lady on a skull (Carmila, I believe to be). You see, most of... those games are considered perfect. Nobody condemns on it with character designs. Also, The theme running in Castlevania is: "Belmont/Alucard/Soma or whoever beating crap out of intimidating monsters and pushing evil Dracula/Chaos and ext. to its doom" or "Badass Gothic Horror Action Game". Well, does the Succubus fit in the category of "Badass" or "Intimidating"? If done right, female characters can fit in the series like SotN Maria or CV3 Sypha. Why is that so hard? Also, I started to hate sexualized characters when I heard about Pachislot and Pachinko.

The fact is that fashion, trends and industries change over time. There is a big difference between Sypha in CVIII - who it was at first unclear whether she was supposed to be a man or woman - vs SOTN Maria. I'm not prude but I wouldn't say that Maria in this context is a scantily clad woman. If anything the SOTN Succubus is more guilty of that than Maria, but she is a succubus, and her art was somewhat censored for the West.

Carmilla herself has had many iterations, not just in Castlevania but in other forms of visual media, such as Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust, or CV: LOS where she is portrayed as a voluptuous woman. The truth is that Vampires are sexualised characters who portray "sexual" mannerisms. The association with consuming blood is sexual, biting women on the neck is sexual, the dark and mysterious characterisitics and nature of the vampire only emerging at night and only entering someone's house/room when invitied are sexual, as is the notion of "turning" another individual.

Furthermore, Castlevania sexualised both male and female protagonists, and males were sexualised long before females. Simon Belmont on CV's cover has rippling muscle and wears little to nothing more than Conan the Barbarian. Similar things happened in the next few games. Then in Bloodlines the original Japanese artwork showed Eric Lecarde appearing androgynous, which mirrored the mysteriousness of Sypha in CVIII. Alucard has been represented in the same way, as did the artwork shift accordingly to attract a wider demographic of gamers; predominantly young females.

Sonia Belmont and Shanoa are both adequately dressed (Sonia actually shows more skin) and these are the only 2 female lead protagonists CV has ever had. In fact, Shanoa was designed to look like a witch in the non-typical sense, and they effing nailed her design, right down to the boots. She didn't even require large breasts or big hips/ rear end to be feminine. (Shit, I mean Laura the Jeweler had more body)

In CoD, Julia is barely showing any skin, nor does Yoko in either Sorrow game, despite the fact they're both well developed women. Charlotte is dressed like a schoolgirl and is wearing far more than the succubi and student witches who roam the class halls of POR. In fact, she is one of the least "sexual" characters in CV, the script portrays her via her speech/ expressions more like Jonathan's younger sibling.

The only scantily clad woman aside from the succubus I can think of is Stella (only her top half) and Vampire Annette from CV: DX Chronicles, and again she's being made to appear as a succubus, which is out of character and a part of her design.

The reason Pachinkovania is frowned upon is because the overt sexual imagery i.e. the cross going between the succubus' breasts in 3d when it's completely zoomed in. They're two steps away from going where Valis has gone, and THIS is not what Castlevania is about, because it's forced, it's crass, there's no elegance to it, it's not typical of what Castlevania is. You see the Garou Pachinko featuring Mai Shiranui is all about "cleavage", because that's a big part of Mai's persona. However, even though a succubus is sexual, the "sexual" part of it is not the only thing that CV is about, it's not what should be the most emphasised.

Everyone has their own opinions, so if you are an individual who prefers the conservatively designed females that is entirely your preference, I for one am not judging anyone based on their sexual preferences/ how conservative they are. What I will say is that saying Astarte is overly sexualised is reaching in my honest opinion. If you have a personal opinion against that boss because of lousy boss design, then I would be more inclined to agree, because although I didn't feel strongly, I can't say she's a memorable boss. However, the sex thing is rather lost on me, when as previous poster have pointed out, Medusa herself has been topless a number of times. In ancient Egypt, people were damn near naked, particularly royalty, and they used to have group orgies, sometimes practice incest. This to me, which is not being portrayed in POR, is much more extreme than showing some bare nipples - which in context are more than likely accurate character attributes.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: SecretWeapon on February 01, 2017, 07:04:51 AM
Don't address the cattle i told you. He won't change his mind.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on February 01, 2017, 10:27:20 AM
SORRY NOT SORRY FOR THE LENGTH OF THIS ONE FOLKS, BUT IT'LL PROBABLY BE MY LAST (serious) ONE IN THE THREAD FOR OBVIOUS REASONS

Also Weapon, I get whatchu be saying, but I don't believe in just allowing things to go on unchecked because they're bothersome and FUK DA POLICE YOU AIN'T MY DAAAAAAAAD, so I don't need to be told a third time to let him be in his silly meandering.

Quote
P.S. Mr/Ms/Mrs Dracula9, could you be nice to other people please?

I'm "nice" to plenty of people.

Idiots who only value their own opinions and treat them like god's word are not one of them.

Don't like how you're being addressed? Change your tone. You get what you give. If you don't like blunt feedback and opinions then don't get on the Internet. Nobody owes you shit, least of all modifying their thoughts to be delivered to you on your terms.

You clearly are only taking what is being said in this thread alone at face value and judging the entirety of someone's character from that single limited point of reference. Not my problem if you can't handle it. Certainly haven't earned enough of my respect to alter how I speak toward you.

Quote
Seth was called Seth in Ancient Egypt (also Suketh, Setesh ext.), not Greeks.
The "th" sound as we know it in modern English is not the same pronunciation in every other language to ever exist. Ancient Egyptian dialect generally pronounced our "th" with a sharper anunciation, to the point that in many cases it sounded akin to a flat "t" sound. One must also consider that where a linguistic is in a given word affects how it is pronounced.

Furthermore, yes, actually, it did come from the Greek Hellenization, as Egyptian language was not structured the same way.

Let's look at Thoth, who also has the "th" sounds. What's his original Egyptian name? Ḏḥwty. Now, you wanna try and pronounce that in English and tell me it's correct? Sure, we have the Romanized Djehuti, but that's still not "correct" or even accurate to the original, as many words of such ancient languages are merely estimated as to their proper pronunciation by historical language analysts.

One must also consider the preferences of any particular sect. Sutekh was particularly favored by the Hittites, and such was the name they attributed to the same or a similar enough deity. In reality, there's not really a singular "correct" name in regards to the original language. That being said, though, relying on Hellenizations or Romanizations or any other country, people, religion, and/or language's attempts at localization as if they are even remotely accurate to the source is a demonstration of misguidance.

Quote
If that does not work, we can put anything, anything but damn Astarte(the true intention of putting that heart attack is so obvious)! Hell, even can put Elgiza monster there as a boss!

Nice double negative. "You can put anything" cannot be rationally followed with "EXCEPT FOR." I consider this statement moot and utterly useless due to this contradiction. Just flat-out proves you don't actually care about anything but your own opinion, since we can do "anything" except what you don't like. That's not how "anything" works.

Quote
Also, my reason for ridding out sexualized characters is that (well, I don't like sexualized characters personally, and I think that sexual theme is what's ruining Japanese gaming industry (least not for Nintendo), but) it doesn't fit with Castlevania.

I'd say "subjective," but the fact that it's so laughably wrong is more important, I think.

Castlevania's about vampires. Vampires are and always have been inherently tied to sexuality by their very nature as carnal creatures.

Case closed there. End of story. I could elaborate much, much further as to how thematic elements of CV relate inherently to elements of the sexual, but vampires are its prime subject matter and vampires are all I need to reference to disprove your statement.

Quote
If you see early games, you wouldn't see any deliberately sexualized characters until Rondo with the lady on a skull (Carmila, I believe to be).

Where to start...

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2F25OUOcs.png&hash=5577492f6d0e09c43c9f21ccbefb775b)

Medusa, CVIII. Tits. I assume based on how pitifully shallow your definitions of sexuality are that you consider breasts and generally the female form to be inherently sexual, which is pretty much a sexist opinion to begin with. The human form is not inherently sexual. Acts of sexuality are sexual. A pair of tits isn't, unless they're being used in a sexual manner. Medusa here has no such context.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2FgbGO7EZ.png&hash=4317eff79a59b7a6e7f9ab6bd93ca034)

Leviathan, CVIII. Leviathan in Hebrew scripture once had a female counterpart who was slain by God to prevent the two from procreating. Boy, that's pretty sexual in nature, isn't it? God killing your only female so the two of you can't fuck? Well, perhaps going to Hebrew scripture for a winged devilbeast who only shares the name is a bit of a stretch, but then so is most of your argument, so I think me making stretch points is fair game also.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2FacQeqy4.png&hash=60e65ab6ef7f2e08bac11795cfeed02e)

Medusa, Haunted Castle. See above argument for tits.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2F5w88n0m.png&hash=59fbf66a2c11e2ef8da5eb5c7db17215)

Harpy, Haunted Castle. Clearly visible nipples, even. Once again, see CVIII Medusa argument for tits.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2F1XLg5PE.png&hash=3b8c4043692401ccc948918364a4bc02)

Medusa, SCVIV. Same argument.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.castlevaniacrypt.com%2Fimg%2Fhc%2Fenemies%2Frollingstone.gif&hash=69b3e9439ae333c9701cb4aa6107f087)

Rolling Stone, Haunted Castle. Same argument.

There are others, plenty of them, but this is enough to prove my point.

What's more, your argument is that Carmilla is naked.

Naked. That's it.

No mention of the fact that she and Laura are easily able to be implied (by the very nature of the source material, vampirism's inherent sexual qualites, and other contextual factors) as lovers, or that Laura prances around in a standard Japanese sexy battle unitard, or that she can kiss you rather passionately and steal hearts from you (which is basically an inversion of the Astarte attack you oh so clearly loathe).

Just that Carmilla's naked.

Once again, your nigh-sexist consideration of the female form as inherently sexual is both bullshit and laughable.

There's also the whole "save the helpless damsels from the evil clutches and intentions of Dracula (a man)" plot device, or that Maria (a twelve-year-old) has a few of the usual Japanese upskirt tease shots in her ending. But these don't have any sexual overtones or couldn't be interpreted as such, nope. Never a chance.

Quote
You see, most of... those games are considered perfect.

Subjective and objectively unprovable.

Quote
Nobody condemns on it with character designs.

Also objectively unprovable. Character design wasn't a focal point like it is now due to limitations of hardware, so there was never much pixel-translations of character design to run with. Character art existed, you know.

Quote
Also, The theme running in Castlevania is: "Belmont/Alucard/Soma or whoever beating crap out of intimidating monsters and pushing evil Dracula/Chaos and ext. to its doom" or "Badass Gothic Horror Action Game". Well, does the Succubus fit in the category of "Badass" or "Intimidating"?

*ahem*

1: "Gothic Horror" means Gothic-archetype demons and enemies. Succubae are one of these.

2: "Intimidating" is largely subjective, but are you trying to say that a demon that almost 100% successfully seduces all of its victims and then uses normally-positive things like sex acts to drain them of their life energies and ultimately either turn them into their thralls or kill them outright isn't something which would be cause for intimidation? Sex is great and generally we humans enjoy it, so twisting an act so near and dear to us as a species into a death sentence is pretty fucking intimidating as a concept to me.

3: "Badass" is also highly subjective, but see the above. Turning something your victims enjoy into something to be feared and avoided lest they suffer horrible fates is pretty fucking badass from a perspective of effective strategy against one's enemies/victims.

4: No, the running theme of Castlevania is good vs. evil, humanity vs. inhumanity, the secular against the dark unknown. Badass warriors against badass forces of evil is just a byproduct of those themes as has always been the case.

Quote
If done right, female characters can fit in the series like SotN Maria or CV3 Sypha.

Once again, your concept of what "fits" is entirely based on the offensively infantile way you view women as characters. God forbid a particular female character is more strongly in touch with her sexual side than another.

Maria is also pretty hot in Symphony, with many of the same design elements (short skirt, stockings, thighs exposed, graceful movements exemplifying the female form, general exquisite elements of beauty and attractiveness) you've been complaining about. Either bitch about all examples, or none of them. Don't get to cherry pick which designs guilty of your condemnations are "valid" for complaint or not.

Quote
Why is that so hard?

Because Maria has always been an ass-kicker and Sypha stomps ass with her magic for a grand total of one game (Fake Sypha doesn't count in my book since, well, it's not actually Sypha and the boss itself is rather weak).

We have Yoko who stomps ass with magic, Sonia who kicks some serious ass, Charlotte who's got some seriously powerful magic at her disposal (despite being more than a little sexualized in the traditional Japanese schoolgirl-type way, but PoR had the anime style so any anime tropes are a given), and last but not least Shanoa who stomps ass and utilizes some of the most powerful magic elements in the series (can't be too many who can use Dracula's own power effectively enough to control its target and damage, as we've seen in Dawn and Aria).

All these female characters also happen to have their own types of attractive designs, some of which have more sexualized elements than others, but in many cases it fits their character--Charlotte has a bit of that sheltered bookworm trying to be something more thing going, as seen in both how overconfident in herself and comically naive she can be at times; Yoko's design is conservative outfit-wise as far as skin shown, but she still has the stockings/heels combination which is somehow always sexual in nature, and her personality is rather befitting of the conservative-but-not-Puritan design she runs with; Sonia wears essentially the female equivalent of what male Belmonts wear, so I don't wanna hear a fucking word from you about that; Shanoa's got the flowing dress and armored boots going on, the completely revealed back is entirely explained for Glyph absorption and the flowing dress isn't any different from other characters' flowing capes and robes except that it's on a female body instead.

The only reason you find this "hard" is because your standards are so ass-backwards and contradictory there simply aren't any true cases that fit your standards without contradicting. In reality (something it doesn't appear you like to deal with), what you're calling "hard" has been done plenty of times in the series and then some--you just have a hard time admitting to or even seeing it, as you're so concerned with your borderline-Puritan ideals of female sexuality.

Quote
Also, I started to hate sexualized characters when I heard about Pachislot and Pachinko. Let's take Sypha for example and compare that with Dracula's curse version. Which do you think is better for Castlevania? Answer is already there.

You're right. I much prefer her CVIII incarnation. But it has absolutely nothing to do with her design or how sexualized she is. I like CVIII more because she's actually capable of doing things and has an arc to follow. It stems nowhere from consideration of sexual tones, but entirely from me disliking the Pachinko titles to begin with due to their bastardization of what makes the games past enjoyable--and no, none of that has to do with sexualization either. Traditional Castlevanias are fun, Pachinko Castlevanias are not. Pure and simple.

At the end of the day, your argument is entirely one of blatant cherry-picking and I dare say blankented sexism.

You've done a lot of bitching and moaning about slender lithe females in revealing outfits and how that apparently causes irreparable harm to the series as a whole due to what I can only imagine is perceived role model influence or some asinine point similar to it.

Don't see you bitching much about Scwarzenegger macho-men with manly buff muscles and manly angry eyebrows and manly stern expressions and big macho man power walking or any of the other male equivalent content to what you have been whining about.

For you see, if revealing clothing showing off the body is sexual on females, then it's also true for males. The only guaranteed part of the human body to perpetually carry sexual overtones are the genitalia themselves. That's the act they were mostly made for (barring the other biological uses such as waste removal, yes I know those are a thing too), so the overtones are present by nature.

Pair of tits? Not inherently sexual, and if you see a pair that way then the fault is on you. Since you only seem to care about female portrayals, I'm gonna draw a logical conclusion based on your singling out of the gender and how cherry-picked and contradictory your arguments have been and say that, whether you care to admit to it or not (or even if you're capable of consciously acknowledging it), you objectify the female form and proceed immediately to antagonize it for showing off any more than you're comfortable seeing.

Don't like seeing a pair of tits or a female character comfortable in her own sexuality? Perfectly fine. What's not fine, though, is putting your singular tiny opinion on a pedestal like any accusation or condemnation you make is irrefutable, since as we can all plainly see, they can be easily and rather largely refuted.

I, for one, am not a big fan of the continued "macho man doing macho man things" trope for male protagonists. I don't like too much the frequency it's used and the corresponding messages that frequency can send. I much prefer the male characters in the series that manage to maintain the same or similar (or even greater) levels of badassery and generally just being interesting characters without being hulking barbarian Schwarzeneggers in tiny little codpiece armor onesies (see: Soma, most recent Dracula iterations, Isaac, Alucard, Juste). But you don't see me bitching and moaning and pontificating like my opinion is law and that I'm absolutely correct and that the things I dislike about a series are bringing the whole series down just because I don't like it.

So let me go back to my first rebuttal:
Quote
P.S. Mr/Ms/Mrs Dracula9, could you be nice to other people please?

Don't like how I'm talking to you?

Well, first and foremost, too bad. I'm violating no forum rules by deconstructing your argument and presenting counterclaims for every fragmented piece, which would be the only true punishment or incentive to speak otherwise.

Second off, it's not my fault or problem if you can't understand the notion of "if you aren't prepared to have your opinions argued, debated, deconstructed, rebutted, attacked, broken down, shattered, reduced to their bare minimum, or otherwise met with counters and opposition, then don't fucking post them on the Internet." This isn't some happy fairytale playground where everyone gets along and agrees with everyone else and there's no confrontation about anything ever. People grow and learn shit by having their worldviews and opinions beaten and dragged through the mud by those of others. If you don't have the spine to handle that, then frankly no amount of pleading and admonishing me will give me any incentive to relent.

Third off, and I'll repeat myself from the beginning of the post, you have done nothing to earn enough of my respect for me to consider you and your opinions worth marginalizing myself and my own for your own sake. There are plenty such people I restrain things and mannerisms for, and all of those people in some form or another have my respect enough to make such considerations--some are just great people, some have proven valiant and worthy opponents on the debate field, some have maybe said or done things in the past that I greatly respect the intentions and/or delivery of, any number of things. What have you done for me to harbor the same feelings? So far, nothing. You made a dumb post, I rebuked it, and since that first interaction you have done absolutely nothing to consider the arguments and possibilities of validity of the other side of your opinions. And before you say that I haven't considered your side, yes, I absolutely have. I wouldn't be breaking down and debating each point of yours if I hadn't, since breakdown and countering of points requires some level of understanding of what those points are trying to say. I've also been around the series for a very long time and have thought about aspects of the series for a very long time, so many of the points you've raised (terrible as some might be) are ones I've long since had myself and either discarded the misinformed or useless ones or modified them accordingly to be more wholesome. Doesn't appear to me thus far that you're willing or even capable of doing those things with your own views; therefore, I see no reason to, essentially, dumb myself and my opinions down just so your feelings don't get hurt. I'm not gonna coddle you and avoid your precious fucking bubble--had mine broken years and years ago by members of this very community, and I'm glad they did; otherwise, I might still be floating around in my own sheltered little opinion bubble and still be just as spineless and incapable of dealing with any form of criticism towards my views as I was then.

Fourthly, my general rule is that "the stupider the argument, the more likely to be an ass/hit a bit harder/have a few lulz and fuck with the OP I am." The more seriously an argument is presented to me, the more seriously I regard it. And while I have no doubts that you take your opinions and arguments very seriously, the content itself is rather lacking in seriousness due to just how contradictory and I daresay hypocritical they are. Therefore, I take the arguments themselves less seriously despite full awareness and acknowledgement that the presenter of them is completely serious.

If I had any doubts as to your integrity and seriousness, I'd have long since started shitposting in reply by now. Dumb arguments meant as shitposts/flames/whatever are usually easy to spot, and occasionally I enjoy having a bit of fun with them since nobody's being serious about it.

So bear that in mind. You might not like how I've been and until further notice will continue to address you and your arguments, but do remember that if not for my understanding and respect of your clear seriousness I could in all guaranteed likelihood been far "worse" based on what you currently seem to have a distaste for. Just like many aspects of life, it could always be worse; so without meaning to sound condescending or patronizing (with apologies if this next bit does, which it likely will due to the nature of what it's saying), I honestly think you should have a little more tact and courtesy than just begging and pleading for me to be "nice" to you because you don't like what I'm saying. Do you think I just copy and paste this kind of shit without an effort or care in the world? Long-winded posts like this take a long fucking time to compose and structure, so that should give you some measure of indication that I'm at least taking your shit seriously enough to give it thoughtful and rational replies in return. I could've shitposted them and Photoshopped memes of Exodia and Dark Magician onto Castlevania characters to illustrate the ridiculousness of that one point, or compiled any number of visuals and artwork of every female character in the series and ironically highlight all their exposed ankles or visible necklines and joke about the "barbaric" and antiquated nature of such views towards women and the female form, or any number of shitposty things I felt like doing (several members, mostly Plottwist, know exactly what I mean by this and exactly what levels of shitposting I can delve to, so I'm not being arrogant or cocky when I say you really should be glad I've gone this route instead).

But I didn't. Because I respected your opinions and arguments enough to take them seriously enough to warrant proper retorts and counterarguments.

But I'm still the big meanie asshole. Gotta love that shit.

Anyway, this has been too much of a post already and probably my last offtopic one in the thread since we're hitting some rather heavy levels of derailing.

You want me to be "nicer" to you? Then give me a fucking reason to do so, starting preferably by ceasing your incessant begging for it. Respect isn't handed to you on a platter because you want and demand and plead for it. That shit's earned. So quit with the entreaties and imploring for it already.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on February 01, 2017, 05:51:02 PM
First of all, you need "manners". Yes, I might be a damn idiot on your opinion, but that doesn't mean that you can be rude to anyone. Or else this might end up like a Youtube comment fight. K?

Quote
The "th" sound as we know it in modern English is not the same pronunciation in every other language to ever exist. Ancient Egyptian dialect generally pronounced our "th" with a sharper anunciation, to the point that in many cases it sounded akin to a flat "t" sound. One must also consider that where a linguistic is in a given word affects how it is pronounced.

Yes. I get the point, but Seth is a modern english pronunciation. That is how we pronounce it. If we get Akumajo Dorakyura and say it Castlevania, is it wrong? So we can say it in our way. If we go really serious with the original spell/pronunciation, we would be typing/pronouncing in hieroglyphics, Japanese, Romanian ext.

Quote
I'd say "subjective," but the fact that it's so laughably wrong is more important, I think.

Castlevania's about vampires. Vampires are and always have been inherently tied to sexuality by their very nature as carnal creatures.

Well, is Dracula sexual? No. Is Death? Is Medusa Heads? Is Zombies? Is Bats? I think answer is written there.

Case closed there. End of story. I could elaborate much, much further as to how thematic elements of CV relate inherently to elements of the sexual, but vampires are its prime subject matter and vampires are all I need to reference to disprove your statement.
I said about it. Medusa, Harpy and more early monsters is just sprited that way. I mean the context. They are nowhere "sexual". In Rondo, also with Carmilla, underneath her, there is a Succubus-like character (Anette, I believe to be) which acts like Succubus and dresses like Succubus. Isn't that intentional?

Quote
Because Maria has always been an ass-kicker and Sypha stomps ass with her magic for a grand total of one game (Fake Sypha doesn't count in my book since, well, it's not actually Sypha and the boss itself is rather weak).

We have Yoko who stomps ass with magic, Sonia who kicks some serious ass, Charlotte who's got some seriously powerful magic at her disposal (despite being more than a little sexualized in the traditional Japanese schoolgirl-type way, but PoR had the anime style so any anime tropes are a given), and last but not least Shanoa who stomps ass and utilizes some of the most powerful magic elements in the series (can't be too many who can use Dracula's own power effectively enough to control its target and damage, as we've seen in Dawn and Aria).

All these female characters also happen to have their own types of attractive designs, some of which have more sexualized elements than others, but in many cases it fits their character--Charlotte has a bit of that sheltered bookworm trying to be something more thing going, as seen in both how overconfident in herself and comically naive she can be at times; Yoko's design is conservative outfit-wise as far as skin shown, but she still has the stockings/heels combination which is somehow always sexual in nature, and her personality is rather befitting of the conservative-but-not-Puritan design she runs with; Sonia wears essentially the female equivalent of what male Belmonts wear, so I don't wanna hear a fucking word from you about that; Shanoa's got the flowing dress and armored boots going on, the completely revealed back is entirely explained for Glyph absorption and the flowing dress isn't any different from other characters' flowing capes and robes except that it's on a female body instead.

Alright. Get the point. But even then, bit of their design could be better. Charlotte, for example, not only that super short miniskirts are not accurate to the history (as I said, only introduced in 1950s, PoR is 1944), also to point out that loose pants does way better job. Shanoa's design could be changed. That Glyph at the back is quite unnecessary, as she can replace back Glyph with some kind of shoulder Glyph. Also, I think the fact that "Glyph requires tattoo" thing is quite unnecessary setting. Also the clothing doesn't fit with Shanoa's characteristics.

For you see, if revealing clothing showing off the body is sexual on females, then it's also true for males. The only guaranteed part of the human body to perpetually carry sexual overtones are the genitalia themselves. That's the act they were mostly made for (barring the other biological uses such as waste removal, yes I know those are a thing too), so the overtones are present by nature.

Quote
Pair of tits? Not inherently sexual, and if you see a pair that way then the fault is on you. Since you only seem to care about female portrayals, I'm gonna draw a logical conclusion based on your singling out of the gender and how cherry-picked and contradictory your arguments have been and say that, whether you care to admit to it or not (or even if you're capable of consciously acknowledging it), you objectify the female form and proceed immediately to antagonize it for showing off any more than you're comfortable seeing.

Don't like seeing a pair of tits or a female character comfortable in her own sexuality? Perfectly fine. What's not fine, though, is putting your singular tiny opinion on a pedestal like any accusation or condemnation you make is irrefutable, since as we can all plainly see, they can be easily and rather largely refuted.

Yes. I do agree with you. The males are also sexualized also (That's why I got Julius and Leon as my favorite Belmont). But sexualization of male characters didn't made the series shit. Magnus the Incubus was only for Drama CD, not the game series. Also Belmont's designs also got more conservative along the series. Simon surely didn't ruined the series, everyone knows that. But I think Succubus did ruin the series. The true reason that I hate sexualized characters is that they ruined Castlevania. Also haterd for Pachinko for same reason. Also Konami seems to only care about sexualization of females, not males. Stuff got better on that criteria, luckily.

So yeah. Here's my final point. Astarte is shit for a boss because it doesn't represent ancient Egypt well. Sexualized female characters doesn't fit the Castlevania series. Rather have Sypha or Maria. OK?

Opinions only. Everyone can have one. But please be nice to other people because being nice delivers your point better and faster.

Also, Mr/Ms/Mrs SecretWeapon, you need basic manners to persuade people. Do you think swearing and shaming to them makes them persuaded to your cause?
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on February 01, 2017, 06:03:43 PM
lol you are so spineless and self-righteous in your opinions and obvious problems with women you could be the next U.S. President.

I need manners...best comeback from someone who can't handle criticism I've ever heard. I'm screencapping and framing that. Pics to follow.

As promised.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2FmP6cUo4.png&hash=67fbeed058dd25d975dbad6a12d2e000)

Come hither.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 01, 2017, 06:16:32 PM
@superc4 You're entitled to your opinions, but this is a thread about POR and Nazi's specifically. Sexualisation doesn't really have enough of a place to need to be a point of contention let alone derail the thread. (I'm the first to admit I've been guilty of this in the past, but we're all responsible) Why not start a thread specifically on this topic?

Also I'm not taking sides one way or the other, but I can see Dracula9's frustration in principle is coming from an argument that hasn't been extensively researched. You seem to be looking for justification of your own ideals/ values with others, which is what it is, but we must also remember that not everyone will share the same ideals and values as ourselves. That's all I will say.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on February 01, 2017, 06:21:07 PM
lol you are so spineless and self-righteous in your opinions and obvious problems with women you could be the next U.S. President.

I need manners...best comeback from someone who can't handle criticism I've ever heard. I'm screencapping and framing that. Pics to follow.

Well, I can handle criticism. There is a way that you can be nice and criticize. You don't have to be rude to criticize. You might think I'm self righteous, but I don't always have to listen to other peoples if I don't think that argument works with me. I have my opinion, and when I think other people's opinion doesn't work with me, I instead argue back with rebuttals. That's debating. You think this as a lecture and other people has to 100% listen to your argument?

Also, this sidetracked to much. Let's just go back to PoR and Nazis. You're right @zangetsu468.

I can say the same word that you said to me, but I don't want to. Also, think about yourself. Did you listen to my argument as much as me listening to your argument? Probably not. Also, I supported Clinton. Just letting you know.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on February 01, 2017, 06:30:07 PM
(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGSa9vHg.jpg&hash=13b61aaae8d4c0e8d4b70432fb029845)

Sorry, folks. It's meme time.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on February 01, 2017, 06:40:04 PM
(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fweknowmemes.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F10%2Fpresidential-debate-memes.jpg&hash=2bf06bf8d609d4f4b89a872a243aa344)

definitely. Please have at you.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on February 01, 2017, 06:52:23 PM
lol nah fam

"meme time" referred to fallacy ref, not an ongoing memewar

you're not ready for that

or worth the effort, now that i think of it

besides, i said everything i wanted to last page, so even with my unbeatable folder of woodies in my army there's no context left for me to explain through memes

but i am a benevolent lord, so i shall bequeath a singular woody upon thee so that thou canst bask within his glory and radiance
(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FaEDCrcl.jpg&hash=38bb401dd3fa2c464cac5206ec0a786a)
repent thy sins unto your woodlord and be cleansed, child

if thou wishest not to repent, then mine presence shall be forfeit unto thee, and thou canst replenish thy health at this church no longer, thus transform'g thy quest to laruba mansion into one of increased difficulty
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: theplottwist on February 01, 2017, 07:10:10 PM
Quote
That Glyph at the back is quite unnecessary, as she can replace back Glyph with some kind of shoulder Glyph. Also, I think the fact that "Glyph requires tattoo" thing is quite unnecessary setting. Also the clothing doesn't fit with Shanoa's characteristics.

Thank god it wasn't superc4 the one to handle Castlevania, or it'd be called "burkhavania" or something, holy shit.

Quote
But I think Succubus did ruin the series.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FOmAxSTM.jpg&hash=7df8c7e20869e126c4e647f9a70aeade)

Like, I know it's your opinion and all. But goddamn that ONE enemy with ONE cutscene on that ONE game that gets nowhere the focus the other parts of the game(s) have ruined the SERIES for you?

Jesus Christ.

Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on February 01, 2017, 07:58:24 PM
Thank god it wasn't superc4 the one to handle Castlevania, or it'd be called "burkhavania" or something, holy shit.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FOmAxSTM.jpg&hash=7df8c7e20869e126c4e647f9a70aeade)

Like, I know it's your opinion and all. But goddamn that ONE enemy with ONE cutscene on that ONE game that gets nowhere the focus the other parts of the game(s) have ruined the SERIES for you?

Jesus Christ.

Well, Burkhavania would be even worse then Succuvania or something. I said standard of SotN Maria, CV3 Sypha or AoS (Not DoS, to be accurate) characters, not making it islamic and stuff.

Also, I said that Succubus ruined it because since the debut, the wave of sexualization rose and rose until Pachinkovania which ruined it. Symphony is a great game. That one shitty cutscene wasn't enough to ruin that game (that cutscene was supposed to be a sad one, until that succubus popped out and ruined the mood)

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/9b/12/70/9b12708d0c2d7219d4d3414811fefed2.jpg)
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: chainsawmidget on February 01, 2017, 10:19:48 PM

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/9b/12/70/9b12708d0c2d7219d4d3414811fefed2.jpg)
No.  There aren't new arguments.  There's you, who's entire arguement boils down to "I don't like it so it shouldn't be there," vs absoultley everybody else, who actually are using things called "facts" to support their arguments. 

But anyway... Nazis. 


...

We need a Nazi succubus. 
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on February 01, 2017, 10:31:44 PM
No.  There aren't new arguments.  There's you, who's entire arguement boils down to "I don't like it so it shouldn't be there," vs absoultley everybody else, who actually are using things called "facts" to support their arguments. 

But anyway... Nazis. 


...

We need a Nazi succubus.

Yeah. Let's stop dogfighting and return to the Nazi topic.

Also about Nazis
...

Rather have Eva Braun Ghost and Hitler Vampire with Human Himmler.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Chernabogue on February 02, 2017, 12:05:28 AM
(https://media.tenor.co/images/3a7b94d55d9b33556f541ace9b67b835/raw)
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 02, 2017, 03:19:28 AM
It would've been a nice touch if they didn't so much focus on the Nazi regime, but instead gave some in game reasoning for the relevance of WWII. i.e. the effects of "Chaos" spreading throughout Europe, beyond Wallachia, even worldwide. With Chaos rising, the hearts of x% humanity become tainted causing people to become paranoid, desire war and destruction, and realise the coming of their Dark Lord.

The Portraits then act as Wormholes which spread demons from the underworld all over the globe.

Resume og story of Jonathan and Charlotte arriving, Brauner severing the link to the throne room while claiming the Castle's throne in his own "temporal space" accessible by his blood art technique. (which is a better reason for Death not being able to find him, rather than just entering his portrait anyway, which he potentially could have done from the getgo). Jonathan and Charlotte are only able to access Brauner's temporal space when the power binding the seal (from the other portraits; spaces in all corners of the world) have been severed.. However, they also require the assistance of Stella and Loretta to "open the void"... etc

The Nation of fools could have been the Holocaust occurring, the walls peppered with blood, graffiti and Nazi Swastikas .
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: chainsawmidget on February 02, 2017, 03:31:56 AM
Quote
The Nation of fools could have been the Holocaust occurring, the walls peppered with blood, graffiti and Nazi Swastikas .
Now that idea I like.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 02, 2017, 03:36:59 AM
Now that idea I like.

Thank you sir :)
In this case, the Legion speaks for itself.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: SecretWeapon on February 02, 2017, 04:49:19 AM
No.  There aren't new arguments.  There's you, who's entire arguement boils down to "I don't like it so it shouldn't be there," vs absoultley everybody else, who actually are using things called "facts" to support their arguments. 

But anyway... Nazis. 


...

We need a Nazi succubus.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hardcoregaming101.net%2Foperationdarkness%2Fcarmilla.gif&hash=8d23bbbaf3767b405842852c5b2d303c)

Nazi Carmilla
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: suomynona on February 02, 2017, 05:19:14 AM
What about...

Brauner is Castlevania's Hitler. He made a deal with Dracula to gain supernatural powers. The bosses of the portrait dungeons are real Nazi party executives/generals (Goering, Goebbels, Himmler ext.) controlling supernatural beings. The Lecarde family, later moved to France, is a Resistance members who sneaked into Hitler's Castle to exterminate Hitler and destroy the castle, which fails. Jonathan and Charlotte is requested by the Allies and Vatican City to destroy Castlevania, which they believe that the power of the Dracula's Castle and Hitler(Brauner)'s powers made Nazi army strong.

That's what I think. Also, let's not start any more dogfight.

Sounds crazy, but I would also like guns as Jonathan's sub-weapon, fighting Nazi Soldiers and monsters.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Nagumo on February 02, 2017, 02:54:50 PM
I think it was actually a good decision not to include or reference Nazis in the game. I'm guessing this was done in order to upset or offended anybody which I think is important to keep in mind. Secondly, although I don't condone anything the  Nazis have done, I'm personally not a fan of the idea of putting them on the same level as demons and other monsters who you can kill in a video game without feeling bad about it. The reason for that is because it's a form of dehumanization which I'm opposed against in all circumstances. Of course, I'm not calling anybody out on liking stories that involve Nazi occultism (it's actually very interesting) but I think it's also important to be aware that the subtext is  problematic. On the other hand, I do think they missed an opportunity by not having really doing anything with the World War II setting. This is just a minor example, but something really neat they could have done is having Gremlins as enemies in the game. Gremlins actually originated in World War II stories in which they are blamed for sabotaging aircraft. That enemy would have been a perfect fit.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: X on February 04, 2017, 11:22:01 AM
There's.. something on the wing.. some.. Thing!
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 04, 2017, 04:45:39 PM
I think it was actually a good decision not to include or reference Nazis in the game. I'm guessing this was done in order to upset or offended anybody which I think is important to keep in mind. Secondly, although I don't condone anything the  Nazis have done, I'm personally not a fan of the idea of putting them on the same level as demons and other monsters who you can kill in a video game without feeling bad about it.

They were never going to put Nazi's or Hitler outright in the game. However Brauner is an artist who looks Caucasian and paints with blood in the context of WWII, with a completely shaved head. I'd say it's safe to assume at least some inspiration from Hitler. Frankly I'm glad they didn't put Hitler in the game, the guy just doesn't seem threatening as an enemy in a video game. (not in Wolfenstein, not now)

They could, however, have put soldiers in the game (rather than recycled sprites) who could've been under the influence of chaos. Having a swastika on the wall of the nation of fools during the events of WWII could have been historically accurate. Placing soldiers (not specifically Nazi soldiers) in that stage who were under the influence of Dracula/ Brauner or influenced by the rising of chaos in general could have worked in context. This is not demonizing someone's belief system who follows the doctrine of Hitler, it's being somewhat historically accurate.

I'd also like to point out that games such as Wolfenstein 3d and Return to Castle Wolfenstein had similar themes, the Nazi's were the enemies of these games, it's a contextual plot device, that isn't taking digs at anyone's belief system. It's a representation of history. Hitler is a historical figure, as is Dracula and both have appeared in popular culture, comics being a prime example https://www.mycomicshop.com/search?TID=275481 (https://www.mycomicshop.com/search?TID=275481)
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/91/ab/cb/91abcb98d796c3d0c7909da7f4ee565e.jpg (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/91/ab/cb/91abcb98d796c3d0c7909da7f4ee565e.jpg)
Characters such as these as well as their associations, give historical context to a plot or situation. Nobody is saying if soldiers were in the game they had to be killed or vanquished inhumanely, they could have been zombie soldiers or the like. Dracula's influence would have been enough of a logistical and rational reason for their "evil".
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on February 04, 2017, 04:54:00 PM
You say that like the Nazi belief system is one we should be considerate and polite towards.  :P

I don't disagree with the rest of the rhetoric, though, quite the opposite, just pointing out an observation.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 04, 2017, 05:26:50 PM
You say that like the Nazi belief system is one we should be considerate and polite towards.  :P

They were big on animal rights, I can get down with that.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on February 04, 2017, 08:18:19 PM
They were big on animal rights, I can get down with that.

Also the Nazis carried out the first public anti-smoking PR campaign in history, and they were the first to link smoking conclusively to lung cancer.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: AlexCalvo on February 05, 2017, 08:55:11 AM
And they also tried to take over the world and exterminate whole races of people....  But yeah they were nice to puppies and kitties.  :rollseyes:
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: KaZudra on February 05, 2017, 01:38:43 PM
And they also tried to take over the world and exterminate whole races of people....  But yeah they were nice to puppies and kitties.  :rollseyes:
Funny enough, I've been trying to wrap my head around it. Fundamentally Nazism is pretty damn awesome if it weren't for the Genocide and World Domination, but hey, I live in the US so if I don't walk with the mass propaganda, I'll be labeled a Neo-Nazi Racist :/
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: chainsawmidget on February 05, 2017, 05:33:53 PM
Quote
Fundamentally Nazism is pretty damn awesome if it weren't for the Genocide and World Domination

And if it wasn't for that whole, pain, blood, injury, loud noises, and death thing, I wouldn't mind getting shot in the head, but that's kind of the main aspect of the thing. 

Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 05, 2017, 06:46:12 PM
Funny enough, I've been trying to wrap my head around it. Fundamentally Nazism is pretty damn awesome if it weren't for the Genocide and World Domination
They're extremists, they move from one extreme to the next. What I can't wrap my head around is take Canadians for example, they're portrayed as peaceful, non-violent people. Yet I still receive emails from Humane Society International, telling me that it's seal pup bashing season... :-\ The answer? Not every Canadian nor person is peaceful, every country, every ethnicity has extremists. Anyone who can beat a defenseless animal to death needs their head examined, preferably in solitary confinement.

Back to Nazi's, it could have made for some interesting CV architecture with the environments. Nazi Architecture was large and imposing, but it was also a bit stark and cold. If POR was based around Europe, it would've been a good excuse to explore some of these areas.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: AlexCalvo on February 07, 2017, 05:47:10 AM
Ok I just want to drop a quick incite.  Nazism is not cool, or "almost perfect" or anything resembling the two.  I'm hoping you guys are a little young and just working through your own philosophy like we all do.  Nazism is racist trash, inherited from horrific murderers.

On topic.  I kind of agree with Nagumo, but for a very different reason.  I think that you have to be really careful about not giving things the gravity that they deserve.  Could you imagine just how Nazis would have been incorporated into PoR?  The saturday morning cartoon vania(note: I do still love PoR)?  WWII and the Holocaust are events that really should not be done in such a silly, light hearted style.  It's just kind of disrespectful.  Maybe in a game more tonally in line with AoS or CoD, but even then it's pushing it.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 07, 2017, 06:30:25 AM
Ok I just want to drop a quick incite.  Nazism is not cool, or "almost perfect" or anything resembling the two.  I'm hoping you guys are a little young and just working through your own philosophy like we all do.  Nazism is racist trash, inherited from horrific murderers.

Everyone else can speak for themselves. I said I like the idea of animal rights only, I still do believe animals should be afforded the right to not be tortured, used in experiments or beaten to death. However, I do not condone nor accept or practice Nazi/ white supremacist ideals and practices.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: X on February 07, 2017, 10:13:08 AM
Quote
On topic.  I kind of agree with Nagumo, but for a very different reason.  I think that you have to be really careful about not giving things the gravity that they deserve.  Could you imagine just how Nazis would have been incorporated into PoR?  The saturday morning cartoon vania(note: I do still love PoR)?  WWII and the Holocaust are events that really should not be done in such a silly, light hearted style.  It's just kind of disrespectful.  Maybe in a game more tonally in line with AoS or CoD, but even then it's pushing it.

Doing a PoR game with Nazis doesn't automatically include all the other things as well (such as the holocaust.) It would simply be a story about the Nazi's using the powers of the supernatural (Dracula and Castlevania) in order to promote their victory in achieving global conquest. It can be as simple as that without stepping on anyone's "sensitive toes" so to speak. I personally don't condone Nazism, I condemn it. Hard. However in terms of story-telling, history, etc. they are a fascinating subject and give us a glimpse into a very turbulent time of the mid-20th century. It's all in our points of view how we chose to perceive these things. No-one can speak for everyone here, we can only speak for ourselves.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: AlexCalvo on February 07, 2017, 03:04:45 PM
I agree completely.  What you are failing to do is look at it in the context of PoT. Arguably the most juvenile and cartoonish game in the series, as i refered to "the saturday morning cartoon vania." Tonally it's quite a goofy and childish affair.  And while it's basic story structure is pretty great, the execution seems laser aimed at younger fans.  Do you think a children's animated series with Nazis in it would be appropriate? It's just disrespectful to take so lightly.

I'm not saying Nazis in Castlevania could never work. I actually gave specific examples of other games that had a serious enough tone where I thought it could work out ok.  I'm a big fan of the Hellboy comic series, which is pretty heavy with the Nazi ocultism.  I am far from saying this subject is too taboo to ever tackle.
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 07, 2017, 04:51:07 PM
Do you think a children's animated series with Nazis in it would be appropriate? It's just disrespectful to take so lightly.


Dragon Ball Z: Fusion Reborn did it
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: Dracula9 on February 07, 2017, 07:32:25 PM
cough cough be prepared in lion king cough
Title: Re: Portrait of Ruin and Nazis
Post by: X on February 07, 2017, 08:46:44 PM
There has been some serious kids cartoons done in the past (yes, I've seen some, and some of that s**t is way out there! :o), so one with Nazis wouldn't be pushing the envelope any further then it already has been.