Topic: Where's Dracula XX ??

[Gunlord]

I like Dracula XX too. It was a very challenging game, so it's really a feeling of accomplishment when you beat Dracula, ESPECIALLY if you manage to beat him without taking any damage--an impressive feat for such a tuff boss! Rondo's Drac was easy cakes compared to him in Dracula X, what with the bottomless pits and all.

However, I wonder if licensing issues prevented this game from being included as an extra. SoTN was on a Sony system originally, and I think the company that made the PC-Engine is now defunct, so Konami didn't have to worry about licensing when they put it and a remake of it on the PSP. However, Dracula X was made for the Super NES, a Nintendo system. Thus, if they wanted to put the game as an extra on the PSP, wouldn't they have to ask Nintendo's permission? I'm probably wrong, so imma just wonderan

[Wolfman Jake]

However, I wonder if licensing issues prevented this game from being included as an extra. SoTN was on a Sony system originally, and I think the company that made the PC-Engine is now defunct, so Konami didn't have to worry about licensing when they put it and a remake of it on the PSP. However, Dracula X was made for the Super NES, a Nintendo system. Thus, if they wanted to put the game as an extra on the PSP, wouldn't they have to ask Nintendo's permission? I'm probably wrong, so imma just wonderan

I doubt that's really a big issue.  The Megaman Anniversary Collection on the PS2 contains Megaman 7, which was a Super NES title originally.  Likewise, the GCN version of the collection contains Megaman 8, which was originally on the PSX and Saturn.

I still am amazed that people hate DXX so much that they feel the need to "strike it from canon."  It's really the SAME story.  Richter Belmont defeats Dracula.  That's nice that many prefer the greater attention to detail as laid out during Rondo, but there is nothing "non-canon" about DXX.  It's an alternate, and admitedly inferior, way to experience Richter Belmont's story.  There isn't a need to throw it out of IGA's precious timeline because it fits EXACTLY where Rondo does.

[The Last Belmont]

Yeah, but if you consider that John Morris died from killing Dracula in Bloodlines it becomes apparent that some can hold their own better than others. Namely the Belmonts and Alucard. Maria also didn't beat Dracula according to the canon ending of Rondo, however, she assisted and held her own quite well in Symphony.

- John

I think others can, alucard beats him and he's only half vampire, as well as John morris and his boy. I think the belmonts are just the strongest vampire hunters and rein supreme in that field as alucard states in SOTN, this is not to say that others can't kill him too, just that the belmonts are the strongest hunters around. I kinda like COTM's introducing new hunters aside from the morris's into the fold who are badass and can take him on.
 (even if it was an early resurrection and drac wasn't at full power yet)

I like Dracula XX too. It was a very challenging game, so it's really a feeling of accomplishment when you beat Dracula, ESPECIALLY if you manage to beat him without taking any damage--an impressive feat for such a tuff boss! Rondo's Drac was easy cakes compared to him in Dracula X, what with the bottomless pits and all.

y'know drac really isn't that bad in XX, just go at him with 99 hearts and a cross. Beat his first form w/out using up any hearts and just item crush his second form when he shoots out that big energy blast straight forward (or do it constantly, doesn't matter but kind of takes the challenge away) and he's cake.

[Steve]

It's really the SAME story.

[Kensuke]

There is no licensing issues. Konami owns the game.

In the 80s, Nintendo required exclusivity clauses in contracts with third parties, but this stopped in the early 90s when the industry grew a big enough pair to tell them to go fuck themselves.

TTi went under, but their parent companies still exist: NEC and Hudson Soft. Ironically enough, Konami is the biggest shareholder of Hudson.

- John

[The Last Belmont]

There is no licensing issues. Konami owns the game.

In the 80s, Nintendo required exclusivity clauses in contracts with third parties, but this stopped in the early 90s when the industry grew a big enough pair to tell them to go fuck themselves.

TTi went under, but their parent companies still exist: NEC and Hudson Soft. Ironically enough, Konami is the biggest shareholder of Hudson.

- John

Yup and what's funny is that the original castlevania wasn't exclusive to the nintendo, their were ports of it for all kinds of other computers/consoles. Guess nintendo went back when they were bringin' over simon's quest and made the castlevania franchise exclusive.

[Wolfman Jake]

No, it doesn't.

[Steve]

Shaft exists as a ghost possessing green crystal balls in Symphony because Richter fought and killed him in Rondo.  The fact that he doesn't exist at all in DXX, as well as, again, the fact that Maria is a completely different character, alone are enough to make it non-canon.

the Maria Renard is really somehow a Belmont thing[...]seems to be exclusive to the instruction manual for the original PCE CD game

It's mentioned in Rondo's manual, several of Rondo's story scenes, and Symphony's Japanese manual.

[Kensuke]

Tell me one thing, besides the Maria Renard is really somehow a Belmont thing, a piece of information that seems to be exclusive to the instruction manual for the original PCE CD game, that directly contradcits anything that happens in Rondo or SotN.

It's not just the manual. Looking through the translation it's implied in the game too. Drac says "Defeated by the Blood of a Belmont" in both endings. Plus Maria says "That's because I have the the same vampire hunter's blood flowing through me just like Richter" when she rescues Annette.

The implication is that Maria is a Belmont. Albeit trading in the whip for certain anima-type magic. The game manual is merely the most explicit evidence.

And realistically, I wouldn't think she'd make it as far into the Drac's castle in SotN if she wasn't a capable Vampire Hunter in her own right. There's a crapload of bad guys in there. Enough to give Alucard trouble. Easiest way to explain that is to give her Belmont blood. If you play the SotN game after DracXX by not Rono, that point is lost on the player.

Richter saves Maria

Correct.

and Annette.

Actually we don't KNOW that for certain. Maria could have saved the other three girls, any combination, or none at all. You're allowed to switch between characters in Rondo, and SotN doesn't revisit all of Rondo...just the final fight.

Richter defeats Dracula. 

According to the canon confirmed by SotN, Richter's ending in Rondo is the correct one. But depending on how the first boss battle in SotN goes, Maria can assist. Which is a nod to the fact that she was a playable character. A person who only played DraculaXX would wonder where the hell she came from.

It doesn't matter that we don't see Shaft in DXX.  His absense in the gameplay doesn't contradict his presense in SotN's story.

Shaft revives Dracula in Rondo and is responsible for kidnapping the girls. He's very necessary according to canon. DXX leads you to believe that Drac did it all himself or whatever. Rondo tells the true story, and explains certain things. Like for instance, in Rondo, Shaft is flesh and blood the first time you beat him. In SotN, he's a ghost. There's a reason for that: Richter kills him in Rondo.

Please, try not to be so cognitively rigid.

I'm not. I'm just not going to condone dropping major plot elements and say "Oh well, it's close enough". Canon means the true story. It would be like if Maria were dropped from SotN, and saying "It doesn't matter, because Alucard does all the work, and we haven't seen her since". Or if dropping Grant from a remake of CV3 is somehow acceptable because you can beat the game without him, and it's "okay, because it doesn't change the fact he shows up in SotN".

I would think the best thing for Castlevania fans would be to try and tie as much in together as possible and make the story richer. Not dumb it way the fuck down like the SNES game did.

- John

[Long John Silver]

The another problem with n64 games would probably be the dracula in Cornell's game. I mean, if he even was present in a game 8 years before reinahrdt/carrie's, the 100 years line would not only contradict rondo/sotn but also itself.

Of course the easiest way to explain it would be to say that dracula was a fake too, whose purpose was to draw the attention away, as well as obtain a good power source in order to bring his long dead master back to life. But the game tried hard to prove he was the real dracula.

[Baigan]

It's not just the manual. Looking through the translation it's implied in the game too. Drac says "Defeated by the Blood of a Belmont" in both endings. Plus Maria says "That's because I have the the same vampire hunter's blood flowing through me just like Richter" when she rescues Annette.

The implication is that Maria is a Belmont. Albeit trading in the whip for certain anima-type magic. The game manual is merely the most explicit evidence.

Question: Does DXX actually state Maria to be someone other than she is in Rondo in-game? If not, there's no loss of canon.

And realistically, I wouldn't think she'd make it as far into the Drac's castle in SotN if she wasn't a capable Vampire Hunter in her own right. There's a crapload of bad guys in there. Enough to give Alucard trouble. Easiest way to explain that is to give her Belmont blood. If you play the SotN game after DracXX by not Rono, that point is lost on the player.

This is really not a big deal. I played SotN before Rondo. Having an imagination, I naturally presumed she was somewhat of a potent fighter.

Shaft revives Dracula in Rondo and is responsible for kidnapping the girls. He's very necessary according to canon. DXX leads you to believe that Drac did it all himself or whatever. Rondo tells the true story, and explains certain things. Like for instance, in Rondo, Shaft is flesh and blood the first time you beat him. In SotN, he's a ghost. There's a reason for that: Richter kills him in Rondo.

The OP was correct in that the absense of Shaft in the game does not assert his non-existence. Many aspects of Castlevania canon are not stated in the actual games.

Also, having played SotN before Rondo, I never assumed Shaft to be a "ghost," so there was no experiencing of a plothole.

I would think the best thing for Castlevania fans would be to try and tie as much in together as possible and make the story richer. Not dumb it way the fuck down like the SNES game did.

I agree that it's best to include as much canon in the actual games as possible, but keep in mind that this is a distinct point from arguing that DXX contradicts canon. DXX may still be an acceptable factually correct telling without having to be the ideal telling.

[Wolfman Jake]

In Reply To #56

Thanks, Baigan.  At least one other person realizes that the games are themselves symbolic representations of the creators' ideas.  DXX is canon, as is Rondo, because it's a game describing the canon event of Richter Belmont defeating Dracula at a specific point in the Castlevania timeline.

[crisis]

In fact, there are *no* problems with CotM. It's a minor resurrection of Dracula in a different country in a different castle (which sort of "becomes" Castlevania by virtue of having Dracula resurrected within its walls) by one of his devoted followers, the vampiric Carmilla. He is fought by the Baldwins and Graves (who may or may not have Belmont blood, there's no real indication either way) with a different weapon, the Hunter Whip, whose origin is not explained. It may muddle things up a bit, but it doesn't *conflict* with anything in canon.

Okay, but the entire idea of cv is based on the Belmonts struggle against Dracula, not Baldwins or Graves. It's always been like that. That's exactly why it's considered a side story when it involves others (and come on, if there's no Vampire Killer then it's not a true cv game).

For LoD, there are two problems. The first is that the Morrises should have the whip during its time period. Of course this would be simple for IGA to "fix" by saying that Reinhardt borrowed it from them because of some extenuating circumstance. The other problem is that two lines of text in the game (one in the intro, the other spoken by Dracula) state that he has been dead for 100 years. Again, this could be fixed by saying that it's an "error in translation" -- ie, the game, being a fictionalized dramatization of the "true story," contains an error. With those small tweaks, this game too does not in any other way conflict with the current canon.

This has been suggested before on the old forum & argued to exhaustion. You can't go back and say "Remember when Dracula said he's been dead for 100 years? Well he didn't really mean that." It sounds stupid & unnecessary.

So you can see why I get aggravated when the so-called problems with these games are blown up to seem like they're simply irreconcilable and must be discarded. It's just not the case

Likewise, others get aggravated when people try to make every single game fit, when in reality it works out better overall by just leaving them as side stories.

[Kensuke]

Question: Does DXX actually state Maria to be someone other than she is in Rondo in-game? If not, there's no loss of canon.

Yes. IIRC, it states that Maria and Annette are sisters. Which is wrong. And would indeed be kinda gross to have Richer marry back into his own family. The most damaging thing is that it's causing fans to put Annette as a Renard and Maria as not a Belmont relative, when the opposite is true. I forsee problems further down the road if DXX were in canon.

It's academic anyhow. IGA stated on his blog that Rondo is the correct version of the story as far as he's concerned.

- John

[Wolfman Jake]

In Reply To #59

Sisters do not have to be biological relatives.  Maria and Annette could be adoptive sisters or step sisters.