Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: darkwzrd4 on January 02, 2010, 06:44:25 PM
-
I've been thinking about this for a while. The storyline as it is now is starting to get a little stall and there are several plot holes. I really think that Konami should make games that act as side stories the either enhance our understanding of the characters or fill in some of the plot holes. Examples of this are games about Sypha before CV3, what Dracula did between LoI and CV3, Maria's search for Richter before the events of SotN, what the Belmonts did between LoI and CV3, already made games but you play though what the other characters did during the main story of the game (example: what Alucard did in the castle during AoS), etc.
-
I don't think the overall story of CV is getting stale at all, since each game is basically self-contained. Like you said I think the era that has vast room for potential is the 300 years that Dracula was dormant. After the events of CVIII, there's not much to tell in detail since Dracula isn't allowed to survive for more than 1 night (however, there are many questions to be answered about Dracula's whereabouts between CVA & Belmont's Revenge). That's what I like about most of the games; the plots are short and sweet, they don't really require epic storytelling. LoS will have an epic story, though. I still see where you're coming from, future games (preferably Metroidvanias) could expand on the dialogue & characters a bit. OoE had this, but it seemed artificial. Where were the other members of Ecclesia? How did Barlowe receive the knowledge of Dominus? etc.
The other tidbits you mentioned, can possibly be covered in radio dramas, mangas, things like that.
-
I was thinking about the 300 years of dormancy, and came up with some plot ideas. But I'm not up on the plot details of LoI or Cod, both of which could throw my whole idea off. Is Lisa the the mother of Alucard mentioned in SotN, the wife of Dracula's who died in LoI? Is the origin of Devil Forging mentioned in CoD?
What about the idea of a corrupt, aristocratic Belmont using a secret fraternity of Devil forge masters (Know as the "Order of the New Moon") to stir terror in the mind of his subjects, so he could be viewed as the heroic lord leading the fight against the evil of the "mythical" vampire lord? All the while Vladimir, a prominent member of the Order, and his wife Lisa, give birth to a son, named Adrian. I should add Lord Belmont IS evil of his own volition, not under any king of mind control.
Years Later, a Lord from on of the Lesser Noble families, Alexander DyNasty, and His loyal knight Aaron Lecrade set out to aid Lord Belmont by seeking out the source of the evil. Along the way, they meet two young vampire hunters, The Nephew of Lord Belmont, and a Mysterious young man who operates under the name of "Alucard." This could prove a key game for the series plot, Chronicling a lot of the history used in the other games.
-
I would like to see more of the side characters tho, since they are pretty cool. Sypha, Hammer from AoS, Maxim from HoD...it'd be nice to see more of them ^^
-
I know I've mentioned it here before, but I'd like to see Dracula kill a Belmont, at least at the beginning of the game. Then let him have a reign of terror on the land. Not a brief one, like setting a villiage on fire, but something with him and his army crippling the region as a whole through an extended period of time. This could establish him as more of a threat, instead of just being a guy who shows up every so often, only to get his ass kicked and banished once again.
Then another Belmont could be introduced in this game. Have HIM kick Dracula's ass. ;D
-
I know I've mentioned it here before, but I'd like to see Dracula kill a Belmont, at least at the beginning of the game. Then let him have a reign of terror on the land. Not a brief one, like setting a villiage on fire, but something with him and his army crippling the region as a whole through an extended period of time. This could establish him as more of a threat, instead of just being a guy who shows up every so often, only to get his ass kicked and banished once again.
Then another Belmont could be introduced in this game. Have HIM kick Dracula's ass. ;D
Agreed.
-
Another idea would be actually playing as Dracula during his "Dormant" period, in his quest to build up his power and further master the dark arts. I could see "good" versions of Axe Knights, and the various "Armor Lord" enemies seen in games since Dracula X.
-
I was thinking about the 300 years of dormancy, and came up with some plot ideas. But I'm not up on the plot details of LoI or Cod, both of which could throw my whole idea off. Is Lisa the the mother of Alucard mentioned in SotN, the wife of Dracula's who died in LoI? Is the origin of Devil Forging mentioned in CoD?
What about the idea of a corrupt, aristocratic Belmont using a secret fraternity of Devil forge masters (Know as the "Order of the New Moon") to stir terror in the mind of his subjects, so he could be viewed as the heroic lord leading the fight against the evil of the "mythical" vampire lord? All the while Vladimir, a prominent member of the Order, and his wife Lisa, give birth to a son, named Adrian. I should add Lord Belmont IS evil of his own volition, not under any king of mind control.
Years Later, a Lord from on of the Lesser Noble families, Alexander DyNasty, and His loyal knight Aaron Lecrade set out to aid Lord Belmont by seeking out the source of the evil. Along the way, they meet two young vampire hunters, The Nephew of Lord Belmont, and a Mysterious young man who operates under the name of "Alucard." This could prove a key game for the series plot, Chronicling a lot of the history used in the other games.
Enough with Alucard for awhile. People act as if he's Superman. He was in enough games already.
-
Enough with Alucard for awhile. People act as if he's Superman. He was in enough games already.
True, but he has only been the main character once. Sure he was one of the allies Trevor could take along in CV3, but SotN was the only game in which he was the main hero. I'll admit that most Belmonts only had one game of their own, but that's because their only human and eventually die of old age. Alucard can't die of old age. He's half-vampire. Someone has to kill him in order for him to die.
On another note, I agree with those who think that there should be a game in which we play as Dracula during the 300 years between LoI and CV3.
-
I was thinking about the 300 years of dormancy, and came up with some plot ideas. But I'm not up on the plot details of LoI or Cod, both of which could throw my whole idea off. Is Lisa the the mother of Alucard mentioned in SotN, the wife of Dracula's who died in LoI? Is the origin of Devil Forging mentioned in CoD?
Elisabetha is the woman who upon her death made Mathias turn into Dracula.
The he marries Lisa, who plays quite an important role in SotN, even thou she is dead. (did they really get married? since marriages are blessed and something from God), and as far as I've heard Lisa resembles Elisabetha.
You know, just as in Stockers Novel.
The origin of Devil Forging is never mentioned, the only thing we know is that there were only two persons who knew about the art at that time, Hector and Isac.
-
Elisabetha is the woman who upon her death made Mathias turn into Dracula.
The he marries Lisa, who plays quite an important role in SotN, even thou she is dead. (did they really get married? since marriages are blessed and something from God), and as far as I've heard Lisa resembles Elisabetha.
You know, just as in Stockers Novel.
The origin of Devil Forging is never mentioned, the only thing we know is that there were only two persons who knew about the art at that time, Hector and Isac.
Correction, Hector and Issac were the only who possessed the knowledge of and the ability to use devil forging at the time. If you read the manga, you would know that several humans traveled to Dracula's castle to learn various dark and forbidden arts. It's just that Hector and Issac were the most powerful and skilled devil forgemasters.
-
Well, since Devil Forging is an art of Alchemy, there is a pretty high chance that Dracula taught Hector and Isaac since he used to be an alchemist and stuff.
-
Well, since Devil Forging is an art of Alchemy, there is a pretty high chance that Dracula taught Hector and Isaac since he used to be an alchemist and stuff.
Also there is a chance the Alucard would also have knowledge of this.
-
Correction, Hector and Issac were the only who possessed the knowledge of and the ability to use devil forging at the time. If you read the manga, you would know that several humans traveled to Dracula's castle to learn various dark and forbidden arts. It's just that Hector and Issac were the most powerful and skilled devil forgemasters.
I've never read the manga.. I only have the games to go on.
Also there is a chance the Alucard would also have knowledge of this.
Probably. He does infact have familiars in SotN.
Can these familiars be ID's??
-
I've never read the manga.. I only have the games to go on.
Probably. He does infact have familiars in SotN.
Can these familiars be ID's??
Could be. Lets not forget he created the Alucard Spear which Eric uses to compliment the power of the Vampire Killer.
-
Could be. Lets not forget he created the Alucard Spear which Eric uses to compliment the power of the Vampire Killer.
So the conclution is that Alucard is quit handy :D
-
So the conclution is that Alucard is quit handy :D
Pretty much.
-
I don't think the overall story of CV is getting stale at all, since each game is basically self-contained. Like you said I think the era that has vast room for potential is the 300 years that Dracula was dormant. After the events of CVIII, there's not much to tell in detail since Dracula isn't allowed to survive for more than 1 night (however, there are many questions to be answered about Dracula's whereabouts between CVA & Belmont's Revenge). That's what I like about most of the games; the plots are short and sweet, they don't really require epic storytelling. LoS will have an epic story, though. I still see where you're coming from, future games (preferably Metroidvanias) could expand on the dialogue & characters a bit. OoE had this, but it seemed artificial. Where were the other members of Ecclesia? How did Barlowe receive the knowledge of Dominus? etc.
The other tidbits you mentioned, can possibly be covered in radio dramas, mangas, things like that.
Well here are some of the plot holes Im sure the wizard is talkin about here.
First off Lament of Innocence takes place in 1094 and states that Mathias (Dracula) is 32 which would place his birth roughly around 1062. SotN contradicts this because it states Dracula is around 800 which would mean he would be born 997. EDIT after further investigation of Rondo and Dracula x both also state that Dracula is over 800 years of age. EDIT Also worth noting is that in The Dracula X Chronicles the manual for both Rondo of Blood and Symphony of the Night neglect to mention the age of both Dracula and Alucard though still mention Richter to be 19 and Maria 12. So there is a chance that the age mentioned in both manual was change so not to contradict Lament of Innocence.EDIT: Also SotN takes place in 1797 and states that Alucard is roughly around 400 placing his birth around 1397. Lisa was executed in 1470 now if she had a normal human life's span that would mean she gave birth to Alucard in her 20s making her birth roughly around 1377, if she did get executed in 1470 that would place her age around 93 even though Alucard remembered her as being youthful. EDIT In hindsight her being 93 when she died could've been the give away that prompted Alucard to realize it was an illusion despite that the succubus made a vital mistake in telling Alucard to get revenge for his mother. If the succubus did get her appearance correct then her age would've been no more then her 40s placing her death around 1417 and making Alucard around his 20s at the time of his mother's death. If Legends was included it took place in 1450 making her age at the time of her death roughly 53.
Second in CV3 Dracula is defeated in 1476 thus forcing him into a 100 year sleep to regain his powers. CV adventure takes place in 1576, 100 years after his defeat and he is again defeated BUT not killed because it was also revealed in Belmont's Revenge that Dracula managed to survive and bide his time until he had regained his strength but is finally put down again by Christopher in 1591( Read the manual for the details of how Dracula survived and his whereabouts). Now Castlevania takes place in 1691 meaning that when Dracula was defeated in 1591 it would have forced him to sleep for another 100 years thus taking place in 1691. If this is the case then Curse of Darkness which takes place in 1479 he shouldn't have returned, since Hector defeated him, until 1579 three years after Adventure takes place, thus contradicting the 100 year resting cycle since Dracula seems to resurrect exactly 100 years after his death, Dracula's Curse(1476) and CV Adventure (1576) prove this fact as does Belmont's Revenge (1591) and Castlevania 1691 since Dracula technically did not die until 1591 when Christopher defeated him.
Finally the inclusion of Bram's Novel (I'm assuming they got the rights to say that Quincy was the descendant of the Belmonts being that the Stoker family got pissed when Nosferatu came out in the 20s) Which takes place in 1897, now I can't remember if Bram actually stated Dracula's age but he did use the actual Vlad Tepes which going off of the novel would actually contradict Dracula's entire history being that Vlad was born c. 1431.
I wont even go into the 1800s though my own speculation is this. Nostraduamus predicted the whole end of Dracula thing so as time grew closer I'm sure Death heard of this prediction and believed it and thus made several attempts at restoring Dracula so that they could change the events predicted.
So in conclusion yes there are plot holes.
Also I thought the japanese were good at math......or is that being too sterotypical?
-
Also Simon's quest which takes place in 1698 Dracula was resurrected when his remains were gathered by Simon who then defeated the count. Now Juste also did this in HoD which takes place in 1748 meaning his natural resurrection would have occurred until 1848 but RoB clearly states that his resurrection was premature due to the ritual of the dark priest shaft.
EDIT
I decided to remove the time line here due to the fact that it also stated in Rondo of Blood and Dracula X that Dracula is over 800 years of age which would also prove that theory wrong.
-
Could be. Lets not forget he created the Alucard Spear which Eric uses to compliment the power of the Vampire Killer.
That thing about the spear complimenting the whip was only mentioned in Judgment, which is non-canon. The only information that is canon to my knowledge is the description of the Alucard Spear in PoR, which states: "A spear used by Eric. Has some connection to Alucard."
Well here are some of the plot holes Im sure the wizard is talkin about here.
First off Lament of Innocence takes place in 1094 and states that Mathias (Dracula) is 32 which would place his birth roughly around 1062. SotN contradicts this because it states Dracula is around 800 which would mean he would be born 997. EDIT after further investigation of Rondo and Dracula x both also state that Dracula is over 800 years of age. EDIT Also worth noting is that in The Dracula X Chronicles the manual for both Rondo of Blood and Symphony of the Night neglect to mention the age of both Dracula and Alucard though still mention Richter to be 19 and Maria 12. So there is a chance that the age mentioned in both manual was change so not to contradict Lament of Innocence.EDIT: Also SotN takes place in 1797 and states that Alucard is roughly around 400 placing his birth around 1397. Lisa was executed in 1470 now if she had a normal human life's span that would mean she gave birth to Alucard in her 20s making her birth roughly around 1377, if she did get executed in 1470 that would place her age around 93 even though Alucard remembered her as being youthful. EDIT In hindsight her being 93 when she died could've been the give away that prompted Alucard to realize it was an illusion despite that the succubus made a vital mistake in telling Alucard to get revenge for his mother. If the succubus did get her appearance correct then her age would've been no more then her 40s placing her death around 1417 and making Alucard around his 20s at the time of his mother's death. If Legends was included it took place in 1450 making her age at the time of her death roughly 53.
Second in CV3 Dracula is defeated in 1476 thus forcing him into a 100 year sleep to regain his powers. CV adventure takes place in 1576, 100 years after his defeat and he is again defeated BUT not killed because it was also revealed in Belmont's Revenge that Dracula managed to survive and bide his time until he had regained his strength but is finally put down again by Christopher in 1591( Read the manual for the details of how Dracula survived and his whereabouts). Now Castlevania takes place in 1691 meaning that when Dracula was defeated in 1591 it would have forced him to sleep for another 100 years thus taking place in 1691. If this is the case then Curse of Darkness which takes place in 1479 he shouldn't have returned, since Hector defeated him, until 1579 three years after Adventure takes place, thus contradicting the 100 year resting cycle since Dracula seems to resurrect exactly 100 years after his death, Dracula's Curse(1476) and CV Adventure (1576) prove this fact as does Belmont's Revenge (1591) and Castlevania 1691 since Dracula technically did not die until 1591 when Christopher defeated him.
Finally the inclusion of Bram's Novel (I'm assuming they got the rights to say that Quincy was the descendant of the Belmonts being that the Stoker family got pissed when Nosferatu came out in the 20s) Which takes place in 1897, now I can't remember if Bram actually stated Dracula's age but he did use the actual Vlad Tepes which going off of the novel would actually contradict Dracula's entire history being that Vlad was born c. 1431.
I wont even go into the 1800s though my own speculation is this. Nostraduamus predicted the whole end of Dracula thing so as time grew closer I'm sure Death heard of this prediction and believed it and thus made several attempts at restoring Dracula so that they could change the events predicted.
So in conclusion yes there are plot holes.
Yes, this is what I was trying to get at. I'm sorry if my wording in the first post was misleading. I'm just tired of games being added to the timeline that contradict it and the fact that the already existing plot-holes aren't being fixed or at least reinterpreted.
Also, the whole resurrection thing in CoD doesn't through off the whole 100 year rule. The reason is that Dracula wasn't truly resurrected in that game. His spirit was simply given a different vessel (Issac's body). The HoD thing can be explained by the fact that Dracula's physical remains were gathered in the castle (besides, that wasn't really Dracula. It was only an evil spirit using the remains). From what I understand, the 100 year rule is for Dracula resurrecting on his own at full power without any of his underlings interfering.
-
That thing about the spear complimenting the whip was only mentioned in Judgment, which is non-canon. The only information that is canon to my knowledge is the description of the Alucard Spear in PoR, which states: "A spear used by Eric. Has some connection to Alucard."
Actually the backgrounds of weapons and characters if you noticed were cannon the event of all of the characters coming across the time rift and over all story of Judgement was not cannon due to the fact they all "forgot" what had happened. Judgement also came out after PoR and there was no need to mention it in OoE. You forget other then OoE there haven't been any other cannon games especially ones with the Lecardes to come out so there would be no need to mention the spear. Even in the official artwork for PoR it has Eric (Wind) with Alucard in the background. So all the character's backstories, their weapons and abilities were cannon just the events of what took place in the time rift however was not cannon.
-
Yes, this is what I was trying to get at. I'm sorry if my wording in the first post was misleading. I'm just tired of games being added to the timeline that contradict it and the fact that the already existing plot-holes aren't being fixed or at least reinterpreted.
Also, the whole resurrection thing in CoD doesn't through off the whole 100 year rule. The reason is that Dracula wasn't truly resurrected in that game. His spirit was simply given a different vessel (Issac's body). The HoD thing can be explained by the fact that Dracula's physical remains were gathered in the castle (besides, that wasn't really Dracula. It was only an evil spirit using the remains). From what I understand, the 100 year rule is for Dracula resurrecting on his own at full power without any of his underlings interfering.
Ive heard that it was an evil spirit but from what I've gathered from the official timeline is that Dracula actually manifested but was in a weakened state much like he was after he was defeated in The Adventure. Actually Chris messed him up so bad he couldn't take human form so in a sense the form he takes in HoD is no different then the form he is in prior to Belmont's Revenge. So with that said he physically manifested and thus after his death would not have been able to ressurect without some help until 1848 which does occur when Shaft prematurely awakens him in RoB.
As for Curse of Darkness though Dracula only was called back through Isaac's body he still returned and was actually physically present. I have yet to read anything official stating that was the reason that he didn't return a 100 years later on the appropriate date but have only heard that speculation by fans. Im sure that could be the reason it does make sense (kind of...) but konami and IGA have yet to come out and say "Yes Dracula can only return a 100 years later when he is defeated but if possess another body and physically manifests then that whole 100 year thing doesn't apply."
It just seems like a way to suck more money out of Castlevania and delute the timeline with less than stellar games when he could've focused on creating a more visually stunning game with better graphics and better playability that also related to the story of Dracula's Curse and actually went into detail about Dracula's rebirth cycle since that would've been the first time the count had to go into a 100 years slumber.
-
Also another thing, IGA removed Legends because he stated that it contradicted his timeline. Now the game takes place in 1450 Dracula (mathias) has already been around for quite some time now. Dracula's Curse takes place in 1476 Trevor would have been around the age of 19 or 20 when this occured placing his birth 1456-1457 seven years after the events of Legends. So a sense the game couldve been worked in given the new history of Dracula via lament of innocence. Alucard would also been very much alive since his birth was around 1397 (assuming they didn't change his birth to suit Dracula's new age) Sonia wouldve been 17 placing her birth around 1433.
The only thing the game contradicted was her being the first Belmont to kill Dracula and IGA's distaste for the game which I think is unreasonable since he couldn't come out with a decent 3D game. Also the game states that her child would carry the bloodline in dark ways hinting that Alucard would be Trevor's father. Which would be a twist but I can see how many people would dislike this though it could easilly be reinturperted as something else given Alucard would've most likely went into hiding after he was defeated by Sonia thus not being around to knock her up and could've provided yet another tragic love story.
EDIT Also it would contradict the 100 rebirth cycle but IGA obviously likes to neglect this anyway so it wouldn't matter, course IGA is also good at changing information too (Changing Dracula's age and origin for example) so he could also state Dracula managed to survive his fight with Sonia in the same fashion he survived his fight with Christopher in Adventure.
-
Well, about Dracula's age, it was changed BEFORE IGA, actually. It was Rondo of Blood where they stated that Dracula was 800 years old. IGA just decided to roll with that because SotN was the sequel to it(hence Dracula in SotN would be around the same age as he was in RoB). IGA said that LoI was to address why Dracula was that old, but I've always seen that as him covering up for someone else's work. Clearly, from RoB and on, Dracula in the CV series wasn't the same Dracula as portrayed in other lores. Though, I can be content with the CV spin on him. I mean, it's like Marvel's spin on Dracula, which might be different than other lore.
-
Well, about Dracula's age, it was changed BEFORE IGA, actually. It was Rondo of Blood where they stated that Dracula was 800 years old. IGA just decided to roll with that because SotN was the sequel to it(hence Dracula in SotN would be around the same age as he was in RoB). IGA said that LoI was to address why Dracula was that old, but I've always seen that as him covering up for someone else's work. Clearly, from RoB and on, Dracula in the CV series wasn't the same Dracula as portrayed in other lores. Though, I can be content with the CV spin on him. I mean, it's like Marvel's spin on Dracula, which might be different than other lore.
Yeah IGA got dealt a bad hand there, if they had left his age alone in RoB then the timeline might be very different now. I have to say I agree, though I dont really like Dracula being a different person I can be content with it now just because it seperates him from Bram's Novel and gives him his own time line and lore.
-
Though keep this in mind since Rondo's age clearly isn't consitant with Lament's origin of Dracula and the fact IGA did not state Dracula's age in the manual for The Dracula X Chronicles (it states richter's and maria) and in the section for Symphony of the Night, the 800 year has probably been removed and replaced to suit Lament.
-
About the Dracula being a different person, I agree. The only reason, I can think, of IGA making him a different person is that it was for the sake of mystery within LoI. Y'know, to have the player guess who becomes Dracula(because nobody in that game was named Vlad Tepes). But, it didn't really work that good as a mystery, because it was something you could see a mile away. IGA should've just called Mathias "Vlad", and drop the mystery angle, focus on Leon and Dracula's friendship, which, during the betrayal, it would've had a greater impact.
As for Dracula's age, I think it wasn't mentioned in DXC because IGA's trying to remove the traces of the timeline that might muddle other installments. In RoB and SotN, it was estimated that he was 800 years old. That would mean he would be 100 years OLDER than Mathias. It's evident that IGA is straying from the timeline, especially with OoE, where he said it takes place "sometime in the 1800s", probably to cover his butt and not have it bump with other events in the "phantom timeline".
-
Also another thing, IGA removed Legends because he stated that it contradicted his timeline. Now the game takes place in 1450 Dracula (mathias) has already been around for quite some time now. Dracula's Curse takes place in 1476 Trevor would have been around the age of 19 or 20 when this occured placing his birth 1456-1457 seven years after the events of Legends. So a sense the game couldve been worked in given the new history of Dracula via lament of innocence. Alucard would also been very much alive since his birth was around 1397 (assuming they didn't change his birth to suit Dracula's new age) Sonia wouldve been 17 placing her birth around 1433.
The only thing the game contradicted was her being the first Belmont to kill Dracula and IGA's distaste for the game which I think is unreasonable since he couldn't come out with a decent 3D game. Also the game states that her child would carry the bloodline in dark ways hinting that Alucard would be Trevor's father. Which would be a twist but I can see how many people would dislike this though it could easilly be reinturperted as something else given Alucard would've most likely went into hiding after he was defeated by Sonia thus not being around to knock her up and could've provided yet another tragic love story.
EDIT Also it would contradict the 100 rebirth cycle but IGA obviously likes to neglect this anyway so it wouldn't matter, course IGA is also good at changing information too (Changing Dracula's age and origin for example) so he could also state Dracula managed to survive his fight with Sonia in the same fashion he survived his fight with Christopher in Adventure.
I think I love you.
To me, you seem like someone who actually thinks through instead of immediately shouting that Legends heavily contradicts with Dracula's Curse and that it could never fit within the timeline. Legends' story could work just fine with a few things being cleared up here and there.
-
Actually the backgrounds of weapons and characters if you noticed were cannon the event of all of the characters coming across the time rift and over all story of Judgement was not cannon due to the fact they all "forgot" what had happened.
I sure hope that the Grant presented in Judgement is not cannon, I hate what that game did with him.
-
I think I love you.
To me, you seem like someone who actually thinks through instead of immediately shouting that Legends heavily contradicts with Dracula's Curse and that it could never fit within the timeline. Legends' story could work just fine with a few things being cleared up here and there.
I agree that Legends' story can work, if some things are cleared up. It would at least explain why the Belmonts are the "strongest" vampire hunters.
-
I agree that Legends' story can work, if some things are cleared up. It would at least explain why the Belmonts are the "strongest" vampire hunters.
Thanks for agreeing and yes there would have be some clearing up like how Mathias came to use Dracula's name, the year of Alucards birth as well as Lisa's birth and death. Taking out a game just because you dont particular like that game, in my opinion, is arrogant and unfair.
Also note that the "Alucard game" may have actually been a prequel explaining these events and thus re-establishing his exact origins since IGA went and re-established Dracula's origins.
It goes to show that IGA did not screw up the time line as Dragonslayer stated and I also confirmed in posts before, that RoB was indeed the reason that the timeline changed and with it Dracula's origins (contradicting Bloodlines which used Bram's vision of Dracula). IGA just had to roll with it, though in truth he wasn't the best story teller.
The time line essentially works the only problem is lack of information and not constantly updating with newer games. This could have been prevented and even repaired by simply creating a website (Japanese and English) going over the time and explain the reasons why this and that occurred which would be cheaper then producing another game. Like say for instance Dracula's constant revival in the 1800s was due to the coming events of 1999 which was predicted by Nostradamus in the 1500s with Death using his influence as Father Zead to corrupt people like Barlow.
I think I love you.
To me, you seem like someone who actually thinks through instead of immediately shouting that Legends heavily contradicts with Dracula's Curse and that it could never fit within the timeline. Legends' story could work just fine with a few things being cleared up here and there.
I love you too nagumo-chan and thank you.
-
Also note that the "Alucard game" may have actually been a prequel explaining these events and thus re-establishing his exact origins since IGA went and re-established Dracula's origins.
Lumas, I'm pretty sure that the Alucard game is a suppose to be a sequel to SotN. I heard that it is meant to explain what happens right after SotN and why the Belmonts disappeared during the 1800s. It may also explain why and how Dracula was sealed away in OoE. At least, that's my understanding. There is still very little information about the game. All we really have is the trailer from last year.
-
What about CotM? That came outta left field in terms of characters & story.
-
It may also explain why and how Dracula was sealed away in OoE. At least, that's my understanding. There is still very little information about the game. All we really have is the trailer from last year.
If this is true, it would be interesting if a much younger Barlowe was a character, or even involve the old lady Danella?
And could you post a link to the trailer Please?
-
Lumas, I'm pretty sure that the Alucard game is a suppose to be a sequel to SotN. I heard that it is meant to explain what happens right after SotN and why the Belmonts disappeared during the 1800s. It may also explain why and how Dracula was sealed away in OoE. At least, that's my understanding. There is still very little information about the game. All we really have is the trailer from last year.
Wizard, IGA or Konami did not release any details on the game the only thing released was the trailer from tgs any information is purely fan speculation much like my own speculation about the game in light that IGA went and re-eastablished Dracula's history so it would be logical that he would do the same for Alucard hence why I stated that Theory. Also the radio drama could also explain what happened to Richter but I dont recall it really doing that, again a proper translation of the Radio Drama would be needed. So unless there is an interview I haven't read from IGA then anything about this game other then the trailer and the fact Alucard is in it, is purely specualtion and isn't official though your theory could very well work.
What about CotM? That came outta left field in terms of characters & story.
Not really the only thing that was really odd was they stated that Carmilla was Dracula's niece much like they did with Elizabeth Bartley this may have been an attempt into combining both characters though poorly done since IGA obviously just wanted her as Dracula's plaything course it could be just a plothole that needs clearing up. The Graves and Baldwins were just a group of Hunters trying to fill the role of the Belmonts since they disappeared during that era. Other than that I really dont know anything out in left field that happened, course its been long time since I have even touched that game.
There is still much contraversy over whether or not CotM, LoD and 64 are even apart of the timeline since they were removed and then reinstated appearing in the last updated timeline when PoR was released. So really until konami releases an updated timeline, which mind you may not happen due to the "reboot" with Lords of Shadow, then we can only speculate.
-
I seem to remember a while back, a documented interview with IGA of him saying his plans to create a sequel to Symphony on a next-gen platform (which, obviously, is what that TGS teaser was). I'll do some searching & see if I could post the link.
But yeah, CotM stated Morris Baldwin defeated Dracula 10 years prior. Also, Hugh seems to put some significance to Nathan's whip, despite it not being the VK. Those tidbits right there are left field. And it was an Austrian castle(??)
Maybe the guys that made it intended to make a prequel at some point.
-
I seem to remember a while back, a documented interview with IGA of him saying his plans to create a sequel to Symphony on a next-gen platform (which, obviously, is what that TGS teaser was). I'll do some searching & see if I could post the link.
But yeah, CotM stated Morris Baldwin defeated Dracula 10 years prior. Also, Hugh seems to put some significance to Nathan's whip, despite it not being the VK. Those tidbits right there are left field. And it was an Austrian castle(??)
Maybe the guys that made it intended to make a prequel at some point.
If thats the case then information like that would be appreciated. I do hope that game gets released some time though I dont see how with LoS coming out. Though I recall an interview with Cox (I think) and they asked him if there was going to be another Castlevania on the DSi he stated he had no comment and I think he also stated he couldn't comment on whether or not IGA was working on another Castlevania game. IGA has also been reported in working on a new project so who knows.
Could be probably they intended to do a prequel but with IGA taking the reigns they obviously didn't get to do that. We were discussing that in the Sorrow Novel (released in japan) Curtis, who is being trained by Julius after the evens of DoS, is weilding a "Holy Whip" the Hunter whip would just be an offshoot of the Vampire Killer much like like this Holy Whip. EDIT Also adding in Simon's Quest you obtain different whips so introducing a new whip isn't anything new or left field and neither is the Castle in Austria being in Bloodlines you traveled all over Europe and in Simons Quest you went to different Castles so that really isn't anything left field either nor is the 10 years prior thing being that in the 64 games Cornell defeated Dracula in LoD 8 years prior to Castlevania 64. In both cases he was prematurely resurrected to try and regain his full power. Also in Simon's Quest he placed a curse on Simon so he would have to bring him back and in Adventure though he technically didn't die he still returned 15 years later. I'm sorry but all those cases really aren't left field or out of the ordinary for Castlevania. Now had they introduced a totally different background story for Dracula, changed the whips name from VK to Hunter's Whip and made replaced the Belmonts with the Graves and made it all take place in Austria instead of Translyvania and saying that this has been going on for hundreds of years then yeah I would say left field.
I think that Dracula's follows kinda figured out that they could just resurrect their master "Hey you know what screw that hundred year thing I mean we got necromancy, devil forgemaster, apple juice, alchemy, sorcery, and all kinds of other mad skillz lets just bring him back to life." With 1999 approaching I can see why they would be scampering to bring him back.
-
All the stuff you're saying about Dracula's resurrections in the 19th century is just a giant clusterfuck that's better left out of the main continuity. If all the games were canon, there would be 6(count 'em, six) resurrections in less than a 100 year period! That's ridiculous. And it doesn't help things that Dracula stating in CV64 that it's been centuries since he's been brought back.
Besides, if they did cover their asses & decide to list the information filling in all the blanks you want answers to, you, me, or anybody on this or any forum would have nothing left to speculate and discuss over. The series would be a lot more boring, would it not?
BTW, Simon obtaining various whips is just a gameplay feature.
-
All the stuff you're saying about Dracula's resurrections in the 19th century is just a giant clusterfuck that's better left out of the main continuity. If all the games were canon, there would be 6(count 'em, six) resurrections in less than a 100 year period! That's ridiculous. And it doesn't help things that Dracula stating in CV64 that it's been centuries since he's been brought back.
Besides, if they did cover their asses & decide to list the information filling in all the blanks you want answers to, you, me, or anybody on this or any forum would have nothing left to speculate and discuss over. The series would be a lot more boring, would it not?
BTW, Simon obtaining various whips is just a gameplay feature.
You need to calm down theres no need to get all heated like that.
I'm sorry if thats your opinion and unfortunetly for you thats all it will ever be is your opinion that you think it is rediculous.
So here is my opinion if they did do that I'm sure lots of people here would find things to discuss ( I know I would) and had they did fill in the blanks then Dave Cox wouldn't have to make comments like " I dont even think the fans understand the timeline anymore." Which is true and yeah gives us something to talk about or more like complain about. To be honest it would be a relief not to have to hear it anymore.
BTW is that kind of like all that magic Juste can use or Richter for that matter with his "item crash" ability a gameplay feature?..Oh wait no it was explained that later Belmonts inherited some magical ability from Sypha Belnades or the Fernandez side of the family. The same could be said there are different whips created though none with the power of the Vampire Killer because they lack the sacrificed soul of Sara explaing why Trevor could use different whips as well as Jonathan.
-
Also maybe you missed this post but in the original Symphony of the Night Manual it states Dracula's age to be 800 (also stated in RoB) and Alucard's to be 400 now that would contradict Lament but it had to be changed thus they did not print their ages when it was re-released in the Dracula X Chronicles because so much had changed. Another legit reason to release a new official timeline filling in the gaps so we know for sure what has been changed and what hasn't.
EDIT and to add the Metal Gear Series has an official timeline aswell and I doubt the cool kids over at www.metalgearsolid.org have run out of things to talk about and they are still releasing games to fill in gaps and their timeline starts in the early 20th century.
-
About the Dracula being a different person, I agree. The only reason, I can think, of IGA making him a different person is that it was for the sake of mystery within LoI. Y'know, to have the player guess who becomes Dracula(because nobody in that game was named Vlad Tepes). But, it didn't really work that good as a mystery, because it was something you could see a mile away. IGA should've just called Mathias "Vlad", and drop the mystery angle, focus on Leon and Dracula's friendship, which, during the betrayal, it would've had a greater impact.
Yeah I think we all saw that coming with Mathias given he almost looks exactly like Alucard only with black hair. I agree that it woulve had a much greater impact on the game if they woulve come out and said he was Vlad Dracula Tepes from the start.
-
BTW, Simon obtaining various whips is just a gameplay feature.
Well, there were several elemental whips in LoI, so it wouldn't be weird for Simon to use other whips then the Vampire Killer.
Problem solved.
-
At what point in the series development did the whip actually gain its mythical status as the "Vampire Killer?" and when did that status start to be taken more seriously? Simon's Quest for example seems to be from a era in Castlevania's life when such things weren't taken that seriously and the precedent at the time was he picked up stronger whips as the game proceeded.
CV1, 3 & 4 : Leather Whip -> Chain Whip -> Longer Chain Whip
CV2: Leather Whip -> Thorn Whip -> Chain Whip -> Morning Star -> Flame Whip
The plot is a big mess, To me it would have been much better to say its the Belmont family that is so powerful, and the whip is just a tool, the weapon of choice. But it would seem we've long past that point. We're dealing with games from the 1980- an era where Game play was more important then plot line and trying to figure out why Simon got better whips is about as easy as explaining what the heck the hearts or the II and III items actually were. I'd like to see IGA try that one, the origin of II & III.
-
At what point in the series development did the whip actually gain its mythical status as the "Vampire Killer?" and when did that status start to be taken more seriously? Simon's Quest for example seems to be from a era in Castlevania's life when such things weren't taken that seriously and the precedent at the time was he picked up stronger whips as the game proceeded.
CV1, 3 & 4 : Leather Whip -> Chain Whip -> Longer Chain Whip
CV2: Leather Whip -> Thorn Whip -> Chain Whip -> Morning Star -> Flame Whip
The plot is a big mess, To me it would have been much better to say its the Belmont family that is so powerful, and the whip is just a tool, the weapon of choice. But it would seem we've long past that point. We're dealing with games from the 1980- an era where Game play was more important then plot line and trying to figure out why Simon got better whips is about as easy as explaining what the heck the hearts or the II and III items actually were. I'd like to see IGA try that one, the origin of II & III.
A quote from the manual of Castlevania
"Because you've got to get through six monstrous floors before you even
meet up with the Master of the House. Your Magic Whip will help, and
you'll probably find a weapon or two along the way."
A quote from IGA explaining why meat falls out of candles.
"Iga: You should ask, why do they eat it! I've thought about this stuff. I've actually thought about the candles. The candles are people's souls that were taken by Death or by the vampires. In Japan there are candles that represent life. So, when you release the souls from the candles by whipping them, they give you a "thank you" present. Thank-you hearts, or thank-you holy water. The meat, I have no idea. "
So yeah its been "magical" since the beginning and IGA did at one point explain the hearts. The II and III if you have read the manuals is refereed too as the Double and Triple Shot and increase the strength of your attack (II dealing two slots of damage and III dealing three.)
-
Dracula's place is really swank! Souls used for light is sooo gawdy.
-
At what point in the series development did the whip actually gain its mythical status as the "Vampire Killer?" and when did that status start to be taken more seriously? Simon's Quest for example seems to be from a era in Castlevania's life when such things weren't taken that seriously and the precedent at the time was he picked up stronger whips as the game proceeded.
CV1, 3 & 4 : Leather Whip -> Chain Whip -> Longer Chain Whip
CV2: Leather Whip -> Thorn Whip -> Chain Whip -> Morning Star -> Flame Whip
The orginal Castlevania already talked about a magical whip passed down through the Belmont familly and some of the other classic games do as well. Bloodlines was the first to name the whip the Vampire Killer.
-
I'm not trying to be too hard, but, vampire Killer could the the most stupid name ever for a legendary weapon. ONly my opinion :) (I call it the Belmont whip, or the alchemy whip, or the holy whip).
But perhaps it has a double sense since Lament of Innocence. Vampire Killer doesn't only mean "What kills vampires", it could mean "The vampire that kills", and considering that the whip was powered by a vampure's blood, it could be likely (or not) ;D
-
I'm not trying to be too hard, but, vampire Killer could the the most stupid name ever for a legendary weapon. ONly my opinion :) (I call it the Belmont whip, or the alchemy whip, or the holy whip).
But perhaps it has a double sense since Lament of Innocence. Vampire Killer doesn't only mean "What kills vampires", it could mean "The vampire that kills", and considering that the whip was powered by a vampure's blood, it could be likely (or not) ;D
You know in my opinion I never liked what Lament did with the whip making it a weapon of alchemy, now im not a religious person in no way but it makes more sense to me that a holy weapon could kill things that go bump in the night not something made of alchemy but again that's just my opinion.
-
You know in my opinion I never liked what Lament did with the whip making it a weapon of alchemy, now im not a religious person in no way but it makes more sense to me that a holy weapon could kill things that go bump in the night not something made of alchemy but again that's just my opinion.
The alchemy whip is just awhip made stronger than a sword, nothing else.
It became the dark creature killer it is today when Sara willingly gave her soul to it. By giving up the very essence of her existance the whip got it holy powers.
The holy powers could probably be given to any item that way, but since the whip was strong before, it got even better now.
A whip stronger than any sword plus the power of holy united in one weapon. :D
-
The alchemy whip is just awhip made stronger than a sword, nothing else.
It became the dark creature killer it is today when Sara willingly gave her soul to it. By giving up the very essence of her existance the whip got it holy powers.
The holy powers could probably be given to any item that way, but since the whip was strong before, it got even better now.
A whip stronger than any sword plus the power of holy united in one weapon. :D
I get what you are saying, had to think about for a quick second, an alchemically enchanted weapon would be stronger then just an average weapon. But it did not gain holy powers from Sara's soul it gained an enchancement in it's already magical powers, infused with her hatred towards Walter for turning her into such a creature. Though in some ways it could be interrupted that it is a holy weapon given it has the power to destroy evil.
-
Well, according to Rinaldo, God created the world with alchemy. So yeah,
Alchemy = holy
-
Well, according to Rinaldo, God created the world with alchemy. So yeah,
Alchemy = holy
Rinaldo also lives in a cabin by himself in a forest controlled by a vampire. He's obviously crazy lol.
Yeah I forgot about that little tid-bit of information so that makes more sense now.
-
I'm not trying to be too hard, but, vampire Killer could the the most stupid name ever for a legendary weapon. ONly my opinion :) (I call it the Belmont whip, or the alchemy whip, or the holy whip).
But perhaps it has a double sense since Lament of Innocence. Vampire Killer doesn't only mean "What kills vampires", it could mean "The vampire that kills", and considering that the whip was powered by a vampure's blood, it could be likely (or not) ;D
How are those names better? They are mundane imo. As for the double sense, its much like Vampire Slayer, it could mean a vampire that slays... but obviously nobody thinks that.
I like the VK name for it. It fits and ironically, no one ever thought of anything even close to it (that i've heard)
Well, according to Rinaldo, God created the world with alchemy. So yeah,
Alchemy = holy
But isn't the Night stone and Crimson stone also alchemical? So Dracula's powers are holy?
-
How are those names better? They are mundane imo. As for the double sense, its much like Vampire Slayer, it could mean a vampire that slays... but obviously nobody thinks that.
I like the VK name for it. It fits and ironically, no one ever thought of anything even close to it (that i've heard)
But isn't the Night stone and Crimson stone also alchemical? So Dracula's powers are holy?
Good point....the ebony and crimson stones were bi products of the philosophers stone..
-
Actually, what Rinaldo said about alchemy was:
"It is a field that experiments with God's creation of the world."
It is neither good or evil. Remember, Rinaldo also said that "some consider alchemy to be heresy."
The fact is that like anything, alchemy can be used for good or evil. If anything, the VK should have been called the Night Slayer for the reason that it is said to be "the bane of the Children of the Night" (which isn't exclusive to vampires).
Good point....the ebony and crimson stones were bi products of the philosophers stone..
Oh, and Lumas, Rinaldo only said that creating the philosopher's stone was the ultimate goal of alchemy. The two other stones were accidentally created, but it isn't explicitly said that they were created at the same time as the philosopher's stone. Then again, I could be misinterpreting this.
-
Night Slayer
Best, name, EVER!
-
Actually, what Rinaldo said about alchemy was:
"It is a field that experiments with God's creation of the world."
It is neither good or evil. Remember, Rinaldo also said that "some consider alchemy to be heresy."
The fact is that like anything, alchemy can be used for good or evil. If anything, the VK should have been called the Night Slayer for the reason that it is said to be "the bane of the Children of the Night" (which isn't exclusive to vampires).
Oh, and Lumas, Rinaldo only said that creating the philosopher's stone was the ultimate goal of alchemy. The two other stones were accidentally created, but it isn't explicitly said that they were created at the same time as the philosopher's stone. Then again, I could be misinterpreting this.
Oh i meant by-product wizard which means a secondary or incidental product deriving from a manufacturing process, a chemical reaction or a biochemical pathway, and is not the primary product or service being produced. A by-product can be useful and marketable, or it can be considered waste.
So let me apply the three stones in that definition so you may correctly interrupt what i meant.
A by-product is a secondary or incidental product (Ebony and Crimson Stone) deriving from a manufacturing process (Creation process for the Philosophers Stone) , a chemical reaction or a biochemical pathway, and is not the primary product (Philosopher's Stone) or service being produced (Eternal Youth). A by-product can be useful and marketable (Vampires have many uses for the ebony and crimson stone), or it can be considered waste. (Fail)
-
Actually, what Rinaldo said about alchemy was:
"It is a field that experiments with God's creation of the world."
It is neither good or evil. Remember, Rinaldo also said that "some consider alchemy to be heresy."
The fact is that like anything, alchemy can be used for good or evil. If anything, the VK should have been called the Night Slayer for the reason that it is said to be "the bane of the Children of the Night" (which isn't exclusive to vampires).
Also Wizard you are correct Rinaldo did state that so there for the vampire killer would be neither good or evil but since the vampire killer gets its powers from the infusion of Sara's Soul it can only be wielded by the bloodline of the man she loved and it could destroy not just vampires but any creature related to the vampire because of her hatred of Walter. With out Sara's assistance the whip would just act as just a regular whip. It was probably refereed to as the Vampire Killer because the main objective was to kill Walter, the vampire of the game but I dont recall Leon, Rinaldo, Sara, or anyone in the game actually call it or say "This is the Vampire Killer".
-
Also Wizard you are correct Rinaldo did state that so there for the vampire killer would be neither good or evil but since the vampire killer gets its powers from the infusion of Sara's Soul it can only be wielded by the bloodline of the man she loved and it could destroy not just vampires but any creature related to the vampire because of her hatred of Walter. With out Sara's assistance the whip would just act as just a regular whip. It was probably refereed to as the Vampire Killer because the main objective was to kill Walter, the vampire of the game but I dont recall Leon, Rinaldo, Sara, or anyone in the game actually call it or say "This is the Vampire Killer".
Also again to continue, because I dont want to modify that last post of mine, the actual main reason it was called the Vampire Killer in the game was obviously IGA and the developers giving the whip its origin along with giving the origins of the Belmonts and Dracula.
-
Don't forget that the Vampirekiller also got some of it's power just being held by Leon Belmont, concidering that the Belmont blood carries mystical powers as well. The whip as it was, was stronger then any man's discarded sword. When Leon used it, it fed off the power within him becoming stronger to the point of slaying legendary monsters. Then after the ceremony with Sara it became the weapon we all recognize today.
-X
-
Don't forget that the Vampirekiller also got some of it's power just being held by Leon Belmont, concidering that the Belmont blood carries mystical powers as well. The whip as it was, was stronger then any man's discarded sword. When Leon used it, it fed off the power within him becoming stronger to the point of slaying legendary monsters. Then after the ceremony with Sara it became the weapon we all recognize today.
-X
Yeah.. Leon askes Rinaldo why the whip feels stronger than when he got it. And Rinaldo says it's becouse Leon wields it. And that is before Sara's soul is added to it.
-
I'm sorry if thats your opinion and unfortunetly for you thats all it will ever be is your opinion that you think it is rediculous.
Lumas, I don't even know what you're trying to say or prove anymore. Every post you make is just reiterating the same stuff over and over again.
It seems you're over-analyzing the series way too much. You're taking facts & mixing it with your own speculations, which is cool, but don't expect every response here to be in agreement with your interpretations. I'm not getting heated; I'm just saying what I feel, as are you.
Anyway, the only right thing LoS is doing thus far is placing the story within a "bubble of the main continuity". Leaves so much room for potential. Everything else is relative.
-
Lumas, I don't even know what you're trying to say or prove anymore. Every post you make is just reiterating the same stuff over and over again.
It seems you're over-analyzing the series way too much. You're taking facts & mixing it with your own speculations, which is cool, but don't expect every response here to be in agreement with your interpretations. I'm not getting heated; I'm just saying what I feel, as are you.
Anyway, the only right thing LoS is doing thus far is placing the story within a "bubble of the main continuity". Leaves so much room for potential. Everything else is relative.
I simply did a few math problems I wasn't really trying to prove anything other then the timeline could work but would need a few things cleared up. I dont really see where I stated any fact being influenced by my own speculation, in fact i high lighted my own speculation as to not confuse anyone with the facts and my own speculations. If i failed to do this then I apologize. If you dont agree with the math of the eras in which the games take place thats fine I didn't create subtractions or addition in fact Im fairly poor at math but if you cant agree 2+2=4 or 1476+100=1576 then I suppose thats a personal matter.
Obviously I have had to repost several things because people, like yourself, didn't understand it the first time which of course dont take this to heart but I think you are just upset you were proven wrong because you lack information tand facts to support your own speculation. I'm sorry I upset you it was in no way my intention to do so Crisis but too many people used the excuse "IGA screwed up the timeline! and it didn't make sense etc etc." (not saying you are one of them) Which in reality he really didn't do that, he just had poor story telling skills. So essentially the only thing i was trying to prove was that the timeline could work since you couldn't keep up. Im not trying to sound rude or heated or trying to say you are ignorant, that would be rude. But since you took the time to try and call me out I figured I would at least take the time to give a defense and reason for my posts.
So with that said I am moving on from our conversation Crisis hopefully we can have another one. And sorry I upset you.
-
So yeah LoS
Lookin good hope we get new info here soon
-
back on the topic of Rinaldo, you know he said he fought Walter I wonder how he lived....course I would like to know more about Joachim i found him to be interesting.
-
back on the topic of Rinaldo, you know he said he fought Walter I wonder how he lived....course I would like to know more about Joachim i found him to be interesting.
I would think that Walter spared him because he could find some use of him. Particularly aiding other warriors with items and weapons to make Walter's game more fun.
-
I would think that Walter spared him because he could find some use of him. Particularly aiding other warriors with items and weapons to make Walter's game more fun.
yeah that seems logical.
-
I would think that Walter spared him because he could find some use of him. Particularly aiding other warriors with items and weapons to make Walter's game more fun.
Rinaldo even tells Leon that he can live so close to Walter just so he can help other adventurers and warriors coming to the castle.
And I highly doubt that he can leave, so he is pretty much a prisoner.
-
Rinaldo even tells Leon that he can live so close to Walter just so he can help other adventurers and warriors coming to the castle.
And I highly doubt that he can leave, so he is pretty much a prisoner.
Well yeah theres that whole barrier thing Leon passes through at the start of the game.
-
Since this topic is about where the series can go here is a direction I absolutly hope it doesn't go. By factoring in Dracula The Un-Dead by Dacre Stoker, which I will doubt now that Castlevania has seperated itself and has its own mythos these days, but the book is in my opinion one of the worse vampire novels ever. They completely ignored everything Stoker did in the original and added things they never happened like Mina and Dracula having sex which never occured in the book or even hinted at. The closest they got was Mina' drinking from him and he only did that so he could have an agent in their group. They both hated and loathed one another. Anyway I just hope they dont factor that book in or make any references to it. It is seriously like every single vampire, cliche action movie only worse. There is also something about Elizabeth Bartley actually being stronger then Dracula which doesn't make much sense because he was much older but I couldn't even finish it because it was absolutly disgusting and a smack to the face of Bram.
-
I agree since Dracula is the proclaimed King of Vampires with and without the Ebony and Crimson stones. So Brahm Stoker's book get's priority in my opinion. If there is a new direction that the series can go I do not know as of yet. I'd have to ponder it for a few before I could present it here.
-X
-
Honestly the only direction or rather would prefer it to go but thats just my opinion is the whole Vampire Hunter D apocalypitic world scenario. Dracula finally rising and taking over the world and laying waste to it and a Belmont decedant coming out of hiding to traverse a ruined earth to opose him.
Course I would like to hear other ideas and scenarios to enlighted myself.
-
Ya' know I actually like those Vampire Hunter D movies. Even though they're Apocalyptic futures they have advanced technologies interacting with a medieval setting. I could see a futuristic Castlevania taking place in such a world since the majority of the fans wish to see Castlevania in a medieval world.
-X
-
Ya' know I actually like those Vampire Hunter D movies. Even though they're Apocalyptic futures they have advanced technologies interacting with a medieval setting. I could see a futuristic Castlevania taking place in such a world since the majority of the fans wish to see Castlevania in a medieval world.
-X
You should read the novels they are good, if you can stand D being described as the most gorgeous feminine man in the world lol. Also the manga captures the world perfectly.
-
You should read the novels they are good, if you can stand D being described as the most gorgeous feminine man in the world lol. Also the manga captures the world perfectly.
But couldn't you also describe Alucard as such. I mean if you look at his picture in the SotN instruction manual, he looks quite feminine. Actually, most of the people who I showed that picture to said that he was a woman at first before I told them that it was a guy.
-
But couldn't you also describe Alucard as such. I mean if you look at his picture in the SotN instruction manual, he looks quite feminine. Actually, most of the people who I showed that picture to said that he was a woman at first before I told them that it was a guy.
Well yeah you could.
D of course came out way before Alucard did back in 1983 while Alucard was introduced in 1989 (Japan release) and according to the official artwork wasn't that good looking. Alucard was only introduced as being beautiful when SotN came out. In fact they used the phrase "A man who has an inhumanly attractive face" or something like that to describe his Genya Arikado persona in the manual for Aria that same phrase is used quite often in the vampire hunter d novels to describe D. Course Alucards gorgeous appearance could be inspired by D but I've heard nothing official stating that.
But yeah you are correct you could say the same for Alucard, course in the novels it is done repetitively with D and done to the extent that he can even make men fluster lol.
-
There's actually a kind of oficial statement about Alucard being influenced by D, IGa said hat in a recently posted interview :)
-
There's actually a kind of oficial statement about Alucard being influenced by D, IGa said hat in a recently posted interview :)
Then there you go, if what ahasverus says is true, then we now know why Alucard is rockin the pretty boy look.
-
Here you have, 3d question
Edit: Two posts below
-
Here you have, 3d question
(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vgmuseum.com%2Fmrp%2Fcv-dos%2Fpackaging%2Fdosusg-248-249.jpg&hash=937ed2876f14f9ed718922f11fd4db6f8d607352)
Sorry for some reason I just got a huge "No hot linking allowed" pic lol.
-
I can see the pic here xD, but check this
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv-dos/packaging/dosusg-248-249.jpg (http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv-dos/packaging/dosusg-248-249.jpg)
-
I can see the pic here xD, but check this
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv-dos/packaging/dosusg-248-249.jpg (http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv-dos/packaging/dosusg-248-249.jpg)
You know I think nagumo tried to send me the same link and I for the life of me of cannot view it for some reason. So post here whatever it is you want me to read.
Sorry about that......
-
Scratch that I managed to get it to work. I think it was my browser lol. That some cool bit of info Ahasverus thanks.
-
Remake Resurrection and give better explanations to Sonia's and Victor's histories. Maybe a game where Solieyu get's his training and has to a foil an
attempt by a vampire or witch to raise the Count. Also play the role as Dracula is a cool idea. We can see his transformation from good (sort of) to evil. He can fight for the church (fighting heathens, reading Psalms & depressing the guys from Monty Python in the process and impaling people{which was church approved back then}) and then change it to where he renounces the church and finds the Reaper learns all of his vampy tricks and impales people (of which the church says bullshit, that's our fuckin job!!! THAT'S OUR FUCKIN JOB!!!) Other than that the dormancy period and the search for Richter by Maria suggestion is also cool by me. That's all I got....
Unless of curse someone was to make a game of someone other than Dracula being raised from the dead.
Hmmmm........
-
Remake Resurrection and give better explanations to Sonia's and Victor's histories. Maybe a game where Solieyu get's his training and has to a foil an
attempt by a vampire or witch to raise the Count. Also play the role as Dracula is a cool idea. We can see his transformation from good (sort of) to evil. He can fight for the church (fighting heathens, reading Psalms & depressing the guys from Monty Python in the process and impaling people{which was church approved back then}) and then change it to where he renounces the church and finds the Reaper learns all of his vampy tricks and impales people (of which the church says bullshit, that's our fuckin job!!! THAT'S OUR FUCKIN JOB!!!) Other than that the dormancy period and the search for Richter by Maria suggestion is also cool by me. That's all I got....
Unless of curse someone was to make a game of someone other than Dracula being raised from the dead.
Hmmmm........
Forget it, the concept behind that game sucked in the first place. The danger of Dracula becomes so great that there is a need to have a past Belmont help out though the miracle of time-travel. Screw time-travel. If the danger is great then wouldn't Alucard just wake up like he did in SotN? This is why the game was canceled in the first place. The time-travel concept was stupid and didn't make sense.
-
Time travel is also a bad thing to incorporate, ESPECIALLY late into an already established series because it's so EASY to screw up. The idea that the world deemed Dracula so bad, that it scanned history and pulled two Belmonts to counter him is super idiotic. If anything, it's the MOST idiotic thing in the ENTIRE CV franchise.
-
Okay, okay now. Settle down, '81. Breathe. Anything... I repeat, A N Y T H I N G, can work with the proper thought and detail put into it. Yes, even time travel. This is why Castlevania most often lacks consistent plotting since equal attention must be distributed to gameplay, presentation and overall programming. It just hasn't been a series that, as yet, has had proper attention paid to story continuity and depth. But you know what? We've lived through it. And we will continue to do so.
-
From what I heard about Resurrection, the game takes place in 1666 right? Isn't Simon Belomont alive during this time period? Why didn't they just get him to take on Dracula in this game?
-X
-
From what I heard about Resurrection, the game takes place in 1666 right? Isn't Simon Belomont alive during this time period? Why didn't they just get him to take on Dracula in this game?
-X
good question
-
Simon wasn't born yet at this time, his games are in the 1690s.