Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: Nagumo on January 16, 2010, 12:02:24 PM
-
The story of the Castlevania series is said to be both very intriguing because of the story that stretches over a thousand year period, but also very complex and even contradicting according to some. Because of the many different teams that each worked on different Castlevania games, there were also many different visions on the storyline, which resulted in them shaping it as they so pleased. We fans were left with a lot of questions and mind boggling paradoxes such as the 100 year rule. Luckily there was IGA who saved the day and fixed almost (if not all of) these problems but as a drawback, he left us with plot holes that he never bothered to fully explain (because...?). In this case I obviously mean gaps in the story and/or plot points that are not really clear and not contradictions (honestly people who think IGA is the timeline antichrist are just fooling themselves and blaming him for their ignorance). Since Castlevania has to deal a lot with such unexplained/vague plot points, I thought it would be a good idea to make a thread about this in which we could discuss and maybe find a satisfying answer to them. I learned that more often then not, their was an explanation for things I didn't quite understood about the story, so maybe this won't turn out to be a pointless speculation/conjecture thread. Everyone can list something here that they have been wondering about (and so shall I) and then we can discuss it.
For instance, why was Saint Germain even present in Curse of Darkness? One might say that he was obviously there to prevent Hector from pursuing Isaac and ultimately becoming Dracula's new host body and thus change the course of things. But didn't this Germain dude also state that he wasn't allowed to chance the future? He wasn't allowed to act upon reality nor speaking the truth (still trying to figure out how that works since that would technically mean that he has to lie every word), so if he can't do that why did he even bother trying to stop Hector?
-
Don't try to deny it, IGA screwed the storyline when he took the powers from the Belmont family and began to use one shot characters to have quick sequels with vague stories, and thanks to that now we have an unbereable cast of unknown people with a vast cast of unknown old heroes (Why the hell not a single Belmont remember it's ancestor life? why do we have to play each time with a different character without a good background? Why don't we know how their life began or ended? Why are they so bland that we barely have some affection for the most of them? - I think that the universal affection to Alucard and Richter comes from the backstory and treatment to their personalities that Iga gave them -).
The lots one shot side characters makes everything worse, each one suposeddly has a backstory and a role on the universal order of castlevania plot, but they are so abandoned or bad treated that the answers they give are far far less than the unbereable questions that they put in the already complicated timeline, and the worst part, Iga doesn't like (doesn't know?) how to fill the holes with good and well timed explanations (Why do we need a sequel to Cv III 20 years latter? why not concentrate in the recent plot holes? Why the need to complicate the simple story of old games with more confusion with the direct sequels?).
Iga hits and runs. He makes a mess, he runs from that mess and create a mess in a time when there's no mess, and the cycle begins again.
I'm not saying that past developers didn't do that, but that was the early 90's when gaming in general was a mess (Final Fantasy anyone?) but Iga was in the transition to mature story oriented games, and he made things worse than they were.
We need a GOOD director for the Classic Saga (LOS comes apart from this mess) who cares about the SENSE of the storyline, the exact opossite to this nonsense:
Iga:
Did you know that my game creation is not based upon the timeline? I come up with the gameplay system and then try to find the right timeline. There was one product where I actually started off with the timeline - that was Lament of Innocence on PS2.
But I always come up with the gameplay system first. Currently I do take control of my team members but I want to think about the gameplay system first - I do complain and make a lot of comments to it. But once the team comes up with the new game system and then I think it's right to put it in 1999, then I will tell a story in that timeline.
That was bullsh**t. He doesn't care about story.
-
True and he did say that the game itself comes first in his mind followed by the story afterwards. How the HELL does that work!? At least in my game concepts the story comes first THEN everything else follows suit. It's much more simple that way. Like IGA I am also a perfectionist but I think the guy must have some masochistic tendencies about doing things the hard way rather then the right way. I'm sure it's possible to do a game first then the story but if you don't know how, then don't bother!
I could go on another rant about his really BIG plothole store: Lament of Innocence (In terms of Dracula's origins rather then the proper Brahm Stoker's tale. But I already did that when I joined up. :)
-X
-
The story of the Castlevania series is said to be both very intriguing because of the story that stretches over a thousand year period, but also very complex and even contradicting according to some. Because of the many different teams that each worked on different Castlevania games, there were also many different visions on the storyline, which resulted in them shaping it as they so pleased. We fans were left with a lot of questions and mind boggling paradoxes such as the 100 year rule. Luckily there was IGA who saved the day and fixed almost (if not all of) these problems but as a drawback, he left us with plot holes that he never bothered to fully explain (because...?). In this case I obviously mean gaps in the story and/or plot points that are not really clear and not contradictions (honestly people who think IGA is the timeline antichrist are just fooling themselves and blaming him for their ignorance). Since Castlevania has to deal a lot with such unexplained/vague plot points, I thought it would be a good idea to make a thread about this in which we could discuss and maybe find a satisfying answer to them. I learned that more often then not, their was an explanation for things I didn't quite understood about the story, so maybe this won't turn out to be a pointless speculation/conjecture thread. Everyone can list something here that they have been wondering about (and so shall I) and then we can discuss it.
For instance, why was Saint Germain even present in Curse of Darkness? One might say that he was obviously there to prevent Hector from pursuing Isaac and ultimately becoming Dracula's new host body and thus change the course of things. But didn't this Germain dude also state that he wasn't allowed to chance the future? He wasn't allowed to act upon reality nor speaking the truth (still trying to figure out how that works since that would technically mean that he has to lie every word), so if he can't do that why did he even bother trying to stop Hector?
One thing I wasn't clear on was the Dracula Wraith in HoD, obviously now that I taken the time to investigate and that it was pointed out to me that it was in fact not Dracula I feel ive learned something new.
Im still unclear on how the premature awakenings work, I think honestly at this moment think what IGA stated back in 2005 makes a lot more sense given the new entry within the series then having a rule but again right now with the contradicting interviews I dont even know if there is a rule or whats up. If they abolished the 100 year rule thing,which I think should be done it would eliminate half of the confusion, then it would work perfectly and finally came out and said "okay from now on forget that 100 year thing". Hopefully we will get answer to that soon as well as that whole coming back every tens years or so in the 1800s since we were to believe that games like CotM, LoD and 64 were placed back into the timeline (least thats what ive made of it) some people think they are still "gaidens"
Ive actually never given too much thought to St Germain but wasnt he able to interfere directly at one point hence why you fight him, perhaps that was his plan all a long or rather maybe thats how time played out perhaps it was destined for those two to fight thus altering time so Hector wouldn't be able to become Dracula's new host? Time is a very touchy subject, the Legacy of Kain series managed to do it wonderfully but it has only been introduced in CoD and judgment, if you wanna count it in as well, for the Castlevania series. Hopefully they will explain and expand more upon, maybe Germain was introduced as sort of a test the waters thing to see how fans would react to the time traveling thing in Castlevania?
-
True and he did say that the game itself comes first in his mind followed by the story afterwards. How the HELL does that work!? At least in my game concepts the story comes first THEN everything else follows suit. It's much more simple that way. Like IGA I am also a perfectionist but I think the guy must have some masochistic tendencies about doing things the hard way rather then the right way. I'm sure it's possible to do a game first then the story but if you don't know how, then don't bother!
I could go on another rant about his really BIG plothole store: Lament of Innocence (In terms of Dracula's origins rather then the proper Brahm Stoker's tale. But I already did that when I joined up. :)
-X
That is the stupid and chaotic way to do it. Anyone with at least a hint of common sense knows that when adding something to a story, you look at the story so far and then you develop what you are going to add. Also, if you do it IGA's way, before you translate your idea into a game, you look at how what you did fits and then edit the new stuff so that it fits with the already existing story.
-
I write stories so it's easy for me to do it this way rather then the game first then the story.
-X
-
That was bullsh**t. He doesn't care about story.
I'm not going to have an argument about that bastard IGA, whetever you like his storytelling or not and think he is just doing it because he wants YOUR money even though you don't like it (though you keep spending it on his shitty games anyway) is entirely your opinion.
Just kidding, though let's just refrain from IGA bashing. I already get it.
I could go on another rant about his really BIG plothole store: Lament of Innocence (In terms of Dracula's origins rather then the proper Brahm Stoker's tale. But I already did that when I joined up. :)
-X
Do tell. :-X
Hopefully we will get answer to that soon as well as that whole coming back every tens years or so in the 1800s since we were to believe that games like CotM, LoD and 64 were placed back into the timeline (least thats what ive made of it) some people think they are still "gaidens"
Heh, so you noticed those little references to non-canon games as well? Cornell's inclusion in Judgment was a pretty big hint but did you also notice the little reference that Order of Ecclesia made to Circle of the Moon? Just to name something.
Ive actually never given too much thought to St Germain but wasnt he able to interfere directly at one point hence why you fight him, perhaps that was his plan all a long or rather maybe thats how time played out perhaps it was destined for those two to fight thus altering time so Hector wouldn't be able to become Dracula's new host?
Hmm, I like that destiny part which I think would work quite well since fate actually plays some kind off role in the game. Though, I still don't get two things:
- How does that "not speaking the truth" thing work? Wouldn't he already break that rule if he would introduce himself to somebody else?
- If it was destiny that changed the future, then why would Saint Germain travel through time? Fate seems to be a pretty unreliable factor to me.
-
Heh, so you noticed those little references to non-canon games as well? Cornell's inclusion in Judgment was a pretty big hint but did you also notice the little reference that Order of Ecclesia made to Circle of the Moon? Just to name something.
Hmm, I like that destiny part which I think would work quite well since fate actually plays some kind off role in the game. Though, I still don't get two things:
- How does that "not speaking the truth" thing work? Wouldn't he already break that rule if he would introduce himself to somebody else?
- If it was destiny that changed the future, then why would Saint Germain travel through time? Fate seems to be a pretty unreliable factor to me.
Yeah thats what makes me confused about their place in the timeline, that really needs clearing up but you wouldn't have to waste money on a game to do that (though another game would be nice). A simple official website in both american and japanese with an updated timeline would suffice. My only explanation and speculation to why Dracula appeared (keep in mind this is just my opinion on the matter) is that when Nostradamus predicted Dracula return in 1999 back in the 1500s Death started to get a little worried that Dracula hadn't manage to defeat the Belmonts and now its the 1800s but wait the Belmonts are in hiding now and since they could prematurely awaken him, though not at full power, surely no one else could stand in their way. So he started scrambling to resurrect him but descendants (Morris, Fernandez and Schienders,) other children of the night (Cornell), people with new magical powers (Shanoa), capable of destroying him and other hunters (Graves and Baldwins) came out and managed to defeat him.
The destiny thing is the only thing that I can think of that works but you are absolutely right that whole "I cant tell the truth" bit but again this can be explained simply that you cannot trust Railroad Tycoons and are not suppose to trust them or their mustaches. But seriously I dont know they really need to explain that.
Thats where things get tricky with time. In their future or wherever Germain comes from (obviously from the time where Railroad Tycoons are in fashion) who ever he works for knew that it was destiny to send Germain back so that he may interfere and thus keep Hector from becoming Drac's new host. It was already predetermined that Germain returned, all his actions, his words everything had already played out that way so he could keep the future on the right track. Kinda like how Kyle Reece was suppose to go back in time to save Sarah Conner so that not only could she give birth to John but also give a means for John Conner to be born, since Kyle is his dad. Course thats the only way i can figure it.
Hope that last part makes sense. If not sorry....
-
In other words everything is preordained. The are no coincidences in life, no mistakes and no accidents. Like Quigon said in Star Wars: TfM. Everything is written out in stone. Even the multiple paths of the future, though the future can be changed all of the possible changes are already written out in gods great plan, so to speak. I guess that's the way things are when you're ALL knowing, ALL seeing.
-X
-
In other words everything is preordained. The are no coincidences in life, no mistakes and no accidents. Like Quigon said in Star Wars: TfM. Everything is written out in stone. Even the multiple paths of the future, though the future can be changed all of the possible changes are already written out in gods great plan, so to speak. I guess that's the way things are when you're ALL knowing, ALL seeing.
-X
Not a religious person but yes that kind of what I was getting at.
-
In other words everything is preordained. The are no coincidences in life, no mistakes and no accidents. Like Quigon said in Star Wars: TfM. Everything is written out in stone. Even the multiple paths of the future, though the future can be changed all of the possible changes are already written out in gods great plan, so to speak. I guess that's the way things are when you're ALL knowing, ALL seeing.
-X
I never liked the idea of destiny or fate or whatever since it results in the story losing all of its suspense.The prediction of Dracula's final defeat in 1999 was pretty stupid. Makes you wonder why the guy is even trying if he already knows that he is going to kick the bucket eventually.
-
That's the funny thing about villains. Even though it's futile, they'll always try, try again.
-X
-
That's the funny thing about villains. Even though it's futile, they'll always try, try again.
-X
The heros would be doing the same thing if the roles were reversed.
-
That's the funny thing about villains. Even though it's futile, they'll always try, try again.
-X
He is'nt only fighting Belmonts (and there relatives), but also fate.
But as we know he lost to fate.
But we also know that he can come back, just that he has lost his own body and castle..
-
And now for something completely different. :-X
Why did Dracula came back as a ghost in CoD instead of just having a normal body like all of his other ressurections? Any reason for that aside from just cuz?
Oh, I believe this was also the case in OoE, and Barlowe was used as a host.
-
Why did Dracula came back as a ghost in CoD instead of just having a normal body like all of his other ressurections? Any reason for that aside from just cuz?
Maybe Draculas Spirit/Remains or whatever weren´t ready for a full blown resurrection? Remember, it was all planned by Death to use a Devil Forgemasters Body as his new Host - he, as Dracs closest Servant and Grim Reaper should know it best.
Oh, I believe this was also the case in OoE, and Barlowe was used as a host.
Indeed, indeed.... honestly, I found that one quite irritating. Before watching Barlowes Bestiary discription, I believed Dracula inhabited his original body. Maybe Barlowe had let him use his body because of that magic seal that was set upon his soul (which, as far as I know, prevented him to resurrect again... not sure about that one, though)
-
Ah, good answers but Dracula was revived in SotN only 5 years after his last major ressurection, in CoD he was revived 3 years after his he was first killed, there is only a difference of 2 years yet he still has his own body in Symphony.
How does that work? :o
-
I never thought of Draculas Final Form in Symphony as a real resurrection.... Alucard defeated Shaft in that strange room in the center of the castle (they reused this in HoD.... I think it is some link to the Chaos Realm)....und Dracula suddenly appears.
He doesn´t even appear in his human form from the beginning - more of a jumble of creatures.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/castlevania/images/1/17/Sotn-drac-finalsprite.PNG
We don´t even know exactly WHY he´s coming back... perhabs he sensed the presence of his son?
But back to topic: He doesn´t even do much in this state... casting some spells and summoning some monsters to heal himself.... and to be honest, he was kinda easy.... further implying (imo), that he wasn´t fully resurrected... (even though it´s non-canon, wasn´t Judgements Alucard wondering if he could beat his father again at full strength?)
Well, but that´s just my opinion/theory
-
Hmm, I've heard some theories before about Dracula not really reviving in Symphony. I find that very interesting but didn't Shaft down right say that he was going to ressurect him? :-\ It would be a bit far stretched to assume that he was just kidding.
-
I can´t remember the exact wording in the DXC Version of Symphony, but yeah, it seems like Shaft was going to resurrect his master right from the start (at least in the orig. Version) Oo
*after being defeated by Alucard* "...bu... but my goal is achieved... Count Dracula has come to purify this corrupt world with the searing flames of chaos!" *end of epicness*
I´m kind of confused now O_o At first, Shaft corrupted Richter and made him Lord of Castlevania... to kill off all the Vampire Hunters who could oppose him since he´s the strongest....
And then, when Richter´s free again, he plans to make Alucard the new Lord, after killing his softer, human side.... and then, after this plan fails, too, he declares he wanted to resurrect Dracula all along? What´s the point in replacing the strongest Vampire Hunter in the Belmont Bloodline with Dracula, who could be "simply" defeated by the next Belmont who´s available? O_o (I hope you know were I´m getting at)
Oh, almost forgot: Considering all of this, this may BE Draculas actual Body... just not at his full strength just like in PoR (well... not quite... here, he has enough power to transform into this.... thing *g*)
Oh, all those Plot holes! So confusing xD
-
I can´t remember the exact wording in the DXC Version of Symphony, but yeah, it seems like Shaft was going to resurrect his master right from the start (at least in the orig. Version) Oo
*after being defeated by Alucard* "...bu... but my goal is achieved... Count Dracula has come to purify this corrupt world with the searing flames of chaos!" *end of epicness*
I´m kind of confused now O_o At first, Shaft corrupted Richter and made him Lord of Castlevania... to kill off all the Vampire Hunters who could oppose him since he´s the strongest....
And then, when Richter´s free again, he plans to make Alucard the new Lord, after killing his softer, human side.... and then, after this plan fails, too, he declares he wanted to resurrect Dracula all along? What´s the point in replacing the strongest Vampire Hunter in the Belmont Bloodline with Dracula, who could be "simply" defeated by the next Belmont who´s available? O_o (I hope you know were I´m getting at)
Oh, almost forgot: Considering all of this, this may BE Draculas actual Body... just not at his full strength just like in PoR (well... not quite... here, he has enough power to transform into this.... thing *g*)
Oh, all those Plot holes! So confusing xD
First in SotN:
Richter is made "Lord of the Castle" as a way to stall until the resurrection of Dracula was complete and he was at full power. Same thing goes for Shaft's intention for Alucard at the end of the game. Even though Alucard beat Shaft, there was still enough time for Dracula to resurrect. The fact is that he wasn't at full power. Hence, the reason he fought in a demon form from the start of the battle. The demon forms are stronger than his normal form.
-
In Reply to #20
Aahh... now I understand... after hearing the Shaft Conversation since quite some time, it seemed like the whole "making Belmont the Castles Lord" was something that should´ve been more than some temporary solution. Thanks for shedding some light on that, wizard.
Hhmmm... Plot Holes... ah, yes: What about Elisabeth Bartley? How can she be Draculas Niece? Even if you´re not leaving LoI out (since Bloodlines came way before it), she was born roughly 100 years later Oo It´s bothering me every time I play Bloodlines
-
Well, Elizabeth Bartley isn't the real life Elizabeth Bathory so she doesn't necessarily have to be born in the 15th century (like her real life counterpart). If IGA uses the Power Retconnance he could make her the niece of Mathias, which would be pretty interesting.
I was checking out Bloodlines' entry in the Japanese timeline once, and interestingly enough, they described Elizabeth as someone only claiming to be Dracula's niece (because...?).
-
She could´ve just been pretending? Interesting. About the why: Maybe Immortality made her crazy and she´s just making things up. Dunno.
And Dracula is like: "Oh, okay, whatever you say, it´s all right als long as you bring me back to life"
-
Now that Dracula has his own origins within Castlevania there is no need to borrow from Bram's Novel since it contradicts everything now. I mean in that interview with IGA in 05 he pretty much stated that Mathias took the name Dracula, not Vlad Dracula Tepes III. I wonder if they will retcon Quincy from the the time line and just use the Morris last name as sort of an "ode" to Bram.
-
Now that Dracula has his own origins within Castlevania there is no need to borrow from Bram's Novel since it contradicts everything now. I mean in that interview with IGA in 05 he pretty much stated that Mathias took the name Dracula, not Vlad Dracula Tepes III. I wonder if they will retcon Quincy from the the time line and just use the Morris last name as sort of an "ode" to Bram.
Actually, from the NP interview(from the NP issue with PoR on the cover), IGA acknowledges Quincy Morris:
Nintendo Power: Any thoughts or hints when we'll see the game that takes place in 1999 and shows Dracula's final downfall at the hands of Julius Belmont?
IGA: I hope I can work on that story for a future project. Not only the game that takes place in 1999, but revisiting Quincy Morris. I still haven't had the chance to expand on the story with Quincy Morris.
I doubt Quincy would be written out of the series, as would the events of Bram Stoker's Dracula.
-
Actually, from the NP interview(from the NP issue with PoR on the cover), IGA acknowledges Quincy Morris:
I doubt Quincy would be written out of the series, as would the events of Bram Stoker's Dracula.
That was theoretically speaking for the future since they have retconned previous things in the story like Dracula's age for one.
-
I don't that and Dracula's age are the same thing though. Besides, Dracula's current age is only 60 years off which I think is pretty forgiveable. :-X
-
I don't that and Dracula's age are the same thing though. Besides, Dracula's current age is only 60 years off which I think is pretty forgiveable. :-X
How did you calculate that?
He died in 1999 thats for sure..
Dracula was "created" in the 11th century, (since the game,according to the game intro, takes place at this time). I found a wikipedia page claiming it to take place at 1094. (confimation please)
But then.. how old was Mathias when he became Dracula??
-
32
-
32
Explanation please.. ..
-
There isn't much to explain though I could always show you the source:
http://castlevania.armster.org/trans_loi.php
Translation of the LoI Perfect Guide. :-X
-
Okay let me rephrase. I wouldn't doubt (not that I would like them to or anything like that) if they did retcon Quincy out of the time line much like they did with Dracula's age, his origin, Castlevania Legends, and other tid bits of info to suit the newly established time line.
-
they did make a reference to Quincy in Portrait of Ruin, though they didn't call him by name. Jonathan asked Eric about what he remembered of his grandfather, and Eric said he was a very kind man. It seems to me that Jonathan was trying to figure out what kind of man would let his son use the VK whip if he knew the consequences, but Eric assured him Quincy and company had no idea that it sucked up the life force of its non-Belmont user.
-
The Conversation you were referring to, Reinhardt ^^
Jonathan: Say, Eric, there's something I wanna ask you.
Eric: Sure. What is it?
Jonathan: Did my father know the Vampire Killer would
consume his life when he used it?
Eric: No. We only learned the truth after Dracula was
defeated. We found out using magic after noticing
John took so long to recover.
Jonathan: I see...
Charlotte: Jonathan? Why did you ask that?
Jonathan: Grandfather was already dead by the time I was
born. I was wondering grandfather gave him the whip
knowing the truth about it.
Charlotte: Hm. I wonder...
Eric: Have no worries. Your grandfather was exceptionally
strong, but kind.
Charlotte: That's good to hear, right, Jonathan?
Jonathan: I suppose...
-------
I kinda agree with Lumas here... they´ve already retconned alot of things..even things that might be important to some extend. It wouldn´t make any diffrence if they´d delete Quincy Oo He´s not even mentioned by name in any CV Game (ingame).
Don´t get me wrong: I liked the idea of Stokers Novel serving as a tie-in to the whole CV Saga in the beginning.... but looking back at it, it doesn´t make much sense to me.
I still haven't had the chance to expand on the story with Quincy Morris.
Sounds like he had the Idea to make a Quincy Game that fits more into CV-Canon. But I wouldn´t bet on it... sounds like another "Battle of 1999" story that´s never come to happen oo"
-
I never thought it made sense that Simon was walking around for seven years with a curse that was slowly rotting his flesh and killing him, then with one week left to go he decides to end the curse. Also, why does Dracula's curse take so long. Talk about a slow burn. No one in that game is in a hurry.
-
Simon didn't realize he was cursed. The Japanese manual basically said he had broken his back in the battle and that he got worse and worse until he felt he was at death's door. In response to this, he went to the family graveyard, and it was there that a mysterious woman told him about the curse and then vanished as if mist.
Wonder who this woman was, if a ghost residing in his families graveyard, maybe it was an ancestor, such as Sypha? Wouldn't that be weird if Captain N got it right? (there's an episode where he goes to the graveyard to fret about Trevor's tarnished reputation and a male Sypha appeared to him).
At any rate, Simon couldn't learn the truth until he went to the place that could tell him the truth, which he didn't do until he thought it was all over.
Here's the translation:
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv2/documents/CV2J.txt
Judgment appears to have retconned the "broken back" thing, and just went with the wounds getting worse. Here's Judgment's ending:
Thus the rift in time was mended, and all were returned to their respective
eras.
Six years later, a mysterious woman would tell Simon Belmont of the curse
placed upon him.
To free himself from that curse, he would have to collect Dracula's remains --
his nail, heart, rib bone, eyeball, and ring -- and burn them all at the ruins
of Castlevania.
And with that, Simon set off on a new quest...
-
I think it all comes down to the fact IGA just needs to release a new time line and establish some things that would be considered plot holes. That hole 100 year resurrection and "half" resurrections needs to abolished because what he stated in 05 makes more sense. I dont see the point in having Quincy in the series anyway, yeah Bram's book was good but this is Castlevania and with Dracula being established as Mathias taking the name Dracula there would be no point in trying to work in some one else's story. I can see paying homage to Bram since he was the man who made Dracula into a vampire by using the Morris' sur-name but I really dont see how it could fit into the time line any better then Legends because it just adds more confusion to what did and what didn't happen in 1800s. We got him returning 1820 then in 1830 then again in 1844 and again in 1852 with Order of Ecclesia happening some where since it happened in the mid 1800s and the inclusion of Brams novel would have him returning again in 1897. Not to mention he was last put to rest in Symphony of the night in 1797 just 23 year previously to CotM. And we don't even know for sure if CotM, LoD, and 64 have been re-established or they are still omitted since the last updated timeline they were present and with Cornell's presence in Judgement, take note that all the other characters were "cannon" characters as well as all the characters back stories, that just leads us to believe that LoD at least is still in the time line because why throw in a none cannon character when you could have just had "Werewolf" like you had a "Golem". He doesn't even take human form so why go through the trouble of establishing him as Cornell if the games weren't present in the time line. So basically he just needs to come out with a new time line to explain everything.
-
And to add, it doesn't matter if they choose to keep CotM, LoD, or 64 to me even though LoD and 64 are two of my favorites and would hate to have them removed but at this point I would just like something officially stated as oppsed to "Well I took them out because...." then turn around and have them present in the time line. IGA has already retconned a lot of things in the series and even went as far as removing games from the time line just because he didn't like them (Legends) sorry I'm not buying that bs of "Oh it didn't fit into the time line and contradicted it" Bloodlines contradicts the story now because it includes Bram's Novel which is totally different to Castlevania's mythos of Dracula and since he has ignored the 100 year bs before thanks to him releaseing Lament of Innocence there is plenty of room for Legends the only thing it contradicts is Trevor being the first Belmont to defeat Dracula. So if he is going to go through all that trouble why not retcon some more things that would help clear up the story better. I can live with out Quincy and possibly the removal CotM, LoD, and 64 so he could make room for his game like he has done in the past. Just go and do it already so we dont have to sit here and guess about what is official and what isn't. I'm not stating he ruined the series or anything like that all I'm getting it is that he is (or was) sitting in the big boy chair and needs to make a choice on how the series' time line should run instead of us playing guessing games.
-
Simon didn't realize he was cursed. The Japanese manual basically said he had broken his back in the battle and that he got worse and worse until he felt he was at death's door. In response to this, he went to the family graveyard, and it was there that a mysterious woman told him about the curse and then vanished as if mist.
Wonder who this woman was, if a ghost residing in his families graveyard, maybe it was an ancestor, such as Sypha? Wouldn't that be weird if Captain N got it right? (there's an episode where he goes to the graveyard to fret about Trevor's tarnished reputation and a male Sypha appeared to him).
At any rate, Simon couldn't learn the truth until he went to the place that could tell him the truth, which he didn't do until he thought it was all over.
Here's the translation:
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv2/documents/CV2J.txt
Judgment appears to have retconned the "broken back" thing, and just went with the wounds getting worse. Here's Judgment's ending:
Thus the rift in time was mended, and all were returned to their respective
eras.
Six years later, a mysterious woman would tell Simon Belmont of the curse
placed upon him.
To free himself from that curse, he would have to collect Dracula's remains --
his nail, heart, rib bone, eyeball, and ring -- and burn them all at the ruins
of Castlevania.
And with that, Simon set off on a new quest...
Yeah, I know what the story says. I just find it a little stupid that he walked around for seven years feeling like crap and getting worse every day, meanwhile Transylvania was cursed also, and all of it seemed to start the day he was seriously wounded by and killed Dracula. Way to make the connection there Simon. The Belmont's may be the toughest group, but they certainly aren't the smartest.
-
Yeah, I know what the story says. I just find it a little stupid that he walked around for seven years feeling like crap and getting worse every day, meanwhile Transylvania was cursed also, and all of it seemed to start the day he was seriously wounded by and killed Dracula. Way to make the connection there Simon. The Belmont's may be the toughest group, but they certainly aren't the smartest.
Simon was never known for his smarts.
-
Simon was never known for his smarts.
None of them are. They are simply known as the strongest vampire hunters. While being some kind of hunter requires skill and knowledge, that doesn't mean that they are intelligent enough to put two and two together.
-
Well, there is speculation that Simon's curse was actually leprasy (that's why Simon's body started to decay and some people even claim that this was also the origin for the song Bloody Tears, because leprasy makes you cry tears of blood). Simon probably first thought that it was just an disease rather then a curse put on him by Dracula.
I hope that's a good explanation.
Why could only Shanoa be the vessel for Dominus?
-
Why could only Shanoa be the vessel for Dominus?
I wondered that too, unless her identity/heritage is the key. Two theories spring to mind:
1. She's the daughter of Alucard and Maria, hence has some of Dracula's blood and can use Dominus.
2. She's the descendant of Hector and Julia, and has inherited some of Hector's dark magic(which we know Hector's Devil Forging abilities use Dracula's magic).
Though as far as crackpot theories are concerned, I'm liking the first one. Shanoa will eventually marry, and down the line, probably give birth to the Lecarde family. And down that line, Stella and Loretta, who both look like they could be descendants of Shanoa.
-
I don't think it's possible for the Lecardes to be ancestors since they are Belmont off shoots. Maria is of course also related to the Belmont Clan but I doubt that descendants of Dracula could power up the Vampire Killer. Same reason why Trevor could never wield the VK IF he would have been Alucard's son.
Well, that's only my opinion of course.
-
None of them are. They are simply known as the strongest vampire hunters. While being some kind of hunter requires skill and knowledge, that doesn't mean that they are intelligent enough to put two and two together.
I disagree since Juste obviously had a way with magic he must have possessed intelligence that was higher for Belmonts.
-
I disagree since Juste obviously had a way with magic he must have possessed intelligence that was higher for Belmonts.
What I meant was that they know how to utilize their powers in various ways, but they may not be able to comprehend how some stuff fits together.
-
i also like the theory of her being Alucard and Maria's daughter. it certainly fits the timeline well. what if she was Alucard's daughter and Soma's ancestor? that would make Alucard both Soma's son and ancestor :o
-
i also like the theory of her being Alucard and Maria's daughter. it certainly fits the timeline well. what if she was Alucard's daughter and Soma's ancestor? that would make Alucard both Soma's son and ancestor :o
I seriously doubt that Shanoa is related to Alucard or Soma. She is probably just someone who has a natural ability to host glyphs. As for why Dominus didn't corrupt her, Albus theorizes in the game that the fact that Shanoa absorbed the glyphs imprisoning the villagers, she also absorbed some of their power. And don't forget, they were suppose to be descendants of the Belmonts.
-
I'd like to establish some points.
1) Judgement is not canon; as stated by Iga himself. Thus, nothing in it including the characters that were used can be presented as evidence that any of the games he officially removed from the time line are canon based on the presence of their characters.
2) Bram Stoker's Dracula is not canon to the Castlevania universe. The only part of the book that are used in Castlevania are the characters and basic plot. Therefore that back story does not need to be retconned since what little we know of the CV universe version of events does not conflict at all.
3) To my own dismay, I find the removal of Legends valid to the preservation of continuity because it directly contradicts the statement in CV3 that Trevor/Ralph was the first Belmont to fight "Dracula". LoI does not contradict this because Mathias hasn't yet become "Dracula" at the end of it. (Hell, I don't think he's even a vampire yet.) The game specifically states that Mathias doesn't become "Dracula" until much later and then eventually he meets a member of the Belmont Clan for the first time with his new identity. Would be nice if they remade Legends without Dracula involved. There are several hundred years of free space that can be filled with the Belmonts fighting other big-nasties. Likewise, the removal of CV64, LoD & CotM makes sense for the purpose of preserving the continuity because they simply created too many tangent characters that have little back story or are unnecessary to the over all plot of the CV universe.
4) OoE is a big slopping bucket of implied crap that doesn't really tell us anything relevant that wasn't already stated or implied in previous games and interviews. I hate the way the game implies all these facts, but does absolutely nothing to explain how things got to be the way they are. Annoying. >=P For example, if all the villagers are descended from Belmonts then there are either no direct descendants or they cannot or will not participate in anything "Dracula" related. Why the hell not explain it outright? What purpose does it serve to keep the point mute?
This leads me to my plot hole of choice. What the HELL is going on with the Belmonts in the 1800's?
-
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2mxplbr.jpg)
3) To my own dismay, I find the removal of Legends valid to the preservation of continuity because it directly contradicts the statement in CV3 that Trevor/Ralph was the first Belmont to fight "Dracula".
nu-uh
Trevor was the first one to defeat (read: kill) Dracula and not the first one to fight him. Which opens up a lot of possibilities for Legends to be included anyway. Saying that the game is non-canon because of that is poppyock. I would also like to make clear that the game doesn't condradict with CV3 (or any other Castlevania media) at all.
Believe me, I know what I'm talking about.
I'd like to establish some points.
1) Judgement is not canon; as stated by Iga himself. Thus, nothing in it including the characters that were used can be presented as evidence that any of the games he officially removed from the time line are canon based on the presence of their characters.
Oh please, don't get me started on that. People should actually pay attention to what the guy is saying instead of putting words in his mouth. Jesus Christ.
-
Trevor was the first one to defeat (read: kill) Dracula and not the first one to fight him. Which opens up a lot of possibilities for Legends to be included anyway. Saying that the game is non-canon because of that is poppyock. I would also like to make clear that the game doesn't condradict with CV3 (or any other Castlevania media) at all.
Where exactly does it say that Sonia didn't defeat/kill Dracula?
Oh please, don't get me started on that. People should actually pay attention to what the guy is saying instead of putting words in his mouth. Jesus Christ.
So then? What were his exact words?
-
Where exactly does it say that Sonia didn't defeat/kill Dracula?
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv-chron/manual/dengeki-scoop2.jpg
Around the time of Castlevania Chronicles was released some magazine called Dengeki Playstation had an interview with IGA and they also included a timeline approved by him with the article. And you obviously noticed that Legends was included in the timeline once but the given date was something during the 15th century rather then 1450. The 100 rule was already established at that point as you can see. If Dracula would have been killed anytime before Trevor did, the 100 year cycle would we screwed up. When taking this timeline into account, I can only draw two conclusions:
1) IGA thinks we're all idiots who would never notice such a huge gaping plot hole as that.
2) IGA retconned that Dracula didn't die at the end. Which would be perfectly legitimate to do since the Dracula is still alive DUN DUN DUNNN ending has been done before.
Of course, I know that this is an old timeline, though I consider your point moot since even IGA ignored it at some point and maybe will again in the future.
So then? What were his exact words?
Post I made at the Chapel (particurally stolen from GrantDaMummy)
I'm pretty sure I've read every single Judgment related interview, and none of them specifically mention "canon" as far as I know.There is enough "hearsay" going on, and people thinking they remember IGA saying something without actually posting any evidence that they aren't misrembering things, using misleading paraphrases or putting words into his IGA's mouth.
I know some people try to twist his quote from gamespy to mean the story doesn't mean anything;
GameSpy: People have been wondering how characters from different Castlevania time periods can appear in the same game. Is this explained in the story mode?
IGA: Yes, the story of why all these characters from different time periods come together is explained, but the story is not the main focus for Judgment. The main focus of this game is a celebration of the franchise's 22-year history, so I wanted to bring these characters together like a festival.
Alright here is the paragraph in the August 2008 issue of Nintendo power. It states (noting that article is discussing an incomplete version of the game before IGA had finalized all the details);
As for how all these characters from thorughout hte ages wound up fighting each other, Iga remains quiet about the story details, but urges players not to worry about it. "When making this concept we wanted to develop a game that was very lively and had lots of things going on at once, almost like a festival," he states. "To create such a game we decided to ignore the time line of the [series], which is normally very difficult in most cases. However, the end result will allow players to see very interesting matches in the game, since many of the characters have been pulled from different Castlevania titles."
Knowing the fact that IGA has admitted that he comes up with gameplay before he decides on a story, this would seem to imply that in the early version that lacked any storyline, he hadn't thought up the time travel plot yet.
Later interviews such as the one I posted above, he discusses how the storyline they finally figured up, allowed the game to fit, and gave an explanation for how it could fit. This may be one of those cases where IGA changed his mind after the fact, in this case while still developing the game. Its really pretty difficult to take anything seriously that was quoted during alpha/beta version of the game over stuff later said when the game went gold, when his comments contradict each other.
A later nintendo power issue, the special holiday 2008 issue (that's December 2008/Januarary 2009 bonus I think) states in its review of the finalized release version;
Longtime vampire hunters should especially appreciate the interactions between characters and the attention to continuity in Story Mode.
It was noticed by many reviewers, and even commented upon in a few interviews that contrary to IGA's previous statement he went out of his way to make the story plausible, and to give it an explanation. It wasn't just a storyless arcade game. For a game that IGA had originally believed ignored the timeline, he went out of his way to explain how it fits into the timeline with the final release.
So yeah, I think I can disagree with you on this. Judgment will remain canon unless there will be confirmation from IGA that it isn't And if you don't agree with me then that's too bad.
I would also like to point out that "ignoring the timeline" is not a synonym for non-canon in this case. If people actually paid attention to the damn story they would notice that the game's events take place in a rift in time which even is refered to as an alternate universe. Oh, and just because it takes place in an alternate universe doesn't mean that the game isn't canon. Because of the time rift thing the game could never be given a proper place in IGA's timeline but it still happend. It's canon. End of story.
-
but that was before LoI came out. From my understanding, when considering the events of LoI, Dracula didn't care about whether humans lived or died until Lisa was killed which I believe happened in 1470. To my best understanding, that event was why he wanted to exterminate humans. He would have no reason to get rid of the Belmonts. Also, the end of LoI says that Mathias/Dracula spent the next few centuries hiding in foreign lands. Thus, there is no place for Legends on the timeline unless the the story of Legends changes.
-
Thought I'd jump in with this little tidbit.
In the Castlevania Radio Chronicle, there is a flashback where Ryudomiru meets Alucard. They talk about Lisa's death and Ryudomiru pledges his services to Alucard because Lisa healed his parents. The Chronicle is Iga canon because he made it, and it's the prelude to his Alucard game, if that ever comes out. The Chronicle takes place in 1798, and the flashback takes place in 1448. Before this, Iga had always hinted Lisa died closer to CV3. But now her death takes place almost right before Legends in 1450.
Makes me wonder if Iga is actually considering on including Legends, at least in the way he gives a slight nod to CotM and the 64's.
-
Thought I'd jump in with this little tidbit.
In the Castlevania Radio Chronicle, there is a flashback where Ryudomiru meets Alucard. They talk about Lisa's death and Ryudomiru pledges his services to Alucard because Lisa healed his parents. The Chronicle is Iga canon because he made it, and it's the prelude to his Alucard game, if that ever comes out. The Chronicle takes place in 1798, and the flashback takes place in 1448. Before this, Iga had always hinted Lisa died closer to CV3. But now her death takes place almost right before Legends in 1450.
Makes me wonder if Iga is actually considering on including Legends, at least in the way he gives a slight nod to CotM and the 64's.
Interesting. I did not know this. If this is the case, then I think I'll take back what I said if Legends becomes a part of the official timeline again.
-
Daniel, were you the one who pointed this out earlier about the time period of the radio drama? Since then, my hopes for them re-instating Legends have been raised considerably. Perhaps with Iga losing his role as "final word on all things Castlevania", Konami has been urging him to include the games that he had not worked on?
I'm trying to grapple with how the events might have flowed if Legends, the radio drama, and everything else are included. Perhaps the following:
1431 (date of Legends minus Sonia's age in that game):
- Mathias may have "become" Dracula at this time as he has reached some new level of power, the people tremble in fear but are powerless to do anything but voice their concern. (from Legend's manual)
- Sonia is born about the same time. Her gifts were evident at an early age and she would be trained to use a whip by her grandfather.
- Dracula meets Lisa, who resembles his previous wife Elizabetha (their resemblance is stated in an the Castlevania Encyclopedia in a Japanese magazine, she may be the reincarnation of Elizabetha) and they marry. Dracula probably tones down on the evil while married to her and Alucard is born. The three live peacefully at his castle and Lisa would help the people in Dracula's land. Among the people Lisa would help are Lyudmil's parents.
1448 (based on year of Symphony of the Night plus one more year for the radio drama minus 150 years):
- The people of Lyudmil's town mistaken Lisa's medicine for witchcraft (from SotN) and execute her. Lyudmil attempts to save her but fails and is driven out of town (from Radio Drama). Dracula finds Lisa's body and mournes (from SotN manga advertisement).
- Alucard meets Lyudmil and Lyudmil pledges his services to him as he has no where else to go. Their shared grief at Lisa's death makes them very close friends.
- Less than two months later (per Sypha's Judgment story), Dracula's force, led by Magnus, attacks the town that killed Lisa. Lyudmil is a victim in the crossfire and to keep him from dying, Alucard turned him into a vampire. This awoke Alucard's bloodlust and he probably went on a rampage, defeated Magnus, may have sucked the blood of many humans (the visions Magnus would later give Maria), and probably served his father's willingly for a while (well, that's my theory anyway)
- The church is alerted to the threat Dracula poses (perhaps after his attack on the village) and sends out Sypha to defeat Dracula two months after Lisa is killed (per Judgment), but she is turned to stone, and remains that way for 28 years
- Alucard begins to question what his father is doing and becomes "abandoned" by him (per Legends).
1450 (based on the date set for Legends):
- Sonia's grandfather is killed by Dracula's forces and he gives her the vampire hunter whip, she becomes determined to destroy Dracula (per Japanese version of Legends). Its possible that her parents had been killed prior to this and that she was now the last Belmont (if the animated Dracula's Curse is correct).
- Alucard, looking for his father, meets Sonia who had just turned 17, and they become allies, friends, and have some sort affection for another. I read at GameFAQs that Alucard trained Sonia, but cannot find a primary source to confirm this.
- When Alucard is ready, he decides to attempt to assassinate his father, but Sonia, who had also set out to the Castle to fulfill her destiny proves that she is up to the task by defeating him in a test. Alucard slumbers. Sonia defeats Dracula. The castle crumbles. He might have escaped though, just as he would escape Christopher during Castlevania: The Adventure.
Later:
- The people become afraid of Sonia for the power she displayed in being able to defeat Dracula and drive her out of the country (per Dracula's Curse). This may have allowed Dracula to recover his strength and recover his position as ruler of Wallachia.
1456 (based on the year of CoD minus Trevor's age in Judgment set that same year): Trevor Belmont is born to Sonia. Alucard is thus not the father. His last name is Belmont in order to prevent the Belmont name from becoming extinct (reasonable hypothesis, coupled with idea he was the "last" Belmont per animated Dracula's Curse).
Later:
- Dracula starts rebuilding his power. He is "peaceful" for a while and offers "sanctuary" to those in trouble from the church (per CoD manga), and trains two such people, Isaac and then Hector in the arts of devil forgery.
- Alucard reawakens and infiltrates his father's organization. (per Japanese Dracula's Curse)
- Dracula begins his full-fledged stage invasion of Europe with his devil forgemasters acting as generals and Alucard appearing to be at his side.
- Grant stages a rebellion and is captured (per Japanese Dracula's Curse). He and his men are turned into monsters (could have happened before the invasion of Europe).
1476 (based on year Dracula's Curse took place in):
- Trevor Belmont answers the church's call, calls himself a genuine vampire hunter and sets off to defeat Dracula. He joins forces with Grant, Sypha, and Alucard. Isaac begs to be sent to kill Trevor, but Dracula is not concerned and sends him to find Hector, who had defected (per Curse of Darkness manga). Trevor and company kill Dracula for the first time.
-
I like the way you think, Reinhardt, really.
But still: Why should Dracula be so reckless and sends Isaac to find Hector? He was almost whipped to death by a Belmont before... who could "easily" intrude his castle and get past his top monsters.
But aside that, it fits to me... although I don´t think Alucard would reunite with Draculas forces after Legends... I always thought that he, after telling Sonia that he´d set himself to sleep, sensed his father´s survival and kept a low profile. And when the time was right and Dracula resurfaced, he waited for Trevor to test him and, when he showed the strength of a true vampire hunter, join his forces.
Hmmm.... oh yeah, perhaps the Belmonts had a bad reputation before Sonia apparently slew Dracula. You must admit, the Belmonts had a 300 years + history of Vampire hunting....And Draculas defeat would be the final straw for Sonia to be expelled.
-
i'm basing the infiltration part on the Dracula's Curse Japanese manual, which says that he infiltrated the underworld. i'm also basing it on the Legacy of Darkness manga. After learning of Hectors betrayal, the Succubus tells him Alucard has also betrayed him and Dracula is distraught.
Here is Alucard's entry from a translation on the Castlevania Realm:
The son opposed his father, who still had a human heart even after getting rid of soul, as his own body was no longer human as well and it
finally went to the point that he slesyd reminding himself of his hate for his father. However, he cannot challenge his own father, who is an evil
spirit himself, all alone as the odds are agaisnt him. Although his relationship to Dracula is a burden for the Cross, nonetheless, Adrian
Fahrenheit Tepes opted to fight anyway. He changed his name to Alucard and infiltrate Wallachia underground with the purpose of destroying
his father and restoring the beauty of Wallachia, he began searching for a comrade that shared the same ideal.
Here is the exchange in the Manga:
Dracula: How could this be? The God of Death has perished?
Succubus: It was a Bemont
Dracula: Belmont has come. I never thought the Hall would fall so soon...
Succubus: Well, of course. The one coming with Belmont... Is your son after all Count.
Dracula: Adrian... Not just Hector, but now you, too... Foolish betrayers... You shall be cursed! Humans who betray me... ...as well as this world! and God as well! You shall learn, at great cost to you... My sorrow and wrath!!
-
Okay, I can´t recall what´s exactly stated in the CV3 Manual besides the whole Poltergeist King mess xD
But yeah, I remember what happenend in the Manga. It really seems like he joined his Father again... but why? Wouldn´t someone notice if he´s holding back and is not harming any humans? And wouldn´t they keep an eye on him, even more because he betrayed Dracula before?
And still, I don´t get why Dracula seems not to have learned anything from his encounter with Sonia, besides of amass an even more powerful army of Monsters and some Devil Forgers... and when one of his strongest is went missing, he sends the other one instead of killing Trever (although you could explain this as Isaac is on the same level as Hector.... if the latter turns out to betray them, Isaac would be the only one who could kill him)
-
I don't think Dracula knew Alucard had betrayed him during Legends. He must have known something was up when he "abandoned" him beforehand, but it probably wasn't an all out betrayal and Alucard probably had an emotional reconciliation when he returned to the castle after being defeated by Sonia Belmont. Its hard to say how long he was pretending to serve his father, perhaps not long enough for there to be any positive evidence of betrayal?
-
Okay, I can´t recall what´s exactly stated in the CV3 Manual besides the whole Poltergeist King mess xD
But yeah, I remember what happenend in the Manga. It really seems like he joined his Father again... but why? Wouldn´t someone notice if he´s holding back and is not harming any humans? And wouldn´t they keep an eye on him, even more because he betrayed Dracula before?
And still, I don´t get why Dracula seems not to have learned anything from his encounter with Sonia, besides of amass an even more powerful army of Monsters and some Devil Forgers... and when one of his strongest is went missing, he sends the other one instead of killing Trever (although you could explain this as Isaac is on the same level as Hector.... if the latter turns out to betray them, Isaac would be the only one who could kill him)
This is why I'm not sure about including Legends in the timeline. In my opinion, the only way it could work is if the storyline of Legends was changed (which I don't see ever happening).
-
Dracula never expects to be beaten in any game.
If they did change the story for Legends, it wouldn't be the first time. The story found in the original Castlevania: The Adventure was completely changed in both the Japanese version and the international version. The original Japanese version of The Adventure said that Dracula hadn't become a vampire yet and was just an evil wizard.
-
Dracula never expects to be beaten in any game.
If they did change the story for Legends, it wouldn't be the first time. The story found in the original Castlevania: The Adventure was completely changed in both the Japanese version and the international version. The original Japanese version of The Adventure said that Dracula hadn't become a vampire yet and was just an evil wizard.
Interesting. Why can't the translators just simply translate the story and games without changing anything.
-
Ha, for The Adventure, there were no translaters. The localizers just made up their own "story" and made it a sequel to Simon's Quest and said the hero was Simon Belmont.
For fun, here's a couple embellishments for Legends. I am going to guess that Sonia's parents died when she was just born during "the Great Belmont Purge" that I'm guessing happened, after which Dracula was ready to reveal himself. Sonia's grandfather escaped with the Vampire Killer and raised her himself. He held on to it until she was grown and passed it to her when he himself was killed. If all the males of the family had been killed off, then Sonia would in fact be the "true successor" to the vampire killer, and thus the whip would not drain her energy like it would the Morris family and she would be able to pass it down to her descendants. When the whip was passed to the Morris family, it must have known that the "true successors" were out there somewhere (even if Death thought they were all dead) and thus required the life force sacrifice to be used.
Meanwhile, when Dracula was finally ready to begin his next phase on his war against God, his plans were "disrupted" when he discovered the re-incarnation of his wife Elizabetha in Lisa and he melted. He could live his pleasant life with her with the belief that there were no Belmonts out there that would hunt him or his family. But then of course, humanity proved to be idiots.
-
That all sounds... pretty plausable, actually.
Sort of the Coppola Dracula movie.
-
Hmmm.... oh yeah, perhaps the Belmonts had a bad reputation before Sonia apparently slew Dracula. You must admit, the Belmonts had a 300 years + history of Vampire hunting....And Draculas defeat would be the final straw for Sonia to be expelled.
Actually, now that I think about it, the people might have expelled Sonia after they discovered that she was a Belmont, which became evident after her defeat of Dracula with a whip. The Japanese Dracula Curse manual said that the Belmonts were feared just as much as the vampires they hunted and as a result they lived far from people and became like myths.
Another point about Lisa's death, I do have a theory that Death may have played a part in it. Imagine that Dracula has all this power and is about to do what Death wants him to do with it, but then he is side-tracked by this whole Lisa and family thing. Dracula just needed a little nudge to set him back on track. Hard to say if he would ever betray Dracula like that, but if he thought it was for his own good, well... The forces of darkness were behind three other witch hunting incidents in Castlevania history, namely, the killing of Sypha's parents (Carmilla), the killing of Rosalee (Isaac), and the killing of Carrie's parents (Actrise, I think..). This one might be no different. And you can't blame it all on the forces of darkness though, as Carmilla said, they just enhanced the humans natural inclinations.
-
Reinhart, (pretty good summary btw) yeah I mentioned this in another thread. I find it pretty interesting that the dates seem to be changing in Legends' favor. The biggest conflict was with Lisa's death, and that seems to be fixed now. The irony is that just when Legends seems to be able to fit into the timeline, Lords of Shadow is specifically said not to be part of it. D'oh! Oh well, can't win them all I suppose.
I think Alucard didn't so much rejoin Dracula as he was just hanging around. He explains his battle with Sonia as a test to see if she could actually beat Dracula. After he is defeated, Alucard says farewell, which I always took as him going into hibernation. That's why I assumed Trevor found him in the crypts. During Legends Alucard isn't only not physically strong enough to kill his father, but he's also not emotionally strong enough. It probably didn't help that he also just lost his mother. So between Legends and CV3, Alucard may not have been helping Dracula's forces, but he wasn't working against them either. They kind of hint at that in Symphony, when Death (or is it Librarian, I can't remember) asks him not to interfere if he isn't going to join them. By the time Trevor, Sypha, and Grant show up, I think Alucard sees there is a chance to defeat Dracula, so he joins them.
For Legends, I think they should just establish that Dracula was defeated, but not killed. Like in Adventure, it only appeared he was dead, but in actuality he escaped to build an army and declare war on humans and the church that attacked him first.
I do like the idea that after Lisa's death, he destroyed the village that killed her. When the church discovered this, they sent their soldiers to destroy him, thus escalating the conflict. That's how real wars usually start, small things turn into huge conflicts. It also gives Dracula a little more character and makes him less "evil", since he was just reacting to what happened.
The idea that Death might have had a role to play in Lisa's execution is also a good one. Not only would it fit the cyclical events of the Castlevania series, but it also makes what comes next even more tragic. And, if Death does reap souls, then the entire war is just good business for him. He's like the weapons dealer that sells to both sides.
-
Reading all this warms my heart - it seems that finally Legends Story does make Sense =D
-
These are all very wonderful food for thought.
And yes, as a promoter of Castlevania Legends, I am quite happy to see that people are piecing together ways to make the whole puzzle of a timeline fit.
I had one biiiiiiig thread, long ago, that explained multiple timelines using lynchpins, which made all the games fit, but 1. I lost the file, 2. the forum was reset, and 3. now there are even more games, making it obsolete.
I should draft a new one. With Aeon's coalition (I believe he may have hired/enlisted Germaine), there may be a greater factor in this, that will probably never be explored, haha... like the Galamoth thing and his relationship with Dracula, and how Galamoth wants to take over the underworld as well as the earth dimension.
-
I'm glad it's starting to make some sense. As ridiculous as it may sound, there is always the possibility they might actually make a Castlevania: Legends ReBirth that could clear up all this stuff.
Alucard did come to the Castle in Legends with the intentions killing his father. He says this in his dialog with Sonia:
lucard Sonia! I didn't think it was true, but it is you!
Sonia Alucard!! I could say the same. What are YOU doing here?
Alucard Listen to me, Sonia. This is not a place for someone like you.
Sonia But Alucard...
Alucard This problem concerns only me and my father. I've come to fight the
lord of this castle. I can not let my father, Count Dracula, get
away with this. I must do this for my mother and for the world that
she so dearly loved. Please understand. I am the only one who can
make amends for the sins committed by my father, and there is no
reason for you to get involved in this battle. Sonia, I could not
bear to lose you, too. Now, turn back!
Sonia Thank you Alucard. You- you're probably right. In fact, you have
always made the right decisions. But I have no intention of going
back now. Just as your father was granted strength from the evil
deity to conquer the world, I have been granted strength to fight
your father. I will not run away. We all decide our own fate. It was
you who taught me that, Alucard.
Alucard Alright, Sonia. Then show me this strength you believe so strongly
in, for I too want to believe. Let us test this strength on me.
Prepare yourself!
Sonia !!
After Beating Alucard:
Alucard Ooww! I had no idea you had become so strong.
Sonia Oh, Alucard!
Alucard It looks like this time it is I who have learned a lesson.
Sonia Alucard, did you purposely...?
Alucard No, Sonia. You have made me believe in your strength.
Sonia Alucard. I'm so sorry.
Alucard Do not trouble yourself about it, Sonia. Now, I must sleep. I fear
we shall not meet again. Farewell, my beloved, my beautiful vampire
hunter.
Sonia Alucard! Alucard, I will never forget you. Farewell, dear Alucard.
The question is why would Alucard be ready to fight his father alone in Legends, but not be willing to do so in Dracula's Curse. Maybe he looked back on that and thought "man, what a fool i was back then"? Maybe he calculated that Dracula was a lot more powerful in Dracula's Curse?
Based on the Japanese translation of the Dracula's Curse that said he "infiltrated the underground" I thought that he was actively participating in and undermining Dracula's organization, but you may be right. I figured the coffin was pretty much just Alucard's bed and he would have gotten into it or out of it as he pleased and may have tested other warriors who stumbled across his coffin before settling on Trevor. The animated Dracula's Curse synapsis does agree with the idea that Trevor woke up Alucard from a multi-year slumber.
Oh, and if anyone's wondering where this synapsis for the animated Dracula's Curse is yet, here's a link. Its obviously not canon, but it may be "correct" in certain places.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14077952/Castlevania-Deck
-
I forgot there even was an animated CV3 project in development, lol. What the hell, how come they haven't updated the status on it yet? It shouldn't take this long to make these things.
-
about Dracula attacking the village Lisa died in, I could have sworn I read in the radio drama that the village was pretty much destroyed when Alucard found Lyudmil there, but now I can't find anywhere that says that. shoot, if it wasn't destroyed, then it might have been the villagers who nearly killed Lyudmil. although who knows why Magnus was there. so i guess the possibility of that happening is only pure speculation, coupled with the idea that Dracula did attack the village and surrounding villages one year after Lisa's death in the Animated Dracula's Curse. Here's a radio drama summary:
http://krizy.livejournal.com/64773.html
-
Heh, I completely missed out on the fun. It's good to see that there actually people who agree with me on the Legends thing. I made a topic about it at the Chapel once but that eventually ended in a trainwreck. But I still want to add my own two cents to this thread.
First I like to point out that Dracula didn't want to exterminate mankind during Legends and there was no war between him and them. This is made very clear during the game itself and in the manual which states that everyone is Europe was to afraid to do anything, and that Dracula's motif was to conquer the world according to Alucard.
So, pretty much every plot hole that prevents Legends from being included in the timeline are taken care off except for one: how was Dracula able to come back after getting the living daylights kicked out of him by Sonia? I actually thought of something that could work very well and it's from the translated opening from CV3 which actually differs a bit from its English counterpart.
15th century Europe.
In this dark age, an evil person named Vlad Tepes lived in Transylvania. Having reached the limits of his power, he revived dark gods and used their power to terrorize the nation of Wallachia.
My theory is that after his defeat in Legends, Dracula survived but was only barely alive and was pretty annoyed to say the least. He was outraged because mankind had judged him for his actions which he viewed as justice. He wanted revenge and he plotted to, in turn, sentence them all to extinction because it was his "divine right" to do so. But he knew that there was no way he could win with his current powers, so the only thing to do is to extend beyond his limits. He revived Dark Gods and they gave him power (because Dark Gods like to do that) which made him even more powerful then before.
Anyway, I also tried to tie this in a bit with something that Dracula said during CoD and this actually gives him a better motif for hating humans. :)
Ah, I also would like to say that these "Dark Gods" have also been refered to in the CoD manga so this theory has actually some canonity (to a certain extent) to back it up.
I think that was the final nail in the coffin for people who say that Legends condradicts. The only thing that could need some enlighting is what Dracula has been doing in the 25 year gap between Legends and CV3.
-
This reminds me of the events that happen in Final Fantasy Tactics.
There are a few characters in those games that, when they're about to die, get a 'voice' that comes out of the Zodiac Stones, who binds them to a pact; they become powerful beings and get to live again, but at the cost of becoming vessels for the Lucavi, the dark gods encapsulated in the stones.
Perhaps, as Dracula was witnessing his final moments, the crimson stone finally manifested its true power; the entity known as "Chaos" offers him the option of having eternal life and limitless power, far more than that of a regular Vampire, and he accepts this, and upon accepting the agreement, and earning his Lord of Darkness title and all his super-powers (that make Alucard not go after him directly in CV3), he is now a vessel of Chaos.
-
In Reply To #74,
I had that idea first =/
-
Perhaps, as Dracula was witnessing his final moments, the crimson stone finally manifested its true power; the entity known as "Chaos" offers him the option of having eternal life and limitless power, far more than that of a regular Vampire, and he accepts this, and upon accepting the agreement, and earning his Lord of Darkness title and all his super-powers (that make Alucard not go after him directly in CV3), he is now a vessel of Chaos.
I like this idea
-
Perhaps, as Dracula was witnessing his final moments, the crimson stone finally manifested its true power; the entity known as "Chaos" offers him the option of having eternal life and limitless power, far more than that of a regular Vampire, and he accepts this, and upon accepting the agreement, and earning his Lord of Darkness title and all his super-powers (that make Alucard not go after him directly in CV3), he is now a vessel of Chaos.
Well, that would explain a few things.
-
I'm going to have to re-read the CoD manga with this version of the timeline in mind, and try to spot that reference to the dark gods. I found it odd that the manga made no references to Lisa or Alucard (until he was at the count's doorstop). I always imagined Dracula, Lisa, Alucard, Hector, and Isaac living as one big happy "family" type thing until Lisa's death. Hector was getting along with Dracula just fine until he started attacking the humans, which I had assumed was as a result of Lisa's death. When Hector talked with Dracula at the end of the game, Dracula didn't go off about how the humans had killed his wife, but rather about how they judged him first as Nagumo had said. I also thought the Radio Drama would be an excellent time for Alucard to namedrop Hector or Isaac when talking to Lyudmil, but that never happenned. I kept expecting all these references (especially considering just about the whole cast of CoD and Dracula's curse made a cameo in the manga), but they never came. It does seem likely that Lisa's death and Dracula attacking with his Devil Forgemaster generals did occur in separate time periods, making it plausible that the events of Legends could have taken place.
-
Yeah.... it would make sense..... seeing as Dracula was so easy to defeat in Legends... and then becoming all that powerful with three powerful forms.
Maybe Chaos was inside the Crimson Stone? I don´t know if anyone here played Shadow of Memories/Shadow of Destiny... it´s story is based on alchemy, too. There was a Beeing known as Hommonculus that was trapped inside the Philosophers Stone... (despite the games´ alchemists assumption that the Stone was needed to CREATE it... but won´t spoil anything... good game with a good story btw, I recommend it)...
-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v119/c0mbat/iga3.jpg)
-
Okay, scrap my idea - what if Dracula had to die to become more powerful?
-
For some reason I always pictured Lisa not really living with Dracula. Any relationship they had would be one of those "late night vampire encounters" type things. I don't think she would have been tolerated for as long as she was if she was running her healing business out of Dracula's Castle. I think this also helps explain why Dracula wasn't able to protect her, or didn't even know she had died right away.
I don't think Alucard ever met Hector or Isaac. I was looking at my timeline. Legends happens in 1450, and if Alucard does go into hibernation (or at least stays in his crypt) until CV3 in 1476, then he definitely wouldn't have met them since Hector was born in 1455 and Isaac was born in 1452.
-
I'm going to have to re-read the CoD manga with this version of the timeline in mind, and try to spot that reference to the dark gods.
It's right at the beginning and I think I should also mention that they are called evil lords in the manga rather then gods (dunno which translation is the correct one) but it comes down to the same thing.
It does seem likely that Lisa's death and Dracula attacking with his Devil Forgemaster generals did occur in separate time periods, making it plausible that the events of Legends could have taken place.
I'm really interested what how IGA feels about that. In the 2005, around the time that the CoD manga and Kojima's Prelude to Revenge comic got released, he obviously intented that Lisa was killed shortly before CV3. Though this was not clearly stated in the comics in any way, I have to admit that it was kind of alluded to.
In the manga, Isaac at one point recalls Dracula once protected the land but its inhabitants betrayed him because they killed his wife. While he is saying that, a picture of a woman hanging to a burning (!) cross can be seen. This scene seems to imply that Lisa died not so long ago, though no specific date is given, so it could be either way. But it was probably orginally intented that way.
In Prelude to Revenge, Hector indirectly makes mention of Lisa's death and recalls that there was "a lamentalable incident".
(http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/5284/42202057.jpg)
Though no mention when it took place or if Hector was even there was made but it was probably once again intented for Lisa to die in the 1470's.
The timeline from 2005 support this, which would rule out any possibility that Legends would be included. However, the website at the offical Japanese website (which I believe was made one year or so after the old one) removed this date while every other game and event was still included. So the statement that Lisa died around that time is no longer offical. Not to mention that the radio drama states that her execution occured 20 years earlier.
I thought I would mention this before someone else would bring this up as an argument.
Oh, and I noticed something interesting while reading the English manual from Legends. Sonia's profile states that she was the first of the Belmont Clan to become a vampire hunter. This would heavily condradict with Lament if it wasn't for the fact that the Japanese manual states she was only the first female Belmont to become one.
:D
-
You know, I think I know what the trigger was that caused Dracula to send Hector and Isaac out to crush Wallachia, turn it into a desolate place, and then intended on marching on the rest of Europe. It was the attempted coup or rebellion that Grant was a part of, not Lisa's death. The Japanese Dracula's Curse said that a group of locals were dissatisfied with the situation. They basically "disapproved" of Dracula's dark ways and thus "judged" him. The people probably lived in fear for years, but weren't willing to actually act until the enigmatic Grant helped give them the courage to do so and a group went out to covertly try to overthrow the count. In the manga, Isaac talked about how the people were essentially ungrateful to Lord Dracula despite how he had always protected the land. Grant and many of his compatriots were of course captured and turned into monsters. The coup probably had popular support (Grant was after all the man of the people), so he turned his wrath on the populace. Then the Eastern Orthodox church sends in their men and they are handily dealt with. He probably dwelled on Lisa's fate the whole time and used it as part of his justification that humans should be eradicated.
Here's Grant's entry in the Japanese manual from the Castlevania realm:
Around the same time, within Wallachia, a group of rebels were corvertly plotting to overthrow Count Dracula. However their human strength was no help and they were no match for Dracula's dark powers. Some of men were teared to pieces, others were sentenced to be skewered and some were transformed into hideous monsters. Grant Dinesti, carefree man from Wallachia was among them.
There's another line about Dracula wanting even more power than what he already had. Selling his body and soul to the devil might be essentially his decision to use the Crimson Stone and lose his humanity. But he wanted even more power than that, which may be where the dark lords come into play, which probably happened right after the coup attempt.
Those who tainted their hand once don't know when to stop. Count Dracula was not sastified with the power he already had after selling his soul and body to the devil and he wanted to have more.
-
Oh, and I noticed something interesting while reading the English manual from Legends. Sonia's profile states that she was the first of the Belmont Clan to become a vampire hunter. This would heavily condradict with Lament if it wasn't for the fact that the Japanese manual states she was only the first female Belmont to become one.
:D
Do you know where to find a translation of the Japanese Legends manual and text available on the web? I could have sworn remembering reading about Sonia's grandfather, but couldn't find a translation on the Castlevania Realm.
-
No translation as far as I know. But if you have the text, a couple of online translators can help a lot. It's actually suprising what kind of stuff they left out of the English translation. I discovered that the Belmonts were a noble familly according to the manual for example.
-
All this plothole talk certainly get's your mind going, doesn't it? :)
I personally think Legends could still fit with the rest of the series. But from what was mentioned earlier about legends taking place in 1450 doesn't quite add up. Before IGA released his personal timeline, the Dungeon had the konami timeline which made more sense. From what I can remember Legends took place in 1472, not 1450. And in the Brahm Stoker novel, Vlad Tepes III became count Dracula in 1462, only 10 years before Legends. Also I read that CV3 took place in 1492; twenty years after Legends which would give Trevor enough time to grow and mature before hunting Dracula. Now that's all very convenient for me. But this also opens up a can of worms as the other games contain premature resurrections and other such tid-bits that contradict the series itself. But personally the aforementioned above just fits with Brahm Stoker's book which in my mind is the proper origin of Dracula and essentially the 'Bible' of the castlevania series in general. I'm sure the original creators of the first CV game; Vampirekiller would understand.
-X
-
yeah, it basically seems like the Castlevania continuum could work with or without Legends just fine, just rearrange the years stuff happened in and you can make it make sense either way. i still lament that Judgment didn't come with an official timeline. having dates for Grant's coup, Sypha being sent out to Castlevania, Lisa's death etc would be great data points. but i think they're purposely leaving the 1400's and the 1800's a little ambiguous just because they're not sure where they want to go with all this and don't box themselves into a corner when making future games. oh, and they want to be vague just so they can change their mind later on about something and say, well, it was only hinted at but not outright said. ugh. so it's up to us to make sense about all of this, connect the dots, and decide for ourselves what we'd rather believe until we find out positively otherwise.
-
Now that's all very convenient for me. But this also opens up a can of worms as the other games contain premature resurrections and other such tid-bits that contradict the series itself.
OK. Let the nay-saying little demon here pipe in and remind y'all that premature resurrections (....heh. sounds dirty) in the series do NOT violate the 100 year rule. The rule states specifically that once every hundred years evil is given a chance to regenerate and manifest itself on the earthly plane once again. This does not stop followers of said evil from orchestrating attempts to prematurely restore the darkness that compels them through various means. In this case, servants of the lord of all darkness, Vlad Tepes Dracula, attempting to raise him from the dead before he is able to arise on his own once every hundred years. Never mind how most of the subplots under Igarashi-sama's direction end up being empty, loopy, and totally unnecessary to the overall storyline. The point is, they are still very much plausible. Shaft's spirit overcoming Richter and using him to raise Castlevania as its new master? Hey, it works. I am tired of hearing that attempts to raise Dracula in between his centennial wake-up calls flat-out contradict the storyline because they don't happen ONE HUNDRED YEARS APART. We need reasons to play these games, and it's up to developers to come up with workable reasons to bring out another title. And you know what? So far it's been working out fine.
....I mean, you know. Apart from the end product leaving us with more questions than satisfaction. But hey, that's life in Castlevania.
...they want to be vague just so they can change their mind later on about something and say, well, it was only hinted at but not outright said. ugh. so it's up to us to make sense about all of this, connect the dots, and decide for ourselves what we'd rather believe until we find out positively otherwise.
As fine a point as this may be, it is exactly this that leads to the most disappointment, frustration, and anger from the fan base. You see, by deciding for ourselves what we want to believe and sticking to it faithfully -- F A I T H F U L L Y, mind you -- fans react so negatively when they find out otherwise. Now it's interesting the phrasing that you used. ~ Until we find out positively otherwise. It's never positive, dude, because we've all stuck so faithfully to what in our hearts we have taken to interpret as the truth that we hate being corrected and proven wrong. George Lucas did it to his whole fan base with Star Wars, and Konami is doing it to us. So you wanna preserve your ideals? Stand by what you know in your heart to be true? People, that's what we come here for. To pull up a seat and say, 'You know the way they handled this particular plot point was lame. I think it would've come off better this way.' You ain't wrong, comrade. You are most certainly not wrong.
-
Since we're done talking about Legends, I would like to talk about another plot hole. So, we all know that the Belmonts have the Vampire Killer and they can kill Dracula with it. However, other heroes like Alucard and Hector are able to defeat him as well, without using the whip of course.
That makes we wonder, has the Vampire Killer as a plot device any meaning in the overarching storyline of the series? I know that it was created in order to defeat Walter with it, but that was because he had the Ebony Stone (I think) but Dracula obviously never obtained it. Otherwise a non-Belmont could never defeat him and it wouldn't matter if he was at full power or not.
Does that mean that the Vampire Killer was only made to kill an one-shot villain? I mean, it's not like they Belmonts need the VK, a regular Alchemy whip seems to be just as effective as shown in Lament in which it was already strong enough to kill vampires and legendary monsters such as Medusa as well.
Thoughts?
-
Well, in LoI, the VK is called "the of the children of the night". Meaning that it is effective against all supernatural creatures of the night (not just Walter). I think the implication is that the whip can piece any special defense, such as the ebony stone, that individuals like Walter may use.
As for how Alucard and other non-Belmonts can defeat Dracula, Dracula doesn't have any special items that protect him like the ebony stone protected Walter. So theoretically, whether the hero is able to use the VK or not is a moot point. The only reason the Belmonts still use the VK is because that's how they are trained to hunt and destroy their enemies.
-
It's a weapon of tradition.. nothing more, to me that is.
It is said that the whip is stronger than any sword, even when it was just the alchemy whip, but in PoR there are weapons much stronger than VK. Don't remember if they are swords or not thou.
-
It's a weapon of tradition.. nothing more, to me that is.
It is said that the whip is stronger than any sword, even when it was just the alchemy whip, but in PoR there are weapons much stronger than VK. Don't remember if they are swords or not thou.
The weapons that were stronger than the VK in PoR were the slow weapons that in real life would require the use of both hands (spears, great swords, and axes)
-
PoR's Holy Claymore was the strongest sword in the game. But once I got the Vampirekiller and the magic ring from completing all the quests, then I'd simply retire it.
-X
-
I think the Alchemy Whip is strong enough to kill almost anything. But Walter was protected by the Ebony Stone, which only the Vampire Killer could destroy.
Mathias was transformed into a vampire by the Crimson Stone, and given power by it, but I don't think that stone offered him the protection that the Ebony Stone did for Walter. Since Dracula isn't protected the way Walter was, I think any powerful magic or weapon would be effective in killing him. Obviously this pertains to the Vampire Killer, but I think it also pertains to other magical weapons like the Hunter Whip, which I've always seen as another full formed Alchemy Whip that wasn't turned into a Vampire Killer.
I also think that killing Dracula isn't just about the weapon. No matter what magical sword, spear, whip, etc. one uses, every warrior that has faced and killed Dracula also has incredible amounts of fortitude. Not only did every warrior have to make it to Dracula, they also had to fight him in his many forms. And with a few exceptions, most of them did it alone. Not just anyone can do that, or Joe the peasant farmer would just take care of it with his pitchfork every time Castlevania rises out of the mists.
I think when it comes to killing Dracula, the warrior is just as important, or even more important, than the weapon they use.
-
one big thing is that all the times the VK was not used to kill Dracula, it was during one of his "early" resurrections, where he was not thought to be at his full power. it may be that when he's at full power, the VK is the only thing that can send him back to the other world and require another 100 years before he's at his full strength again. even when help is given in the form of an Alucard or Maria, I'll bet the final "canon" blow was always with the VK.
the one exception to this seems to be that Dracula appeared to be at his "full" power during Judgment, as its made clear that this was the first time Alucard had faced him alone at his full power (I'm pretty sure Dracula entered the rift at the very beginning of his 1999 resurrection as a result, considering he was at full power and "remembered" Eric), but the end result of defeating Dracula in the rift was not to send him back to hell and trigger another 100 year resurrection cycle.
it may be that even if you did manage to kill Dracula without using the Vampire Killer while he was at his full strength, he would still be at his "full strength" the next time his minions pull of an early resurrection, which could be the very next day for all we know if he wasn't killed properly.
-
one big thing is that all the times the VK was not used to kill Dracula, it was during one of his "early" resurrections, where he was not thought to be at his full power. it may be that when he's at full power, the VK is the only thing that can send him back to the other world and require another 100 years before he's at his full strength again. even when help is given in the form of an Alucard or Maria, I'll bet the final "canon" blow was always with the VK.
the one exception to this seems to be that Dracula appeared to be at his "full" power during Judgment, as its made clear that this was the first time Alucard had faced him alone at his full power (I'm pretty sure Dracula entered the rift at the very beginning of his 1999 resurrection as a result, considering he was at full power and "remembered" Eric), but the end result of defeating Dracula in the rift was not to send him back to hell and trigger another 100 year resurrection cycle.
it may be that even if you did manage to kill Dracula without using the Vampire Killer while he was at his full strength, he would still be at his "full strength" the next time his minions pull of an early resurrection, which could be the very next day for all we know if he wasn't killed properly.
I agree with you to a point. I think it is nearly impossible for a human not using the VK (or a weapon like it) to defeat Dracula when he is at his full power. However, I think that it is possible for a non-human (or an individual of demonic decent) to do it without the VK. For example, Alucard in Judgment. It would be still be very difficult, but still within reason.
-
The way I always interpreted the VK whip is that it was what allowed an ordinary human to be on Dracula's level.
The Belmonts are just human after all. Even if they are at their full potential, it is the whip that gives them the edge.
What other mere human ever defeated Dracula? Pretty much every other character that has done the job had some sort of powers, right?
Alucard is a vampire & his son. The Belnades/Fernandez clan are powerful mages/witches. Are there any obvious ones that were just people? Grant perhaps, but I guess you could say he had Trevor's help.
-
anybody have any idea why a Belmont's blood was the key to the chaotic realm (or whatever the heck that place was) in Curse of Darkness? um, and what the cosmic implications for that are?
-
anybody have any idea why a Belmont's blood was the key to the chaotic realm (or whatever the heck that place was) in Curse of Darkness? um, and what the cosmic implications for that are?
Good question. It is never really explained. Also, just before Issac stabs Trevor, he states that placing a guard there (Dullahun) played a part in breaking the seal. This leads to four more questions: 1) Who sealed the castle? 2) When was it sealed? 3) Who placed the guard there? 4) If the Belmonts placed the guard there, why did they choose an entity of darkness?
-
Whenever I played the old CV games I never thought that the whip itself was anything special except for the fact that only a Belmont could wield it. I my mind it was the Belmonts themselves that carried the power to subdue Dracula and unless you were a Belmont by blood then there was no way in hell that you would be able to take down the king of vampires. It didn't matter if you were another vampire, a wizard, etc. But when SotN came out everything I thought I knew was tossed out the window.
-X
-
Good question. It is never really explained. Also, just before Issac stabs Trevor, he states that placing a guard there (Dullahun) played a part in breaking the seal. This leads to four more questions: 1) Who sealed the castle? 2) When was it sealed? 3) Who placed the guard there? 4) If the Belmonts placed the guard there, why did they choose an entity of darkness?
um... must have been Alucard? maybe he and Dullahan go way back? i could see him say "hey Trevor, your eye is bleeding profusely. let me have some of that stuff before you patch it up for a second." if he figured out how to seal the castle in an eclipse in 1999, maybe this was his first crack at it?
shoot, i feel robbed. if volume 3 of the COD manga had actually been made, maybe we'd understand this a little better. it might have had some excellent flashbacks from around this time if it focused on Trevor.
-
um... must have been Alucard? maybe he and Dullahan go way back? i could see him say "hey Trevor, your eye is bleeding profusely. let me have some of that stuff before you patch it up for a second." if he figured out how to seal the castle in an eclipse in 1999, maybe this was his first crack at it?
shoot, i feel robbed. if volume 3 of the COD manga had actually been made, maybe we'd understand this a little better. it might have had some excellent flashbacks from around this time if it focused on Trevor.
I feel the same. Oh why was the manga discontinued.
-
For some reason I was under the impression that it was Trevor who put Dullahan there. If he did I could only assume that it was with Alucard and Sypha's help.
On another note, anybody ever wonder where Sypha and Grant were during Curse of Darkness? Affair? (j/king)
-
lol
-
On another note, anybody ever wonder where Sypha and Grant were during Curse of Darkness? Affair? (j/king)
Sypha was home takin care of the House and Grant.. well.. he just hangs around.. .. ::)
Well.. seriously though.. didn't Grant stay in the village below Castlevania to rebuild it?
-
well, if Michelle Danasty from the "Akumajo Dracula: Kabuchi no Tsuisoukyoku" novel is his descendant, we can assume he got over Sypha and got himself a wife and kids.
-
About that seal thing,
I dunno who placed the seal and why it was in the infinite corridor but I know who placed the Dullahan there. It was Death who wanted Hector to break the seal. During the game it was explained that a Devil Forgemaster produces some kind of special energy during battle which is apperently strong enough to break it. He wanted Hector to fight the Dullahan, so that the seal would be undone and thus would result in the ressurection of Dracula's Castle which in turn would allow him to revive.
At least, that's what I think. Otherwise I have no clue.
-
About that seal thing,
I dunno who placed the seal and why it was in the infinite corridor but I know who placed the Dullahan there. It was Death who wanted Hector to break the seal. During the game it was explained that a Devil Forgemaster produces some kind of special energy during battle which is apperently strong enough to break it. He wanted Hector to fight the Dullahan, so that the seal would be undone and thus would result in the ressurection of Dracula's Castle which in turn would allow him to revive.
At least, that's what I think. Otherwise I have no clue.
I guess could have been Issac. After all, he managed to get a sample of Trevor's blood, which acts as the key to that area and he knew how to break the seal. The proof of his knowledge is based on what he says before he stabs Trevor: "Do not equate the power of a devil forgemaster with that of an ordinary sorcerer. The magical power produced in battle is more than enough to break a seal like that."
If the manga was continued, it could have explained it better.
-
I thought he refered to Hector when he said that because he was the one fighting at that moment. Anyway,
any reason why "retellings" of Simon's adventure exist (Haunted, Castlevania Chronicles)? Like a story explanation?
-
It might be the fact that Simon is a popular generic character for Castlevania which is why he starred in more games then any other Belmont. All those games and all those console ports...
-X
-
so you don't have to figure out where to squeeze the game into the timeline.
-
I was more refering to an "in-universe" explanation...
But I guess there isn't one. :-\
-
all these games are supposed to be telling the same story. but it would be nice if we could figure if it happened in "any" of the games, then it happened canonically. the only story difference of any importance (other than perhaps the different details about how and why Dracula returned) is Simon's bride in Haunted Castle. I was hoping judgment would make some kind of reference to her, but alas, no. I suppose Dracula's plan to end the Belmont line with the curse would be kind of pointless if he was married and had the opportunity to have kids for the seven or so years it took for the curse to wear him down. Unless the curse also made him sterile?
-
Simon "the infertile" Belmont, lol. I love Simon, but if he was sterile, it's probably more likely to be the fault of steroids than it is Dracula.
Here's a reason why there are so many versions of the first Castlevania. Each version is Simon telling the story again.
Simon: Did I ever tell you kids about the time I killed Dracula?
Juste: Yes Grandpa, you've told us like a hundred times.
Simon: It all started when Dracula swooped out of the sky and took your Grandma as we were leaving the church.
Juste: Why did you get married in the middle of the night?
Simon: So I took out my trusty whip and yelled "Dracula, I'm a comin'!"
Juste: Why did you bring a whip to your wedding?
Simon: ... and at the end of the first corridor, I turn the corner, and there's this huge fucking bat. So I just pulled out my trusty battle axe and started throwing it at him.
Juste: Why would you throw it at him? Wouldn't you just have to go pick it up after it fell back down? This story never makes any sense.
Simon: Don't back talk your elders young man! And get your hair cut.
Juste: Grandpa, this is the style.
Simon: Back in my day we wore manly mullets. For cryin' out loud son, you look like a girl! And what's with that giant red coat? Where's your ultra tight body armor that leaves nothing to the imagination? If you want people to think you're a real man, you've gotta show them your man parts, son.
Juste: sigh
Simon: Did I ever tell you about my friend Arthur. Now there's a real man. See, he and his girlfriend were having a picnic in the graveyard in the middle of the night, when all of a sudden, Satan shows up and steals her away.
Juste: What?
Simon: So he fights his way all the way to Satan, while only wearing his underpants.
Juste: Why would anyone do that?
Simon: But that Satan is a tricky one, and he transports Arthur all the way back to the graveyard. So Arthur has to fight his way all the way back to Satan again.
Juste: Why didn't Satan just teleport him into the ocean or space or something?
Simon: You young'ns got it too easy. You couldn't even kill Dracula's ghost, lookin' like you do.
-
Simon "the infertile" Belmont, lol. I love Simon, but if he was sterile, it's probably more likely to be the fault of steroids than it is Dracula.
Here's a reason why there are so many versions of the first Castlevania. Each version is Simon telling the story again.
Simon: Did I ever tell you kids about the time I killed Dracula?
Juste: Yes Grandpa, you've told us like a hundred times.
Simon: It all started when Dracula swooped out of the sky and took your Grandma as we were leaving the church.
Juste: Why did you get married in the middle of the night?
Simon: So I took out my trusty whip and yelled "Dracula, I'm a comin'!"
Juste: Why did you bring a whip to your wedding?
Simon: ... and at the end of the first corridor, I turn the corner, and there's this huge fucking bat. So I just pulled out my trusty battle axe and started throwing it at him.
Juste: Why would you throw it at him? Wouldn't you just have to go pick it up after it fell back down? This story never makes any sense.
Simon: Don't back talk your elders young man! And get your hair cut.
Juste: Grandpa, this is the style.
Simon: Back in my day we wore manly mullets. For cryin' out loud son, you look like a girl! And what's with that giant red coat? Where's your ultra tight body armor that leaves nothing to the imagination? If you want people to think you're a real man, you've gotta show them your man parts, son.
Juste: sigh
Simon: Did I ever tell you about my friend Arthur. Now there's a real man. See, he and his girlfriend were having a picnic in the graveyard in the middle of the night, when all of a sudden, Satan shows up and steals her away.
Juste: What?
Simon: So he fights his way all the way to Satan, while only wearing his underpants.
Juste: Why would anyone do that?
Simon: But that Satan is a tricky one, and he transports Arthur all the way back to the graveyard. So Arthur has to fight his way all the way back to Satan again.
Juste: Why didn't Satan just teleport him into the ocean or space or something?
Simon: You young'ns got it too easy. You couldn't even kill Dracula's ghost, lookin' like you do.
LAMO
-
That was epic! ^_^
-
By the way, what´s the deal with the Abondoned Castle from CoD? At first, I believed it to be the ruins of Castlevania (which, of course, turned out to be false).
Then, I believed it to be the Castle of Walter after seeing some similarities, although just loosely (another hint seemed to be the Secret Maoi Item.... which you can get if you had an LoI Save).
But then I read something about the whole thing beeing just a Homage to CV1´s Castle....
To be honest, I´m confused.
-
From what I can extrapolate the abandoned castle is Castlevania from cv3. There are clues that indicate it as such all throughout the castle itself. There are some backgrounds seen from the original CV1 which I thought was an interesting touch but it leads it to be even more likely that it is in fact Castlevania. Also Castlevania is the "ONLY" castle in exsistance that has the final tower-top design which is where you fought the giant mechanized knight in CoD.
-X
-
But what´s the other Castle supposed to be? The one which Hector refers to as Draculas Castle? It´s just doesn´t make sense.
Oh yeah, I remember the guy who turned me into a CV Fan saying that Dracula had more than one Castle....
-
It does seem like there's two Castles in the original Castle, but the "Abandoned Castle" in CoD seems to have elements from both original Castles, so it still doesn't make sense.
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/entrance.htm
Don't have any "good" theories, but considering that the "Abandoned Castle" is still standing before "Dracula's Castle" is risen, maybe it's a Castle that's been there for centuries that originally has nothing to do with the "Demon Castle". When Dracula's Castle is created or regenerated, it is used as a template, since it's the nearest Castle to Dracula's Castle. When the Demon Castle crumbles, this "real" one remains and can be used by Dracula's forces until the Demon Castle returns. Maybe it's Dracula's original castle that he created and lived in for a while, but he later tapped into demonic energy that allowed him to "summon" the "Demon Castle" nearby, so he "abandoned" this one and started using the new demonic one?
Games featuring the Abandoned Castle? (was standing at the beginning of the game and didn't dissolve at the end):
- Curse of Darkness (Isaac and monsters hung out here)
- Order of Shadows (called the "mansion", Dracula's Castle didn't materialize until Dracula was revived)
- Simon's Quest (it's "abandoned", but not pulverized)
- Bloodlines (it's run down, but not completely destroyed and has the same mechanical boss)
Games featuring Dracula's Castle (patterned after the Abandoned Castle, often "raised" at the beginning or middle of the game, crumbles at the end):
- Legends
- Dracula's Curse
- Curse of Darkness (revived near the end)
- The Adventure and Belmont's Revenge
- Order of Shadows (raised when Dracula is raised, but mysteriously doesn't crumble at the end)
- Castlevania (looks "exactly" like the Abandoned Castle, but destroyed when Dracula is killed)
- Harmony of Dissonance (came into being when Maxim "second" soul was created)
- Rondo of Blood etc
- Symphony of the Night (castle "appeared" because of Richter and showed Maria the way)
- Order of Ecclesia (castle "appears" when Dracula resurrected and then dissolves)
- Legacy of Darkness and Castlevania 64 (crumbles at end of C64)
- Aria of Sorrow (sealed in an Eclipse)
-
I have noticed that the castle's location sometimes engulfs already existing architecture within. This is not limited to the caverns inside and nearby, but also any nearby.
Case in point: The Villa. The Villa is its own dwelling that happened to be up in that hill. However, when the castle manifests itself around it, it becomes "annexed" to the castle (Castle Annex: The Villa), and its entire grounds become haunted. Sometimes areas nearby are unaffected but it's usually because of some holy force nearby, such as Rinado's place near the Castle of Eternal Night (different situation).
-
I think Jorge is right. When Castlevania rises, it engulfs whatever is around it, changing it to what it needs to be. I think every time Dracula is defeated, the "creature of chaos" that is the castle, essentially dies. The ruins that are left are it's lifeless body.
I think the castle in the beginning of CoD was one of these husks that the Castle leaves behind. I think when they raise Castlevania later in the game, they are just raising the creature again, so it spawns a new body, like it always does.
-
Also, Dracula's Castle has the habit of popping up in different locations. Sometimes it's perched atop a large hill/cliff and it overlooks the lake(SotN). Other times it's within the countryside, away from a large body of water(OoE). CoD had it appear ON the lake itself.
The funny thing about the Abandoned Castle and Dracula's Castle in CoD was that the Abandoned Castle LOOKED more like Dracula's Castle(in comparison to past CV games) than the final Dracula's Castle ever did. I mean interior and exterior. The final Dracula's Castle almost had the appearance of a cathedral in the exterior, and the interior felt very un-Castlevania-ish. One example would be the Keep staircase, which twisted and turned like a snake. Another would be the way to the front, which was a large stone bridge with no courtyard or wooden draw bridge. Interestly enough, the Abandoned Castle had both, as well as areas that replicated most of CV1's stages, and the classic staircase to Dracula's lair.
Also, something that I found strange about CoD when Dracula's Castle materialized was how all the water in every area vanished. What was the point of that? The lake was bare, the aquaduct and rivers were dry. Where did all the water go? Did it become Dracula's Castle(like it was some strange alchemy that transmutes water into a castle)? Why water?
-
Also, something that I found strange about CoD when Dracula's Castle materialized was how all the water in every area vanished. What was the point of that? The lake was bare, the aquaduct and rivers were dry. Where did all the water go? Did it become Dracula's Castle(like it was some strange alchemy that transmutes water into a castle)? Why water?
Didn´t Castlevania rob the life essence of it´s surroundings? Water = Life. You know what I mean?
I can´t recall CV3 right know, but didn´t the Castle dissappear like always? I thought it did.
Oh yeah, I don´t know if this is the right place to discuss but: you remember the place where you fought Isaac and Death? That crazy purple room? I have no idea what it´s purpose was (Maybe Devil Forging? Since there was an Orb with something that looked like a monster inside it). Sooo... about that room. Purple? The room before Dracula? You know what all this reminds me of?
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/castlevania/images/0/04/CV3_Doppelgangar.JPG
Let´s assume the room was to be used to perform Devil Forging.... since there was no Hector or Isaac present at the time Trevor invaded the Castle, nobody would shape a creature out of the mass. Know, imagine some kind of accident happenend... (which would explain the btoken orb with the monster inside)... the gooey mass would come to life... but has no real form of it´s own. But when it sensed the arrival of Trevor and co. it would just mimicry their form to attack them.
(I´m kinda proud of this idea)
-
Very interesting! Just saw the Ending of Legends and Draculas Curse. While Legends Castle goes right into the water, CV3´s crumbles to ruins.
So the Castle which rises at the end of CoD could be the one from Legends... while the abondoned one could really be Castlevania from Draculas Curse, just like X said.
-
What I always wondered was this:
So, apparently, Simon Belmont gets cursed in Castlevania 2, and it says he became that way after getting injured by Dracula in the final battle from the first game. But what if when you beat the first game, you didn't get hit once by Dracula? I know it may be being picky, but it is possible.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAybiJ6Qf1M (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAybiJ6Qf1M)
-
yeah, they should totally release Castlevania and Simon's Quest as back-to-back games. If you beat Castlevania without being hit, you don't have to play Simon's Quest.
-
yeah, they should totally release Castlevania and Simon's Quest as back-to-back games. If you beat Castlevania without being hit, you don't have to play Simon's Quest.
Why would anyone wanna be rewarded with NOT having to keep playing??
And does it really say that the curse is laid upon Simon when he is being hurt?
-
I'm pretty sure that CVIV was never supposed to be a sequel:
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv4/documents/CV4J.txt
Or am I missing something here?
-
Just from the original Japanese title you can tell it wasn't intended as a sequel.
"Akuma-jou Dracula"
Why is that even in question?
-
I'm copy/pasting this from another thread.
Again, this is why I used to think CV4 was a sequel to CV2 (the key words here being 'used to').
QUOTE (from other thread):
I can chime in on how CV4 'could've' been seen as a sequel to Simon's quest:
WARNING (Incoming Spoilers from a ridiculously long time ago!)
------------------------------------------------------------
1. if you finish Simon's quest with the best ending, Dracula rises from his grave after the text is gone.
(http://www.inverteddungeon.com/jorgefuentes/images3/castle2good-6.gif)
(zOMG Spoiler)
2. Dracula's grave in Simon's Quest, and his grave in Super Castlevania IV (more so in the JPN version with the cross) is designed exactly the same way:
(http://www.inverteddungeon.com/jorgefuentes/images3/Akumajo%20Dracula-J%200004.png)(http://www.inverteddungeon.com/jorgefuentes/images3/Akumajo%20Dracula-J%200005.png)
END QUOTE
-
I noticed the grave stones too, but the intro of the game stated that it had been hundred years since the last battle between Dracula and the Belmonts. How does that work? :-\
-
When I first got the game (I must have been like 12 yo) I thought it was a sequel because of the IV on the box & title screen.
Then when the intro started up and I read that part I was confused as to how Simon managed to show up 100 years later without aging.
-
obviously, the powers that be looked for a hero to who could stop Dracula, and none could be found (because Simon died of his wounds after Simon's Quest and had no descendants), so it decided to transport Simon in time 100 years later to face the count.
-
Oh... well I don't know about that.
-
The thing that I think really throws people for a loop with CV4 is the intro. I know that at least in the US version of the game, it states that "once again Simon Belmont sets out with only his whip and his courage." after saying that "Dracula and the Belmonts haven't fought each other for 100 years". If the part about Simon Belmont once again setting out, or that the previous battle was 100 years earlier was removed, there would be no problem because then the game would either be a remake of the original CV or a sequel to Simon's Quest.
-
Though SCV4 is a remake and I'm thankful that the mistress of the forbidden library; Nagumo could find the Japanese translation of the intro story, I still think that this game holds potential to be the sequel to Simon's quest. Al you would need to do is remove certain sections of the US intro to make it so.
-X
-
Though SCV4 is a remake and I'm thankful that the mistress of the forbidden library; Nagumo could find the Japanese translation of the intro story, I still think that this game holds potential to be the sequel to Simon's quest. Al you would need to do is remove certain sections of the US intro to make it so.
-X
Long ago, before the people at Konami and Iga released their timeline, the good people at Nintendo Power created a timeline. This made sense, because back then the majority of Castlevania games were on Nintendo. This timeline of theirs was pretty accurate. There was only a few differences. They included Legends for instance. The biggest difference was that they put CV 2 just a couple years after CV 1, and CV 4 took place about five years later. I always like that. It made more sense for me that Simon took care of his curse in two years instead of seven, and I always liked the idea of him fighting Dracula one more time.
-
I thought the JPN version of Super CV 4 had something different.
I always thought it was just a translation problem. We've seen those before.
Again, this is what I used to believe, heh heh... now I know it's a reimagining type of game.
Anyone got the translation of the JPN CV4 intro text?
-
This was the Text that Nagumo found:
The text was translated by "Help Me":
"During the middle ages in Europe, there was once a peaceful small country named Transylvania. A country associated with the legend of
Dracula.
'Once in every hundred years, there's a time when the power of good is weakened and men filled with evil in their hearts pray for the ressurection
of the prince of darkness. And with each ressurection, his evil power grows stronger.'
In the past, he has taken several forms in this world with each ressurection. However, when the entire world is covered by many dark clouds
and the demon king rules the dark evening, the Belmont family has always come forth to oppose him.
The Belmonts had always defeated Dracula in death duels, banishing him from the living world for another hundred years, in which prosperity
would once again be covered by shadows and Transylvania suffers a continous disaster...
One day, the village was shrouded by a dark thunderstorm and a straight stroke of lightning quickly silenced the town. In that very instance,
the dark powers has brought back the once powerful Price of Darkness and along with him, a powerful demon army. To help solve this crisis,
Simon, the young heir of the Belmont clan, has vowed to liberate the human world. Although, insecured of his overwhelming influence, Simon
nonetheless arms himself with the whip containing mysterious powers inherited from his ancestors and sets for to the demon castle."
Hope that help's you Jorge. It helped me. :)
-X
-
Look at that..
Simon is not even mentioned..
-
Ah, that text is from the manual though. Dunno about the intro but I shall try to dig it up somewhere.
-
Isn't it CV4 where they mention Dracula is resurrected on Easter this time?
-
Nah, that was Chronicles ;)
-
Here are some pics of the Japanese intro text:
(http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh189/koala_knight/Game%20Translation%20Stuff/AkumajouDraculaJ_00002.png)
(http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh189/koala_knight/Game%20Translation%20Stuff/AkumajouDraculaJ_00001.png)
(http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh189/koala_knight/Game%20Translation%20Stuff/AkumajouDraculaJ_00000.png)
-
Here are some pics of the Japanese intro text:
(http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh189/koala_knight/Game%20Translation%20Stuff/AkumajouDraculaJ_00000.png)
(http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh189/koala_knight/Game%20Translation%20Stuff/AkumajouDraculaJ_00001.png)
(http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh189/koala_knight/Game%20Translation%20Stuff/AkumajouDraculaJ_00002.png)
It is the same as the Japanese Manual Story.
-
It is the same as the Japanese Manual Story.
(http://i45.tinypic.com/14ki9m8.jpg)
Woah, really? So that means that the statement that SCVIV takes places exactly 100 hundred years after the last confrontation between Dracula and the Belmont Clan is just American mumbo jumbo ? (The Japanese manual doesn't mention it) If that is true, that means that it could be quite possible that this game was indeed originally intented to be a sequel to Simon's Quest. The manual does mention the 100 year rule but does not claim to take place on the 100 year mark. With this plus the fact that the gravestone that Dracula rises from is the same from CV2, Jorge's theory actually makes a whole lot of sense.
o my god
-
Nah, that was Chronicles ;)
Ah yeah, thanks for reminding me. I totally forgot about that game for some reason.
-
Woah, really?
http://koutei65535uhauha.hp.infoseek.co.jp/kyassuru/sfc/index.html
-
It seems to me that CV4, CV1, and Chronicles are just different versions of the same event.
-
Same here. Even though Simon´s an awesome character, him fighting Dracula three times sounds a bit.... well.... unlikely.
Wasn´t The Adventure also believed to be another of Simons exploits to Castlevania because translators were making things up again? So, Simon Belmont! Go forth and fight Drac 4 times till CV5 arrives!
;)
Oh yeah, I´m also referring to normal life expectations at the time, which, as far as I know, wasn´t as high as it is today.
-
One of the guys at ROMHacking.net is re-translating the text.
It'll be interesting to see the differences in nuance between different translators.
-
http://koutei65535uhauha.hp.infoseek.co.jp/kyassuru/sfc/index.html
Ohhh. You're restarting the site? Nice.
Though yeah, the story is really just vague about things. It could be either a retelling or third encounter no problem. Super CVIV was the one to introduce the hundred year rule wasn't it? I guess it'd be logical to guess it takes place on the 100th year mark thus, even if it didn't specifically date when it takes place.
-
It seems like only yesterday that I was enjoying another fun-filled romp through Super CV IV; lights out in my room, surround sound turned up, watching the intro again like a good little super fan. For the life of me though, I do not recall it mentioning anywhere at any point that Simon and Dracula's confrontation was now taking place at the hundred year mark. It was the first time the 100 year rule was established, true, but it did not state specifically that this latest encounter was part of the cycle at all. -And I could quote that opening scrawl text word for word back then. In fact, what does stand out now is how it mentions that "once again" Simon Belmont must confront Dracula, setting it up as a true sequel.
Now it was my understanding that the original Japanese version was another remake and that the American translation had tweaked things to make it appear as if this were the third time Simon ventured into the castle. Not the other way around as is now being speculated.
-
@Nagumo:
You made me lawlz so hard just now! XD
Hokuto No Ken is also awesomesauce!
But... wow yeah! :O
-
Now it was my understanding that the original Japanese version was another remake and that the American translation had tweaked things to make it appear as if this were the third time Simon ventured into the castle. Not the other way around as is now being speculated.
You are correct. There is nothing in the original Japanese text that says anything to even imply that Simon had fought Dracula before.
That game is a remake, nothing more. The American mumbo-jumbo is just that.
On the subject of the hundred year thing, do we have any info on the games previous to SCV4? Japanese manual scans, in-game text?
Anything at all that would indicate the rule?
-
Well, Trevor fought Dracula twice.
And so did Christopher.
It's not that far-fetched to have the main hero of the series do it three times. After all, that 2nd time was a joke. xD
"BLARRRRGH I AM DRACULA REBORNNNN!!!"
"Yeah dude but I took real bad care of your parts, I made sure to bump the sack into every tree, boulder and archway on my way here soooo"
"ARRRRRRRRRH WHY AM I ALL FUBAR?!??!?"
"Yeah here"
**puts a garlic down in front of Drac**
"AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAhhhhhhHFFFFFffff fffffffffffffffff" **dies**
"Yeah that'll teach ya to have the hero collect your remains to revive you."
(mental note: using his parts to revive him always yields a fucked up weak-ass Drac. Better tell my children and grandchildren)
Fast-forward a few years:
"Grandpappy, you killed Dracula three times?"
"Yeah Juste, but I really don't count the 2nd time, he was all messed up. Come here with your old grandpappy and I'll tell ya all about it"
"Ok! :3 "
-
Alucard did it three times and nobody is complaining about that....
Oh, I have another plothole: Simon had to ressurect Dracula in CV2 (which he did) to break his curse, but Rondo/DXC seem to ignore this because of the it-has-been-100-years-since-Dracula-is revived thing.
-
I have decided that I will believe Simon fought Dracula 3 times just because Simon is cool enough.
-
I always assumed that it was common knowledge that Super Castlevania 4 was a retelling of Simon's first encounter with Dracula. As a kid, when it was first released, I remember being confused but then common sense kicked in.
-
Well, Trevor fought Dracula twice.
And so did Christopher.
It's not that far-fetched to have the main hero of the series do it three times. After all, that 2nd time was a joke. xD
"BLARRRRGH I AM DRACULA REBORNNNN!!!"
"Yeah dude but I took real bad care of your parts, I made sure to bump the sack into every tree, boulder and archway on my way here soooo"
"ARRRRRRRRRH WHY AM I ALL FUBAR?!??!?"
"Yeah here"
**puts a garlic down in front of Drac**
"AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAhhhhhhHFFFFFffff fffffffffffffffff" **dies**
"Yeah that'll teach ya to have the hero collect your remains to revive you."
(mental note: using his parts to revive him always yields a fucked up weak-ass Drac. Better tell my children and grandchildren)
Fast-forward a few years:
"Grandpappy, you killed Dracula three times?"
"Yeah Juste, but I really don't count the 2nd time, he was all messed up. Come here with your old grandpappy and I'll tell ya all about it"
"Ok! :3 "
Wait, Trevor only fought him once (CV3). When was the other time?
-
I'm with Thernz on this one.
Simon's just full of win and awesome. :D
@DarkWzrd: You're right, Curse of Darkness doesn't have him fight Dracula... per se.
EDIT (adding):
@Nagumo: I think that the 100-years rule is just a rule for when the forces of good start to weaken. Thus, around this time, you're likely to get a more Powerful Dracula than at other times.
So, while you can resurrect Dracula at any time (as many games have shown), that Dracula will inevitably be weaker depending on when you do it, or what current events are around to augment/offset this. For example, you can resurrect Dracula 'out of season' if there's a major event that will help him (like in Bloodlines and the souls of World War 1, or Portrait of Ruin and the souls of War World II, etc.).
Bringing him forth 'out of season' and on a relatively peaceful time period will result in a weak Dracula (Harmony of Dissonance).
-
One of the characters in Castlevania 64 or Legacy of Darkness (don't remember who) said something like "don't be ridiculous, Dracula's not due to return for some time now". It is a "legend" that Dracula revives every 100 years, and that what everyone expects. But do funny things like using man-wolf power to enable Dracula to re-incarnate in a new body, and you can get him to bypass that cycle.
One thing that's a real shame is that Super Castlevania IV talks about the fact that Dracula had been resurrected "many" times every one hundred years and that there was always a Belmont to take him down, and yet Super Castlevania IV only represents his second 100 year resurrection cycle. i thought that since Lament of Innocence took place in a thousand years ago, that it was making room for several 100 year resurrections. but they decided to adhere to the "Trevor Belmont is the first Belmont to kill Dracula" line, so that didn't happen.
You know, Super Castlevania IV really gave you a sense of many many 100 year confrontations between the Belmonts and Dracula. Lords of Shadows takes place way back in the 1050s and "seems" to already have established that Dracula hates the Belmonts, making me think they go back possibly many centuries before that. Lords of Shadows might recapture some of that long family history that the canon series boxed itself out of.
I wonder if the 100 year confrontation between the Belmonts and Dracula still took place between LoI and CV III, even if the end result wasn't the Belmonts actually killing Dracula, just putting a stop to his plans during the time he was at his most powerful. Iga thought he was living quite peaceably during this time period, but I wonder.
-
Here are the translating efforts of the guys over at ROMHacking.net:
http://www.romhacking.net/forum/index.php/topic,10329.msg155533.html#msg155533
-
Let's forget the 100 year rule. Remember, the timeline gets changed every so often and no one seems to think about it until a new game is finished instead of the other way around. That is what causes these plot holes. Keep in mind that when older games like CV4 were made, there as no real origin to the whip or reason why the Belmonts always fought Dracula other than the fact that he was evil. Things change and stories evolve. That being said, we can't assume that everything said in the games themselves is accurate anymore (especially in the older games).
-
Here are the translating efforts of the guys over at ROMHacking.net:
http://www.romhacking.net/forum/index.php/topic,10329.msg155533.html#msg155533
It's funny how the two translations of the intro/manual use the 100 year date in a different context. The second translations makes you believe that the game does take place on the 100 yeark mark while the other doesn't. The translation from the Castlevania lore also translates that part differently.
So, which translation is correct?
Paul Jensen:
As it neared 100 years
since the dark lord was destroyed
in a life-and-death struggle
with the Belmonts
and banished from the human world,
a lasting drought cast a shadow
over Transylvania's former prosperity.
DarknessSavior:
The demonic lord loses a fight to-the-death against a Belmond, and then is banished from the human world for 100 years.
Around that time in Transylvania, the people are visited by thousands of reoccuring injuries, and a black cloud hovers over the once prosperous town.
Help Me:
The Belmonts had always defeated Dracula in death duels, banishing him from the living world for another hundred years, in which prosperity
would once again be covered by shadows and Transylvania suffers a continous disaster...
-
Actually there was an origin to the whip. It was stated in the CV3 manual. Trevor had received the whip along with the five sub-weapons from the poltergeist king in order to slay evil. But I guess that wasn't good enough for IGA.
-X
-
Okay. Here is the original text from the SNES game's opening text scroll.
Every one hundred years the forces of good mysteriously start to weaken. Thus, the power of Dracula starts to revive itself. His power grows stronger and stronger every one hundred years.
Dracula has revived many times. However, his sinister actions have been consistently thwarted by the Belmont family. It's been one hundred years since the last confrontation between Dracula and the Belmont family. But now the serenity of Transylvania is being threatened by destructive forces.
On a dark and eerie night Dracula rose from his grave to unleash his destructive power over the countryside. Once again Simon Belmont is called upon to destroy Dracula. With only his whip and courage he sets out to restore peace to Transylvania.
Well... Can't say I recalled the blurb about it having been one hundred years already since the last encounter. But then, the only real thing separating the overall gist of the opening introduction in the English version from the original Japanese version is the line, "Once again Simon Belmont is called upon to destroy Dracula." Other than that, the story does pretty much establish this as a remake and not a sequel.
However, the image of Dracula rising from the same gravestone seen at the conclusion of CV II combined with the fact that Dracula is VERY very under-powered in the game's final match does keep the idea of SCV IV being a new adventure for Simon firmly embedded in my mind.
As for the whole hundred year rule thing. . . Random script writers' ineptitudes aside, Japan is notorious for restarting a series from the point of a brand new title numerous times ignoring many of its previous installments. Godzilla is a solid example of this. 10 years after Toho's last Godzilla film in the late 70's, the monster was treated to a rebirth in 1984 that took place 30 years after his very first movie and retconned all of his previous outings in between (more than a dozen films at least). This was the beginning of a darker, more serious Godzilla series that ended in 1995 with the creature's death. Four years later, the Godzilla Millennium series was launched introducing a newer, more menacing design for the beast and a more slick, stylized format. Once again, it alluded to the idea that the majority of the monster's previous outings had never happened and that Godzilla has simply always been around since awakening in 1954. Curiously, the entire Millennium series is comrpised of movies that restart the series over again. That is, each subsequent film is a direct sequel to the first movie ignoring all movies in between. This changed with Godzilla: Tokyo S.O.S. which is a direct sequel to the previous film Godzilla Against MechaGodzilla. All this came to an explosive halt when Ryuhei Kitamura mounted Toho's 50th anniversary Godzilla film - Thus far, the last in the series. Godzilla: Final Wars pulled a full J.J. Abrahams-worthy 540-degree turn by revealing in a flashy five-minute opening montage that EVERY Godzilla outing had not only happened, many of its key moments were now repeating themselves and all leading up to a final penultimate battle royal. Proof positive that with a little ingenuity (and a bit of fun), any plothole-ridden series can be fine-tooled and reimagined into a working, cohesive whole.
Now as for Castlevania, as far as I've been playing the series the way that I've ALWAYS understood the hundred-year rule is that it does not exclude other attempts to raise Dracula by various other means. Human sacrifice, spirit-transfusion, mind-control, black magic, tampering with the space-time continuum, all are perfectly good methods of raising the lord of all vampires as far as I'm concerned. Never once was there a mandate that explicitly stated Dracula and his castle could ONLY rise once every hundred years. No, once every hundred years the barriers separating our world from the realm of darkness weakens of its own accord and evil is allowed to break through since it naturally grows stronger and stronger over time. Dracula is a manifestation of ultimate evil. The Demon Castle is a manifestation of it as well. He claims the most steady ownership of its power and thus they come back every hundred years whether we mere mortals want them to or not. Aside from that, there is nothing stopping servants of evil from doing their darnest to raise the dark lord prematurely whenever the urge takes them. When you factor in how many other possible threats could be lurking in the void of chaos that even a Belmont would have a tough time putting down, the possibilities of future CV titles really is limitless.
...A shame though how some people just don't choose to see it that way.
-
Actually I see that quite clearly and is a perfect example of the hundred year rule as well as premature resurrections.
-X
-
Actually there was an origin to the whip. It was stated in the CV3 manual. Trevor had received the whip along with the five sub-weapons from the poltergeist king in order to slay evil. But I guess that wasn't good enough for IGA.
-X
I believe the Poltergeist King was made up by Konami of America, unfortunately. ;_;
Oh Poltergeist King~
Forgotten under the sands of mistranslation.
-
Now as for Castlevania, as far as I've been playing the series the way that I've ALWAYS understood the hundred-year rule is that it does not exclude other attempts to raise Dracula by various other means. Human sacrifice, spirit-transfusion, mind-control, black magic, tampering with the space-time continuum, all are perfectly good methods of raising the lord of all vampires as far as I'm concerned. Never once was there a mandate that explicitly stated Dracula and his castle could ONLY rise once every hundred years. No, once every hundred years the barriers separating our world from the realm of darkness weakens of its own accord and evil is allowed to break through since it naturally grows stronger and stronger over time. Dracula is a manifestation of ultimate evil. The Demon Castle is a manifestation of it as well. He claims the most steady ownership of its power and thus they come back every hundred years whether we mere mortals want them to or not. Aside from that, there is nothing stopping servants of evil from doing their darnest to raise the dark lord prematurely whenever the urge takes them. When you factor in how many other possible threats could be lurking in the void of chaos that even a Belmont would have a tough time putting down, the possibilities of future CV titles really is limitless.
My thoughts exactly.
-
There seems to be an idea that Dracula can "rise on his own" at the 100 year mark. While this has been "shown" to be true in the cinematics for Super Castlevania IV and the end of Simon's Quest, every other 100 year mark game "shows" that it was a group of humans or devils that raised him in a ceremony, and the Japanese CV IV story still says that it was men's prayers that caused his return anyways. The ending of Judgment also basically says that it wasn't necessarily Dracula's choice to return time after time again, he was called by humans ("His spirit is reborn in our world time and time again, not by his own will, but in answer to man's wicked call.", of course, the famous SotN Dracula-Richter speach says essentially the same thing)
-
I used to think that Dracula just naturally resurrected himself every hundred years, but after reading what Reinhart said, I think he's right. Dracula does talk a lot about how it's never his choice to be resurrected, but it's humans who call upon him. I kind of like that better also. It make Dracula a more tragic character. By becoming the Dark Lord, he's never allowed to truly die and rest in peace. He's like a genie. He has these incredible powers, yet he's still chained to the whims of humans. He may have originally hated God and humans for killing his wives, but after centuries of being resurrected by the people he hates, maybe his goals have changed. What if Dracula is no longer just trying to "defy God", what if his goal is to kill all humans so he can finally rest.
Also, if you look at each resurrection as being instigated by a cult, it fits in really well with the timeline. Back when Dracula first started being resurrected, there weren't that many cults that worshiped him. But the further along in the timeline you get, the more cults and followers there are. That's why there are more modern attempts to bring Dracula back than there were when he first became the Dark Lord.
-
Dracula has always been a tragic character. He doesn't need a bunch of foolish cultists to make him as such by resurrecting him prematurely. Dracula's tragedy began when his wife threw herself out the window due to false news of Dracula's death by the Turks. Saddened at first about his loss Dracula became mortified when thr head preast told him that her soul could not be saved due to her taking her own life. That pushed him over the edge and started his down-hill tragedy. Then renouncing for whom he dedicated his life to serve, stabbing the cross in his castle chapel, drinking the blood that came from it and essentially going mad with rage and despair. -now that's tragedy.
-X
-
Dracula has always been a tragic character. He doesn't need a bunch of foolish cultists to make him as such by resurrecting him prematurely. Dracula's tragedy began when his wife threw herself out the window due to false news of Dracula's death by the Turks. Saddened at first about his loss Dracula became mortified when thr head preast told him that her soul could not be saved due to her taking her own life. That pushed him over the edge and started his down-hill tragedy. Then renouncing for whom he dedicated his life to serve, stabbing the cross in his castle chapel, drinking the blood that came from it and essentially going mad with rage and despair. -now that's tragedy.
-X
I think you are confusing CV with the movie "Bram Stoker's Dracula". Dracula did no such thing in the CV series.
-
Yeah, not until SotN did they start making him a tragic figure. Although, by extension from the novel you could say they started that trend in Bloodlines.
-
Please do not pay any regards to the USA manual for Castlevania III. It is a silly translation with crazy things like Poltergeist Kings and Belmont Warrior Chromosomes and roads that fork (not spoons).
With CV4, pay more attention to the JPN manual and story than the USA one (though this one is a lot closer to the original).
-
Actually darkwzrd4 Dracula did do such a thing in the CV series. But IGA brought out LoI and messed it up. No matter what anyone else tells me, even if IGA were to tell me, I won't accept LoI's Dracula origins as true. Only Brahm Stoker has that right as he invented Dracula; the true Dracula. Besides CV Bloodlines came first so the game has first say in the matter.
-X
-
Actually, anyone who feels like making an origin for Dracula has the right to since the copyright for Bram Stoker's novel ran out in 1962.
And whether you accept it or not, LoI's origin IS the official one for the time being.
-
I sometimes try to figure out the Galamoth thing. If he's from 10000 years into the future, why is he going aaaaall the way back in time to try and destroy Dracula? Does that mean that Dracula is still alive and kicking in another 10000 years, making Galamoths life miserable? Cause otherwise I don't see the point. Galamoth should just rule his own futuristic netherworld and forget about what happened 10000 years ago, jeez! Though it all depends on when Judgment takes place, so "10000 years into the future" obviously means absolutely nothing. I also wonder what Galamoth is standing around the castle in SotN for, if not for trying to kill Dracula. He must've traveled through time, but why isn't he HELPING Alucard instead of trying to kill him off? Galamoth probably knows something that we don't, being from the future and everything... not that he actually appears to have a brain, but whatever... Blah. I don't get it. I admit I haven't paid that much attention to the storyline so maybe Galamoth is very obvious to everyone else...
-
Never played Judgment and I don't really want to either cause the way some of the familiar characters (Grant) have been bastardized. To me Galamoth comes off as what appears to be an ancient Egyptian god as he definitely looks the part. He was one of the most toughest bosses in SotN but I don't see him as becoming anything more then what he already is. Sure he was the head villain in Kid Dracula but he's still a very simple villain unlike Dracula, or Death for that matter. In terms of coming from the distant future for what-ever purpose is a complete mystery to me. I can agree with Inccubus on this. I don't see the point of a distant future villain coming back in time for some obscure reason. If anything I can see Galamoth coming from the distant past (not future) for some nefarious scheme.
-X
-
He may have warped from the future to SotN, but got stuck in a very cramped room with no way out. Seriously, how would get out of that room!?!?
It seems that Dracula is alive (so to speak) in the nether regions of hell (Underworld) even in the far future. Perhaps Galamoth is a demon who wants to rule the netherworld but Dracula holds power in there... great power that surpasses Galamoth (the power of dominance seems to be enough to overtake Galamoth's soul, since Soma gets to use it).
So Galamoth, being a time-altering demon, decides to write Dracula out of existence by wiping him from history. He could go back to save Lisa, thus preventing Dracula from becoming Lord of Darkness... or he could go and kill him whilst he's still a human in the early days... but instead, he does a very poor plan: He sends one of his minions (the Time Reaper) to do this for him (I guess he sends him, so that he can immediately see the change, rather than doing the dirty work himself... HA HA TYPICAL SUPERVILLAIN).
Of course, the Conservation of Time Coalition, led by Aeon and his TimeTravelers (St.Germaine recruited later) go and 'patch up' Galamoth's time rift in Judgment (Aeon) and some other event that affects time (in CoD).
-
Will the 1999 event cause a rift in time as well, since St. Germain alludes to going there next?
-
I don't remember the Time Reaper (which is a laughable excuse for a character) saying anything about Galamoth being from the future, only that he was sent by him.
As for 1999, petty much anything goes with that plot point since it hasn't been written AFAIK.
-
It would make sense for the dude to be from the future as well. That makes it easier to send someone else from the future and stuff...
-
The thing is, though, that when he is from is largely irrelevant. Unless his time of origin somehow impacts his time control ability it doesn't make a difference if he can go anywhen he pleases.
-
For instance, why was Saint Germain even present in Curse of Darkness? One might say that he was obviously there to prevent Hector from pursuing Isaac and ultimately becoming Dracula's new host body and thus change the course of things. But didn't this Germain dude also state that he wasn't allowed to chance the future? He wasn't allowed to act upon reality nor speaking the truth (still trying to figure out how that works since that would technically mean that he has to lie every word), so if he can't do that why did he even bother trying to stop Hector?
His presence already changed the future. This may have been all that was needed to alter Time's Flow and keep Hector from becoming Dracula.
True and he did say that the game itself comes first in his mind followed by the story afterwards. How the HELL does that work!? At least in my game concepts the story comes first THEN everything else follows suit. It's much more simple that way. Like IGA I am also a perfectionist but I think the guy must have some masochistic tendencies about doing things the hard way rather then the right way. I'm sure it's possible to do a game first then the story but if you don't know how, then don't bother!
I could go on another rant about his really BIG plothole store: Lament of Innocence (In terms of Dracula's origins rather then the proper Brahm Stoker's tale. But I already did that when I joined up. :)
-X
I thought Japanese game makers designed the character first? Wouldn't fleshing out the characters as much as they could be what they would be aiming at in a game where you take control of one character through a gigantic adventure? Iga is weird.
-
I find what happens to me when I start spriting a character is that while I work, the story start to write itself down in my head. This is the case for all my sprite characters. But i could never see myself doing it IGA's way. Though i think I've tried it once but never got anywhere.
-X
-
I don't remember the Time Reaper (which is a laughable excuse for a character) saying anything about Galamoth being from the future, only that he was sent by him.
As for 1999, petty much anything goes with that plot point since it hasn't been written AFAIK.
Actually here's some text to confirm:
Death & Aeon:
Death: Everything should be in place.
Aeon: It most certainly is. All thanks to your efforts.
Death: Now, what fiend would dare challenge my Lord Dracula?
Aeon: A messenger from ten thousand years in the future. Sent by one seeking your lord's throne of darkness.
Death: Then he must be stopped at once.
Aeon: Which leads to our final dilemma... The door will allow only a single being to enter.
Death: I see no dilemma. I will go -- through you, if need be...
Aeon: That is my desire.
----------
Dracula & Aeon:
Dracula: I've played your silly little game long enough. Time is secure now, is it not?
Aeon: Not quite. One last foe remains. A servant of he who hunts you from ten thousand years in the future.
Dracula: I fear no one requiring such absurd means to face me.
Aeon: With the final key the time barrier can be opened. Your final opponent awaits.
Dracula: Enough of your theatrics. Take me to him.
Aeon: Which leads to our final dilemma... The door will allow only a single being to enter.
Dracula: No matter. I will crush you and be on my way.
Aeon: You will not pass so easily.
----------
There ya go.
As for some insight on Aeon himself, here's his introduction:
As a guardian of time, Aeon journeyed through the ages.
One day, suddenly and without warning, a powerful entity appeared from 10,000 years in the future, determined to destroy the very fabric of time.
Aeon enlisted the power of thirteen mighty souls, setting each on a path that would lead to this great enemy.
With only a single chance at victory, Aeon must determine the most worthy champion for the battle ahead...
----------
And here's his ending:
Thus the rift in time was mended, and all were returned to their respective eras.
Of course, Aeon had no era of his own to return to.
Even now, he wanders time eternal, observing all that occurs. It is the only way to satisfy his infinite curiosity.
Whenever the fabric of time is disturbed, he -- or rather, someone he enlists -- will arrive to repair it.
And Aeon's role will remain forever shrouded in mystery...
----------
-
A messenger from ten thousand years in the future. Sent by one seeking your lord's throne of darkness.
This only states that the Time Reaper is from the future. It doesn't say that Galamoth is from there.
A servant of he who hunts you from ten thousand years in the future.
Again it doesn't say anything to Galamoth's origin, just when the attack is coming from.
One day, suddenly and without warning, a powerful entity appeared from 10,000 years in the future, determined to destroy the very fabric of time.
This seems to refer to the Time Reaper, not Galamoth. After all the entity you fight at the end is the former not the later.
The whole thing is too vague to say anything concrete about Galamoth. The only reason we even know that Galamoth is involved is because of 1 mention of his name at the end. What if the Time reaper had just said 'master' and not mentioned anyone by name at all?
I don't mean to nit pick, but when nothing is concrete it just isn't.
-
I always found Galamoth an interesting character. We know so little about him, and even the few things we learn leads to more questions. He obviously wants to be the Dark Lord, but he always seems to try and gain that title through subversive means. This makes me think that Dracula is truly more powerful. And as mentioned already, Dracula's power of dominance would work on him.
The Time Reaper is an interesting touch. Obviously he's Galamoth's version of the Grim Reaper, which makes me wonder if Galamoth has some sort of Dark Lord thing going on in the future.
btw, does anyone have a screencap or picture of that Galamoth statue in Judgment? I've never found a decent pic of that.
-
I wonder if LOS will be an origin story, it was a CV I remake after all, so the old saga is not completely erased in there, perhaps we'll get a remagining of the old series?
-
Having a re imagining of the series would be better for IGA cause then he could do what he wants with it rather then messing up the current series even more. Kinda like with Startrek. Since Rick Berman took over after Gene Roddenberry died, the series' continuity has become so grossly deformed that nothing makes sense now. Berman's team obviously does not watch the series enough to navigate through it's history properly. That's what makes J.J. Abrams' re imagining so attractive cause it's a fresh start. but with familiar feel and characters.
-X
-
one thing i'd like to get straightened out is Grant's back story. i think its pretty clear that him being a "pirate" is just something the North American game made up. but i've been bugged by a single reference to him being a thief that didn't even make it into the final Judgment game. here's from the press release announcing his inclusion in Judgment:
Grant Danasty used to live as a noble thief (much like Robin Hood) all the while aspiring to become a vampire hunter like Trevor. As the most agile man in Transylvania, Grant Danasty joined forces with Trevor to defeat Dracula. Since overpowering Dracula, Grant Danasty has become a true champion of good, devoting his time to restoring the town to the days before Dracula’s rule.
here's what his background story in the manual actually became:
Danasty is a rogue from Valachia with a strong sense of justice. He helped Trevor defeat Dracula and then worked to rebuild the town. He sees Trevor as an older brother.
I'm guessing they decided that making a reference to Robin Hood sounded stupid, but it's stuck in my mind and i feel that i "understand" him a lot more as a Robin Hood like figure. maybe a rogue with a strong sense of justice who is a man of the people is pretty much the same thing as a Robin Hood like person. can we imply by "rogue" that he's a thief? the one thing in the game that indicates that he actually is a thief is the fact that he "steals" coins from candles etc.
then there's a question if he's acting on his own, or if he has a band of merry men. the robin hood analogy and the English Dracula's Curse manual calling him a "pirate captain" makes me think he's a leader of a band of thieves. but the Japanese Dracula's Curse doesn't seem to suggest this. it just says he was one of several people who tried to overthrow Dracula, not necessarily their leader. and these conspirators are not necessarily thieves, even if he is, or even if he has a band of thieves. in my mind the conspirators are his loyal band of thieves and his lament that "everyone is dead" in the Japanese version means that all these people who he has grown so close to in their cause are dead. the Japanese translations i've seen doesn't even seem to say he is a thief, much less a pirate. i wonder if the Judgment persona ended up as a compromise between the Japanese and North American Dracula's Curses?
so, in my mind at least, he is the leader of a group of outlaws opposing Dracula's rule in the name of the people. one way that they tried to resist Dracula was to steal from him and helped his suffering people with the goods. i imagine most of the times they acted like bandits along a trail, but they may have resorted to piracy on the lake Dracula's Castle sits in as well, so you could actually call Grant a Pirate Captain after all...
are there any interesting nuggets in the Japanese version of Judgment that might help verify or disprove this theory?
-
In CV3 Dracula's castle is not situated on a lake-side it's a small watery inlet that opens up into the Black sea. We see this again in the opening of SotN. You also forgot to mention the end credits in CV3. While scrolling through the characters that you play it says the Grant is an acrobat. ??? What the hell? He's a Pirate in the manual but in the game credits he's some kind of circus preformer?? Last time I checked, Grant had acrobatic ability but he was a pirate.
-X
-
i thought it was on a lake in both games (Crystal Lake). guess i'll have to recheck the maps.
i never thought "acrobat" was being used in the literal sense. only that he had acrobatic skills. but yeah...
-
I don't remember any mention of anything taking place by the Black Sea.
There's a geographical problem with that anyway because Transylvania is land locked with the province of Wallachia in the south between it and the Black Sea. And they only ever mention a *town* called Wallachia, not the province.
-
I've just looked over a map of Romania and I can see the eastern inlet where the castle would be situated. I've also checked the SotN map that appears during the game intro and it's the exact same place. Many other games also support this sea-side location too. The only games that don't seem to be CV64/LoD.
-X
-
All the games say they take place in Transylvania, therefore they cannot physically take place on the Black Sea.
Additionally, none of them say that they take place there. Furthermore, the CV3 map is a very close up map that could just as easily be a complete fabrication not based on any real place. The SotN map looks way to blurry to accurately matched to a real map. More importantly, we don't know the scale of this map. It could be the inlet of a large lake that happens to have a similar contour.
-
no, not all the games say Transylvania. some newer ones all say Wallachia (not just a town by that name). the map during the intro of Curse of Darkness comes to mind, but there's probably more. but it does get confusing that there's a town and region called Wallachia in different games. wonder how much of the Wallachia town/region Transylvania/Wallachia confusion is just inconsistent localizations or just different names being used during different centuries.
-
Yeah it does get kind of confusing with all these mix'n match games that konami of america likes to pull on us fans. The only things we need to keep in mind are these facts; Wallachia is a province within Romania and Transylvania is the central mountainchain that crosses directly through the country itself. In tearms of the towns and cities mentioned in the series, they're pretty much all factisious. I just don't understand why KoA couldn't figure this out and had to confuse us all??
-X
-
Oh, I totally forgot about something.
Since people are saying that LoD and CV64 are canon again, how and why did the Schneiders pass the whip to the Morris family? Eh, I really don't know if those games were indeed reinstated but I'm asking it anyway.
-
Oh, I totally forgot about something.
Since people are saying that LoD and CV64 are canon again, how and why did the Schneiders pass the whip to the Morris family? Eh, I really don't know if those games were indeed reinstated but I'm asking it anyway.
I wouldn't pay attention to that. The people saying that a likely people who liked those games and think that they should have never been removed from the cannon. Plus, if you remember, in PoR Jonathan (spelling?) in a conversation with charlotte asks "why the belmonts even gave the whip to the morris family." So, according to that, the Schneiders never existed.
-
It's been so long since I've played CV64 or LoD that I've forgotten. Did either of those games specifically call the whip Vampire Killer? If they didn't, you could always go with the CotM excuse that it's a different magical whip.
-
you could say that. In CotM it was called the 'Hunter whip' and not 'Vampirekiller'
-X
-
It's been so long since I've played CV64 or LoD that I've forgotten. Did either of those games specifically call the whip Vampire Killer? If they didn't, you could always go with the CotM excuse that it's a different magical whip.
While they never called the whip in CV64 Vampire Killer, Reinhart's intro stated that he was the heir to the Belmont clan. So, the implication is that the whip he weilds is the VK.
-
I was never convinced that "Hunter Whip" is really talking about a different whip than the VK. I always figured it was just an alternate name for it. It's been called all sorts of other things in the past, such as "Holy Whip". But yeah, it might be a different whip.
Didn't Iga mention once that the events of C64 and LoD did happen in an "alternate reality", that might even have ties to the main canon, but that Legends never happened in any reality within the canon multiverse? Cornell could have been taken from this multiverse in Judgment.
-
Didn't Iga mention once that the events of C64 and LoD did happen in an "alternate reality", that might even have ties to the main canon, but that Legends never happened in any reality within the canon multiverse? Cornell could have been taken from this multiverse in Judgment.
IGA doesn't like Female protagonists. That's why Legends is non-existant in all the multiverse timelines. The man seriously needs to lighten up on the whole sexual discrimination gig.
-X
-
Yeah it does get kind of confusing with all these mix'n match games that konami of america likes to pull on us fans. The only things we need to keep in mind are these facts; Wallachia is a province within Romania and Transylvania is the central mountainchain that crosses directly through the country itself. In tearms of the towns and cities mentioned in the series, they're pretty much all factisious. I just don't understand why KoA couldn't figure this out and had to confuse us all??
-X
Actually Transylvania is a region too. I think you were thinking of the Carpathians when you mentioned the mountain range. It is largely contained within Transylvania but also goes into the rest of Romania and beyond.
Since there is confusion about the locations mentioned in the games why don't we just list what we have available. I recommend disregard the US localization garbage and just concentrate on what we can find from the Japanese versions.
IGA doesn't like Female protagonists. That's why Legends is non-existant in all the multiverse timelines. The man seriously needs to lighten up on the whole sexual discrimination gig.
-X
Ummm... Shanoa.
-
That's been disproven what with the whole Shanoa thing.
And prior to that, with Charlotte as a co-protagonist.
And prior to that with Yoko as a playable character in Julius mode.
It may have been something cool to say back in Harmony/Aria times, but times have changed.
-
When the man brings out a woman Belmont then I'll change my outlook on him. And it better be a damn good game too.
-X
-
Didn't Iga mention once that the events of C64 and LoD did happen in an "alternate reality", that might even have ties to the main canon, but that Legends never happened in any reality within the canon multiverse? Cornell could have been taken from this multiverse in Judgment.
IGA doesn't like Female protagonists. That's why Legends is non-existant in all the multiverse timelines. The man seriously needs to lighten up on the whole sexual discrimination gig.
-X
If that's the case, then what about Shanoa?
-
And the female who got the most attention to detail or actual depth was the freakin' Hogwarts student. Coincidence? I'm not goin any further with that one.
Anyways, a few thoughts. Reinhardt Schneider's opening story does not indicate that he is wielding the VK, and the crimson whip seen in-game did not look the part either. It was changed to look like the legendary whip when fully upgraded in LoD. Considering how this harkens back to the original CV, the Game Boy titles, SCV IV and Dracula's Curse, it seems much more symbolic in terms of inheritence. i.e. Vanquishing the forces of darkness by the hand of a Belmont descendent will bring forth the weapon's full strength. As for the Hunter's Whip used by Nathan Graves, it also appears to be totally separate from the VK. But since his greatest strength lies in the DSS card combinations, the whip quickly becomes a secondary weapon.
I mentioned a theory once some years ago about Reinhardt and Nathan being related based on similarities in their appearance and their whips, and since nothing concrete was ever officially mentioned about their parents' backstories. All we know is Reinhardt's father trained him and was named Mikael, and Nathan's folks allegedly died in battle with Dracula himself. It might have been even possible that Reiny and Nate were one and the same character. I mean it. - Nothing set in stone officially from Grant DaNasty's original Japanese concept? It is open to our interpretation and, maybe, some lucky folks who will get to expand on it in a future game someday. (SIDE NOTE: Why anyone would take anything from Judgment into consideration since it was officially declared non-canon is a mystery) Seriously, with a little thoughtful inventiveness the world of Castlevania, plotholes and all, is a canvas ripe for breathtaking restoration.
By the by, the opening narrations from the N 64 games are the only games to implicitly state that the story takes place in "the province of Wallachia." All other games have been vague at best.
-
Looking through the Castlevania Wikia Gaming site I found something interesting.
Apparently what CV64 states is that it takes place in "Transylvania, in 1852. The Province of Wallachia."
Taking CV3 into account, are they then placing both a town and a province called Wallachia within the borders of Transylvania which seems to be rather consistently referred to as a country all it's own?
It seems, then, that the only games that make mention of Wallachia do so in the context of it being within Transylvania in one form or another. I should also note that several of the games simply make no mention of their exact setting.
Incidentally, one of the reasons I hate CotM is because it takes place in Austria for no good reason that is ever disclosed.
-
(SIDE NOTE: Why anyone would take anything from Judgment into consideration since it was officially declared non-canon is a mystery)
I really don't want to bring that argument up again, so I'm just going to say that whetver people quote in order to support that idea is really open to interpretation. Let's don't forget that IGA never uses words like non-canon and the like. The best we got is that the game isn't part of the timeline, but taking into account that the events of Judgment take place in a rift in time, stated to be some kind off alternate universe, it's more then likely to assume that the game is indeed not part of it, but that doesn't mean that Judgment hasn't any canonity merits. Something that seems to support this, is that Story Mode "pays a lot of attention to continuity", according to IGA himself.
And come to think of it, this statement seems to apply that the character of Cornell is also part of the continuity he refers to. Call it grasping at straws, but I still see enough reason to disagree.
-
CotM takes place in Austria because it is apparently where Carmilla is from.
The events of "Carmilla" (the novel) take place in Southeastern Austria, in a castle in Styria.
So you can say that Carmilla's hangout is Styria, Austria, and Dracula's hangout is in Wallachia, Romania.
Since Carmilla's resurrects Dracula in her castle, this is similar to how Countess Bartley (Bathory), resuscitates Dracula in England, in the Castle Proserpina.
-
Drac wanders around the world just to be whipped to death in the head when reborning....i would rather stay in the abyss and rule there! :P
-
I think he sort of does wander in the abyss.
You know, it's not by his hand that he is once again given flesh...
-
makes some sense, yet i believe he has the will to rule over our world...bc of the hatred for the humans (Lisa)
-
CotM takes place in Austria because it is apparently where Carmilla is from.
The events of "Carmilla" (the novel) take place in Southeastern Austria, in a castle in Styria.
So you can say that Carmilla's hangout is Styria, Austria, and Dracula's hangout is in Wallachia, Romania.
Since Carmilla's resurrects Dracula in her castle, this is similar to how Countess Bartley (Bathory), resuscitates Dracula in England, in the Castle Proserpina.
Damn! Totally forgot about that! It's been like 15 years since I last read that story.
OK. I hate it ever so slightly less. I still don't forgive the blatant mistranslation of Carmilla into Camilla.
That's just thoughtless and uneducated.
-
makes some sense, yet i believe he has the will to rule over our world...bc of the hatred for the humans (Lisa)
He doesn't want to rule the world. He wants to exterminate all humans.
-
Damn! Totally forgot about that! It's been like 15 years since I last read that story.
OK. I hate it ever so slightly less. I still don't forgive the blatant mistranslation of Carmilla into Camilla.
That's just thoughtless and uneducated.
That happened in Simon's Quest. I believe it's still "Carmilla" in CotM, but I haven't played in a while so I'm not fully sure on this one.
It's also "Carmilla" in Rondo of Blood.
-
In CotM the story puts her name as Camilla, but that's just stupidity of the transators part. I firmly beileve that her name is Carmilla. Maybe they just forgot to insert the 'R' in her name.
-X
-
Pro'lly. I have a half a mind to correct that and play it again with a very smug look of translation superiority on my face.
Let's see, plot holes, plot holes...
Where did John Morris get his steroids all the way back in the 1800's?
-
He doesn't want to rule the world. He wants to exterminate all humans.
oh yes, you're right, as Shaft said: "to cleanse and purify this world"
-
The only problem with exterminating the human race completely is that Dracula and other lesser vampires will have nobody to dine on. They would have to resort to feeding on animals which might be very undesirable to them. Clearly Dracula has not thought this through...
-X
-
Actually I think Dracula, like most "Final Boss" type of characters, would destroy all of mankind, then destroy himself. I don't think he cares about other vampires nearly as much as he cares for that final goal. It's all very nihilistic.
-
nihilistic.
:-X
-
So by wiping out the entire human race he is, in fact committing a form of suicide through genocide?? Talk about a screwball vampire.
-X
-
how does that jive with his other goal of defying God? does he want to actually overthrow God or is destroying God's imperfect creations sufficient for him. did he decide that God didn't exist and forget about that goal? what about ruling the underworld, where vampires probably don't need human sustenance?
-
how does that jive with his other goal of defying God? does he want to actually overthrow God or is destroying God's imperfect creations sufficient for him. did he decide that God didn't exist and forget about that goal? what about ruling the underworld, where vampires probably don't need human sustenance?
Well, at first all he wanted revenge against god. To do that, he became a vampire so that he would have eternal life. Thus, he would defy god's decree of limited life.
My interpretation based on the existing evidence is that he only started to desire the extinction of the human race after Lisa's death to avenge her.
-
If God truly created humankind in His image, their extinction would assuredly be the ultimate Fuck You a demented douche like Dracula would aspire to.
And remember kids, suicide is our way of saying to god, "You can't fire me! I quit!"
-
If God truly created humankind in His image, their extinction would assuredly be the ultimate Fuck You a demented douche like Dracula would aspire to.
And remember kids, suicide is our way of saying to god, "You can't fire me! I quit!"
whoa....this thread is going too deep.....
it's just a game anyway, i always thought ridiculous "you can't defeat me" by Drac followed 5 mins laters by "this cannot be, you defeated me for the 38.563.658.375th time!!!!!" :o
-
If only Dracula could have a dinner date with Vorador or Kain then maybe he would realize instead of killing off humanity he could just enslave them and use them as cattle and just thin the herd. An eternity of living in mortal fear and being tormented by a vampire ruler seems to be a better form of revenge then genocide to me. Also maybe he could learn a new move set because the one he has now just hasn't been working for the past few centuries. No wonder the Belmonts and now everyone else can beat him.
Grandpa Belmont: " Okay little simon here is what he is gonna do. First off he will say something about how weak humans are blah blah then throw his glass full of blood down and say Have at you. Then he will turn into some bats and appear infront of you and use a fire ball spell. Now all you gotta do is jump over the fire balls or use your whip to destroy them then smack him in the face or throw a couple tire irons at his head. He will turn into some bats and appear behind you just keep doing this until he transforms into a a really huge and really ugly demon then he will just jump around and shit green energy down on you, just kinda step out of the way when he does this or he will use his fire breath. Just keep whipping him and tossing tire irons at him until he says "Oh no this cannot be!"
Simon "That doesn't sound too bad....and hes been doing the same routine for centuries?"
Grand pa Belmont: "Yup its gotten so bad that some pretty boy with a 75 dollar hair cut beat him last week."
Simon "Wow...and here I thought I had something to worry about. Wait I thought he only appeared once every hundred years?"
Grandpa Belmont "Nah that was so 1994. The new director decided it would be better to just throw in some more people and have them fight Dracula every week or so."
Simon "But wait then what the hell are we having to deal with this if anyone can just beat him?"
Grandpa Belmont "Beats me."
EDIT
Grand pa Belmont: "Also when you get there if you really wanna piss him off call him Mathias."
Simon: "Why would I call him that?"
Grand pa Belmont "Well as of Lament of Innocence it turns out Dracula is some guy named Mathias. He just thought the name Dracula sounded cool or whatever also he got made fun of in highschool so it brings back bad memories."
Simon: "So let me get this straight.....Dracula is Mathias not Vlad Dracula Tepes....okkay...also what the hell is a lament.."
Grand pa Belmont "I think its a sad song or poem.."
Simon "Who is sad???"
Grand pa Belmont "IGA..."
Simon "Who the hell or what the hell is an IGA"
Grand pa Belmont " Believe me...you dont wanna know... now before you go off on your quest we need to do something about that hair...and put this on.."
Simon: "What the hell is this granpa Im not into bondage!"
-
That story is soooooo sad and very true about our beloved series. :'(
-X
-
Seriously though Kain or Vorador would wipe the floor with Dracula both are older and more powerful and are more true to what a vampire should be, Vorador more than Kain because Kain is on his quest to restore balance to nosgoth where as Vorador believe vampires to be dark gods whoes duty is to thin the herd plus he lives in a creepy mansion in a dark swamp/forest. The only reason Vorador met his end was because of mobius' staff had the effect to paralyze vampires but because of the paradox Kain and Raziel created he was able to be resurrected thus appearing in Blood Omen 2. Kain is also no longer effected by such weapons since he lost the heart of darkness. Both have done battle with "holy brotherhoods" and have outwitted them and out musceled them where Dracula seems to be defeated every time by such orders.
-
Here's a plot hole that I don't think anyone was mentioned yet. In AoS, when Julius regains his memory, he says that he sealed the whip in the castle to weaken its spirit, but as Alucard says in SotN, the castle is a creature of chaos and changes with each incarnation. In other words, the castle should be different from the way it was during the Demon Castle War in 1999. Yet, in AoS, Julius says that he knows precisely where he put the whip. So, how can that be if the castle is different from when the whip was sealed their?
And yes, I've performed some Thread Necromancy.
-
And remember kids, suicide is our way of saying to god, "You can't fire me! I quit!"
If only that were true, but you can't quit a life that you yourself, have willingly chosen.
Here's a plot hole that I don't think anyone was mentioned yet. In AoS, when Julius regains his memory, he says that he sealed the whip in the castle to weaken its spirit, but as Alucard says in SotN, the castle is a creature of chaos and changes with each incarnation. In other words, the castle should be different from the way it was during the Demon Castle War in 1999. Yet, in AoS, Julius says that he knows precisely where he put the whip. So, how can that be if the castle is different from when the whip was sealed their?
This is another indication of IGA not thinking things through before implementing them. The man really needs to loosen his grip before the rest of castlevania slips through his fingers.
-X
-
I don't know why that would be such of a problem. I mean, Julius being able to sense the whip's power or something sounds like a good enough handwave to me.
-
Julius may have hid it in Dracula's Keep or an usual CV place, so he can find it easily.
-
It should have been visible in Soma's game. Like, just hanging on the wall somewhere in the background.
-
Here's a plot hole that I don't think anyone was mentioned yet. In AoS, when Julius regains his memory, he says that he sealed the whip in the castle to weaken its spirit, but as Alucard says in SotN, the castle is a creature of chaos and changes with each incarnation. In other words, the castle should be different from the way it was during the Demon Castle War in 1999. Yet, in AoS, Julius says that he knows precisely where he put the whip. So, how can that be if the castle is different from when the whip was sealed their?
And yes, I've performed some Thread Necromancy.
Maybe since the castle was sealed in the eclipse its still the same castle he went to in 1999.
-
Maybe since the castle was sealed in the eclipse its still the same castle he went to in 1999.
Perhaps. We would need the 1999 game to be sure.
-
The castle only changes so much, though. The clock tower, keep, and entrance hall are nearly always the same, for example.
So yeah, Julius probably just put it there.
-
It is said (not proven) that the castle sealed in the Eclipse is exactly the same castle from 1999. However, because this Castle isn't connected to anything, but rather just floating in the Ether, areas such as the Floating Gardens are possible. In reality, those gardens were probably in/around the castle, so 'some' Castle reshaping must have taken place, but not enough to really say that it's metamorphed as it does when it goes to the human dimension.
-
Actually I think Dracula, like most "Final Boss" type of characters, would destroy all of mankind, then destroy himself. I don't think he cares about other vampires nearly as much as he cares for that final goal. It's all very nihilistic.
Indeed. This is why I think Dracula fighting other vampires who prefer to keep humans as walking food would make a nice storyline.
Dracula doesn't give a shit about other vampires, really. He doesn't hate them, but certainly does not seem to feel camaraderie or a connection with them either. And I think that's pretty cool 8)
-
We fans were left with a lot of questions and mind boggling paradoxes such as the 100 year rule. Luckily there was IGA who saved the day and fixed almost (if not all of) these problems...
I would like to flip it around, and ask what mind boggling paradoxes existed before Iga "saved the day"? Presumably you are talking about pre-SotN Castlevania, which would have been most of the classicvanias of the '80s and early '90s. Those stories were really very simple plot setups, so I'm not sure what mind boggling details existed that required saving. The question of why Dracula rises every hundred years, or why the Belmonts hunt him? I guess they didn't go into too much detail there, but I always liked that. It allowed you to use your own imagination to flesh out and embellish the story.
-
Agreed.
-X
-
Just how old are large clockwork clock towers, really?
-
The first were not done with clockwork as much as they were done with Water Power.
Interestingly enough, in Castlevania III the stage before the Clock Tower (Block 9) has a large water reservoir at the top of the tower, which is constantly pumping (you even have to fight ravens in that section) and that water after passing through the clockworks (of the final stage - it's right next to it according to the map) falls back down to the waterfall section of the lower part of the stage.
It's likely that the CVIII Final Stage clock tower is water-powered, not electricity-powered.
The very first clock towers were water-powered... though CVIII breaks that by having a Pendulum, which indicates an Escapement System, which wasn't around at the time.
I think Mills (Water Mills and later Windmills) were invented prior to clockwork towers, since the principle is similar.
-
That's what I meant. Gears and pendulums. Anything just as or more advanced than what we see in Castlevania.
It's like Dracula secretly invented everything first.
-
Like Adam (Frakenstein's monster).
... But that's another thread.
-
It seems many of the inventions Mankind comes up with always appear in Dracula's Castle first. Including (but not limited to):
-The Escapement System (of Clock Towers)
-Water and Steam-Based Motion Devices (Windmills, Watermills, Water Towers, Modern Piping)
-Lightning/Electricity-based Animation (Mecha, Robots, and Frankie's Monster)
-Early Prototypes of Machinery and Technology (Motorcycles, Blimps, Transistor Radios, Explosives)
-Anachronistic objects (Modern Office Chairs in the past, New York Pizza in the 18th Century, Positron Rifles in a 1999-sealed Castle)
-Genetic Experimentations (Melty Zombies, Lizard-Man Combinations, Killer Baby Fetuses, Homunculi)
...and none of this actually counts as 'magic'. The stuff that's 'magical' and 'mythical' is even weirder. :P
-
...But then Dracula became an old fogey and refused to let his henchmen upgrade past muskets.
-
It seems many of the inventions Mankind comes up with always appear in Dracula's Castle first. Including (but not limited to):
-The Escapement System (of Clock Towers)
-Water and Steam-Based Motion Devices (Windmills, Watermills, Water Towers, Modern Piping)
-Lightning/Electricity-based Animation (Mecha, Robots, and Frankie's Monster)
-Early Prototypes of Machinery and Technology (Motorcycles, Blimps, Transistor Radios, Explosives)
-Anachronistic objects (Modern Office Chairs in the past, New York Pizza in the 18th Century, Positron Rifles in a 1999-sealed Castle)
-Genetic Experimentations (Melty Zombies, Lizard-Man Combinations, Killer Baby Fetuses, Homunculi)
...and none of this actually counts as 'magic'. The stuff that's 'magical' and 'mythical' is even weirder. :P
Makes you wonder why Dracula doesn't just use his powers to drop atomic bombs (or something like them) on major human cities. I mean he truly does seem to get advanced technology before humans do. If that was truly the case, I would think that he would have nuclear technological knowledge (or something like it) before WWII. He could just use it to wipe out humans before they even know what hit them. Then again, that's probably asking a lot seeing how he always seems to lose in the end. I mean he is fighting the Belmonts for roughly 500 years and has never won. Then again, he rarely changes his battle strategy. It's actually kind of pathetic really. You would think that he would change his strategy after every defeat.
-
He drops Atomic Bombs of Gradius-esque quality (complete with Salamander Dragons) on Reinhardt & Carrie, boy I tell you what!
**doesn't know where that 'boy I tell you what' came from**
-
Hank Hill?