Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: Profbeanburrito on November 02, 2007, 06:46:16 PM
-
Seriously, why the heck isn't Dracula XX for the SNES on DXC?? Now, I know it's no Rondo of Blood but it's still awesome.
They have that lame Akumajou Dracula Peke game on it, which last like a minute, but no XX?!
I guess it just disappoints me
-
In Reply To #1
I know. Weird, huh?
PEKE is like... "Hi, bye!"
-
In Reply To #1
Indeed. It gets a bad rep, but I like to play through it when I want a challenge. It was pretty original in its layout; except for the first level, it opted to take a different approach for its areas, like having Richter cross a lake to reach the entrance, or the Atlantis area.
Then again, some people are finding the Rondo remake to be insane in its difficulty...I always found it to be the easiest of the older Castlevanias. So DXX probably would've killed them.
-
In Reply To #3
In my opinion, the 3DRondo is easier than the 2D one, 'cept for some spots. The fact that Richter can jump forward but then backflip lets me avoid a number of obstacles.
-
XX never really appealed to me to much...maybe I try it again if it ever gets VC'd...I stopped my emulation ways about a couple of months ago...
-
Dracula X for Super NES is boring. I was disappointed with it even before I knew about Rondo of Blood.
-
In Reply To #6
Dracula XX holds a dear place in my heart. I first played it back in 95', it was the first CV game I had played up to that point other than CV4. The music in XX was made to somehow sound a little better than the original Rondo. I liked everything in that game, except for Maria's different sprite. I mean, they can keep every sprite the same, look the same, animate the same and all, but couldn't include the original Maria sprite? What the hell? the XX Maria is so gimped looking, it makes me want to cry. Though, that's the only negative I have for this game. Its insane difficulty only adds to the fun for me.
-
In Reply To #7
I think the sprites actually matched the Artwork in that game, unlike other games where the sprite looks nothing like the art (SotN Richter).
-
The saturn version had a alternate costume for richter that matched his artwork.
-
The saturn version had a alternate costume for richter that matched his artwork.
Tried to. It was still very unaccurate and sloppy.
-
Seriously, why the heck isn't Dracula XX for the SNES on DXC?? Now, I know it's no Rondo of Blood but it's still awesome.
They have that lame Akumajou Dracula Peke game on it, which last like a minute, but no XX?!
I guess it just disappoints me
Dracula XX or Dracula X as it's known in the states is a terrible game, it felt really thrown together and the ending didn't make any sense the first time I played it, we see all these close ups and stuff and no writing or talking to let us know what's going on. That Dracula fight was cheap and retarded, you get hit at all you fall in a pit and die, there's no skill involved it's all luck, especially on dracs final form I can dodge every attack but if he corners you or fires one off as your jumping it's instant death.The Werewolf fight was stupid too, an ordinary werewolf shouldn't take 20 hits to kill it and possess attacks that can slaughter you in 4. I think Koji looks at the Duo one as the "true" X and probably doesn't even bother ancknowledging the SNES travesty.
-
Totally disagree with you there. The Super NES title was solid. Doesn't hold up to Super Castlevania IV, of course, but to say it was a bad game is blasphemy.
-
^ I've just never really liked it it feels unfinished as well as what I already stated. And if Koji was to include it he'd have to come up with a way to revive dracula again and have annette and maria captured as well.
-
In Reply To #12
For those of us that never got to experience the real Rondo XX was our chance. I personally loved the game.
It was definitely a bit old school with its limitations but a bit knew school with Richters backflip.
I loved the new sprites and the fight against Drac was amazing. His laugh as he teleported around the room was the best ever. Death was awesome too.
A great game and I miss seeing the ending, I think it was among Castlevania's most unique.
-
It still should've been in DXC instead of that shitty-ass PEKE game. I mean, what a waste of an unlockable that was.
LOL THIS IS WHAT IT WAS LIKE WHEN YOU DID NOT HAVE SYSTEM CARD LOL
-
In Reply To #1
AFAIK, Dracula XX is basically just a dumbed down retelling of Rondo. So there's no canon issues. For timeline purposes you got your official US remake in the form of DXC.
It would be like saying they need to remake Castlevania IV even though you have a remake of X68000. They both chronicle that period in Simon's life. If they're going to remake anything they need to remake CV2 and CV3. I'd also appreciate a remake of Bloodlines (which was Yamane's first foray into Castlevania). I'm a huge fan of Bloodlines, and I don't think it gets the respect it deserves.
I also think the people that say DXX has better music than Rondo are under the influence of a controlled substance (no offense, but I've seen this way too often). It's the same damn music, except they had to downgrade it for the SPC700 chip. I think Konami did a phenomenal job given the technical limitations of the SFC/SNES (especially on how they did "Boodlines"), but it's nowhere near the quality of Rondo or DXC.
- John
-
It still should've been in DXC instead of that shitty-ass PEKE game. I mean, what a waste of an unlockable that was.
LOL THIS IS WHAT IT WAS LIKE WHEN YOU DID NOT HAVE SYSTEM CARD LOL
I agree that's a mega waste of good space.
-
PEKE was a inside joke. Even when it was included in the PC Engine game it was an inside joke.
I thought it was kinda cute that included it for the benefit of completists and as a historical curiosity. It shows that Konami still gives a damn about its roots. Like an art gallery or something. Most people outside Japan don't even know what the hell a PC Engine was. Outside the Castlevania comunity and hardcore importers people are still convinced that there was CVIV and then we jumped directly to SotN. ::)
I also sincerely doubt it took up that much space. Probably well under a megabyte.
- John
-
I think Konami did a phenomenal job given the technical limitations of the SFC/SNES (especially on how they did "Boodlines"), but it's nowhere near the quality of Rondo or DXC.
- John
I agree John, I have all the PC-engine dracula tracks on my pc and they blow what we hear in XX out of the water.
-
I agree with Jorge completely. I was hoping it would have been included. I thought the graphics and sound were better than Rondo. Music was different, and lower quality, but somehow that degraded sample 8 channel music strikes a warm cord in my heart.
-
I agree with Jorge completely. I was hoping it would have been included. I thought the graphics and sound were better than Rondo. Music was different, and lower quality, but somehow that degraded sample 8 channel music strikes a warm cord in my heart.
If you guys own the game you can always dl and emulator and rom of it and play it on your psp that way. Wouldn't be illegal if you own the cart. :)
-
I think at this point Konami doesn't care about Dracula XX anymore. So I doubt they'd really go after you if you downloaded it and gave it a whirl. Might as well try Bloodlines for the Genesis/Mega Drive too. Way back in the day there was a crackdown on 8 and 16 bit roms, but this seems to have died down a lot in the last 7 or 8 years. Maybe with the Wii Virtual Console you'll see the majors going crazy if they put their old games on it though.
Another thing that pissed me off about Dracula XX was the character artwork. I know a lot of people don't like the anime artwork, and I kinda see their point where Castlevaina is concerned, but I'll take Rondo's cheesy anime over the MARVEL COMIC BOOK crap that was in DXX. If you didn't know any better, you'd swear that DXX was a Konami of America attempt to make up for the fact that NEC/TTI couldn't get its shit together in the US.
Here's a YouTube video that illustrates my point. Note the debate going on in the comments area about what one had the better music:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nygpN25smA8
Here's a video comparing "Bloodlines" in both the PCE and SFC versions. While the SNES version is *quite* good, the author reaches the only SANE opinion as to what one is better. ;D ;D ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWAFtnYvgVU
- John
-
I think at this point Konami doesn't care about Dracula XX anymore. So I doubt they'd really go after you if you downloaded it and gave it a whirl. Might as well try Bloodlines for the Genesis/Mega Drive too. Way back in the day there was a crackdown on 8 and 16 bit roms, but this seems to have died down a lot in the last 7 or 8 years. Maybe with the Wii Virtual Console you'll see the majors going crazy if they put their old games on it though.
Yeah I remember the 1st crackdown back in the 90's, the older consoles like nes and snes are so old now though, the chances of them doing anything especially with a game konami seems to have forgotten are slim to none. I for one think nintendo should stay the fuck out of the whole situation, I refuse to pay money for a game I've already bought once, unless it's been totally updated, remade or their's a whole slew of extra stuff. Nintendo seems to be in the habit of releasing the same game 3 or 4 times on the same console, look at the nes classic or whatever they called the straight port nes titles, you got mario being released for like the umpteenth time on the gameboy and pacman which is available for everything being released for the gazillionth time, nintendo just needs to mind their own business, if they wanna charge people for games they've already bought that's their deal, they shouldn't ruin it for the rest of us who don't wanna go plug in our nes or snes and go through all the trouble of getting an RF to Audio/video colored cables converter, not to mention if someone has a busted system then they're pretty much screwed. And if somebody wants to dl an oldschool game(s) and they don't own the cart especially if it's really old like pre-n64/PS era, I don't see the harm, nobodies losing money, the games haven't been made for over a decade and if people want the game for the wii they're still gonna buy it, not to mention you have to know what all is required and how to get everything working, and also how to occasionally finetune your emulator if the rom requires specific settings or if you need some kind of extra software for the em to get the rom to play right. Nintendo has made so much money and would still be making tons and tons of money off current gen games, they really need to keep their asses out of rom downloads and just mind their own business.
-
In Reply To #1
AFAIK, Dracula XX is basically just a dumbed down retelling of Rondo. So there's no canon issues.
Maria's character was completely changed in DXX. She went from a distant relative of Richter with Belmondo blood to Annette's sister and just another damsel in distress. DXX also didn't include the character of Shaft. (It didn't feature Tera or Iris, either, but Shaft is a character who actually shows up again, in Symphony.)
-
Wouldn't be illegal if you own the cart.
Yes it would. Unless you dump your own copy it's illegal. It's like you have your own copy, but go and steal someone else's.
I know it's impossible to prove this but still, don't lie. :P
-
In Reply To #24
True. What I meant to say by there "is no canon issues" in omitting it. It's Rondo, but with certain subtile things changed. I think SotN established that Rondo is the TRUE telling of that story.
- John
-
In Reply To #16
Uhm...yes...DXX have that CV music Feeling, In personal I love the Oposing Bloodline from SNES than TG one...Rondo original sounds...like an anime soundtrack :/
-
In Reply To #16
Uhm...yes...DXX have that CV music Feeling, In personal I love the Oposing Bloodline from SNES than TG one...Rondo original sounds...like an anime soundtrack :/
Which would be kinda fitting, no? Seeing as they were going for the anime look in that game.
To each their own. I still don't see the need for an elaborate comparison though. It's the same exact music downgraded for the SPC700. If you listen to the video I posted you'd see that they went out of their way to make "Bloodlines" in DXX sound like "Bloodlines" in Rondo. It really comes down to sample quality and programming; not composition. Bloody Tears for instance sounds nowhere near as full on the SNES. A more fair comparison would be to compare Bloody Tears as done on the SPC700 in Castlevania 4 to the one that was done in Rondo and DXX. Different *compositions* of the same song. There it comes down to a question if you like the "slow gothic" sound in CV4, or the more upbeat version using in Rondo/DXX.
At least in DXC they made some major changes to a few of the compositions, which re-opens a debate.
Once again, I'll grant they did a good job in the SNES version, but the overall quality just isn't there. You're comparing streaming Redbook audio to an 8 channel PCM chip.
- John
-
Yes it would. Unless you dump your own copy it's illegal. It's like you have your own copy, but go and steal someone else's.
I know it's impossible to prove this but still, don't lie. :P
but I've seen it posted alot on other forums and sites that if you own the game it's cool. :?
-
If you know anything about law or political science, you'll realize that "theft" relating to emulators and ROMs are soft laws (meaning, they're not written and included in a set of laws that lead and govern modern society), not hard laws. This is why you get so many contradicting statements. It's basically, "please don't use ROMs of emulators, it's stealing. However, if you do, there's not really much we can do about it." Plus the fact it's very difficult to trace ROM and emulator usage.
-
In Reply To #1
I've decided Dracula XX is just too cool for IGA to release.
-
In Reply To #31
No. It's redundant and added N-O-T-H-I-N-G to the series. It dropped out all that was awesome about Rondo.
Most of the branching paths.
The selectable characters.
2 out of the 4 girls.
The cinema scenes that advance the story.
Level design that was actually intelligent.
CD quality music.
Most of the awesome bosses.
Shaft became a really retard boss and not a cool boss & plot element.
Rondo has more in common with CV3 (the high watermark on 8-bit) than any game since, which is why it's better.
Theoretically, it might even be considered a fifth game thrown out of canon because it either directly contradicts what we see in SotN in the worst case or is rundant in the best case.
If you were going to remake DXX you might as well remake Legends, the N64 games, and CotM. That's obviously not going to happen on IGA's watch.
- John
-
Dracula XX is just another version of Richter's story. Rondo and Dracula XX are just alternate tellings of the same story, much like Castlevania, Super Castlevania IV, and Castlevania X86000/Chronicles all tell the same ONE Simon story. You wouldn't call any one of those versions of Simon's story non-canon, would you?
-
But they're not the same story, Symphony very clearly continues from the Rondo version of events.
-
Dracula XX is just another version of Richter's story. Rondo and Dracula XX are just alternate tellings of the same story, much like Castlevania, Super Castlevania IV, and Castlevania X86000/Chronicles all tell the same ONE Simon story. You wouldn't call any one of those versions of Simon's story non-canon, would you?
As Steve pointed out, DracXX has some major changes that potentially screw up the plot. Such as downplaying Shaft to the point where he'd be unrecognizable to anybody who hasn't played Rondo, and dropping Maria as a playable character. Losing the two other girls sucks, but isn't vital. Another thing is the level design disregards Castlevania canon in terms of Drac's throne room. All the others going as far back as CV1 have gotten in right: Stairs leading up from right to left to the throne room...yada yada. I don't know where the hell they got those stupid platform pillars from. The Beginning of SotN looks like the ending to Rondo/DXC. The US intro to DXX says that Simon killed Dracula several hundred years prior. I dunno if that's in the Japanese intro, but it's dead wrong.
Yeah...you could maybe claim that the SNES team was using "artistic license"...but why go there, when there's a superior game that gets everything right.
All of the Simon stories I've played are pretty damn identical, or close enough to where it doesn't affect anything. Except for maybe Haunted Castle, which I don't think anybody cares about.
- John
-
I played the SNES game first, and thought it was cool. I didn't think it was a "step backwards" just like the others have implied. The game was "colorful" for me.
..until I played the original ROB. All I can say is ROB is the "real" deal, the level designs are awesome, all the features are more detailed, and is more "colorful".
Then, I went back to the SNES one, then I was like WTF....
-
In Reply To #36
Sure, Dracula XX glossed over a lot of details that Rondo covers, but nothing really contradicts the events in Sympony of the Night, as you seem to suggest. Richter 1) rescues Maria (and Annette, even though that doesn't seem to really matter in Symphony) and 2) defeats Dracula. Yes, Shaft doesn't have the prominence that he does in Rondo, but Dracula XX doesn't contradict his presense or level of involvement in Symphony of the Night either. I can understand you don't like Dracula XX, and I agree that Rondo is the superior experience for Richter's story, but don't let that justify your need to "remove it from canon."
Oh, speaking of Castlevania canon, I thought that the N64 games and CotM were added back into the official timeline as per the pre-order bonus material that shipped last year with PoR? As far as I know, the only game still outside of canon is Castlevania Legends.
-
If you check the official records nope. They were just added there by the makers of the bonus, possibly only to promote them since they're still not that old. They had no description at all, plus unlike legends they're both considered sidestories.
Perhaps they were mentioned on timeline just because they were considered side stories from the beginning, unlike legends which tried to add itself as a pretty bad beginning of the series.
Yes, Shaft doesn't have the prominence that he does in Rondo, but Dracula XX doesn't contradict his presense or level of involvement in Symphony of the Night either.
In dracula xx shaft doesn't exist at all. He was completely removed from the game.
The same game also made Maria into Annette's blood related sister, while originally she was a distant Belmont relative.
-
I think they are confusing Rondo's "Shaft" with the Necromancer Boss.
The Necromancer also appears in CotM. Under that cloak (which I will admit is very similar to Shaft's) is a skeletal demon.
Necromancer (CotM):
(http://castlevania.classicgaming.gamespy.com/cotm/bosses/necromancer.gif)
(resembles Shaft's Ghost)
Necromancer (DXX):
(http://castlevania.classicgaming.gamespy.com/Images/bosses/warlock.gif)
Shaft's Ghost (Rondo):
(http://www.inverteddungeon.com/jorgefuentes/images3/ghostofshaft.png)
Necromancers usually have things rotating around them, like Tombstones (DXX), or energy rings (CotM).
Shaft was not present in DXX. In this alternate story, Dracula himself kidnaps the two girls closest to Richter and decimates the entire village.
I happen to like the art. It's by Akihiro Yamada and it's darker and has a particular style (we all like different styles, I happen to like that one because of the shades of black used, it's not a common style, plus it resembles older 70's artwork).
More of Akihiro Yamada's work (mostly manga and watercolor stuff, much like Yoshitaka Amano) can be found here:
Anime Paper (http://www.animepaper.net/gallery/scans/Akihiro-Yamada/1/)
-
In Reply To #39
Ah, I did originally think it was a Necromancer in DXX, but given the way people were talking about Shaft's "reduced" role in DXX, I assumed I had been wrong and that it was supposed to be Shaft. At any rate, Shaft's exclusion from DXX still doesn't contradict his presense in SotN. Nor does the lack of being able to play as Maria in DXX contradict her involvement in SotN. The only point that seems to be a problem is Maria's ancestory. I'm going to assume that the mention of Maria being a distant Belmont relative was in the original Japanese Rondo script, because I haven't come across anything indicating that in the DXC remake. It really doesn't make much of a difference, and it is a minor plot consideration at best. It's almost as ridiculous as worrying if Simon's hair is brown or pink in canon.
Also, that's interesting about the inclusion of the N64 Castlevanias and CotM in the PoR timeline pre-order bonus. I could see CotM still being a "viable" cross-promotion, but The N64 Castlevanias have been out of production for many years, and were made for a Nnintendo console now two generations obselete, unless Konami was thinking ahead, over a year in advance, of releasing those titles for Nintendo's Virtual Console.
-
Oh, speaking of Castlevania canon, I thought that the N64 games and CotM were added back into the official timeline as per the pre-order bonus material that shipped last year with PoR?
None of those three were ever considered canon to begin with. According to IGA, the producers were producing "Gaiden" from the word go. That usually means a product designed to make a quick buck. They were put in the US time line likely because they were known to exist to a majority of people. The fact that no story descriptions were written suggests that even here they have no bearing on the main story arc.
The only one that tried to be part of the main story arc but was retroactively thrown out amidst controversy was Legends. I'm not going to restart the debate, but I rather like Legends for the story and artwork...flawed though the game is.
The same game also made Maria into Annette's blood related sister, while originally she was a distant Belmont relative.
Yes. It's a common misconception that Annette and Maria are related. That plus the "several 100 years" crawl really screws over DXX. It doesn't help matters that Maria refers to Richter as "Onii-chan" in Rondo, but I take that to be a "cute" honorific than anything else.
Shaft was not present in DXX. In this alternate story, Dracula himself kidnaps the two girls closest to Richter and decimates the entire village.
I always thought the Necromancer boss was a lame ass attempt at Shaft. But if it's not Shaft, then that's even worse. Shaft's antagonism with Richter can play a pretty important role in SotN.
I happen to like the art. It's by Akihiro Yamada and it's darker and has a particular style (we all like different styles, I happen to like that one because of the shades of black used, it's not a common style, plus it resembles older 70's artwork).
Yamada's artwork is good. But not in that game. For some reason it didn't translate well into spite form and ended up looking like a Marvel Comic Book. I dislike it immensely. Amano's artwork never had that problem (re: Final Fantasy). Possibly because Squaresoft gave their games a more attention instead of rushing a stillborn product out the door.
- John
-
I'm going to assume that the mention of Maria being a distant Belmont relative was in the original Japanese Rondo script, because I haven't come across anything indicating that in the DXC remake. It really doesn't make much of a difference, and it is a minor plot consideration at best.
It's in the Rondo instruction manual. A translated copy of it exists in the Dungeon.
It makes a HUGE difference, because Belmont blood makes a huge difference. That's why the Morris clan isn't as ubber as the Belmont clan. If they ever decide to bring back Maria or one of her relatives in a game, it's something that can be addressed.
Also, that's interesting about the inclusion of the N64 Castlevanias and CotM in the PoR timeline pre-order bonus. I could see CotM still being a "viable" cross-promotion, but The N64 Castlevanias have been out of production for many years, and were made for a Nnintendo console now two generations obselete, unless Konami was thinking ahead, over a year in advance, of releasing those titles for Nintendo's Virtual Console.
SotN was released two years before the first N64 game. Legends was released one year before the first N64 game. SotN is older, but I don't think it's a stretch to say it's more well known. Time doesn't factor into it.
I think that IGA will tolerate the N64 games and CotM as side stories, but he was absolutely dead set against Legends rearing its head again. Legends was the only one that he has spoken at great length as to his justification for destroying all records of its existance. First it was because of the characters gender, and after everybody grabbed their torches and pitchforks, he said that it was because it messed up his ideal timeline (whether he knows about the criticism or not is anybody's guess).
I don't buy the "it's an Konami of America invention" crap, because if it was really made out of ignorance they would have put Legends on it. There's a reason why only those three are on there, but at the same time there is no story description.
- John
-
I don't buy the "it's an Konami of America invention" crap, because if it was really made out of ignorance they would have put Legends on it. There's a reason why only those three are on there, but at the same time there is no story description.
- John
I don't buy that either, but your reply two posts up led me to believe you thought otherwise. Of course SotN is more popular than CotM or the N64 games. My point was that they weren't included for the sake of popularity or wide consumer recognition. That's a point you seem to more clearly convey in your reply one post up. I think the N64 games and CotM have no description on that timeline because IGA hasn't quite figured out yet how to make them "fit." I recall reading a while ago that IGA was particularly frustrated with those games cluttering up the 19th century with way too many Dracula resurrections.
Also, I still don't think it's important that Maria have Belmont ancestory. Belmonts are not the only characters in the world of Castlevania who can hold their own against the forces of Dracula.
-
I think the N64 games and CotM have no description on that timeline because IGA hasn't quite figured out yet how to make them "fit." I recall reading a while ago that IGA was particularly frustrated with those games cluttering up the 19th century with way too many Dracula resurrections.
He hasn't figured out how to make them "fit" because they're not supposed to.
IGA clearly stated that he's not including them in the main timeline because the were gaiden stories according to the original development teams in Kobe. Supposedly, there was going to be a greater Belmont connection in the N64 games (early development stuff mentioned a Reinhert Belmont), but this was later changed. Probably because before IGA, there wasn't really a huge concern within Konami to try and make everything fit, so they didn't even try. In other words, he's not really doing anything different than the original directors intended. They didn't care about canon. So the only natural thing to do is to keep them as gaiden stories. Likewise, Dracula XX and Haunted Castle (arcade) were arguably never part of the time line either. They were just designed to milk more money off the franchise.
Legends was the only one he admits he intentionally redacted. And he's given a couple of differing reasons for this over time.
Unfortunately, prior to corporate reorganization, Nagoya got somewhat of a reputation of being the "shit division" of Konami. God bless 'em with Saturn Symphony, but they just fell short of greatness. Kobe wasn't too far behind either. KCET and KCEJ are and always were the praetorian guard.
The article that describes this is here:
http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=4&cId=3152109
Also, I still don't think it's important that Maria have Belmont ancestory. Belmonts are not the only characters in the world of Castlevania who can hold their own against the forces of Dracula.
Yeah, but if you consider that John Morris died from killing Dracula in Bloodlines it becomes apparent that some can hold their own better than others. Namely the Belmonts and Alucard. Maria also didn't beat Dracula according to the canon ending of Rondo, however, she assisted and held her own quite well in Symphony.
- John
-
Of course whether or not they were "meant" to fit into the CV timeline or not, there are very few problems with including CotM or LoD into the timeline.
In fact, there are *no* problems with CotM. It's a minor resurrection of Dracula in a different country in a different castle (which sort of "becomes" Castlevania by virtue of having Dracula resurrected within its walls) by one of his devoted followers, the vampiric Carmilla. He is fought by the Baldwins and Graves (who may or may not have Belmont blood, there's no real indication either way) with a different weapon, the Hunter Whip, whose origin is not explained. It may muddle things up a bit, but it doesn't *conflict* with anything in canon.
For LoD, there are two problems. The first is that the Morrises should have the whip during its time period. Of course this would be simple for IGA to "fix" by saying that Reinhardt borrowed it from them because of some extenuating circumstance. The other problem is that two lines of text in the game (one in the intro, the other spoken by Dracula) state that he has been dead for 100 years. Again, this could be fixed by saying that it's an "error in translation" -- ie, the game, being a fictionalized dramatization of the "true story," contains an error. With those small tweaks, this game too does not in any other way conflict with the current canon.
So you can see why I get aggravated when the so-called problems with these games are blown up to seem like they're simply irreconcilable and must be discarded. It's just not the case :)
-
I like Dracula XX too. It was a very challenging game, so it's really a feeling of accomplishment when you beat Dracula, ESPECIALLY if you manage to beat him without taking any damage--an impressive feat for such a tuff boss! Rondo's Drac was easy cakes compared to him in Dracula X, what with the bottomless pits and all.
However, I wonder if licensing issues prevented this game from being included as an extra. SoTN was on a Sony system originally, and I think the company that made the PC-Engine is now defunct, so Konami didn't have to worry about licensing when they put it and a remake of it on the PSP. However, Dracula X was made for the Super NES, a Nintendo system. Thus, if they wanted to put the game as an extra on the PSP, wouldn't they have to ask Nintendo's permission? I'm probably wrong, so imma just wonderan :o
-
However, I wonder if licensing issues prevented this game from being included as an extra. SoTN was on a Sony system originally, and I think the company that made the PC-Engine is now defunct, so Konami didn't have to worry about licensing when they put it and a remake of it on the PSP. However, Dracula X was made for the Super NES, a Nintendo system. Thus, if they wanted to put the game as an extra on the PSP, wouldn't they have to ask Nintendo's permission? I'm probably wrong, so imma just wonderan :o
I doubt that's really a big issue. The Megaman Anniversary Collection on the PS2 contains Megaman 7, which was a Super NES title originally. Likewise, the GCN version of the collection contains Megaman 8, which was originally on the PSX and Saturn.
I still am amazed that people hate DXX so much that they feel the need to "strike it from canon." It's really the SAME story. Richter Belmont defeats Dracula. That's nice that many prefer the greater attention to detail as laid out during Rondo, but there is nothing "non-canon" about DXX. It's an alternate, and admitedly inferior, way to experience Richter Belmont's story. There isn't a need to throw it out of IGA's precious timeline because it fits EXACTLY where Rondo does.
-
Yeah, but if you consider that John Morris died from killing Dracula in Bloodlines it becomes apparent that some can hold their own better than others. Namely the Belmonts and Alucard. Maria also didn't beat Dracula according to the canon ending of Rondo, however, she assisted and held her own quite well in Symphony.
- John
I think others can, alucard beats him and he's only half vampire, as well as John morris and his boy. I think the belmonts are just the strongest vampire hunters and rein supreme in that field as alucard states in SOTN, this is not to say that others can't kill him too, just that the belmonts are the strongest hunters around. I kinda like COTM's introducing new hunters aside from the morris's into the fold who are badass and can take him on.
(even if it was an early resurrection and drac wasn't at full power yet) :)
I like Dracula XX too. It was a very challenging game, so it's really a feeling of accomplishment when you beat Dracula, ESPECIALLY if you manage to beat him without taking any damage--an impressive feat for such a tuff boss! Rondo's Drac was easy cakes compared to him in Dracula X, what with the bottomless pits and all.
y'know drac really isn't that bad in XX, just go at him with 99 hearts and a cross. Beat his first form w/out using up any hearts and just item crush his second form when he shoots out that big energy blast straight forward (or do it constantly, doesn't matter but kind of takes the challenge away) and he's cake. :)
-
It's really the SAME story.
-
There is no licensing issues. Konami owns the game.
In the 80s, Nintendo required exclusivity clauses in contracts with third parties, but this stopped in the early 90s when the industry grew a big enough pair to tell them to go fuck themselves.
TTi went under, but their parent companies still exist: NEC and Hudson Soft. Ironically enough, Konami is the biggest shareholder of Hudson.
- John
-
There is no licensing issues. Konami owns the game.
In the 80s, Nintendo required exclusivity clauses in contracts with third parties, but this stopped in the early 90s when the industry grew a big enough pair to tell them to go fuck themselves.
TTi went under, but their parent companies still exist: NEC and Hudson Soft. Ironically enough, Konami is the biggest shareholder of Hudson.
- John
Yup and what's funny is that the original castlevania wasn't exclusive to the nintendo, their were ports of it for all kinds of other computers/consoles. Guess nintendo went back when they were bringin' over simon's quest and made the castlevania franchise exclusive.
-
No, it doesn't.
-
Shaft exists as a ghost possessing green crystal balls in Symphony because Richter fought and killed him in Rondo. The fact that he doesn't exist at all in DXX, as well as, again, the fact that Maria is a completely different character, alone are enough to make it non-canon.
the Maria Renard is really somehow a Belmont thing[...]seems to be exclusive to the instruction manual for the original PCE CD game
It's mentioned in Rondo's manual, several of Rondo's story scenes, and Symphony's Japanese manual.
-
Tell me one thing, besides the Maria Renard is really somehow a Belmont thing, a piece of information that seems to be exclusive to the instruction manual for the original PCE CD game, that directly contradcits anything that happens in Rondo or SotN.
It's not just the manual. Looking through the translation it's implied in the game too. Drac says "Defeated by the Blood of a Belmont" in both endings. Plus Maria says "That's because I have the the same vampire hunter's blood flowing through me just like Richter" when she rescues Annette.
The implication is that Maria is a Belmont. Albeit trading in the whip for certain anima-type magic. The game manual is merely the most explicit evidence.
And realistically, I wouldn't think she'd make it as far into the Drac's castle in SotN if she wasn't a capable Vampire Hunter in her own right. There's a crapload of bad guys in there. Enough to give Alucard trouble. Easiest way to explain that is to give her Belmont blood. If you play the SotN game after DracXX by not Rono, that point is lost on the player.
Richter saves Maria
Correct.
and Annette.
Actually we don't KNOW that for certain. Maria could have saved the other three girls, any combination, or none at all. You're allowed to switch between characters in Rondo, and SotN doesn't revisit all of Rondo...just the final fight.
Richter defeats Dracula.
According to the canon confirmed by SotN, Richter's ending in Rondo is the correct one. But depending on how the first boss battle in SotN goes, Maria can assist. Which is a nod to the fact that she was a playable character. A person who only played DraculaXX would wonder where the hell she came from.
It doesn't matter that we don't see Shaft in DXX. His absense in the gameplay doesn't contradict his presense in SotN's story.
Shaft revives Dracula in Rondo and is responsible for kidnapping the girls. He's very necessary according to canon. DXX leads you to believe that Drac did it all himself or whatever. Rondo tells the true story, and explains certain things. Like for instance, in Rondo, Shaft is flesh and blood the first time you beat him. In SotN, he's a ghost. There's a reason for that: Richter kills him in Rondo.
Please, try not to be so cognitively rigid.
I'm not. I'm just not going to condone dropping major plot elements and say "Oh well, it's close enough". Canon means the true story. It would be like if Maria were dropped from SotN, and saying "It doesn't matter, because Alucard does all the work, and we haven't seen her since". Or if dropping Grant from a remake of CV3 is somehow acceptable because you can beat the game without him, and it's "okay, because it doesn't change the fact he shows up in SotN".
I would think the best thing for Castlevania fans would be to try and tie as much in together as possible and make the story richer. Not dumb it way the fuck down like the SNES game did.
- John
-
The another problem with n64 games would probably be the dracula in Cornell's game. I mean, if he even was present in a game 8 years before reinahrdt/carrie's, the 100 years line would not only contradict rondo/sotn but also itself. :P
Of course the easiest way to explain it would be to say that dracula was a fake too, whose purpose was to draw the attention away, as well as obtain a good power source in order to bring his long dead master back to life. But the game tried hard to prove he was the real dracula. :o
-
It's not just the manual. Looking through the translation it's implied in the game too. Drac says "Defeated by the Blood of a Belmont" in both endings. Plus Maria says "That's because I have the the same vampire hunter's blood flowing through me just like Richter" when she rescues Annette.
The implication is that Maria is a Belmont. Albeit trading in the whip for certain anima-type magic. The game manual is merely the most explicit evidence.
Question: Does DXX actually state Maria to be someone other than she is in Rondo in-game? If not, there's no loss of canon.
And realistically, I wouldn't think she'd make it as far into the Drac's castle in SotN if she wasn't a capable Vampire Hunter in her own right. There's a crapload of bad guys in there. Enough to give Alucard trouble. Easiest way to explain that is to give her Belmont blood. If you play the SotN game after DracXX by not Rono, that point is lost on the player.
This is really not a big deal. I played SotN before Rondo. Having an imagination, I naturally presumed she was somewhat of a potent fighter.
Shaft revives Dracula in Rondo and is responsible for kidnapping the girls. He's very necessary according to canon. DXX leads you to believe that Drac did it all himself or whatever. Rondo tells the true story, and explains certain things. Like for instance, in Rondo, Shaft is flesh and blood the first time you beat him. In SotN, he's a ghost. There's a reason for that: Richter kills him in Rondo.
The OP was correct in that the absense of Shaft in the game does not assert his non-existence. Many aspects of Castlevania canon are not stated in the actual games.
Also, having played SotN before Rondo, I never assumed Shaft to be a "ghost," so there was no experiencing of a plothole.
I would think the best thing for Castlevania fans would be to try and tie as much in together as possible and make the story richer. Not dumb it way the fuck down like the SNES game did.
I agree that it's best to include as much canon in the actual games as possible, but keep in mind that this is a distinct point from arguing that DXX contradicts canon. DXX may still be an acceptable factually correct telling without having to be the ideal telling.
-
In Reply To #56
Thanks, Baigan. At least one other person realizes that the games are themselves symbolic representations of the creators' ideas. DXX is canon, as is Rondo, because it's a game describing the canon event of Richter Belmont defeating Dracula at a specific point in the Castlevania timeline.
-
In fact, there are *no* problems with CotM. It's a minor resurrection of Dracula in a different country in a different castle (which sort of "becomes" Castlevania by virtue of having Dracula resurrected within its walls) by one of his devoted followers, the vampiric Carmilla. He is fought by the Baldwins and Graves (who may or may not have Belmont blood, there's no real indication either way) with a different weapon, the Hunter Whip, whose origin is not explained. It may muddle things up a bit, but it doesn't *conflict* with anything in canon.
Okay, but the entire idea of cv is based on the Belmonts struggle against Dracula, not Baldwins or Graves. It's always been like that. That's exactly why it's considered a side story when it involves others (and come on, if there's no Vampire Killer then it's not a true cv game).
For LoD, there are two problems. The first is that the Morrises should have the whip during its time period. Of course this would be simple for IGA to "fix" by saying that Reinhardt borrowed it from them because of some extenuating circumstance. The other problem is that two lines of text in the game (one in the intro, the other spoken by Dracula) state that he has been dead for 100 years. Again, this could be fixed by saying that it's an "error in translation" -- ie, the game, being a fictionalized dramatization of the "true story," contains an error. With those small tweaks, this game too does not in any other way conflict with the current canon.
This has been suggested before on the old forum & argued to exhaustion. You can't go back and say "Remember when Dracula said he's been dead for 100 years? Well he didn't really mean that." It sounds stupid & unnecessary.
So you can see why I get aggravated when the so-called problems with these games are blown up to seem like they're simply irreconcilable and must be discarded. It's just not the case :)
Likewise, others get aggravated when people try to make every single game fit, when in reality it works out better overall by just leaving them as side stories.
-
Question: Does DXX actually state Maria to be someone other than she is in Rondo in-game? If not, there's no loss of canon.
Yes. IIRC, it states that Maria and Annette are sisters. Which is wrong. And would indeed be kinda gross to have Richer marry back into his own family. The most damaging thing is that it's causing fans to put Annette as a Renard and Maria as not a Belmont relative, when the opposite is true. I forsee problems further down the road if DXX were in canon.
It's academic anyhow. IGA stated on his blog that Rondo is the correct version of the story as far as he's concerned.
- John
-
In Reply To #59
Sisters do not have to be biological relatives. Maria and Annette could be adoptive sisters or step sisters.
-
Question: Does DXX actually state Maria to be someone other than she is in Rondo in-game? If not, there's no loss of canon.
Yes it does.
-
In Reply To #59
Sisters do not have to be biological relatives.
-
Okay, but the entire idea of cv is based on the Belmonts struggle against Dracula, not Baldwins or Graves. It's always been like that. That's exactly why it's considered a side story when it involves others (and come on, if there's no Vampire Killer then it's not a true cv game).
Ummm, no. It has not always been like that. Bloodlines is the point where they decided that the Belmonts weren't going to be the ONLY main characters. The Belmonts go off the stage in late 19th century and the Morris family pinch hits for them in 1897 and both world wars. This was a nod to Bram Stoker. This presumably doesn't change until 1999, when Julius comes along to deliver the coup-de-grace on behalf of the Belmont family.
- John
-
It's already been established that the Morris' are Belmont related & can face Dracula. Where has it been established that the Baldwins and Graves are of Belmont blood?
-
Guys, let's totally argue trivial points and the most specific meanings of vague one-liners that were most likely mistranslated anyway and would be too infeasible to actually change for the sake of tampering with canon and the series timeline!
That said, considering IGA's at the helm, he could've just rewrote the minor details in Dracula XX. But he didn't. And besides, with the bad rep DXX gets outside of the fandom, it would've gotten more complaints than praise (unlike surefire hits like SotN and RoB). Obviously, he came to the conclusion that there was no point to even considering the idea.
-
Sisters do not have to be biological relatives.
-
In Reply To #66
No thanks. I'm just pointing out the logical flaws in the "DXX can't possibly be canon" argument. Some people seem to have it in for DXX like it insulted their mothers.
Stigma Black has the right idea. This has gotten way past ridiculous.
-
Okay, but the entire idea of cv is based on the Belmonts struggle against Dracula, not Baldwins or Graves. It's always been like that. That's exactly why it's considered a side story when it involves others (and come on, if there's no Vampire Killer then it's not a true cv game).
Hunh? Alucard's not a belmont and neither are the morris's and their games are true games. COTM has everything that makes castlevania castlevania besides having a belmont as the main hero which has been done before but argueing it's not a true castlevania game because a graves beats drac and accepting a game like SOTN is hippocritical. It was a premature ressurrection and drac can be beat by other people especially when he's weakened and it's not a natural 100 year ressurrection.
Ummm, no. It has not always been like that. Bloodlines is the point where they decided that the Belmonts weren't going to be the ONLY main characters. The Belmonts go off the stage in late 19th century and the Morris family pinch hits for them in 1897 and both world wars. This was a nod to Bram Stoker. This presumably doesn't change until 1999, when Julius comes along to deliver the coup-de-grace on behalf of the Belmont family.
- John
Yup eric states this in POR and I'm hoping it'll be expanded upon in future games.
Necromancer (CotM):
(http://castlevania.classicgaming.gamespy.com/cotm/bosses/necromancer.gif)
(resembles Shaft's Ghost)
Necromancer (DXX):
(http://castlevania.classicgaming.gamespy.com/Images/bosses/warlock.gif)
Shaft's Ghost (Rondo):
(http://www.inverteddungeon.com/jorgefuentes/images3/ghostofshaft.png)
Necromancers usually have things rotating around them, like Tombstones (DXX), or energy rings (CotM).
Shaft was not present in DXX. In this alternate story, Dracula himself kidnaps the two girls closest to Richter and decimates the entire village.
Yeah it's like they took shaft's sprite from rondo and altered it to make it the Necromancer boss in XX.
-
Hunh? Alucard's not a
-
*sigh* you're missing my point.
SotN still involved a Belmont despite the main character being Alucard.
no you said it was the belmonts struggle against dracula that made a true cv game, Richter does next to nothing except fight you one time in SOTN, Alucard does all the work and the game's about his struggle against dracula not Richter's.
CotM doesn't even mention the Belmonts, meanwhile introducing a whole new family we never heard of that has absolutely no relation to anything else, which is why it'll always be considered a SIDE STORY.
Which is all fine and good, but I inferred from the way you stated your opinion that you were saying it is inferior to the other games.
I'm not saying CotM isn't a cv game; i'm saying it's a gaiden to the main story arch. The creators obviously didn't care to mention the Belmonts, so why should IGA care to try & include it?
I agree and I also think Iga doesn't include it because it wouldn't mesh with everything else, I wish the game didn't give a set date though so if he wanted to he could place it in the timeline somewhere.
-
Just so it's clear, sidestory or "gaiden" does not imply "non-canon."
-
In Reply To #71
In this case, yes it does.
-
It's already been established that the Morris' are Belmont related & can face Dracula. Where has it been established that the Baldwins and Graves are of Belmont blood?
Nowhere. But neither is Eric or Alucard, or probably some other people I'm forgetting offhand. Plus isn't the Morris relation kinda weak at best?
Bottom line being that, no, Belmonts are not the only ones that can take on Drac and win. They just happen to be the best, most experienced, and arguably the ones Drac is most afraid and bitter about.
CotM and the N64 games were thrown out because it was designed to be gaiden from the beginning, and IGA didn't want the work of trying to integrate it.
It's the same falacy about how Drac can only rise 100 years. IGA's even given up on that one.
- John
-
That's NOT what the words "sidestory" or "gaiden" mean, though. If you want to call a game "non-canon," then call it non-canon.
-
Just so it's clear, sidestory or "gaiden" does not imply "non-canon."
It doesn't imply either. You can have canon gaiden and non-canon gaiden. The term simply denotes a story that is incidental to the main story arc.
The term Gaiden is commonly used in popular Japanese fiction to refer to a spinoff (canonical or otherwise) of a previously published work that is not officially considered a sequel nor a prequel. - Wikipedia
However, it's generally agreed that gaiden can't conflict, otherwise it gets tossed. Strictly speaking, CotM doesn't really confict. The N64 games sorta do. Legends was never gaiden either, but it conflicts in a massive way. DXX was never gaiden, but it conflicts too.
- John
-
In Reply To #60
You know, when you think about it, original Rondo shouldn't be canon. How the hell is Shaft in SOTN when Richter killed his human form, then killed him as a ghost? If you really want to get into it, it makes for sense for it to go DXX ---> Sotn, since Shaft would still be alive. But since it goes original Rondo --> Sotn, Shaft should be 40 feet under. Silly IGA and team, should've gotten a new bad guy.
-
In Reply To #76
:o
Now that's just crazy talk!
Stop being crazy!
>:o
-
In Reply To #60
You know, when you think about it, original Rondo shouldn't be canon. How the hell is Shaft in SOTN when Richter killed his human form, then killed him as a ghost? If you really want to get into it, it makes for sense for it to go DXX ---> Sotn, since Shaft would still be alive. But since it goes original Rondo --> Sotn, Shaft should be 40 feet under. Silly IGA and team, should've gotten a new bad guy.
but ghosts can't be killed though, shaft was just defeated. He needed to turn Richter to restore his power. He probably had to wait awhile until he was even powerful enough to turn Richter.
-
Or he just stored himself in one of his orbs. I mean, he did that in rondo already, and in sotn too you had to smash the orb floating over richter to free him.
-
Or he just stored himself in one of his orbs. I mean, he did that in rondo already, and in sotn too you had to smash the orb floating over richter to free him.
Yeah he could have done that too, actually that would have been a cool trick if that's what he did, let Richter think he was defeated so he could bide his time and find a way to beat Richter if Dracula was defeated.
-
Hmm, so licensing isn't really a big issue? I see. Thanks, Wolfman Jake and Kensuke. I guess it really is disappointing they didn't include XX, then...
-
In Reply To #81
Shaft, that slick beast. Yeah, It kinda slipped my mind that he sealed some of his power in one of the orbs, to come back to fight Richter as a ghost, so yeah, I guess he could do it again. I'm still pretty sure it shows that final orb fall to the ground and break after you defeat his ghost. I should go play original Rondo again and check that out, but I'm too lazy.
-
It doesn't imply either. You can have canon gaiden and non-canon gaiden. The term simply denotes a story that is incidental to the main story arc.
- John
I didn't mean that sidestory/gaiden implied canon either. The words, as you said, simply denote spin-off stories. A lot of people were referring to games as "gaiden" when they were really arguing canon vs. non-canon.
-
In Reply To #83
Yes. But if something contradicts they can't both be true. So gaiden or not, it would become non canonical at that point. Their's no evidence that XX was supposed to be a gaiden either. But it does contradict the correct version of events in Rondo, so it doesn't rate on the timeline, and is effectively thrown out of canon. Only Rondo does.
Also, once again I'd like to point out that the N64 games and CotM were always intended as gaiden. Legends and XX were not. That's why their toss out was more drastic.
- John
-
From Japanese Official Guide Book.
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv-rob/tdxc/guide-p009.jpg
Shaft:
The soul is moved to another place.
Even if the body is lost, power can be used through the crystal ball.
-
I think it's quite clear at this point that Dracula XX is dead and gone, for obvious reasons.
And if there's another reason why it wasn't included, there's also the fact that IGA had nothing to do with it. At least he had some tangential involvement with the original Rondo of Blood.
-
In Reply To #84
But no plot element that differs between Rondo and DXX has any baring on what happens in SotN, whatsoever. Maria's ancestory never comes up, and I don't think Annette is even mentioned once in SotN, for that matter. This isn't about "salvaging" DXX. This is about the ability to be cognitively flexible enough to realize DXX isn't any kind of a threat to the continuity of the Castlevania story. It works with either Rondo or DXX without really missing a beat. Yes, Rondo is the better experience overall, but that isn't, and was never, the point of contention.
-
In Reply To #86
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3162527
IGA: Well, the first Castlevania I worked on was Symphony of the Night -- I didn't actually work on Rondo of Blood. But my wife did. She worked on the development team. So I'd sometimes go to my wife's desk to play the game, and luckily I was given a "special thanks" in the credits.
-
In Reply To #88
I did say tangential. It's not like he was the game's director or anything.
-
From Japanese Official Guide Book.
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv-rob/tdxc/guide-p009.jpg
Shaft:
The soul is moved to another place.
Even if the body is lost, power can be used through the crystal ball.
the link don't work homes.
-
In Reply To #90
Go here.
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv-rob/tdxc/
Click on the appropriate image. It should work then.
- John
-
Some people seem to have it in for DXX like it insulted their mothers.
Yes. DXX insulted my mother...
...and killed my father.
...and raped my sister.
So it deserves to go to hell. ;D
- John
-
I think, personally, RoB IS the preferred "canon" version for the simple reason that IGA and the others who created SotN BASED that game on RoB's events, not Dracula XX. Everything to come AFTER SotN bases their "world" on that which was seen in SotN, even some of the "retconned" ones. So, I'd think the canon branch of reality definately went through RoB, while Dracula XX's branch isn't considered canon. There IS a reason why some of the areas in SotN look like graphically upgraded areas of RoB.
And while nothing's wrong with Dracula XX being in your personal canon, when it comes down to official Konami canon regarding the series, RoB is the game that take the spot there!
-
In Reply To #90
Go here.
http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/cv-rob/tdxc/
Click on the appropriate image. It should work then.
- John
Thanks man yeah it's workin' now. Man the japanese version of the manual is all in full color. The one we got is all black and white except the front and back. Somebody was being stingy. :P
-
I think, personally, RoB IS the preferred "canon" version for the simple reason that IGA and the others who created SotN BASED that game on RoB's events, not Dracula XX. Everything to come AFTER SotN bases their "world" on that which was seen in SotN, even some of the "retconned" ones. So, I'd think the canon branch of reality definately went through RoB, while Dracula XX's branch isn't considered canon. There IS a reason why some of the areas in SotN look like graphically upgraded areas of RoB.
And while nothing's wrong with Dracula XX being in your personal canon, when it comes down to official Konami canon regarding the series, RoB is the game that take the spot there!
Ok, I think I can resolve the differences of opinion here. There are at least two different ways to define "canon" in the case of Castlevania, or any number of videogame series. There is the notion that a game is canon or not, and the notion that events are canon or not. A game like Castlevania Legends is non-canon in both definitions of the term. Sonia is an non-canon character, and her "event" effectively didn't happen. Since Castlevania Legends concerns a completely non-canon character in a non-canon event, the game must also be non-canon. You can certainly argue, and I don't disagree, that DXX is non-canon in that Rondo is the version of the story that IGA prefers, but DXX also describes the Richter defeating Dracula event at the same point in the timeline as Rondo, and in that sense, DXX is canon. Think of it this way: Castlevania, SCV4, and X68000/Chronicles all tell the same canon event, Simon Belmont defeating Dracula (for the first time), but it only "actually" happened one way. While all three games are canon in "event" definition, only one is canon in the "game" definition.
-
But no plot element that differs between Rondo and DXX has any baring on what happens in SotN, whatsoever.
-
I've got news for you, even IGA thinks the timeline sucks. Castlevania's never had an amazing plot and I don't think that will ever change, so all this bickering over useless minutae is pointless.
http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/10/interview-iga-t.html
WN: I've wanted to ask this for a while: what do you think, in the whole history of Castlevania, was the worst decision anybody ever made about the series?
KI: Probably when we put out the timeline. Because since Dracula only appears every 100 years, we made the whole timeline and ran out of places to put in another game. I made the timeline, but I shouldn't have actually released it, because now it's all official. That was a bad decision.
-
The story of a game can--and often does--extend beyond what's spelled out in the game itself.
-
In Reply To #58
Yeah it's a shame that KCEK didn't care to put in any firm links to the CV story in CotM. They could have explained some relationship between the characters at least, to make it more compelling. But I guess they did what they wanted.
As for the LoD thing, I still disagree. I don't think it's stupid at all to say something like that. And you *can* do whatever you want when you are the owner of a series. To say it can't be done is like saying Tolkien couldn't rewrite the Hobbit and blame the original edition's "mistakes" on Bilbo. BTW, if you didn't know, that's exactly what he did, the Hobbit (and LotR) being supposed "translations" of the fictional Red Book of Westmarch.
There are two ways to look at the games in the Castlevania series. They are either LITERALLY showing us every single event exactly as it happened, free of omission and error. Or, they are subjective interpretations of the Belmonts' fictional family history, and thus subject to errors in presentation. It's not without precedent, as in my example above. I think IGA should have went that route.
-
The story of a game can--and often does--extend beyond what's spelled out in the game itself.
-
In Reply To #88
Please forgive my ignorance, but who is IGA's wife, specifically? Did they meet working on Castlevania or something? That would be sweet ^_^
-
In Reply To #100
As our Japanese friend pointed out, the US manual for DXC adopts the Rondo version in they're related by blood. So that proves nothing other than the fact that the US manual for SotN adopted the DXX version of events, and then the US timeline was retconed back to the Rondo version via DXC.
Again...pick one. They can't both be right.
- John
-
In Reply To #102
Sure they can, How about..... they're related but they don't know it?! >.>
-
In Reply To #102
But the point is, neither of them has to be right, because neither scenario makes any difference about what happens afterwards in continuity. Therefore, the different profiles mentioned in DXX and the U.S. SotN instruction manual are not sufficient reasons to make the claim that DXX doesn't matter or that it was "thrown out of canon." If you want to hate on the game, try something else, like the art direction, or the gameplay, etc., instead of some picky and inconsequential detail.
-
And yet this thread's dragged on for seven pages. Inconsequential indeed.
-
In Reply To #105
Well, to be fair, this particular issue hasn't been going on for the entire seven (EDIT: now eight) pages of the thread ;)
Consider another good reason for Konami not to include DXX in The Dracula X Chornicles. They can sell it seperately on Nintendo's Virtual Console instead of "giving it away for free," so to speak.
-
If you want to hate on the game, try something else, like the art direction, or the gameplay, etc., instead of some picky and inconsequential detail.
I've done this. Many times now. Do I really need to do it again?
For me Rondo is superior to DXX in almost every conceivable way (graphics, music, story, controls, level design, depth, difficulty curve).
- John
-
In my opinion, I don't think someone can accept the idea that DXX might not be canon.
-
I've done this. Many times now. Do I really need to do it again?
- John
Of course you don't need to.
-
In my opinion, this thread needs to die.
-
Of course you don't need to.
-
(http://uk.geocities.com/nec43xkq3/up/1792.png)
My idea(fan fiction)
-
I mean, overall, Rondo is superior to DXX, but in graphics detail, DXX is more superior. With that said, wouldn't it be obvious to choose the more updated game as a follow up unless the updated game wasn't intended to be a replacemet of the previous one?
That's a debatable point really. Yes, DXX has some additional effects (the flames in level 1, and a tiny amount of Mode 7) but overall I think they two are pretty close to even, with Rondo actually being superior in a few other respects (more detailed atmospheric effects such as the storm and rain effects in stage 2, and some nicer looking parallax in other stages). Many of the foreground sprites were identical or near identical between versions. Screen resolution were close to identical. The color palette on the SNES seems brighter, but that's not necessarily a good thing for a Castlevania game.
Also, I dunno if anybody ever noticed but the town in the first level of Rondo meshes PERFECTLY with the designs used in Simon's Quest. I've also noticed that Maria's spite in PoR is clearly taken from Rondo.
I agree with pretty much everything else you said though.
- John
-
Is the Japanese version of Dracula's Curse non-canon because it screws up in the intro and states that Ralph/Trevor fought Dracula 100 years before Simon did instead of 215 years?
Go back in time more than a hundred years before Simon Belmont's time, when the the battle between Dracula and mankind began.
More than != Exactly. :o
-
In Reply To #114
Yeah, but it's an implication of an approximation.
If I said "I'm more than 20 years old" I could be 200 or 21, but most people would have to take what I look like into context to guess.
In that particular aspect, "More than 100" 'could' be 'around 100' (also maybe translation issue?), or could be 'more than 100' but not more than 200.
After all, if it was more than 100, shouldn't it have explicitly said "more than 200"? It'd be more logical as such.
I'm all for 'benefit of the doubt', but really, that's reaching.
Semantics.
Also, "Retroactive Continuity" does not seem to apply to games like Legends, since many people's 2nd argument against that game was based partly on the idea she stole Trevor's thunder since he was the 'first hero' before that game.
However, this is a thread about DraculaXX so I'm gonna shut up about that can o' worms. Please forget I mentioned it. :P
-
I mean, overall, Rondo is superior to DXX, but in graphics detail, DXX is more superior.
Hmm not seeing that though, The PC-Engine Rondo's graphics look leaps and bounds above XX's, I mean they had so much more space to work with putting the game on a cd, compared to the insanely limited space of a supernes cart.
-
In Reply To #111
Uh, I don't think the timeframe of Dracula's Curse was retconned to suit SotN. That was screwed up from the beginning, since Konami established right away that the Belmonet who fought Dracula 100 years before Simon was, in fact, Christopher. The U.S. opening to Dracula's Curse sidesteps the problem altogether by not mentioning a specific number of years in which Trevor fought Dracula prior to Simon.
But if Dracula's Curse gets a "by" in the canon for doing something that seems even more detrimental to the continuity of the series (getting the date of events wrong by over a century) with a little "retcon" magic, then why does DXX get slammed for a detail about a character relationship that doesn't actually affect the immediate story, or any other story in the series, or the entire continuity of the series for that matter? Seriously, whether or not Maria and Annette are sisters of some type (i.e., biological full, biological half, adoptive, step-sisters, etc.) doesn't matter. It doesn't contradict that Maria may or may not be distantly related to the Belmont clan. Being related to the Belmont clan is also not necessary to justify Maria's presense or influence in the Dracula X or SotN events. In which century a game took place in a series that relies on a continuity of a lineage of hero characters seems a much bigger issue than "is this character a sister of this other character or a second cousin twice removed of a different character?" You do not need to "thow DXX out of canon" to justify the fact that you simply hate the game.
-
I think it was probably just a typo in legend of demon castle. If the japanese manual says christopher was the last one to fight him then it probably wasn't intentionally done. :)
-
In Reply To #118
Christopher was mentioned in the manual for the original Castlevania, not Castlevania III.
-
Maybe Maria and Annette are "sisters," like, "blood" sisters or something. Maybe they swore some kind of oath to protect each other when they were kidnapped ;D
Seems there are ways to have your cake and eat it too, after all :P
-
In Reply To #118
Christopher was mentioned in the manual for the original Castlevania, not Castlevania III.
I know but I'm sure the creators of III looked at all the previous games and manuals so they could get a feel for what they were making, I mean 3 feels a lot like the 1st one. I think they meant 200 but accidentally put a 1 in there by accident and didn't wanna go back and fix it cuz technically 100 still works cuz it has the "more than" in front. :)
-
The glue factory called. They want their horse back.