Lords of Shadow has the better story, but it's important for an origin story to feel faithful to the source material, and LoS fails at that.Because the idea was to depart from the source material in a new direction.
I agree.. even if most of the story is still unkown is more believable than the cliched anime fest of LoI
Anime? What was so anime about it? How was LoS "believable"? The story in LoI was also basing itself of the whole "Death of Elisabeta" origin story....which is the popular origin of Dracula.It's just Ahasverus showing his LoS pride again. He always does things like that, even if the way he props LoS seems condescending. ;D
Lords of Shadow's story isn't over yet so I can't comment.
Because the idea was to depart from the source material in a new direction.
I loved LoS, but the EPICNESS of the whole thing just turns me off
E...P...I...C..... I tell ya, it's all 300's fault. Not to shame the movie.
Mathias became a vampire when he stole Walter's soul with the stone.
"he doesn't see me following him...Yes, Gabriel, DO your ab crunches!"
Because the idea was to depart from the source material in a new direction.
It still brings us to the question of what makes Castlevania?This is why I think LoS should not have the CV label and be its own separate series while CV stays CV and continues the storyline as it was before LoS came out.
There is no whip. There is a chain attached to a cross and it's not Vampire Killer.
There is namedropping.
There is no candles (?)
No familiar boss battles (?).
No Stoker-inspired gothic athmosphere.
No CVish music.
There is a castle.
There is no Death (?)
etc.
And I swear to God, I remember reading in this particular forum that someone said they would even be willing to get rid of the name "Castlevania". Castlevania without Castlevania. Let that sink in for a moment.
If there is a majority of long-time CV fans who say this isn't very much like Castlevania, isn't that enough? Overall it seems that those who accept this as being truly Castlevania, accept the ideal of riding its fame while doing a new thing and acknowledging it forgot its roots. I mean, I'm not particularly sure what the majority thinks but so it seems at least.
There is no candles (?)
No familiar boss battles (?)
There is no Death (?)
Death is in the game at least. (debatable)
A chain whip? yes- Like in many castlevanias. Just not named vampire killer, and given a cross shaped hilt and made retractable.
It is actually called Vampire Killer a couple of times in Zobek's narration, if I remember rightly.
Based on the original "manly" look before they became pretty boys with Richter
LoI's whipping. Only upped on steroids.
he is reminiscent of Simon from CVll, (armor) and fits in with John Morris of being built like a truck.
I always found it amusing how Morris in Bloodlines has this HUGE frame. The guy is seriously buff.
At first I thought the Combat Cross was pretty lame, but I must admit I've grown accustomed to it. Hopefully we'll get to see Rinaldo in the DLC (but they might butcher his "image" somehow, haha)Lol. I see what you did there.
also I think Flame is obsessed with manly men/largeness in general
LOL just messin' with ya buddy :D
Even then, LoI just gave him a voice and small bit of personality. He was still sort of shallow. I never understood why Death serves whoever has the crimson stone. Whats in it for him? WHY did he serve Walter?Death NEVER served Walter. That's a misconception that many picked(as well as believing Walter's "You betrayed me!!" was meant for Death, when it was ACTUALLY meant for Mathias). It didn't even state specificially that Death serves Mathias SOLELY because he wields the Crimson Stone(as IGA says, the Crimson Stone was just a means for Mathias to become immortal, and it becomes useless afterwards, yet Death still stays loyal to Dracula, even after Dracula's soul is born into Soma, and the Crimson Stone is forever gone). I think Mathias's alliance with Death was forged through some other means. He was just announcing that he was offering Walter's soul to the one who kept the Crimson Stone(which was Mathias). Walter could only stand at Death's threshold if he was widdled down by a powerful warrior who wielded the only means of harming such a vampire, the Vampire Killer. Death couldn't just kill Walter and give his soul to Mathias to become a powerful Vampire himself. Considering what Death is, and what vampires are, Death has no dominion over immortals(duh, they can't die).
Lol. I see what you did there.
if he was widdled down by a powerful warrior
As for Zobek being Death, I'd rather not. I never was fond of the idea that Death was once an actual human being. It's an idea that was tossed around in fanfic theories on this board before. To me, Death should always be death. A being the transcends creation, at the most, or at the least, I might be able to swallow Death only being human once if he was the FIRST human(Adam, or something), died and was offered the role to usher all of life to the netherworld. But Death being some knight? I can't swallow that. Death should be far more ancient than that. Original Death had the idea right(even appearing as some strange Death God in SotN, like that was what he was worshiped as by some ancient civilization). I can only swallow Zobek as being Lord of the Necromancers.
But as for why Death continues to remain loyal to Dracula..
don't you have any idea why a raven is like a writing desk?
Hopefully we'll get to see Rinaldo in the DLC (but they might butcher his "image" somehow, haha)
I've gone though the last few chapters of the game again and they're some scrolls(as well as Zobeks narration) that refer the lord of the necromancers as Death.No, there is no entity called Death. The reapers in LoS are the physical manifestation of death in this game. So, instead of having one supreme entity called Death, you have a bunch of lesser entities that represent it. Also, those reapers aren't pushovers. In a group, they can kill you in a number of seconds if you aren't careful.
And going by all the posts about this manner, I can think of only two things:
1. Death has been reduced to a lesser enemy, thus becoming a complete weaking in this timeline.
2. There is no Death in this timeline at all.
My theory: Zobek>>Death>>>>Necromancers>>>>>>>Reapers
well to be fair, this is a topic about story. Origin stories. In a topic like that, you should expect spoilers, since they are sometimes necessary to explain points.
Zobek was actually manipulated by Satan, who is the final boss.
This is something I already mentione in another thread but Jorge thought that enough time has passed.
Yet there is a specific announcement that you should use the tags. The mind boggles.
No, there is no entity called Death. The reapers in LoS are the physical manifestation of death in this game. So, instead of having one supreme entity called Death, you have a bunch of lesser entities that represent it. Also, those reapers aren't pushovers. In a group, they can kill you in a number of seconds if you aren't careful.Reapers can kill you in 2 hits. 2 HITS. And they swing twice per attack too!
While that might be true, I was thinking more of a brief comparsion between the two games as oppose to the thread to stray away and evolving into topic about about Zobek = Death because of a specific scene. I wouldn't expect spoilers in here unless I mention spoilers in the heading. Besides, if you guys have to mention spoilers, please use the spoiler tags. I haven't beaten the game yet, which I made clear a few times (someone got the point in avoiding to mention spoilers here). Remember that not everyone passed LOS yet since it is only a few months old and there are going to be someone here so wants a generic or brief comparsion of the two games. I apologized for not being blunt the first time, so I changed the title to say to use spoilers tags.
This is something I already mentione in another thread but Jorge thought that enough time has passed.
Yet there is a specific announcement that you should use the tags. The mind boggles.
Thank you for ruining it for me. I think I am going to stay away from this topic
No, there is no entity called Death. The reapers in LoS are the physical manifestation of death in this game. So, instead of having one supreme entity called Death, you have a bunch of lesser entities that represent it. Also, those reapers aren't pushovers. In a group, they can kill you in a number of seconds if you aren't careful.
Well lets agree to disagree that Death is unaccounted for in this game, just a bunch of necromancers including one very very very powerful necromancer god.
well didnlt thewy say that gabriel is NOT a belmont from birth? I wonder how they will go with this.. are their true belmonts that will be introduced and somehow tied in?No, Gabriel is the first Belmont in this continuity. He chose the name for himself due to his love of the mountains. And they really just namedropped him being a Cronqvist as a mythos nod to Mathias Cronqvist being the IGAverse's Dracula
No, Gabriel is the first Belmont in this continuity. He chose the name for himself due to his love of the mountains. And they really just namedropped him being a Cronqvist as a mythos nod to Mathias Cronqvist being the IGAverse's Dracula
Here's what LoS got right: it treated Dracula as the protagonist. This is how I've seen it for years. Dracula is the closest thing to a main character the series has. Even if he's also the antagonist.
I didn't play LoS. From the spoilers and cutscenes I remember he calls himself Dracula at least on occasion.
And hey, if you wanna go down that road, I suppose Vampire Killer is the main character.
To be honest, I like both plots, but LOI didn't have that great a plot, it was pretty bland in generic, until you see the plot twist involving Leon's wife. On the other hand, Rinaldo and Joachim both had great potential (along with Walter with their mutual connection to make the plot much more intresting and flashed out. But They didn't they just hinted of what happened between them, never really giving us a satisfying answer. Then it topped off with Mathias who utterly made the plot completely worhtwhile with his speech condemning God.I agree.
LOS is an overall better presentation, and the plot is damn good and enjoyable through out the game. It only fails towards the end... ironic consider this seems to be the reverse of LOI in how they paced it. But it did change up some nice plot elements with death, gods, and angels in a way that struck us with aww, especially with the God Pan who is easily my favorite character in that game.
In the end, the games are a draw to me, but if you were to combine the best aspects of both games plots, you could easily have an award winning plot.
Hardly Devil May Cry, moreso God of War.Castlevania did it first though. it INVENTED it almost.
The Candles are the main characters. They are in every Castlevania game. EVERY. Even loS has breakable candles.
Castlevania did it first though. it INVENTED it almost.
Actually Devil May Cry invented it in the 3D genre to be more precise.
Afterwards games like Ninja Gaiden and God of War copied it.
Sorry, but if you're going to make a statement like that, then you should say Rygar made that move, then Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden, and GoW copied it. That's what everyone seems to tell me anyway.
That said, they play differently. And GoW should've copied more from DMC and NGB.
God Of War is just a Typical Overrated game that Ripped off other games of the same Genre and used an amercianized super flawed plot involving Kratos whining about something he did and after understanding the situation a sequel comes in where he is just betrayed by everything that has a name.God of War isn't overrated, it deserves all the awards & praise it gets because it's a genuine fun series to play. You just hate it because it's popular amirite?
God of War isn't overrated, it deserves all the awards & praise it gets because it's a genuine fun series to play. You just hate it because it's popular amirite?This does apply to God of War 1, below applies to all that is sequels.
The plot is heavily based on Greek Mythology, dunno what's "Americanized" about it. Ever hear of the term tragic hero (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragic_hero)? Greek Mythology is chock-full of 'em, which is what Kratos is.
One, not tragic, Never had a great loss due to the ONLY thing they can do is kill him, and did not.He lost his entire family (mother, brother, wife, daughter) what's more tragic than that?
Two, If it were heavily based on Greek mythology, Zues would have killed Kratos at the start of 2Zeus DID kill him, but Gaia had the power to bring him back. Did you not pay attention to the plot at all?
Three, GOW3 was rated perfection, Lack of variety in weapons, a ridiculous story, great graphics, dissapointing unlockables, and most of all, plotholes GALORE, yeah its totaly diserved it [/sarcasm]"Lack of variety in weapons?" What were you expecting, for him to have Alucard's SotN arsenal? And nearly every game story nowadays has plotholes, who the hell cares?
I did my best to see what was good in it, I really did, but I saw it for what it was, God of War was THE game, it did deserve the awards, but 2 and 3 ruined it to the point of ridiculous, and the problem was is i got more popular the more stupid it got.That's too bad you feel that way, your loss I suppose.
He lost his entire family (mother, brother, wife, daughter) what's more tragic than that?The fact that it is a commonly used plot device.
Dude, The Tragic Hero suffers a great loss at the end, not the beginning, this is just another revenge story ruined by sequelsEspecially in classical works.