Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: Super Waffle on March 25, 2015, 10:11:46 PM
-
I've just got to say I really enjoyed MoF for its gameplay, but my god that ending was some mindnumbing Days of Our Lives bullshit. "Oh noes, what a tragic misunderstanding! I had no idea a guy who openly refers to himself as TREVOR BELMONT could possibly be closely related to me, another guy named GABRIEL BELMONT! How could fate be so cruel as to trick me into killing my own son?"
How the hell does that even happen? How can Gabriel not possibly be aware of this information ahead of time when he's clearly watching Trevor from the moment he enters the castle and he has his magical all-knowing fortune telling mirror to investigate that shit? Does this idiot know anything? Does someone need to tell him Elvis is dead?
And yeah, I know there was something about how the Brotherhood tried to hide Trevor for his own safety when he was born, but that doesn't stop him from still calling himself TREVOR BELMONT and constantly proclaiming how he wants to defend the BELMONT NAME. At no point do you see him using any kind of pseudonym to hide his real identity. If he'd been using a different name throughout the game, then at least the ending would have made some sense.
-
blablablabla
*nods head up and down*
-
I've just got to say I really enjoyed MoF for its gameplay
You actaully enjoyed that floaty shitty slow and non responsive mess of gameplay mechanics? MOF had to be some of the worst 2.5D platformer controls I've ever experienced. The gameplay is what cursed the game in my opinion.
Story wise it was mediocre like most Castlevania games IMO.
You need to check out Muramasa (rebirth). It blows MOF out of the water in every way.
Now I'm depressed about MOF again...
-
Well okay the grappling mechanics were kind of weird and inconsistent. But I thought it was a pretty decent Metroidvania despite that.
-
You need to check out Muramasa (rebirth). It blows MOF out of the water in every way.
I remember that amazing game i still have my pirated copy for the wii somewhere
-
I don't have a Wii. But speaking of Vanilleware games, MoF's story structure kind of reminded me of Odin Sphere, except every character was Velvet.
-
It's also on ps vita. It was even free on there for ps+ members for a while. After I had already bought it of course.
-
what's a PS Vita
-
I - I actually loved MoF. I probably just lost all credibility whatsoever, LOL. I ignored it's many flaws and just had fun with it. I knew it'd probably be the last platforming CV for a long while. I enjoyed it for what it was. :P
-
I - I actually loved MoF. I probably just lost all credibility whatsoever, LOL. I ignored it's many flaws and just had fun with it. I knew it'd probably be the last platforming CV for a long while. I enjoyed it for what it was. :P
It's ok, credibility is overrated.
-
I have finished Odin Sphere and Dragons crown. I love me some vanillaware. Still have not finished Muramasa. I don't know what it is, but I just couldn't get into it. Yet I've finished Mirror of Fate 3 separate times. It might just be a matter of taste?
-
I don't have a Wii. But speaking of Vanilleware games, MoF's story structure kind of reminded me of Odin Sphere, except every character was Velvet.
(http://media.tumblr.com/d6a2d609b3747b17221b0c9e4b0eeb0b/tumblr_inline_n2ayje916U1qe4ieh.gif)
-
I have finished Odin Sphere and Dragons crown. I love me some vanillaware. Still have not finished Muramasa. I don't know what it is, but I just couldn't get into it. Yet I've finished Mirror of Fate 3 separate times. It might just be a matter of taste?
Everything is a matter of taste...I mean, some people would rather eat hot dogs than filet mignon.
Not to tease you.. But 3 times through MOF and not once through Muramasa!? That's a pallet I'll never understand.
-
had no idea a guy who openly refers to himself as TREVOR BELMONT could possibly be closely related to me, another guy named GABRIEL BELMONT! How could fate be so cruel as to trick me into killing my own son?"
Before the final battle, Dracula asked for Trevor's name, and Trevor withheld it.
He didn't learn his name until after he buried him.
-
Why the hell would he suddenly decide to do that? He didn't have any problems constantly mumbling about who he was and what his motives were at every point prior to that scene. And even if he doesn't specifically say that he's Trevor, he straight up tells Gabriel he's there to avenge the family name that Gabriel tarnished. Does Gabriel honestly not have the slightest clue who this guy who single-handedly infiltrated his castle and uses the exact same skill set as him might be? Isn't he just a teensy bit suspicious when he's shown watching Trevor from far away and scheming to himself? Doesn't his omnipresent magic mirror thingie make him aware of who Trevor is by default?
Ok, so the whole misunderstanding hinges on every character acting like inconceivable morons for no reason. I was a little off in my initial reaction. I seriosuly went through Trevor's story mode on assumption Gabriel was fully aware of who Trevor was (or could easily figure it out) and was such an evil family-destroying bastard that he just didn't care he was going to kill his own son. At the beginning of the game (which chronologically takes place after everything else, but whatever), we see Gabriel has absolutely no qualms with trying to murder the shit out of Sypha (his daughter-in-law) and Simon (his grandson) to punish Trevor. Then that ending cutscene in Trevor's story happened and I was just like "Wait, how?"
-
Why the hell would he suddenly decide to do that? He didn't have any problems constantly mumbling about who he was and what his motives were at every point prior to that scene. And even if he doesn't specifically say that he's Trevor, he straight up tells Gabriel he's there to avenge the family name that Gabriel tarnished. Does Gabriel honestly not have the slightest clue who this guy who single-handedly infiltrated his castle and uses the exact same skill set as him might be? Isn't he just a teensy bit suspicious when he's shown watching Trevor from far away and scheming to himself? Doesn't his omnipresent magic mirror thingie make him aware of who Trevor is by default?
It's been years since he was gabriel though. It's been Trevor's entire life, and some of Simon's. he abandoned his former identity and just decided to forget all about it.
the brotherhood never stopped sending people after him though, which is why you still find dead knights everywhere. all because he uses one of Gandolfi's weapons doesnt mean much, he's obviously just a bit more special than the other rank and file knights he's fought and killed.
Revenge for his mother's murder? He's killed lots of people. It's not like he keeps count. And trevor was being very obtuse as well. he didn't outright reveal who he was and who he was avenging, and Gabe never cared enough to look into the mirror.
TL;DR both Gabe and Trevor are hardheaded dense motherfuckers, and never bothered to "get to know" each other because they were too busy being at each other's throats.
Ok, so the whole misunderstanding hinges on every character acting like inconceivable morons for no reason.
more or less. Gabe always was a hard headed stubborn person, and trevor is his carbon copy, right down to the brooding.
At the beginning of the game (which chronologically takes place after everything else, but whatever), we see Gabriel has absolutely no qualms with trying to murder the shit out of Sypha (his daughter-in-law) and Simon (his grandson) to punish Trevor.
Gabriel is just an asshole and a retard. he didn't know Sypha and Simon lived where they did. He didn't even know Trevor had any family. But because he decided that as revenge he'd burn down and massacre a brotherhood village, he perpetuated the cycle by killing trevor's wife and setting his grandson on the path of vengeance.
Do mind though, that when you encounter him as Simon/Alucard, he isn't so quick to just come to blows. he even tailed Simon and Alucard. That said, he realizes the Belmont family is just cursed to keep the cycle going so he claims he's decided to just end the bloodline alltogether. But he doesn't go all out against Simon and Alucard. hell, half the fight is him possessing Simon to attack Alucard, and the other is him just doing the disappearing reappearing fire ball strat, where against Trevor he went all out no holds barred. and despite not having actually died when Simon impales him, he still goes away and his castle crumbles, only to eventually rise again, queing Alucard's master plan as shown in LoS2.
Then that ending cutscene in Trevor's story happened and I was just like "Wait, how?"
because they decided to tell the story backwards. basically because they wanted the reveal that Alucard was Trevor to be sort of a surprise. Despite everyone figuring it out before the game was even out.
That said I thought it was done well. gave me some chills when they zoom out on Trevor's coffin and it says "Alucard". And the ending with Gabe trying to revive trevor and failing I thought were well done
basically, i enjoyed it for the opposite of you. I loved the plot and setting, the gameplay not so much
-
what's a PS Vita
A PS Vita is a very powerfull handheld console that people want to trade for the less powerfull 3DS :D
-
A PS Vita is a very powerfull handheld console that people want to trade for the less powerfull 3DS :D
jupiter is a much bigger planet than earth but nobody wants to live there
-
I play my vita almost daily. I bought a 3ds XL and kept it for less than a month before selling it.
I think the vita gets an unfair rep around here.
Sure there are some games on 3ds I'd play but I could say the same thing about vita if I had sold that instead.
Both have a good library.
I just think the vita is better in every way. Even games. Haters gonna hate. At least the functions of the vita work properly and it's comfortable to hold.
3ds fails at 3d. Which is the flagship feature.
I'm not anti 3ds. I just think people have it backwards.
-
I play my vita almost daily. I bought a 3ds XL and kept it for less than a month before selling it.
I think the vita gets an unfair rep around here.
Sure there are some games on 3ds I'd play but I could say the same thing about vita if I had sold that instead.
Both have a good library.
I just think the vita is better in every way. Even games. Haters gonna hate. At least the functions of the vita work properly and it's comfortable to hold.
3ds fails at 3d. Which is the flagship feature.
I'm not anti 3ds. I just think people have it backwards.
If it was that good it would've sold better. Also the NEW 3ds have amazing 3d effect.
-
It is that good.
The reason it hasn't sold better is because Sony botched the marketing and pricing. Despite that, great games continue to come out on it, and of course, you can do way more with it than you can the 3ds.
I also use mine as a 2nd controller to my ps4.
Nintendo and Sony have had inverted success and failures this generation. Nintendo blew it with marketing on the Wii U in the same way, yet they still have awesome games on it. But the PS4 has blown it away in sales.
I'm not going to tell you that the Wii U isn't worth buying just because it hasn't sold as much as a PS4. And even though I sold my 3ds, I'm not on here mocking it and telling people not to buy it.
Yet that's the attitude people have towards the Vita. The fact is that it is a great handheld and worth owning especially if your are into CV and CV style platformers.
There are great games on Vita. I'll say it again. There are great games on Vita!
-
Definitely a 3DS and Nintendo fan all the way here...but to each his own. :-P You like Vita? Good! I like 3DS! Vita is this that and the other? Cool! 3DS is that this and some of those too! ;-P :-)
The New 3DS effects are really nifty! I do wish they'd improved the name a little...at least to something that rolls off the tongue a little easier! :-P
-
I don't use the 3D feature of the 3DS cause it makes me dizzy.
Both the Vita and 3DS have their strengths and weaknesses. Just get what you want and ignore what others say. haha.
@Android: Wait til they develop something that will follow the 3DS and hope that the name won't be hard to pronounce.
-
Definitely a 3DS and Nintendo fan all the way here...but to each his own. :-P You like Vita? Good! I like 3DS! Vita is this that and the other? Cool! 3DS is that this and some of those too! ;-P :-)
The New 3DS effects are really nifty! I do wish they'd improved the name a little...at least to something that rolls off the tongue a little easier! :-P
Every time I see the new colored buttons of my new 3ds xl I think about super nintendo, so "Super Nintendo 3ds XL" is a better name to me :D
-
@Android: Wait til they develop something that will follow the 3DS and hope that the name won't be hard to pronounce.
The New and Improved 3DSA XL+ SP 2! U!
-
The New and Improved 3DSA XL+ SP 2! U!
LOL! Then its alternative version has micro in it.
-
Just catching up on this. I agree with Flame here regarding the plot. The gameplay system was ok imo, a bit on the clunky side at times, but not too bad. I felt that the plot was pretty solid, even with the story told out of order. Stubbornness is something of a family trait, you can see it in all of them. Yes, Trevor was rather foolish to not say who he is straight away, as was Gabe. All three of them, especially Gabe and Trevor, are blinded by their thirst for vengeance. Pure and simple. Trevor's death scene gets me in tears a lot of the time when I watch it, it is to me one of the best moments in the whole trilogy, alongside Gabriel's reunion with Marie in LoS2. My issues with the story come more in the intervening time betwen MoF and the downfall of Drac's castle in LoS2, alongside an aspect of the scene where Gabriel remembers 'the plan'. Why does he call Alucard Trevor? Trevor never gave him his name, and it was Drac himself who called him Alucard. Surely then he would have sed that name?
-
the conversation between Alucard and Drac. after the brotherhood fight probably takes place quite a while after MoF.
enough time for Drac to come back and his castle to be rebuilt after it crumbled in MoF.
he probably learned Trevor's name at some point
-
the conversation between Alucard and Drac. after the brotherhood fight probably takes place quite a while after MoF.
enough time for Drac to come back and his castle to be rebuilt after it crumbled in MoF.
he probably learned Trevor's name at some point
MoF: 1073-1103
LoS2 prologue: c. 1547
(http://castlevania.wikia.com/wiki/Lords_of_Shadow_Timeline (http://castlevania.wikia.com/wiki/Lords_of_Shadow_Timeline))
-
Oh, I got that, I was more expecting him to more instinctually favour the name he chose for him, is all, especially as when they fought during MoF, he had used 'Alucard'.
-
That said I thought it was done well. gave me some chills when they zoom out on Trevor's coffin and it says "Alucard". And the ending with Gabe trying to revive trevor and failing I thought were well done
Did nobody else think that this scene was the lamest shit ever? First off we don't need to be told it's Trevor's coffin due to the preceding scene. Secondly, the original series actually had a reason for Dracula's son to adopt the name Alucard, which is never explained in MoF, and makes no sense as to why Dracula would assign Trevor this name. It would have made more sense if post-vamp Trevor didn't go by any name. Thirdly, why did he have to stamp the name Alucard on the coffin? What was he going to forget his son was in there? Absolute shenanigans that whole scene.
-
Gotta have that pandering.
-
Did nobody else think that this scene was the lamest shit ever? First off we don't need to be told it's Trevor's coffin due to the preceding scene. Secondly, the original series actually had a reason for Dracula's son to adopt the name Alucard, which is never explained in MoF, and makes no sense as to why Dracula would assign Trevor this name. It would have made more sense if post-vamp Trevor didn't go by any name. Thirdly, why did he have to stamp the name Alucard on the coffin? What was he going to forget his son was in there? Absolute shenanigans that whole scene.
IMO I don't think it was a stamp intentionally made by Dracula, just some kind of breaking the fourth wall stuff to show to the players that trevor is Alucard.
-
You don't think that it might be dracula's way of claiming him as an underling or something like that? In that sense the name on the coffin could be seen as a slap in the face, or a stamp of ownership. There are a few decent reasons I can think of and any one of them would be fine.
It's hardly an issue IMO.
-
Maybe the castle chose the name, as Trevor clearly was the opposite of Dracula.
-
Yeah. Compared to all of the problems MOF has, that one (if you can call it that) is minor.
-
I don't want to bash MoF, or LoS for that matter, but then again I do. The entire series' plot was nonsense to me. Not necessarily in the idea that it just doesn't make sense, but it just seems so twisted and out of place. It just feels...off.
-
The reason Dracula names his Son's tomb "Alucard" is because he never learned his name before he died.
But, His son represented the complete opposite of himself. Trevor was a carbon copy of gabriel when he was in the brotherhood, and stood opposed to his father, who had thrown all that away and cursed it.
So, Since he is Dracula, he dubbed his unnamed Son in memory of his defiance of him.
basically its the exact same as it is in the classic series, only this time Dracula named him it instead of him picking it out himself. It still represents him as being opposed to his father.
-
I don't want to bash MoF, or LoS for that matter, but then again I do. The entire series' plot was nonsense to me. Not necessarily in the idea that it just doesn't make sense, but it just seems so twisted and out of place. It just feels...off.
It's actually fascinating how bad the plot is depite not being intentionally written that way.
-
It's actually fascinating how bad the plot is depite not being intentionally written that way.
How so? Because the Castlevania series had already raised the plot standards so high before LOS?
Come on now...
The plot isn't the problem in MOF. It's the shitty gameplay, drab levels and boring music.
LOS1 had none of these problems IMO and is one of the best CV's in the series.
LOS2 on the other hand. I'd say it's towards the bottom.
-
I was talking about the LoS trilogy as a whole actually. But the way MoF fits into the overall narrative is pretty terrible actually. I've already talked about more extensively before so I'll keep it short.
First of all, it's hilariously overwritten. Especially the first game suffered from this with anything before the DLC being meaningless, padded fluff. Secondly, there's the pandering for the sake of pandering i.e using the same story beats from the previous canon without any regard for if making sense or meaningful in the story. There're also awful moments such as two "Et tu, Brute?" moments mere minutes from each other in the first game, and the nonsensical Gabula-Alucard gambit in the second. Last but not least, you're supposed to take all the awful scenes completely seriously: that stupid explosion scene, giant robots attacking Dracula's castle, Castlevania city, etc. It's all so distasteful. It's like a child's idea of what's dark and mature.
Quality of the previous games' narratives doesn't excuse the quality of the LoS series, so that's irrelevant. However, I'll bite. Say what you will about the writing of the pre-LoS games, but at least the writing is coherent and straight forward. I'm not saying it's great but at least it's compelling and easy to grasp.
-
I think it is due to Castlevania having decades to tell its story arc, and LoS tried to cram a whole bunch of references in three games while changing details, Brauner for example.
The old canon seems to try and take its time. LoS felt like it was trying to rush everything after the first game and had an identity crisis. To me. Others may disagree. But I think that is the problem overall with the LoS feeling off. But for me, it is also how Dracula IS a Belmont and while connections are good, it is not needed. Hero meets villain works just as well vs hero is villains son, emotions, blah.
-
It felt like they really needed an editor to kick them back on track but they couldn't find one, so they had Cox write the story.
-
tha mane difference between the "akumajo dracula" series & "lords of shadow" series is that in the classic, all of the humor was tongue-in-cheek, not whimsical but cheesy. whereas in loshadow all the humour seems forced & tasteless. however i did thoroughly enjoy the Toy Maker section, reenacting the play, him narrating the boss battle, etc. that was very charming & unique
as for alucard/trevor, according to mercurysteam logic he should've been named Dracula, since Gabrian calls himself "Dracul" and we all know what the name Dracula means. so theyre going against their own logic when they called him alucard. but whatever. plz dont try n justify it becuz no matter what argument u have, it still makes no sense
LoS felt like it was trying to rush everything after the first game and had an identity crisis.
thnx for the shout-out bruh
-
If they wanted to bring Dracula into modern times so badly, and assuming they were planning on making only 2 or 3 games from the beginning, why set the first game 1000 years before that? There's a huge space of nothing inbetween the two games, so what's the point? So many "what were they thinking?" moments.
It felt like they really needed an editor to kick them back on track but they couldn't find one, so they had Cox write the story.
I'd say it would be a benefit if next time they're trying to be ambitious with the story they hire an author/somebody who actually knows how to write.
as for alucard/trevor, according to mercurysteam logic he should've been named Dracula, since Gabrian calls himself "Dracul" and we all know what the name Dracula means. so theyre going against their own logic when they called him alucard. but whatever. plz dont try n justify it becuz no matter
Haha, I never thought of that before. It would make 100% more sense for Gabula to have called him that.
-
I still to this day wonder how Mercury Steam got the chance. Who was the other possible developers and what was their pitch like I wonder?
-
I had a whole post written up, then I realized:
A. I've already been here
B. Flame already said everything
So... fuck the haters, mang.
And mainline Castlevania straightforward? Really? I mean, it was fine by the time Symphony of the Night came out, but the GBA, DS, and PS2 games filled it up with so many power crystals, side heroes, mysterious strangers, ressurection cycles, "heirs", plot holes, and loose ends.
-
Haha, I never thought of that before. It would make 100% more sense for Gabula to have called him that.
after further thinking, lets say upon Trevo confronting Gabula blah blah, afterwards he appropriately dubs him "Dracula." he can even give him a speech on how, should he ever perish, he would be next in line to inherit the castle & the title "prince of darkness." After realizing what hes become & wanting no part of it, he renames HIMSELF Alucard. that woulda at least made a little more sense
or, one of my first theories way prior to los2 & mof being released, after the events of the DLC "resurrection" Gabula exiles himself to his castle in Transylvania, conducts taboo rituals in his demon castle until 1 day he meets a fair maiden which reminds him of Marie, they conceive a child, you know the rest. i'd have rather seen Trevor & Alucard at most be half-brothers, than them being the same damn person
i recall us laughing at the very thought of an "Alucard Belmont" several years ago, no way they would do something so silly like that
-
i recall us laughing at the very thought of an "Alucard Belmont" several years ago, no way they would do something so silly like that
They're taking ideas from here confirmed, quick someone write up a good story for the next CV. :P
And there's no point in comparing the old Castlevanias with LOS at least regarding story. The old games knew exactly what they were and what kind of story would fit best. LOS on the other hand took itself way too seriously regarding a few plot elements. That made all it's weakpoints so easy to point out compared to the older titles where we would've simply ignored it.
-
I still to this day wonder how Mercury Steam got the chance. Who was the other possible developers and what was their pitch like I wonder?
Japan's pitch was that 3D SotN sequel we got a teaser for. Nobody knows what the US pitch was.
-
And there's no point in comparing the old Castlevanias with LOS at least regarding story. The old games knew exactly what they were and what kind of story would fit best. LOS on the other hand took itself way too seriously regarding a few plot elements. That made all it's weakpoints so easy to point out compared to the older titles where we would've simply ignored it.
You're right. I'm sure the developers of past Castlevania games like legends, and curse of darkness planned on having their games pulled from the official storyline that didn't even exist at the time that they released their games.
You're right, there is no point comparing them because the old games had no official and consistent continuity until IGA made a flawed attempt at cramming it all together.
LOS was a thought out trilogy all by the same dev team that just happened to suck at the end.
CV before LOS was created by different teams that were unaware that their games would be included in a later devs timeline (Iga) and they had no say in how or if they would be included.
You're right that they are not comparable, yet so wrong on why they are not comparable.
-
The reason Dracula names his Son's tomb "Alucard" is because he never learned his name before he died.
But, His son represented the complete opposite of himself. Trevor was a carbon copy of gabriel when he was in the brotherhood, and stood opposed to his father, who had thrown all that away and cursed it.
So, Since he is Dracula, he dubbed his unnamed Son in memory of his defiance of him.
basically its the exact same as it is in the classic series, only this time Dracula named him it instead of him picking it out himself. It still represents him as being opposed to his father.
Firstly I don't buy it, the unnamed son goes into a tomb as the unnamed son. Second, he fed him his blood in hopes/ knowing he would awaken. Third, again it's just so Saturday Disney to stamp his name on the coffin. Learning his name in some other random way like through picking up notes/ artifacts or whatever would've made more sense. Even if Gabriel gave him that name, when he woke up his name was still Trevor. That's what's silly, we know that in traditional CV Alucard is Dracula's son. But they have to shoehorn it in so badly to the story where it just isn't rational, he may as well just be a strong vampire. When CV Legends was canon, it was implied that Trevor was Alucard's offspring, meaning the Belmonts were 1/4 Vampiric, it was unspoken, no one really knew for sure but one could speculate. Putting a stamp on someone's coffin to tell you their name is just unnecessary, leaves nothing to the imagination and means there's nothing mysterious about who this person is, fans knew before the game was released.