Topic: Why does IGA keep writing checks he never cashes?

[Nagumo]

In Reply To #64

It doesn't imply it either.

Castlevania III was supposed to be the first time a Belmont and Dracula battled.   

I dare you to quote the sentence where that is stated because that isn't mentioned anywhere in that game.       

thankyu 
 

[A-Yty]

In Reply To #59 & 60:

And SCVIV was a reimagining, so I think it makes it valid. Or has anywhere been specifically stated that the resurrection that is supposed to happen every 100 is not Dracula reviving on his own?


Whether or not reboot would ruin another continuity is a matter of how much they will stay true to the original. Star Trek is a good example of an effective reboot: it took the best things from the established canon while having many non-Trekkies work on it. This balanced the fan demand with neutral writing.

That is what they should do with CV; maintain the Belmonts, ,aintain a guy similar to Dracula, side characters like Sypha and Grant, classic subweapons etc.

[Clara E. Leet]

All that happened at the end of Legends if you got the special ending was it was revealed that Sonia had a baby. OH MY GOD A WOMAN USING HER REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM. It's clear that Alucard was Sonia's instructor (Manual FTW), and that he had feelings for her, but Sonia never really portrayed any mutual feelings directly in the game. It was only stated that she had a child. If it were Alucard's, that would have to mean that she travelled through Dracula's Castle while pregnant, considering she never saw Alucard after she fought Dracula.

She was the first female Belmont ever used in a CV game. Regardless of people's feelings on it, it is a shame that no one else has ever used a female Belmont again. On the same note, it would be great to see a male Belnades.

Personally I'd like to see Legends remade, but instead of Sonia DEFEATING Dracula, she merely fights him, and perhaps weakens him, but doesn't destroy him. Therefore she would face him, but the first defeat would still be Trevor's honor.

[Giz]

I dare you to quote the sentence where that is stated because that isn't mentioned anywhere in that game.

[Nagumo]

In Reply To #68

The american Cv3 box doesn't mean anything because all it is, is just random stuff made up by the people who were supposed to translate it.It's the same case with the Poltergeist King. He is also made up.

I also agree with everything is Clara's post. 

[Giz]

And SCVIV was a reimagining, so I think it makes it valid. Or has anywhere been specifically stated that the resurrection that is supposed to happen every 100 is not Dracula reviving on his own?

A remake that in canon was replaced with Chronicles, which shows a ritual being conducted to bring Dracula back - on the one hundred year mark. If he was capable of 'auto-resurrecting', there would be no need for that ritual to take place.

Furthermore the entire point of Dracula's resurrections is that it's our own evil and hatred that brings him back, the actions of those who succumb to his seductive power.

[crisis]

Personally I'd like to see Legends remade, but instead of Sonia DEFEATING Dracula, she merely fights him, and perhaps weakens him, but doesn't destroy him.

lol now that would be silly. Lets just leave Dark Night Prelude as it is.

[Giz]

Besides, lament's ending says that they won't meet until the events of approximately CVIII anyway~

[Nagumo]

Besides, lament's ending says that they won't meet until the events of CVIII anyway~

No it was said that they wouldn't meet until several centuries later.

[Giz]

So it was. Regardless, the implications are the same~
Legends is an awful game and has no place in the timeline, and it simply flows much better with the leap being directly from Lament of Innocence to Dracula's Curse.

This is an incredibly dumb argument and there are much more interesting ones taking place in the thread concurrently so don't bother responding because i'm not going to respond to anything you have to say on this subject.

[Nagumo]

In Reply To #74

So it was. Regardless, the implications are the same~

Ehh, no.

"I don't bother responding" my ass. This sounds childish but I think you just can't take that I proved you wrong

[Giz]

If that was the case, I wouldn't have even bothered to acknowledge that you were right in the first place.

[Clara E. Leet]

I liked Legends just fine. Just because a game wasn't up to the standards of reviewers or players doesn't mean it's not a valid game.

Giz, if you "don't particularly care" about people's opinions, then you have no excuse (or right, for that matter) to criticize them and incite arguments.

[justin312]

The only ones he excluded were ones that could quite simply not work.

I respectfully disagree.  The only reason Circle of the Moon and Castlevania 64 do "not work" within the rest of the story is because they conflict chronologically with Symphony of the Night and Order of Ecclesia.  Otherwise, they work just fine with the rest of the story. 

The fact is that post-1991, there have been five Castlevania games made that IGA was not involved with.  And four out of those five games have been retconned from his timeline.  IGA wasn't retconning those games because they "quite simply could not work", he retconned those games because they didn't fit with his vision of the Castlevania story.  And like I said before, whats good for the goose is good for the gander.  If IGA's timeline and backstory don't fit with MercurySteam's and Kojima's new vision of Castlevania, they have every right to retcon every one of his games if they think it will help them tell a better story.  He certainly had no problem retconning what others who came before him did.

[Giz]

Giz, if you "don't particularly care" about people's opinions, then you have no excuse (or right, for that matter) to criticize them and incite arguments.

With nothing objective left to discuss in an argument I didn't particularly care about in the first place, that leaves only subjective feelings on our behalfs. I feel it is better the way it is, Nagumo feels otherwise, and I am completely apathetic to Nagumo's opinion as an opinion. I disagree, but with no objective basis I feel no need to debate it further.

Not to mention the whole "what does it matter, it isn't canon and most likely never will be, etc." thing. If it does become canon someday, I may care; until then though I can't say I do.

The only reason Circle of the Moon and Castlevania 64 do "not work" within the rest of the story is because they conflict chronologically with Symphony of the Night and Order of Ecclesia.

All of which were made post-Symphony (and were intended as sidestories to begin with) so there is no excuse for conflicting with Symphony of the Night.

there have been five Castlevania games made that IGA was not involved with.

I'm counting seven; unless IGA was involved in the SNES port of Dracula X (I've found nothing saying he was) and the original version of "Chronicles" on the X680000. I've found nothing stating he was though I may be mistaken in this regard~

If IGA's timeline and backstory don't fit with MercurySteam's and Kojima's new vision of Castlevania, they have every right to retcon every one of his games if they think it will help them tell a better story.  He certainly had no problem retconning what others who came before him did.

And in the process would be disregarding every single game made in the Castlevania series thus far, if this were to become its new official face - what with the fact that it isn't connected to anything.