Topic: My Thoughts on a New Direction the Series Can Go

[Lumas]

I agree that Legends' story can work, if some things are cleared up.  It would at least explain why the Belmonts are the "strongest" vampire hunters.

Thanks for agreeing and yes there would have be some clearing up like how Mathias came to use Dracula's name, the year of Alucards birth as well as Lisa's birth and death.  Taking out a game just because you dont particular like that game, in my opinion, is arrogant and unfair.

Also note that the "Alucard game" may have actually been a prequel explaining these events and thus re-establishing his exact origins since IGA went and re-established Dracula's origins.

It goes to show that IGA did not screw up the time line as Dragonslayer stated and I also confirmed in posts before, that RoB was indeed the reason that the timeline changed and with it Dracula's origins (contradicting Bloodlines which used Bram's vision of Dracula). IGA just had to roll with it, though in truth he wasn't the best story teller.

The time line essentially works the only problem is lack of information and not constantly updating with newer games. This could have been prevented and even repaired by simply creating a website (Japanese and English) going over the time and explain the reasons why this and that occurred which would be cheaper then producing another game.  Like say for instance Dracula's constant revival in the 1800s was due to the coming events of 1999 which was predicted by Nostradamus in the 1500s with Death using his influence as Father Zead to corrupt people like Barlow.

I think I love you.

To me, you seem like someone who actually thinks through instead of immediately shouting that Legends heavily contradicts with Dracula's Curse and that it could never fit within the timeline. Legends' story could work just fine with a few things being cleared up here and there.      

I love you too nagumo-chan and thank you.

[darkwzrd4]

Also note that the "Alucard game" may have actually been a prequel explaining these events and thus re-establishing his exact origins since IGA went and re-established Dracula's origins.

Lumas, I'm pretty sure that the Alucard game is a suppose to be a sequel to SotN.  I heard that it is meant to explain what happens right after SotN and why the Belmonts disappeared during the 1800s.  It may also explain why and how Dracula was sealed away in OoE.  At least, that's my understanding.  There is still very little information about the game.  All we really have is the trailer from last year.

[crisis]

What about CotM? That came outta left field in terms of characters & story.

[Jayfeather]

It may also explain why and how Dracula was sealed away in OoE.  At least, that's my understanding.  There is still very little information about the game.  All we really have is the trailer from last year.

If this is true, it would be interesting if a much younger Barlowe was a character, or even involve the old lady Danella?

And could you post a link to the trailer Please?

[Lumas]

Lumas, I'm pretty sure that the Alucard game is a suppose to be a sequel to SotN.  I heard that it is meant to explain what happens right after SotN and why the Belmonts disappeared during the 1800s.  It may also explain why and how Dracula was sealed away in OoE.  At least, that's my understanding.  There is still very little information about the game.  All we really have is the trailer from last year.

Wizard, IGA or Konami did not release any details on the game the only thing released was the trailer from tgs any information is purely fan speculation much like my own speculation about the game in light that IGA went and re-eastablished Dracula's history so it would be logical that he would do the same for Alucard hence why I stated that Theory. Also the radio drama could also explain what happened to Richter but I dont recall it really doing that, again a proper translation of the Radio Drama would be needed. So unless there is an interview I haven't read from IGA then anything about this game other then the trailer and the fact Alucard is in it, is purely specualtion and isn't official though your theory could very well work.

What about CotM? That came outta left field in terms of characters & story.

Not really the only thing that was really odd was they stated that Carmilla was Dracula's niece much like they did with Elizabeth Bartley this may have been an attempt into combining both characters though poorly done since IGA obviously just wanted her as Dracula's plaything course it could be just a plothole that needs clearing up. The Graves and Baldwins were just a group of Hunters trying to fill the role of the Belmonts since they disappeared during that era. Other than that I really dont know anything out in left field that happened, course its been long time since I have even touched that game.

There is still much contraversy over whether or not CotM, LoD and 64 are even apart of the timeline since they were removed and then reinstated appearing in the last updated timeline when PoR was released. So really until konami releases an updated timeline, which mind you may not happen due to the "reboot" with Lords of Shadow, then we can only speculate.

[crisis]

I seem to remember a while back, a documented interview with IGA of him saying his plans to create a sequel to Symphony on a next-gen platform (which, obviously, is what that TGS teaser was). I'll do some searching & see if I could post the link.

But yeah, CotM stated Morris Baldwin defeated Dracula 10 years prior. Also, Hugh seems to put some significance to Nathan's whip, despite it not being the VK. Those tidbits right there are left field. And it was an Austrian castle(??)

Maybe the guys that made it intended to make a prequel at some point.

[Lumas]

I seem to remember a while back, a documented interview with IGA of him saying his plans to create a sequel to Symphony on a next-gen platform (which, obviously, is what that TGS teaser was). I'll do some searching & see if I could post the link.

But yeah, CotM stated Morris Baldwin defeated Dracula 10 years prior. Also, Hugh seems to put some significance to Nathan's whip, despite it not being the VK. Those tidbits right there are left field. And it was an Austrian castle(??)

Maybe the guys that made it intended to make a prequel at some point.

If thats the case then information like that would be appreciated. I do hope that game gets released some time though I dont see how with LoS coming out. Though I recall an interview with Cox (I think) and they asked him if there was going to be another Castlevania on the DSi he stated he had no comment and I think he also stated he couldn't comment on whether or not IGA was working on another Castlevania game. IGA has also been reported in working on a new project so who knows.

Could be probably they intended to do a prequel but with IGA taking the reigns they obviously didn't get to do that. We were discussing that in the Sorrow Novel (released in japan) Curtis, who is being trained by Julius after the evens of DoS, is weilding a "Holy Whip" the Hunter whip would just be an offshoot of the Vampire Killer much like like this Holy Whip. EDIT  Also adding in Simon's Quest you obtain different whips so introducing a new whip isn't anything new or left field and neither is the Castle in Austria being in Bloodlines you traveled all over Europe and in Simons Quest you went to different Castles so that really isn't anything left field either nor is the 10 years prior thing being that in the 64 games Cornell defeated Dracula in LoD  8 years prior to Castlevania 64. In both cases  he was prematurely resurrected to try and regain his full power. Also in Simon's Quest he placed a curse on Simon so he would have to bring him back and in Adventure though he technically didn't die he still returned 15 years later. I'm sorry but all those cases really aren't left field or out of the ordinary for Castlevania. Now had they introduced a totally different background story for Dracula, changed the whips name from VK to Hunter's Whip and made replaced the Belmonts with the Graves and made it all take place in Austria instead of Translyvania and saying that this has been going on for hundreds of years then yeah I would say left field.

I think that Dracula's follows kinda figured out that they could just resurrect their master "Hey you know what screw that hundred year thing I mean we got necromancy, devil forgemaster, apple juice, alchemy, sorcery, and all kinds of other mad skillz lets just bring him back to life."  With 1999 approaching I can see why they would be scampering to bring him back.

[crisis]

All the stuff you're saying about Dracula's resurrections in the 19th century is just a giant clusterfuck that's better left out of the main continuity. If all the games were canon, there would be 6(count 'em, six) resurrections in less than a 100 year period! That's ridiculous. And it doesn't help things that Dracula stating in CV64 that it's been centuries since he's been brought back.

Besides, if they did cover their asses & decide to list the information filling in all the blanks you want answers to, you, me, or anybody on this or any forum would have nothing left to speculate and discuss over. The series would be a lot more boring, would it not?


BTW, Simon obtaining various whips is just a gameplay feature.

[Lumas]

All the stuff you're saying about Dracula's resurrections in the 19th century is just a giant clusterfuck that's better left out of the main continuity. If all the games were canon, there would be 6(count 'em, six) resurrections in less than a 100 year period! That's ridiculous. And it doesn't help things that Dracula stating in CV64 that it's been centuries since he's been brought back.

Besides, if they did cover their asses & decide to list the information filling in all the blanks you want answers to, you, me, or anybody on this or any forum would have nothing left to speculate and discuss over. The series would be a lot more boring, would it not?


BTW, Simon obtaining various whips is just a gameplay feature.

You need to calm down theres no need to get all heated like that.

I'm sorry if thats your opinion and unfortunetly for you thats all it will ever be is your opinion that you think it is rediculous.

So here is my opinion if they did do that I'm sure lots of people here would find things to discuss ( I know I would) and had they did  fill in the blanks then Dave Cox wouldn't have to make comments like " I dont even think the fans understand the timeline anymore."  Which is true and yeah gives us something to talk about or more like complain about. To be honest it would be a relief not to have to hear it anymore.

BTW is that kind of like all that magic Juste can use or Richter for that matter with his "item crash" ability a gameplay feature?..Oh wait no it was explained that later Belmonts inherited some magical ability from Sypha Belnades or the Fernandez side of the family. The same could be said there are different whips created though none with the power of the Vampire Killer because they lack the sacrificed soul of Sara explaing why Trevor could use different whips as well as Jonathan.

[Lumas]

Also maybe you missed this post but in the original Symphony of the Night Manual it states Dracula's age to be 800 (also stated in RoB) and Alucard's to be 400 now that would contradict Lament but it had to be changed thus they did not print their ages when it was re-released in the Dracula X Chronicles because so much had changed. Another legit reason to release a new official timeline filling in the gaps so we know for sure what has been changed and what hasn't.

EDIT and to add the Metal Gear Series has an official timeline aswell and I doubt the cool kids over at www.metalgearsolid.org have run out of things to talk about and they are still releasing games to fill in gaps and their timeline starts in the early 20th century.

[Lumas]

About the Dracula being a different person, I agree. The only reason, I can think, of IGA making him a different person is that it was for the sake of mystery within LoI. Y'know, to have the player guess who becomes Dracula(because nobody in that game was named Vlad Tepes). But, it didn't really work that good as a mystery, because it was something you could see a mile away. IGA should've just called Mathias "Vlad", and drop the mystery angle, focus on Leon and Dracula's friendship, which, during the betrayal, it would've had a greater impact.

Yeah I think we all saw that coming with Mathias given he almost looks exactly like Alucard only with black hair. I agree that it woulve had a much greater impact on the game if they woulve come out and said he was Vlad Dracula Tepes from the start.

[Nagumo]

BTW, Simon obtaining various whips is just a gameplay feature.

Well, there were several elemental whips in LoI, so it wouldn't be weird for Simon to use other whips then the Vampire Killer.

Problem solved.         
 

[Jayfeather]

At what point in the series development did the whip actually gain its mythical status as the "Vampire Killer?"  and when did that status start to be taken more seriously?  Simon's Quest for example seems to be from a era in Castlevania's life when such things weren't taken that seriously and the precedent at the time was he picked up stronger whips as the game proceeded. 

CV1, 3 & 4 : Leather Whip -> Chain Whip -> Longer Chain Whip
CV2: Leather Whip -> Thorn Whip -> Chain Whip -> Morning Star -> Flame Whip

The plot is a big mess, To me it would have been much better to say its the Belmont family that is so powerful, and the whip is just a tool, the weapon of choice.  But it would seem we've long past that point.  We're dealing with games from the 1980- an era where Game play was more important then plot line and trying to figure out why Simon got better whips is about as easy as explaining what the heck the hearts or the II and III items actually were.  I'd like to see IGA try that one, the origin of II & III.

[Lumas]

At what point in the series development did the whip actually gain its mythical status as the "Vampire Killer?"  and when did that status start to be taken more seriously?  Simon's Quest for example seems to be from a era in Castlevania's life when such things weren't taken that seriously and the precedent at the time was he picked up stronger whips as the game proceeded.  

CV1, 3 & 4 : Leather Whip -> Chain Whip -> Longer Chain Whip
CV2: Leather Whip -> Thorn Whip -> Chain Whip -> Morning Star -> Flame Whip

The plot is a big mess, To me it would have been much better to say its the Belmont family that is so powerful, and the whip is just a tool, the weapon of choice.  But it would seem we've long past that point.  We're dealing with games from the 1980- an era where Game play was more important then plot line and trying to figure out why Simon got better whips is about as easy as explaining what the heck the hearts or the II and III items actually were.  I'd like to see IGA try that one, the origin of II & III.

A quote from the manual of Castlevania
"Because you've got to get through six monstrous floors before you even
meet up with the Master of the House. Your Magic Whip will help, and
you'll probably find a weapon or two along the way."

A quote from IGA explaining why meat falls out of candles.

"Iga: You should ask, why do they eat it! I've thought about this stuff. I've actually thought about the candles. The candles are people's souls that were taken by Death or by the vampires. In Japan there are candles that represent life. So, when you release the souls from the candles by whipping them, they give you a "thank you" present. Thank-you hearts, or thank-you holy water. The meat, I have no idea. "

So yeah its been "magical" since the beginning and IGA did at one point explain the hearts. The II and III if you have read the manuals is refereed too as the Double and Triple Shot and increase the strength of your attack (II dealing two slots of damage and III dealing three.)

[MantapusProductions]

Dracula's place is really swank!  Souls used for light is sooo gawdy.