Topic: Thunderbrand's Spoiler thread---

[Foffy]

Uhm...Lords references Death in some of the narrations for a few stages. It's implied he has a part in the region where the Necromancers reside, if I recall. It actually got me thinking that Death was the "Reaper" listed in the strategy guide bestiary, but he's not in the game exactly.

I don't mind the twists and turns, and in fact that outside of the ambiguity of the timeframe of the modern scene, that this could easily be woven into IGA's continuity. Bastard child from the Cronqvist family joins the Brotherhood of Light, given the name Gabriel Belmont by the members there. After Marie dies, he could try to start over with a new name and a new life, such as taking the name Mathias Cronqvist (or maybe he found out that was his name after the events of LoS). He then spits in the face of God by becoming a vampire, purposely defying him for the loss of Elizabetha. Then, I guess as a vampire, he meets Lisa and she's killed, so he decides that he not simply smite God, but all of humanity, and so begins all of the games from Dracula's Curse on. And of course the real Belmont family comes into play, not as a surname based off of the "beauty of the land" or whatever shit they say it is in the Travel Book.

The big dealbreaker to this one fanss confusing-yet-IGA-like-theory is that the modern event is if it's set after 1999, which creates a big fucking hole in the idea. But outside of that, I can't name one specific, individual story element of the game that directly conflicts IGA's vision without some contextual interpretation.

[Ahasverus]

If it doesn't fit at least the most basic par of old canon (CVIII, CV1-2, SOTN, they are the only relevant ones storywise) so it doesn't make sense, and, we'd have a whoop-a-boo of Castlevania set in modern times straight out... That's something I don't like to think

fter Marie dies, he could try to start over with a new name and a new life, such as taking the name Mathias Cronqvist (or maybe he found out that was his name after the events of LoS).

That's actually pretty convicing 

The big dealbreaker to this one fanss confusing-yet-IGA-like-theory is that the modern event is set after 1999, which creates a big fucking hole in the idea. But outside of that, I can't name one specific, individual story element of the game that directly conflicts IGA's vision without some contextual interpretation.

Retcon the sorrows.

Please.

[crisis]

CASTLEVANIA: LORDS OF SHADOW ISN'T CANON.

[Foffy]

CASTLEVANIA: LORDS OF SHADOW ISN'T CANON.

This is why I said woven into IGA's series. There's nothing to toss in if it's already canon. At the very least, I'm sure IGA's next game will include references to Lords. In a way, Adventure Rebirth did with the final form of Dracula looking a hell of a lot like the masks in this game. ;3

[Dremn]

CASTLEVANIA: LORDS OF SHADOW ISN'T CANON.

[Nagumo]

I think the forum just got hit by a canon frenzy. And I love every single minute of it.

 

[Apolake]

"Just as planned."
Death Note - Kira's Laugh (Original)

[Munchy]

Gotta say, after hearing the twist with Gabriel being "Dracul"... Lord, no wonder Kojima endorsed it. This kinda reminds me of the whole "Super Joe was actually the bad guy all along!" twist in the new Bionic Commando just in terms of sheer randomness and stupidity. It's like Kojima looked at the game and said, "Well, no completely nonsensical plot twists so far... better do something about that if you want to keep your funding."

Of course, I haven't played the game and seen how it unfolds, so I can't rightly rip on it completely. I'll just say there needs to be a shitload of convincing to pull it off in a non-facepalm manner.

I'm on board with Satan and whatnot though. The MSX Vampire Killer kept mentioning "Dracula's Satanic castle", so I figured it kinda stood to reason that Ol' Scratch had some part in Drac's evilness. Not to mention other games like the N64 one talking about "battle against the Devil" so the Christian overtones aren't exactly new.

[Valtiel]

As for Gabriel being Dracula, I think it has as much standing as the whole Mathias is Dracula thing. I wonder who the "Vladd III" people are going to react to it, because seemingly, since CVI, they've been clamoring that CV's Dracula is the historical "Vlad Tepes", and this one shuns that theory as well. Actually, as I stated in the other thread, I actually like Mathias as Dracula more, because he didn't get strung along like Gabriel did. Mathias had a clear objective, and used people to achieve it. His means of becoming Dracula was very sisister and evil, the puppet master who used Walter, Leon and Sara to achieve his goal. Gabriel was being strung along by Zobek, who was being strung along by Satan. Way to be the puppet, Gabriel!

*This is my first post, so hello. Been lurking here forever, and this message urged me to join the discussions*


I strongly disagree on this. I've always perceived Mathias as an incredibly weak Dracula (in fact, despite loving LoI I admit the entire origin story had me raging for how bad it was), and I think Gabriel is actually a lot more impressive. I'll go with a list to ease further discussion:

1. it's true that Gabe is manipulated for the best part of the story, but on the other hand, Mathias wasn't self sufficient in his raise to power. In fact, we were thrown some ridicolous "I got this stone and since you cleared the castle and killed this vampire for me, now I'm immortal!" plot twist that didn't do much to portray Mathias as a powerful individual. Heck, what did his entire manipulation amount to? Leon was suffering from a loss (and this would sort of justify Gabe too), Walter was the biggest idiot in the history of videogames...
2. The lack of subtlety isn't even my biggest beef; the fact is, Mathias basically "steals" his power from someone else's effort. It may be sinister, but it also shows cowardice, and weakness. And there's no character evolution either: Mathias is a bad man who does bad things until he becomes a bad vampire.
3. Gabriel, on the other hand, goes through all the trials himself. He bests the previous Lords of Shadows as a mere human, showing incredible courage and prowess. He literally goes through half Europe on his own, facing basically every monster you could think of, prevailing on each one, and is ultimately betrayed - was he a fool? Maybe, but that adds to the explanation of Dracula's character. Dracula's cruelty could very well also come from such a dramatic experience. Not trusting anyone anymore, he survives in loneliness and ultimately becomes a monster. His faith in humanity is lost, and he may want revenge on what he fought for and betrayed him.
4. More importantly, Gabe is manipulated, but once the betrayal is revealed, he proceeds to face off the Devil itself. And wins. Mathias didn't even have the guts to face Leon.

Now, on the LOS IS NOT CANON POINT, that's not entirely correct.

LoS IS canon in LoS' timeline, which isn't the same of the post SotN Vanias. We do not know how the game will evolve from here; we may get installments in both timelines, fundamentally pushing forward two different alternate universes, and fans will be free to pick the one they prefer or stick with both. We may even get only LoS-timeline games, and that would make LoS basically the only canon relevant to new games.
While it has flaws, I find the LoS canon immensely more promising that the current state of the IGA-canon - I'm unsure the IGA-canon can survive the Soma disaster, and having proceeded the storyline past the 1999 game has sucked almost all the momentum from that promised moment of truth. A part of me would honestly prefer to see the 1999 game in the LoS timeline because it feels like there's a lot more room for having an actually good story, while an IGA 1999 would have to deal with us knowing what happens next and Soma.

[Valtiel]

I think the forum just got hit by a canon frenzy. And I love every single minute of it.

 

In many ways, even if you completely detest what they are doing with LoS... it's sort of refreshing to be able to discuss the saga's canon without having to directly tackle the post-1999 games. I think the anime turn of the saga had killed any interest in looking at the canon as anything worth discussing for me.

[Inccubus]

It occurs to me that by using major character names from the old timeline that it helps to keep future games in this new timeline free from falling back into the old timeline to a certain extent.

[DragonSlayr81]

1. it's true that Gabe is manipulated for the best part of the story, but on the other hand, Mathias wasn't self sufficient in his raise to power. In fact, we were thrown some ridicolous "I got this stone and since you cleared the castle and killed this vampire for me, now I'm immortal!" plot twist that didn't do much to portray Mathias as a powerful individual. Heck, what did his entire manipulation amount to? Leon was suffering from a loss (and this would sort of justify Gabe too), Walter was the biggest idiot in the history of videogames...
2. The lack of subtlety isn't even my biggest beef; the fact is, Mathias basically "steals" his power from someone else's effort. It may be sinister, but it also shows cowardice, and weakness. And there's no character evolution either: Mathias is a bad man who does bad things until he becomes a bad vampire.
3. Gabriel, on the other hand, goes through all the trials himself. He bests the previous Lords of Shadows as a mere human, showing incredible courage and prowess. He literally goes through half Europe on his own, facing basically every monster you could think of, prevailing on each one, and is ultimately betrayed - was he a fool? Maybe, but that adds to the explanation of Dracula's character. Dracula's cruelty could very well also come from such a dramatic experience. Not trusting anyone anymore, he survives in loneliness and ultimately becomes a monster. His faith in humanity is lost, and he may want revenge on what he fought for and betrayed him.
4. More importantly, Gabe is manipulated, but once the betrayal is revealed, he proceeds to face off the Devil itself. And wins. Mathias didn't even have the guts to face Leon.

1. How powerful Mathias was, physically, was irrelevant to the story AND him becoming Dracula. He was described, early on, as becoming sickly, which should've given the idea of his standing of power besides that of Leon, who was said to be one of the strongest knights in the land. They never said that Mathias was a strong knight, but a genius tactician.

2. It's only cowardice to those with high honorable standards, which Mathias showed little regard for. It's like if a clan of ninja assassins snuck into a samurai camp and waited until all the samurai were asleep to slit their throats. Not fighting them one-on-one might provoke the notion that the ninja were cowards(because the samurai might've, indeed, won in one-on-one combat), but when it comes to survival, all's fair in love and war. And if it means achieving your goals through dirty tactics, so be it. 

3. Gabriel, I see, is a lot like Leon. Both knights who were said to be the strongest of the the time, but both went on teir different paths. Interestingly enough, both were decived by brothers-in-arms whom they had full trust in. The only difference is what became of them afterwards. Though Gabriel showing prowess and courage doesn't make him better than Mathias. It's just a personal preference, and nothing more. You like tough, battle hard knights or behind-the-curtain manipulators? I'm thinking you like the former.

4. Again, physically, Mathias's power was irrelevant at that point, as he only sought a powerful vampire soul to make himself immortal. He didn't care about becoming a super strong demon king general and greatest warrior in the world. He was content with what he was at that point. Also, him choosing to flee from Leon was probably one of the most smartest things he could do in the situation considering he knew Leon now had the Vampire Killer in his grasp. It's not like Mathias was scheming to become immortal just to have everything go down the drain by the hand of Leon's whip. THAT would've been stupid. Besides, he had no need to fight against Leon, because he accomplished what he set out to do. It wasn't until later that he'd actually fight the Belmonts, but by then, his whole outlook has changed, and he's become the enemy of humanity.

[Valtiel]

1. How powerful Mathias was, physically, was irrelevant to the story AND him becoming Dracula. He was described, early on, as becoming sickly, which should've given the idea of his standing of power besides that of Leon, who was said to be one of the strongest knights in the land. They never said that Mathias was a strong knight, but a genius tactician.

2. It's only cowardice to those with high honorable standards, which Mathias showed little regard for. It's like if a clan of ninja assassins snuck into a samurai camp and waited until all the samurai were asleep to slit their throats. Not fighting them one-on-one might provoke the notion that the ninja were cowards(because the samurai might've, indeed, won in one-on-one combat), but when it comes to survival, all's fair in love and war. And if it means achieving your goals through dirty tactics, so be it. 

3. Gabriel, I see, is a lot like Leon. Both knights who were said to be the strongest of the the time, but both went on teir different paths. Interestingly enough, both were decived by brothers-in-arms whom they had full trust in. The only difference is what became of them afterwards. Though Gabriel showing prowess and courage doesn't make him better than Mathias. It's just a personal preference, and nothing more. You like tough, battle hard knights or behind-the-curtain manipulators? I'm thinking you like the former.

4. Again, physically, Mathias's power was irrelevant at that point, as he only sought a powerful vampire soul to make himself immortal. He didn't care about becoming a super strong demon king general and greatest warrior in the world. He was content with what he was at that point. Also, him choosing to flee from Leon was probably one of the most smartest things he could do in the situation considering he knew Leon now had the Vampire Killer in his grasp. It's not like Mathias was scheming to become immortal just to have everything go down the drain by the hand of Leon's whip. THAT would've been stupid. Besides, he had no need to fight against Leon, because he accomplished what he set out to do. It wasn't until later that he'd actually fight the Belmonts, but by then, his whole outlook has changed, and he's become the enemy of humanity.

1. I completely agree - Mathias does make sense as THAT Dracula, but a comparison was drawn between the two characters. Branding Gabriel as a simpleton isn't more correct than branding Mathias as a gimp. I'm not stating that physical prowess is more descriptive of the character of Dracula than genius - I would guess he sounds like a more threatening villain if he's both - however looking at what the two characters did to become the Vampire Lord, I can't help but think that Gabe's track record is more impressive. If Mathias' machinations were more complex than "I got this stone and Leon is mad with anger" I could probably even see things your way; to borrow from another Konami game, while Ocelot certainly doesn't have Liquid Snake's combat skills, the amount of scheming and double crossing he pulled off warranted him to role of star villain. Mathias does nothing of that magnitude - I'd be hard pressed to say Mathias does anything at all.
If tomorrow Kojima and Mercury Steam tell us that Gabe is actually Dracul and Dracula is his son and they retell Mathias' story giving the character some justice, I'll be all for giving that a chance.

2. That's fair, however my point was simply that if you told someone "this dude betrayed a friend to make him do all he needed to become Dracula" and "this dude went through all these adventures and was betrayed and became Dracula out of spite and anger and faced off Satan himself", I'd be hard pressed to believe he would find Mathias' story more "impressive". You may tell me that betrayal suits Dracula; as I said, we probably have a point of disagreement in the fact that you find the fact that Dracula was a bad guy before becoming a vampire a plus, Dracula is "historycally" a tragic figure. The idea of him being a necessary evil is completely rooted in his historical inspiration (think of the Turks and the "woods of the impaled" tactics he used to stop them). Dracula also is commonly portrayed as a champion of Christianity that feels betrayed in myth. I don't see how people couldn't see this ending coming, tbh.

3. I could actually prefer tactical geniouses... the point is that there's no comparison between how the two are portrayed. It's not really Mathias' character's fault - it's probably just the fact that IGA's storytelling is dire and LoI's script was exceptionally weak. I have no particular preference for warrior types, and actually nothing in CV's Dracula design hints at him being a warrior (he wears a tuxedo in XVth century, hard to build anythign from there). I do however fancy (due to cultural influxes and my expertise in the original Dracula mythos) the idea that he's a cursed characters, and that he didn't willingly pursue his curse, until the very end. Having him "want" to become a vampire sort of strips him of any dramatic impact. Mathias' version was sort of redeemed by his physical sickness. If the story played something along the way of him being frustrated by his body's weakness (think Griffith in Berserk) and pursuing vampirism as a way to be "full" again, the character could have developed its potential more.

4. Yes, fleeing was smart and it also spared us from having an origin story where the main villain already dies (something LoS was wise enough to do too - not saying it couldn't be pulled off, but still) - however it does remove some oomph from the character. By the time I played LoI, I had been through the ordeal of reaching and fighting Dracula, a guy so strong that he could command Death, several times. He's meant to be frightening. And in his origin story... he flees?
That's what Gabriel achieves greatly. There's a specific scene when he turns wearing the Death Mask... and you think "this guy defeated all lords of shadow, and some colossal titans, and an army of monsters on his own, and now he's infused with semidivine power and pissed off. How the hell do you stop him?". I can picture the next game in the LoS continuity and playing a Belmont knowing he will have to eventually face Gabe/Dracula... good luck with that.

[Ahasverus]

If LOS is indeed a prequel to LOI (then fitting in the canon-- accept it, it's toooo easy to put it in) I think the whole "Mathias" thing is a LIE, he's not that fragile, he's not that fool... just look at gabriel's face when he's at the throne as Dracul(a?), his face is different his original one so he may change his shape thanks to devil's mask, I also think elizabetha is not real, probably a succubus or a manifestation of Claudia, I think his whole plan was to take Leon belmont to his side, perhaps Leon is his son? IDk, yeah, I was against this game turned into the canon but the hell, it fills so well and answers o many things that I will love they included it... however, I would like the canon to be "arranged".... retell CVIII, I, SQ, ROB, and SOTN and we have the whole Castlevania mythos without fill, retcon the others. Simple.

[GuyStarwind]

4. Again, physically, Mathias's power was irrelevant at that point, as he only sought a powerful vampire soul to make himself immortal. He didn't care about becoming a super strong demon king general and greatest warrior in the world. He was content with what he was at that point. Also, him choosing to flee from Leon was probably one of the most smartest things he could do in the situation considering he knew Leon now had the Vampire Killer in his grasp. It's not like Mathias was scheming to become immortal just to have everything go down the drain by the hand of Leon's whip. THAT would've been stupid. Besides, he had no need to fight against Leon, because he accomplished what he set out to do. It wasn't until later that he'd actually fight the Belmonts, but by then, his whole outlook has changed, and he's become the enemy of humanity.

Not to mention Leon just destroyed the eternal night surrounding Walters castle. I believe Mathias says something like "Dawn is approaching" then he has Death fight Leon. Not only would it had stupid for him to fight Leon at that point because of the vampire Killer it would be stupid because day was coming and word around town is vampires can't survive in the sun light.