Topic: Any Details on new DS title yet?

[Kensuke]

Wolfman,

He messes with Richter in some indeterminate period between Rondo and SotN actually. He's screwed up before Alucard enters the castle. Hence, Maria goes looking for him. And really, it's just a theory that could conceivably work in the context of the current story without having to add too many additional elements. I'm not saying it's the one true explanation.

And no, I'm not going to have this debate with you again. Because no matter how much stuff is modified, omitted, in error, or just plain fucked up, you're going to come back with "But it can still be saved because item X is not totally important to the plot!". Using DracXX in favor of Rondo turns too many plot elements into so many MacGuffins. DracXX isn't even in the canonical timeline IGA published, so its a pointless argument in any event. Sorta like how my idea of trying to bring Sonia back in the fold went nowhere.

- John

[Wolfman Jake]

In Reply To #76

Indeed, Shaft doesn't mess with Richter's mind until AFTER the events of Dracula X.

[DragonSlayr81]

While this is true, and Dracula XX is listed as a title that documented the event, Creator intent for Symphony of the Night was that it continued from RoB's perspective, not Dracula XX. IGA's said, in the past, that SotN was created to continue on the story from Rondo of Blood, specifically. And in no way, in the past, has Dracula XX ever been refered to as "Rondo of Blood", hence IGA knew what game he was connecting SotN to, and what game he wanted to be the representative of those events. It's only further pushed by IGA's bias for the games he love. RoB is one of his top three(quoted as being his second favorite CV game of all time, following closely after CV3), and we all know his bias is a big concern in how he makes his games. And while personal enjoyment or following of the canon timeline is subjective as long as the events remain the same(interchange RoB for Dracula XX), to see the canon as how IGA wants it to be seen, by his intentions and intentions following that which paved the way for SotN's development, RoB is the game which depicted Konami's canon, until IGA or a new developer says otherwise.

[Wolfman Jake]

In Reply To #78

People have been putting words into IGA's mouth for far too long, especially concerning Dracula XX.  Saying that the SotN team used Rondo as their reference isn't the same thing as dismissing DXX.  That's an unwarranted inference.  The simple fact that DXX is included in the timeline as approved by IGA, and that it is NOT among the "other stories" expressly excluded from the timeline as noted, speaks volumes about this issue.  DXX also depicts the Dracula X events.  Some of the details between Rondo and DXX (or among Rondo, DXX, and DXC) differ, but not to any degree that contradicts events either depcited in SotN or in the rest of the timeline.  Certain people need to deal with the fact that DXX is NOT a "non-canon" game just because they hate it.

[Long John Silver]

It depicts them yes, but in a different light, like Haunted Castle does to Cv1. They both have only the core plot the same (Hero vs drac) but the rest of the stuff differs. Completely different levels, new characters, with the old ones gone, stuff like that.

So in short, it's mentioned on the timeline because it's kind of similar, but only mentioned as an afterthought, a "there's that other game that exists too, but it's more of an addon. The first title is the correct interpretation of the story."

[Wolfman Jake]

It depicts them yes, but in a different light, like Haunted Castle does to Cv1.

[Long John Silver]

You say drac was resurrected by shaft. In dxx shaft doesn't exist at all however. Also it's not people putting words into iga's mouth. You chose which ones of his words to accept and which to ignore or trivialise. He said himself that the events of rondo are the correct version of the plot, and he was the one who mentioned about annette and maria not being related and dxx screwing even such trivial matter. Otherwise why would sotn have so many referrences to rondo and zero to dxx, which had all new stages, changed or new characters, new plot and even totally different drac? Maybe because it counts ar much as order of shadows?


Also you're making a big deal out of such stupid thing, just like those legends fanboys who refuse to accept their little game has little influence on some piece of paper and dismiss all valid points, then repeat everything once they
runs out of arguements.

[Wolfman Jake]

In Reply To #82

Shaft isn't seen in DXX, but that doesn't mean he doesn't exist.

[Long John Silver]

Shaft isn't seen in DXX, but that doesn't mean he doesn't exist.

Yes it does. What's not mentioned in the game and manual might as well not exist at all. Hell, I could say that in dxx Drac was revived by a bunch of transvestite faeries but they were simply not seen in the game and it'd hold just as much truth as your shaft comment.
Not to mention shaft is dead and just a ghost of his former self in sotn, yet in dxx he's not even making an appearance, much less dying. And Richter somehow magically knows him personally, even if according to xx he never met him. Although I can pretty much guess which one of your pro-xx-quotes™ you'll reuse to counter this.

I originally said that the game was just an alternate take on the original, just like haunted castle was on castlevania 1. It was you who started posting all that crap as if I said that dracula xx is a blight on that timeline everyone takes too seriously and that the game needs to be eradicated, and dragged me into this stupid conversation.

I don't give a damn really, Dracula XX is a pretty mediocre game with ugly artwork not holding the candle even to its japanese boxart/manual, has horrbily washed out colors (almost as bad as hod) and is not worth debating over in my opinion. Rondo always was, is and will be the only true story for that date for me and 95% of remaining cv fans including Iga, and your comments will not change that no matter how much you'll try to.

The first original game is usually the one that's included in the timeline as far as castlevania goes. Not spin-offs like all the cv1 remakes or dxx. Hell, I bet in the future even Dracula X Chronicles will just join that list under rondo, because it's still just a remake, not the original.

[Wolfman Jake]

Yes it does. What's not mentioned in the game and manual might as well not exist at all. Hell, I could say that in dxx Drac was revived by a bunch of transvestite faeries but they were simply not seen in the game and it'd hold just as much truth as your shaft comment.

Sorry.

[Long John Silver]

You dragged yourself into this "stupid conversation."

[Wolfman Jake]

You could've just as well ignore my comment instead of attacking me by using all those pompous encyclopedia-driven high and mighty big words to make it look like you're smarter than me.

[Long John Silver]

Actually, Kensuke originally butted in with his comment on "another nail in DXX's coffin."

[Azmodan]

What is this all about? Wolfman, Serio isn't trying to force you to believe DXX cannot substitute Rondo, it's just that SotN was made with Rondo in mind. If you believe otherwise, fine, but resorting to childish insults isn't helping.
Agree to disagree, or something.

[Thomas Belmont]

Knowing that Dracula X is a weak REMAKE of Rondo of Blood, why would anybody consider Dracula X canonical or to be a seperate event from Rondo?