Topic: Lords of Shadow sequel is coming out this year, hinted by David Cox over twitter

[Kingshango]

How so? Only in Castlevania do they seem to be dropping the ball. In fact, they've made brilliant decisions like stamping out MGS games like candy. Mucho money in that department.

You may not like it, but they're not in the red, and their popularity is through the roof. I'm not surprised at all.

Hudson.

What they did to Hudson (and Team Silent for that matter) is beyond forgiveness, doesn't matter if the make the perfect Metal Gear or the best Castlevania ever created, what they did was foul.

And if it wasn't for my interest for Castlevania and Revengance (mainly for Platinums involvement ) I would have dropped Konami entirely by now.

Don't be surprised when you see the news headline "Koji Igarashi resigns from Konami, disbands Japanese Castlevania team" in the near future, you know it's coming.

[Ahasverus]

I mean, with Konami's fuckery recently, I wouldn't be surprised at all if they made him helm a Frogger game. I just can't find it.

Oh ok thank you, it seems I'm wrong on that one O.o

So IGA has only made Otomedius and Tokimeki after HoD? Weird, I mean, he was a known developer, even with its failures in CV, he must have some vision or something worth developing.

And then Konami greenlit Neverdead and Blades of Time... and the abortion called SHCollection.

WTF Konami?

[beingthehero]

To be honest, the Silent Hill collection is kind of fascinating for its terribleness.

[Rugal]

I hope the ending to LoS2 isn't dlc.

[Dremn]

I hope the ending to LoS2 isn't dlc.

I wouldn't mind DLC if it was just extra levels for the sake of extra playtime and nothing that directly effected the story.

[Ahasverus]

I hope the ending to LoS2 isn't dlc.

I don't think they will do sucha  thing, if anything the ending of LoS was one of its most praised aspects, I think they'll try to blow it out from the water

[uzo]

They've already done it with the first. I'm sure the second will follow suit.

Get your wallets ready.

[Ahasverus]

They've already done it with the first. I'm sure the second will follow suit.

Get your wallets ready.

Ehm, no? If anything, Resurection was /worse/ than the actual ending, which was emotional and all the stuff (not counting the epilogue). I think the game ended pretty well. You can't call it incomplete

[Munchy]

The real crime wasn't making DLC levels. It was splitting them in two and charging too much money for each one.

[Dremn]

Get your wallets ready.

I'm not opening shit until I see everything on youtube first. I'm glad I didn't buy Reverie or Resurrection.

[Flame]

the DLC chapters seem more IMO, That they probably figured it best to explain the epilogue a bit more. Since last we see him he's standing on a cliff all mopey after having saved Humanity and gained nothing from it, and suddenly, EU SUNT DRACUL. IN A MODERN DAY CITY.

so they rushed 2 dlc packs for it. Their quality, things like the cutscenes being the sketchy artwork still things and the narrative and story progression feeling too quick, screams to me that they rushed them after LoS's Epilogue reception, to try and explain a bit more.

And maybe Konami figured it could make more money by splitting them into two dlc chapters, IDK. but the DLC extra chapters furthering the story were just an odd thing for a game that was very well complete without them.

lots better that "I was named myself Dracula and then killed the one people called Dracula and took his place, and nobody noticed" explanation that we had before

Except we never had that explanation. It's an unexplained plot hole that Dracula is not in fact the historical figure, but a crusader named Mathias. In a timeline where the historical Dracula still existed, and the normal world still spreads the urban legends about him and such.

Unless Mathias WAS the historical Dracula in the IGAverse.

you know, the more I think about it, considering Gabriel calling himself Dracul, "the Dragon", It makes less and less sense why Mathias would call himself "Son of the Dragon". The theoretical philosophy behind Gabriel's name cant apply to Mathias, since Satan has never really made an appearance in the IGAverse. Hell has, more or less, but not Satan. Mathias gained his vampirism through Alchemical sorcery, and never bested any big bad demonic foes head to head. In fact, he duped his best friend into doing all that for him. And he always assumed the name Son of the Dragon. Who is Dracul, the dragon, in the IGAverse?  Does Mathias consider Satan the Dragon and himself the spawn of Satan? "Devil's castle Dracula"?

perhaps it was just something that was never really thought out. After all, namimg him Dracul just wouldnt have been as iconic as "Dracula". ANd when the character was created, he was the same Dracula from the movies and book, who was loosely based around the real life Vlad lll "Tepes" Dracula, son of Vlad ll Dracul. It wasnt till IGA decided to make an ORIGINAL CHARACTER DO NOT STEAL out of him and give him a unique origin story, that the origins of the name suddenly went out the window and made no sense.

LoS on the other hand, coming into the picture as a reboot/AU well into the franchise' lifespan and in an age where it's not too hard to look this shit up, has more freedom to actually reimagine Dracula with while a similar origin as IGA's, a name that makes more sense as someone who calls themself the Dragon without being the Son of any other Dragon- Dracul- as opposed to Dracula.


Interesting thought though, that means if we get a LoSverse Alucard, he would be the actual Dracula, Son of the Dragon.

[Ahasverus]

Interesting thought though, that means if we get a LoSverse Alucard, he would be the actual Dracula, Son of the Dragon.

And then the anagram would be even more justified, he's called Dracula but because he's good, he rejects the title and becomes Alucard the complete opposite of it.

Which ould leave the other Belmonts out of the question, and that's impossible because Cox has said many times that LoS "Shows the motives between the conflict between the Belmont family and Dracula".

Perhaps the Belmonts were concieved when he was human and Alucard (dracula) when he was already a vampire? Is there going to be a Lord Adrian in the new series? I hope so!

[DragonSlayr81]

Except we never had that explanation. It's an unexplained plot hole that Dracula is not in fact the historical figure, but a crusader named Mathias. In a timeline where the historical Dracula still existed, and the normal world still spreads the urban legends about him and such.

Unless Mathias WAS the historical Dracula in the IGAverse.

Actually, Mathias WAS the historical Dracula in the IGAverse/classic canon. The whole theory about "some other guy named Dracula stealing Mathias's powers" was just fanfiction, plain and simple. There was enough room due to the gap in the timeline for it and no game to retcon it, so it exists simply because fans WANT it, but considering what IS in the canon(bypassing fan bullshit), AND taking into consideration that IGA said Mathias changed his name to Dracula Vlad Tepes(adopted a new identity and cast off his old name), this is basically the truth in the old series.

you know, the more I think about it, considering Gabriel calling himself Dracul, "the Dragon", It makes less and less sense why Mathias would call himself "Son of the Dragon". The theoretical philosophy behind Gabriel's name cant apply to Mathias, since Satan has never really made an appearance in the IGAverse. Hell has, more or less, but not Satan. Mathias gained his vampirism through Alchemical sorcery, and never bested any big bad demonic foes head to head. In fact, he duped his best friend into doing all that for him. And he always assumed the name Son of the Dragon. Who is Dracul, the dragon, in the IGAverse?  Does Mathias consider Satan the Dragon and himself the spawn of Satan? "Devil's castle Dracula"?

IGA stated "Dracula" means "Son of the Devil" even though it means "Son of the Dragon". And given the reason why Mathias would change his name(to wage war against God), it's only fitting he renamed himself the son of God's enemy. The opposite of Jesus Christ, the Antichrist. Later on, of course, Dracula would game recognition as the Dark Lord, king of monsters, and become the classic canon's "Devil", but that early on, before he was truly the "Dark Lord" of the later years, naming himself the "Son of the Devil" would suffice. And after all the years, it probably just stuck. Why rename himself to Dracul? Besides, just familiarly speaking, the name "Dracula" sounds better, IMO. Plus, even though Satan(or, just say "The Devil") isn't mentioned doesn't mean the belief in him(an ultimate figure of evil) doesn't exist. Leon and Mathias were holy knights, fighting FOR the church and God. No doubt there were MANY believers back that felt the dark things were due to the Devil's influence. And like I said, Mathias might've not known the true extent of the darkness, his power or what he'd become when during LoI. I'd liken it to Sephiroth in FFVII. In the Nibleheim scene(whole scene, up until Cloud flings him into the Mako pit), he's pretty hard pressed in believing he's a member of the Cetra race, believing he's a rightful heir to the planet that was taken from him and his people by the humans. It isn't until later he becomes aware of what he truly is, and accepts it.

Though, if we're up to fan interpretation/theory, I mentioned this before, but symbolically, I think Walter Bernhard was the classic canon's "Dracul". I think he has dragon heads on his kneeplates, and the entrance to his stage "Pagoda of the Misty Moon"(the very area where he gives Sara back to Leon) has large dragon skeletons pressed into the marble floor. Walter was also a very powerful vampire and was Mathias/Dracula's predecessor.

[Flame]

Ah, so it was basically IGA screwing up his information on what Dracula means. Ok.

still, while I guess that makes sense in the antichrist fashion, if the historical dracula still existed, then that means that mathias practically faked his own family. he faked himself as his father and then became the son. or something.

I just figured that given the fact that Dracula is rather arrogant and such, that he wouldnt name himself son of anything, but the actual menace itself.

oh well.

Score 1 for Gabuella then. Mathias considers himself son of the devil. Gabriel considers himself THE devil.

[DragonSlayr81]

Ah, so it was basically IGA screwing up his information on what Dracula means. Ok.

In literal terms, yes. But, IGA was playing off the biblical notion that Devil and Dragon means the same thing.

still, while I guess that makes sense in the antichrist fashion, if the historical dracula still existed, then that means that mathias practically faked his own family. he faked himself as his father and then became the son. or something.

What Mathias did, I dont' think we'll ever know the truth behind it. I mean, in some way, he rose to power and became a "ruler"(not just in the Dark Lord sense, but a ruler of land, with villages under him). I'm leaning towards the whole "secret history" thing. That, in the CV universe, the truth behind Dracula is the truth in it's world. There's a lot of dark things going on behind the scenes where the government and church are handling these matters. What is known by normal, everyday people in CV's world could be fabricated lies. Historical coverups to hide the dark truth that's been going on for centuries.

I just figured that given the fact that Dracula is rather arrogant and such, that he wouldnt name himself son of anything, but the actual menace itself.

Two major differences between Mathias and Gabriel. Mathias becomes a vampire with little to no knowledge of his potential(other than being a powerful vampire and existing as an immortal to mock God's decree of mortality), nor the truth behind the darkness and Chaos fully realized(until MUCH much later). Gabriel's becomes aware of Satan(in LoS) and his own powers by the end of the DLC. He is already pretty drenched in what dark potential he has within his body, and knows fully well he handed Satan his own ass. Totally different characters. One is basically a greenhorn vamp, the other knows that he defeated the most infamous figure of evil in all of Christianity. They are both pretty stark contrasts in themselves.