Topic: Will the old timeline be used again ?

[Beaumont_Belmont]

I'm certainly not opposed to new blood coming in and making the game. I get the feeling WayForward would love making a 2D Castlevania game.

[olrox2]

Beside the story telling aspect, i liked the idea of characters sharing something.  I mean its not i cant bear changing but i cant see a castlevania the same way as i would see a final fantasy.
And about ff i realized despite the "new story and world for each episode" part, i ended up getting bored(it must have happened when i finished 12)
My fear is that  a specific way of making a castlevania game ends fading completely.

Metroidvania games were once blamed for having a save system and being too easy. But they ask you to move in a whole castle, to come back at some places, explore a bit.
Maybe Metroidvania cant reach a large audience the same way the next shooter will and i am afraid Konami tries to make the game "smoother".
Symphony of the Night is popular partly because it offers much content,i am not sure i never got all items of the game. And i must say its because of Sotn that i wanted to play Rondo of Blood, i liked the idea of a link between two épisodes.
Even thought a lot of games are not story centered, fans often have an interest for timeline: Diablo,Starcraft, Zelda...

Offtopic: What is good sales on a portable console? Sales for ds épisodes seem to stick around0,3-0,4k, but Donkey Kong barely does better.

[A-Yty]

But here's my point: a game, by definition, needs a plot to drive it forward. All canon Castlevania titles we've seen have been situated in relatively precise points of the same same chronology; as such, they are all consistent with each other. Yet there is little space left in the timeline; Konami will inevitably have to look elsewhere to situate its future games.

Well, it took this long to fill the timeline (and it's not really even full yet). I don't think there's a need to think that far ahead (I'm not sure if I believe CV going on for 54 years is plausible..?). Besides, the pace of new CVs getting published has been fairly fast. I wouldn't expect them to spring out a new CV at that speed in the hypothetical new canon. In fact, it is something I hope that they avoid if they reboot and choose an actual timeline instead of a non-chronological setting. I would rather play one spectacular CV game for three years than play a mediocre one every year. I think replay value has made SotN the holy grail it is and that such value has not been reached again, may be why it is sometimes considered an unreachable pinnacle (for the record, I don't agree with this and despite SotN being an awesome game, I'm fully confident it could be surpassed).

There's a possibility it may even aggravate the issue if they ditch causality completely. Like has been mentioned, it couldn't mask other possible shortcomings in the areas that are often considered far more important to CV than story. It may enable worse bait and switching in the style of LoS and make any CV henceworth (not just LoS) a hollow shell.

Or it could make employing CV's core elements work better. Maybe it would be good. To me, however, it would be more like a premeditated, never-ending process of throwing things on the wall and seeing what sticks. With the justification of not having to have a history. Kind of like a free pass to go nuts as long as you wear certain clothes.  Sooner or later, I think it would face a similar problem as a filling timeline. I mean, we can get rid of the vampire hunter clan, but can we really drop "Dracula" and "castle" from a series that began as "Demon Castle Dracula"? And if we can't, how much can be altered from that formula and would that require a timeless setting?

To me, at least, it seems, the story does matter. Or causality/history, at least.

[darkwzrd4]

Will the old timeline be revisited? IMO, there is a sleight chance. It's more likely that another team will be given the CV reins and reboot the series again. The old timeline only has a couple spaces that would make sense to fill: 1) post SotN/why the Belmonts can't use the whip until 1999, 2) the 1999 event. Other than that, I don't really see anything that could be added to the old timeline and contribute to it as well.

Truth be told, I like the idea of different teams creating their own vision of CV. I'm not saying make one game and then move on. I'm saying create a short, story-driven saga distributed over 3-5 games. Afterward, the reins of CV would be given to another team who would like a chance to make a CV series.

I mean so long as these sagas are story-driven, have great gameplay, and have core CV concepts like the 5 sub weapons, Belmont family with whip, Alucard, a demonic castle, and Dracula (without any of them being just a hollow name drop like in LoS), there should little for fans to complain about.

[chainsawmidget]

Just a random thought that comes from reading too many DC comicbooks, but what if they had an in-story way to reboot the timeline? 

The story for Judgement involved time travel, so maybe we could expand on that somewhat.  Suppose Galamoth has been manipulating history in order to finally defeat Dracula.  The other continuities could even bee acknowledged as previous failed attempts to rewrite things in his favor. 

[A-Yty]

Just a random thought that comes from reading too many DC comicbooks, but what if they had an in-story way to reboot the timeline? 

The story for Judgement involved time travel, so maybe we could expand on that somewhat.  Suppose Galamoth has been manipulating history in order to finally defeat Dracula.  The other continuities could even bee acknowledged as previous failed attempts to rewrite things in his favor. 

Indeed (and that bit about time travel messing things up is what I've been thinking often, too). And rebooting through the story itself is how I would go about it if I was writing it.

Maybe IGA had this in mind in CoD. He acknowledged the cluttered continuity and introducing St. Germain opens up possibilities.

The thing about the whole idea is that time travel is a very fragile plot device. Not saying it shouldn't be used, but it has been used so many times and it can slip into deus ex machina territory easily.

[Belmontoya]

Anything involving time travel in castlevania makes me want to vomit.

The best thing a new developer could do at this point is what mercury steam should have done and that is to do a remake of Cv1. This is almost like doing a reboot, but not really. Or they could remake Cv3 and start a new version of the game from that point.

Another complete reboot so soon after LOS will create confusion.

But I'm open minded and up for whatever happens. That is of course unless it includes something as ridiculous as time travel.

[Beaumont_Belmont]

Here's my own idea: maybe we can have a Castlevania game without Dracula proper. The greater Castlevania universe, after all, seems to have other vampires and unholy creatures of the night throughout Europe. There's a lot that could be done with characters we've already seen. What does Olrox do when he's not crashing at Dracula's? Elizabeth Bartley's apparently got at least one Castle. The Belmonts are vampire hunters best known for their epic spat with Dracula, but why not see them and their associates (i.e the Belnades, Morris, Graves, Schneiders, etc) fighting OTHER vampires or somesuch?

[X]

I agree with A-Yty that only IGA would want to continue the old storyline because it's his story and he is the one who created it.

IGA did not create the story nor is it his. He merely continued what others had started or else he would have done his own CV timeline without including the original games that he never made. At this point I have my doubts if Konami will continue with the old timeline. And I'm fairly certain that LoS will not continue after LoS2 is released.

Here's my own idea: maybe we can have a Castlevania game without Dracula proper. The greater Castlevania universe, after all, seems to have other vampires and unholy creatures of the night throughout Europe. There's a lot that could be done with characters we've already seen. What does Olrox do when he's not crashing at Dracula's? Elizabeth Bartley's apparently got at least one Castle. The Belmonts are vampire hunters best known for their epic spat with Dracula, but why not see them and their associates (i.e the Belnades, Morris, Graves, Schneiders, etc) fighting OTHER vampires or somesuch?

There is definitely lots of room for many Castlevania Gaidens (side stories). Just how many Belmont descendants are there, And how many different branches came from the main family line? Lots. And the same is true for potential villains. Lots of other infamous vampires and monsters that the CV universe has yet to touch upon.

[Nagumo]

IGA did not create the story nor is it his. He merely continued what others had started or else he would have done his own CV timeline without including the original games that he never made. 

I already thought this would hit a sore spot with some, heh. Personally, I think IGA created the storyline in the sense that he unified games that were never supposed to be linked (CVA and CV3 etc.), and actually tried to let it stay consistent afterwards.

I'm surpised some people are saying "I can't see Castlevania being like Final Fantasy", but before 1997, that's exactly what it was. I'm not sure if everyone read the "Akumajo Densetsu fan interview" thread, but something that became evident of it, despite being disputed by some, what that CV3 and CVA were both mutually exclusive games that both were the definite prequel to CV1. Also, there's no way CV4, Haunted Castle, Vampire Killer etc. were ever supposed to be in the same continuity. This was just something IGA came up with after the fact.

If the series would go into "not caring about continuity mode", it would revert back into it's natural state.

I'm perfectly fine with gaming series that have one unified continuity, but that's not what the developers want. Otherwise, we never would have gotten Circle of the Moon, The Arcade, the Pachislots, Lords of Shadow, CV4 when we already had CV1, Adventure Rebirth when we already The Adventure, etc., etc.

I also disagree more that one continuity would mean no sense of history. It can still be done. Shin Megami Tensei for example, has several sub-series that one their own already created decently fleshed-out worlds (Devil Summoner, Persona), but also connects everything on a meta-level in a subtle, but interesting way. Every world is connected through the Amala network, and events in one world can affect another. Not that Castlevania would need that much of a connection between continuities, but sometimes small references here and there and a few cameos do the trick. Heck, Final Fantasy itself even has the Void which links each game's world together, and Gilgamesh, who is basically Mr. Continuity Nod.

[/rambling]             

[Lelygax]

Anything involving time travel in castlevania makes me want to vomit.

You accept mythology and magic, even time stop and time rewinding magic, but can't accept time travel?

[e105beta]

You accept mythology and magic, even time stop and time rewinding magic, but can't accept time travel?

I mean, if you go with the idea that any sufficiently advanced form of technology looks like magic, then technically a lot of the magic could theoretically exist.

Time travel, on the other hand, straight up couldn't.

I also want to make it known that I think time travel is a stupid plot device myself.

[Lelygax]

I mean, if you go with the idea that any sufficiently advanced form of technology looks like magic, then technically a lot of the magic could theoretically exist.

Time travel, on the other hand, straight up couldn't.

I also want to make it known that I think time travel is a stupid plot device myself.

Who said that only technology can make time travel possible? Its true in our world, because magic isnt acessible here, but in a world with magic you dont need a device to walk through time.

Death is a major example, time cant stop him from reaching a place or someone, nor can restrain his moves.

I understand that time travel can very easily be done wrong in a game, but if you think at everything carefully before doing it, it can be done right. You just cant forget about any detail, even if it seems little or insignificant.

[e105beta]

Who said that only technology can make time travel possible? Its true in our world, because magic isnt acessible here, but in a world with magic you dont need a device to walk through time.

Death is a major example, time cant stop him from reaching a place or someone, nor can restrain his moves.

I understand that time travel can very easily be done wrong in a game, but if you think at everything carefully before doing it, it can be done right. You just cant forget about any detail, even if it seems little or insignificant.

I think you missed my point.

I was trying to say that in my experience, people are far more accepting of magic that could have some sort of scientific explanation. Time travel doesn't have any real way to explain it, and causes too many paradoxes even when properly explained.

[chainsawmidget]

I was trying to say that in my experience, people are far more accepting of magic that could have some sort of scientific explanation.

You must lead a sheltered and dull life. 

I have never in my life heard anyone say "Well, I know it's magic, but how does it technically work in the scientific sense?" 

And if they did say that, I would tel them "It works by being magic.  Abracadabra, presto-change-o, and Bibbidy bobbedy boo, it works."