Topic: reboot, but still "canon"

[crisis]

when aria of sorrow was first announced, after reading its preview i was super excited & intruiged by the fact that for the first time ever Castlevania would not only be taking place in modern time, but in the [near] future. but it wasnt Belmont fighting mechas or robots with laser swords, it was still very much classic castlevania with a unique twist. arguably the best plot the series has ever given us

many keep talking about "whats next." has anyone considered the possibility of them taking the series into the far future, centuries beyond aos? aria/dawn not only served as an epilogue to the saga, but left the door open to a reboot of the story. yes dracula is destroyed, but his essence lives on. what happens when Soma dies? who will inherit Draculas power? will the Belmont clan continue?

i think konami could very well make use of a thousand years beyond aos for cv stories. but they dont have to be "futuristic" at all. look at Getsu Fuma, another Konami game video. IT TAKES PLACE IN THE YEAR 14,672. even Vampire Hunter D, taking place in year 12,090. Kid Dracula is in 11,1797. Time Reaper from Judgment comes from 10,000 years hence, and serves Galamoth, the new Dark lord. can castlevania use a similar approach?

i think this is a good way for konami to introduce a reboot to the story, while still remaining "canon" with what has come before it. it doesnt have to suffer from the plotholes of the classic games, but it can still adhere to the classic traditions while still remaining "fresh." it can introduce a new origin story. it can reference the struggles of the ancient Belmont clan, while introducing new heroes to take on the new threat. the new Dark Lord wont be the same Dracula obviously, but he (or she?) will be close enough, due to inheriting his power & resurrection cycle. these games can indeed contain futuristic elements here n there, but still keep it subtle enough that it doesnt seem too far-fetched. maybe 500 years from now the cv world reverts back to antiquity due to some cataclysm, or perhaps adopts a high-Victorian-esque society perceived through a 25th century lens.

or perhaps they can leave it ambiguous, saying that the plot could indeed take place centuries after AoS, but not confirming or denying, leaving it up to the fans to speculate.


what you guys think? is this a good way to continue our beloved castlevania without erasing 25 years of canon? or should they just wipe the slate clean and start from scratch?

[PFG9000]

I say it's...brilliant!  Although, I don't really care about the story anyway.  They could do yet another spin on Simon vs. Dracula every year, and as long as the gameplay is solid, I wouldn't care that the story is unoriginal.

[KaZudra]

my new 52 idea still rests on the table

[K.G. Morder]

I figure when Soma dies, his soul finally moves on, and does not reincarnate or pass on his power.

[RegalSin]

Aria of sorrow was just the happy-post 1990's Jappy version of modernized Horror-movie themed, like "Demon City" or "Dangerous Jack".
RIght now in Japan, that feeling of grim is no longer their and most of everybody even if not successful walks around with long hair compared to their "Golgo 13" great, grand parents. Sadly yes it has been that long since Golgo 13, and that is how watered down, Japan has become. Look at "River City Ransom" and compare the three versions of the same game. The latest version, recreates the 1990's but it is clearly feeling like 2004.

About modernizing the series. It has been done more then once. In SOTN, their were tons of machine laden critters. In the N64 game there is an entire level dedicated to science. Motorcycle and car driving skeletons ( I do not know how that works ), and "Circle of the MOON" also featured many modernized enemies.

I don't know about best plot I have to replay the game. It felt kinda watered down, and the final enemy looked like something out "Akira".

..........

About inheriting powers. Dracula is an extremly advance being, and does not have powers, he is the devil in the flesh, and does nothing but creates hell on earth, at least from the players view. On the flip-note people also consider this a Halloween game, so hell is kinda boring. Otherwise the game was fun and all. I would think that Dracula is the relationship that Demtri has to the underworld, however in this series he is the ultimate evil.

If Dracula is an evil essence, how would that make sense, he is the devil in flesh, that has been summoned, by humans. there is nothing good about him.

Konami could say whatever they want to say, all the present day stuff has been done, and is so 1989, so they say the "future" because that is how the waning, Konomites are all feeling. Konomi are no different then our parents, or even us of that generation.

Well I do see it, they have done so in the past. About Kid Dracula, they just made that year up. Alcuard is him, and if not they are just playing around with us. I see what you are saying. Time reaper was kinda silly when you think about it. They had to make up some kind of enemy.

About Victoran, maybe, but I do not like the idea. I prefer a future disaster with Victoran parts, like "Heavy Metal Fakk" or "Fall of NY:2010". If "Jason X" can have robots, Lara Croft, cryo-chambers, and even an artificial earth, I guess Dracula also do the same.

The original games is the series. What they make now is complete farce, playing on the idea of new, and attacking the consumers. They are targeting teens, five year olds, and people trying to find a loophole to finish the series. It is obvious the entire LOTS is Alucard and Dracula, and nothing more. You never see a moment where the Vampire Killer does his job.

Well I think right now, Konami does not care, if they could do another ROB, they would do it right now. The fact that they allowed a western developer to touch the game, and the current development trends the likes of "Maximo" AKA "Ghouls and Ghosts". Like the "Resident Evil" series, it has reached the roof with Castlevania. Chances are the original fans are all approaching retirement are depressed by current trends. Right now it is like a dark age, especially for the west.

Right now I think, they do not care what they do with the series, a team that has nothing to do with the official game, made the SOTN game, on an over powered system, and LOTS is no different. I mean how lame is a casket, with Alucard name embossed on it.

[Shinobi]

To be frank, Castlevania or Akumajou Dracula is not some kind of relevance or cultural impact in Japan, not even reaching the same league as Kamen Rider, Mobile Suit Gundam, Ultraman, Super Sentai, etc.

[zaxiou]

I always thought the years to be trivial as it's represented throughout the whole game only by the costume of the character a la Soma from Aria. They'll have to implement something from that time period in the game if you want to give the time period more significance than just the opening titles including "Far in the future". The idea is pretty good nevertheless, I support it. 

[Shinobi]

I just find the "distant future going back to medieval setting" is too wack-off from the real life events for me. The post apocalyptic setting with lesser technology and some remnants of present civilization(like Hokuto no Ken, Escape from New York, Revolution, etc.) is more plausible or real life accurate for me.

[X]

The only real things that indicated AoS took place in the not-too distant future was the date of events and the Positron Rifle.

[Shiroi Koumori]

The only real things that indicated AoS took place in the not-too distant future was the date of events and the Positron Rifle.

Yup. The timing of the eclipse is accurate.

[theplottwist]

Loved the idea.

Imagining if they could "reboot" the story in the future makes my mind roll already...

I mean, the already established canon continues exactly as it is, but Dracula's 'start-of-evil' happens again in this future. Let's say: A man goes to a war, and his wife dies thinking he died. He then curses God, and goes about becoming the incarnation of darkness. He would not be "Dracula", but this would be a very symbolic way of saying that "Dracula" is not a person, but more like a concept. Dracula is a man that denies mortality and seeks to destroy God's creation, the humans, because of his own perceived damage against him by said humans, and his own perceived betrayal by God's part. "Dracula" as a concept is the result of a specific chain of events that creates a curse.

Then, as a calling of darkness, Castlevania is ressurrected to serve him as a result of this chain of events. Just like that. Inside the story, no explanation is given as to why it happened beyond "Evil-man summoned himself a fancy, big-ass stronghold, and took residence there, because he's this powerful and narcisistic, and said stronghold seems haunted". No traces or data of Dracula exist anymore. No Belmonts (at least in name), nothing. The Castle simply rises, as the dwelling of evil, and the man takes residence inside it. However, we as players are very aware of why it happened. Hell, Castlevania could also be a concept. It's simply "Dracula's" will twisting an structure around him to serve as his home, an impenetrable armor against humankind, so he can be far away from them to savour his hate and bitterness. It could be a gigantic underground military base, for all I care, but twisted into becoming Castlevania itself, by having it creep all over the walls and becoming hell's gate on Earth.

The game(s) then could take a whole new path, with the characters actually researching a way to destroy this "unknown" evil, and just maybe, doing archaeology/exploration in some ruins, and unearthing remnants of the dark past that is the original canon. They, along many games, (maybe) finally discover what is Dracula, and what the prophecy says. "Where there are the need for a Dark Lord, there will rise one". They go about discovering pieces of the past, and unearthing some of it's secrets (maybe even including the Vampire Killer itself, and 'reverse engineering' the idea and it's power into a new weapon), but they never discover everything. They discover just enough to create the link between past and future, and to create a complete new story at the same time, but never enough to know what exactly happened back then.

And yeah! Robots possessed by spirits! Zombies of mutant creatures from the future! Futuristic (but still realistic) weapons!
I always understood that the Castle is the will of Dracula, thus it takes an appearance that suits his will. How to make Castlevania have some pseudo-futuristic settings if not by having the "Dracula" himself perceive that as suitting for him? He could have robots and other futuristic things in his arsenal, simply because he perceives them as useful on his time. Dracula always seemed "stopped in time" for me. This could be the case for this new evil...

Or not... I dunno. xD

[X]

I mean, the already established canon continues exactly as it is, but Dracula's 'start-of-evil' happens again in this future. Let's say: A man goes to a war, and his wife dies thinking he died. He then curses God, and goes about becoming the incarnation of darkness. He would not be "Dracula", but this would be a very symbolic way of saying that "Dracula" is not a person, but more like a concept. Dracula is a man that denies mortality and seeks to destroy God's creation, the humans, because of his own perceived damage against him by said humans, and his own perceived betrayal by God's part. "Dracula" as a concept is the result of a specific chain of events that creates a curse.

I personally could never see the name 'Dracula' as being anything as less as a concept to describe someone whom has embraced the darkness. The name Dracula is a title; Son of the Dragon. That's what it means. I don't want to see it degraded as a means for other villains to come along and cash in on Vlad III's title. To me it's just stupid. And it would be stupid of future CV directors to embrace such a concept. I wouldn't mind other villains showing up in CV so long as they are not Dracula. Dracula is Dracula and no-one else. IGA already made this mistake with Mathias and now we have Gabriel in the LoS series. Just no more, please.

[theplottwist]

I personally could never see the name 'Dracula' as being anything as less as a concept to describe someone whom has embraced the darkness. The name Dracula is a title; Son of the Dragon. That's what it means. I don't want to see it degraded as a means for other villains to come along and cash in on Vlad III's title. To me it's just stupid. And it would be stupid of future CV directors to embrace such a concept. I wouldn't mind other villains showing up in CV so long as they are not Dracula. Dracula is Dracula and no-one else. IGA already made this mistake with Mathias and now we have Gabriel in the LoS series. Just no more, please.

My man, I don't think you understood me correctly. I also think that there should be only one dude called Dracula, and this dude belongs on the original canon.

What I mean is that in Castlevania, Dracula is hardly a "vampire" and more like a demon lord with a high ranking title. I don't have a correct term to refer to what Dracula is (He certainly is not a vampire in the classical sense), but it would be interesting to see that someone can become what Dracula became by undergoing the same process.

Also, I do not see any degradation. There is a reason for why Dracula means "Son of Dragon" and that is his hatred towards God. This villain would not need to be called "Dracula", in fact a new name would be better. Being an overall original character that happened to undergo the same initial experiences is better. I used the title as a general way to refer to what Dracula fundamentally is: A scarred man feeling betrayed and rebelling against God in epic proportions.

[machetespeghetti]

I think the rebooting or the simple telling or the origins of castlevania is annoying First legends, then Loi, and now Los. I agree with X dracula is just an embodiement of evil he may have never been human. AND GODDAMMIT DRACULA IS NOT A BELMONT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is why I Don't care for the ps2 games or Los shadows series. But everyone on here just keeps praising them.
I think I'm going to end it all soon.

[X]

@theplottwist. Okay, I get your meaning now 

There is a reason for why Dracula means "Son of Dragon" and that is his hatred towards God.

In the biblical sense the title Dracula is evil but in reality it simply means 'Son of the Dragon'. And Dragons are not evil. They are a kin to the serpent, representing power, fertility and creation.