So why is Castlevania Legends not considered canon to the Castlevania timeline?

[deepFlaw]

Well, if anything this thread is making me want to return to the series sometime sooner.

I played Dracula X Chronicles (including SotN), the original at some point, and when Bloodstained went up on KS I bought all 3 GBA games (I'd always wanted to play them when I saw them in Nintendo Power...) but never played more than Circle of the Moon.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Nonsese. Metroid Prime, which is in 3D, is a better application of the Metroid formula than every singe Metroid-clone 2D Castlevania.

And the N64 games already got the basic design right, essentially a 3D version the classic action platformer games, with a CV2/4 vibe, with some non-linearity breaking it up, and remain to this day the most faithful 3D adaptation of the series by far. The PS2 games are flat boring repetitive hack and slash dungeon crawlers with almost no platforming, more akin to a 3D Gauntlet than Castlevania, and LOS is a God of War clone, more akin to a modern Double Dragon than Castlevania.

Click to shrink...

That's the problem, though. Just making "a 3D version of the classic action platformer games" was bad. CV64 was sluggish, the combat was terrible, the platforming was janky and overly difficult because of poor level and camera design, and overall it just felt like almost every other N64 adaptation of an NES/SNES series - so enamored by the fact it was in 3D that it wasn't actually fun to play. The hedge maze level was clever, though.

If you want to truly adapt Castlevania to 3D, you need to redefine what the series is the same way that Symphony did in the PS1 era. You can't just make a flat attempt at aping the Classicvania or Metroidvania styles because those don't translate to 3D. You need to look at the elements that define Castlevania regardless of era - atmosphere, horror monsters, boss battles, music and weaponry - and adapt those in a new way.

Bloodborne, for example, carries on the Castlevania essence in basically every way except de-emphasizing platforming.

 

[Twenty5Thousand]

Well, if anything this thread is making me want to return to the series sometime sooner.

I played Dracula X Chronicles (including SotN), the original at some point, and when Bloodstained went up on KS I bought all 3 GBA games (I'd always wanted to play them when I saw them in Nintendo Power...) but never played more than Circle of the Moon.

Click to shrink...

It'd be nice if Konami released a collection of more than just SotN and Rondo given how many games are out there spread across multiple systems.

The only reason I can think they wanted to release Symphony and Rondo together only on PS4 was because they used the PSP versions of those games.

 

[D.Lo]

I don't think that's really fair to say Castlevania can't work in 3D given there are only a few 3D Castlevania games.The first 2 were on the N64 and were all pretty rushed and it was in an age where people were trying to still figure out how to do games in 3D. The rest were all games with a bigger focus on action than the Metroidvania style exploration and progression.

If Metroid can work in 3D I believe Castlevania can as well. Hell I also think it'd be possible to do a really good 3D Castlevania game with the structure of the linear action games of the series.

Click to shrink...

There is literally no reason why the Metroid formula cannot work in 3D in 3rd person. In fact Metroid Other M is basically exactly that, though design wise it's a weak application of the 'power up based gating non-linear action adventure' Metroid formula (and it has many other well documented gameplay and presentation issues), but it is a clear case of the actual formula and structure applied in 3D.

Take Metroid Other M, with better controls, better action design, more clever application of the Metroid world structure (not being set on a boring space ship would be a good start) and you have a solid 3D third person Metroid-like. Heck set it in Transylvania and have Billy Belmont as the protagonist and you have yourself the design of a working 3D Metroidvania game.

Curse of Darkness was also essentially a really scabby, amateurish take on the same thing too for that matter, but the concept is there.

That's the problem, though. Just making "a 3D version of the classic action platformer games" was bad. CV64 was sluggish, the combat was terrible, the platforming was janky and overly difficult because of poor level and camera design, and overall it just felt like almost every other N64 adaptation of an NES/SNES series - so enamored by the fact it was in 3D that it wasn't actually fun to play. The hedge maze level was clever, though.

If you want to truly adapt Castlevania to 3D, you need to redefine what the series is the same way that Symphony did in the PS1 era. You can't just make a flat attempt at aping the Classicvania or Metroidvania styles because those don't translate to 3D. You need to look at the elements that define Castlevania regardless of era - atmosphere, horror monsters, boss battles, music and weaponry - and adapt those in a new way.

Bloodborne, for example, carries on the Castlevania essence in basically every way except de-emphasizing platforming.

Click to shrink...

Why? All your complaints about the N64 games are purely technical or just details. Make Castlevania 64, but have better combat, platforming and controls. Done.

Some adjustments need to be made to bring some game styles to 3D, but not that much. Essentially just the action front. Rayman 2 is essentially a linear 3D action platformer, a 3D version of Clasicvania could be that (and Castlevania 64 essentially is that, just with some early 3D awkwardness). Metroid Other M and Curse of Darkness are 3D applications of the Metroid-style formula, their problems are nothing to do with that formula not working in 3D, just that they're a weak application of that formula (extremely, laughably weak in CoD's case) and they're also bad in other non-formula related ways.

And Metroid Prime is a near flawless application of the Metroid formula in 3D. It just happens that on the action front it's mostly in first person (though morph ball and space jump are is third person).

And there's no single essence of Castlvania. The original game is a hammy monster movie themed little action platformer. CV4 is a moody slow trawl (see also CV64 which captured that vibe perfectly in 3D too). Rondo is whiz-bang animu j-rock and roll. Igarashi's games are animu teen melodrama. The series is already all over the place.

 

[TreIII]

Besides, you already have the other recurring series presence who works just fine as a recurring antagonist that ties everything together: Death.

Click to shrink...

Even so, I'd say that he'd be more effective a nemesis if you didn't fight him all the time, either. CoD made the perfect case for him to be someone who could be manipulating events to benefit Dracula/Chaos/etc, which is certainly something I could see working for his character. I even liked how the one "Sorrow-era" light novel ended up having Death manipulate and control Julius' vampire hunter disciple because he didn't take kindly to Olrox's independent actions.

So, yeah. Have him around, lurking in the backdrop. But have the heart to let others take center stage, is all I ask.

 

[deepFlaw]

It'd be nice if Konami released a collection of more than just SotN and Rondo given how many games are out there spread across multiple systems.

The only reason I can think they wanted to release Symphony and Rondo together only on PS4 was because they used the PSP versions of those games.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, that'd be nice to see. I don't mind terribly going back to even the GBA, and I've been playing other original DS games as well, so for the purpose of just playing the Iga games I'm ok. But I'd like to branch out beyond that eventually, so...

Anyway, maybe I'll return to those GBA games for the the next Metroidvania I play whenever I'm actually done Hollow Knight, hah.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Even so, I'd say that he'd be more effective a nemesis if you didn't fight him all the time, either. CoD made the perfect case for him to be someone who could be manipulating events to benefit Dracula/Chaos/etc, which is certainly something I could see working for his character. I even liked how the one "Sorrow-era" light novel ended up having Death manipulate and control Julius' vampire hunter disciple because he didn't take kindly to Olrox's independent actions.

So, yeah. Have him around, lurking in the backdrop. But have the heart to let others take center stage, is all I ask.

Click to shrink...

Works for me.

 

[Deleted member 47318]

That's what I always assumed was the reason for it. Having the Belmonts draw any part of their power from Dracula seems really fucked up.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, mankind ill needs saviors such as that.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Yeah, mankind ill needs saviors such as that.

Click to shrink...

It also just kind of makes Alucard's whole thing (being the descendant of Dracula who rose up against him) kind of irrelevant if the entire Belmont clan is also Dracula's descendants.

 

[KtotheRoc]

Yeah, mankind ill needs saviors such as that.

Click to shrink...

 

[KDR_11k]

It also just kind of makes Alucard's whole thing (being the descendant of Dracula who rose up against him) kind of irrelevant if the entire Belmont clan is also Dracula's descendants.

Click to shrink...

Wouldn't it make the Belmont clan a direct result of Alucard's uprising against Dracula?

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Wouldn't it make the Belmont clan a direct result of Alucard's uprising against Dracula?

Click to shrink...

It does. It minimizes Alucard's own actions and takes away the Belmonts' own agency by making them into vehicles for Alucard's vendetta.

 

[Cheerilee]

It also just kind of makes Alucard's whole thing (being the descendant of Dracula who rose up against him) kind of irrelevant if the entire Belmont clan is also Dracula's descendants.

Click to shrink...

I don't think that's really true.

CV3 says that the Belmonts were feared and hated, and that they were unjustly driven out of town for the "evil" supernatural ability which they had used to defend the people from evil. The recent cartoon says that it happened when Trevor was just an innocent little kid.

CV Legends says that Sonia was Trevor's mom. She was born with abnormal supernatural ability, and her grandfather recognized it, so he gave her the family's magic whip and taught her how to use it to fight evil. And in 1450, she did. She also bumped into a young Alucard, the half-Vampire who was not evil, but who was not yet actively fighting Dracula, and they had a one night stand. After her adventure, Sonia realized she was pregnant, but nobody told Alucard that he was the father.

I don't think this particularly conflicts with the 11th century stuff with Leon and the origins of the Vampire Killer whip. And it doesn't mess with the 100 year thing if Dracula somehow escaped his encounter with Sonia and it took him 25 years to recover and rebuild. And it supports the idea of the people turning on the Belmonts if Sonia gave birth to a monster-baby out of wedlock.

26 years later, in 1476, Trevor (who is 1/2 a supernaturally-powerful Belmont, and 1/4 Vampire descendant of Dracula, but shows no obvious signs of being a Vampire), meets up with Alucard and Sypha and they take down Dracula in one shot. Trevor and Alucard are clueless as to their relation, and the subject is never discussed. Trevor goes on to marry Sypha and mixes the Belmont bloodline (which has traces of Vampire in it) with the Belnades bloodline, so now the Belmonts carry wizard magic potential as well.

100 years later, in 1576, Christopher Belmont fights Dracula, but he's unable to finish the job so he has to fight him again fifteen years later in 1591.

Leading to Simon Belmont's CV1 adventures in 1691 and 1698. Which leaves weasel room in the 100 year rule for Shaft to bring Dracula back twice, in 1792 and 1797, for Rondo and SotN. And at the end of SotN, Richter Belmont's sister-in-law Maria Renard runs off to cheer up the depressed Alucard, but they probably don't have sex, as the immortal Alucard has decided to deliberately end his own bloodline through chastity (not knowing it already lives on in some small way with his allies, the Belmonts, due to that fling he had with one of them).

 

[MegaXZero]

I don't think this particularly conflicts with the 11th century stuff with Leon and the origins of the Vampire Killer whip.

Click to shrink...

It does. Legends notes Sonia was raised in an aristocratic family. In lament, Leon gave up his nobility to rescue Sara. Also Dracula's origin doesn't match at all between the two games.

 

[Cheerilee]

It does. Legends notes Sonia was raised in an aristocratic family. In lament, Leon gave up his nobility to rescue Sara. Also Dracula's origin doesn't match at all between the two games.

Click to shrink...

Those are hardly dealbreakers.

In the 11th century, Leon defies the Church and renounces his title. 356 years later, in the 15th century, Sonia was said to have been raised by her aristocratic family. Can you really see no possible way to reconcile these two accounts?

Nevermind the fact that Leon's game was made years after Sonia's game was made.

 

[MegaXZero]

Those are hardly dealbreakers.

In the 11th century, Leon defies the Church and renounces his title. 356 years later, in the 15th century, Sonia was said to have been raised by her aristocratic family. Can you really see no possible way to reconcile these two accounts?

Nevermind the fact that Leon's game was made years after Sonia's game was made.

Click to shrink...

I'm speaking about current canon. These two games can't exist in the same timeline now. Legends said the Belmonts were aristocratic, not just a family. You could say they became nobility again, but losing it shortly after for Trevor's family exile would be as pointless as making Alucard the father. And dracula's origin is radically different between the two games. In lament, Mathias uses the crimson stone with walter's soul in the 11th century. In legends, a nondescript man makes a pact with an evil demon during the early 1400s and takes over Europe. It doesn't even mesh well with SotN's story.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

I'm speaking about current canon. These two games can't exist in the same timeline now. Legends said the Belmonts were aristocratic, not just a family. You could say they became nobility again, but losing it shortly after for Trevor's family exile would be as pointless as making Alucard the father. And dracula's origin is radically different between the two games. In lament, Mathias uses the crimson stone with walter's soul in the 11th century. In legends, a nondescript man makes a pact with an evil demon during the early 1400s and takes over Europe. It doesn't even mesh well with SotN's story.

Click to shrink...

Like I said, it's abundantly clear they didn't think anything through when making Legends. It didn't even make sense when it was new. So Sonia killed Dracula and then, what, 25 years later he came back again? Even though Dracula's resurgences were almost always separated by a century unless he was deliberately summoned back early?

Also, Alucard's character in SotN was dedicated to stopping his own bloodline. He would not have fathered any children with a human woman - it directly contradicts his mission in life.

 

[Lunar15]

She was removed because IGA is a weird sexist who thinks guys can't relate to female heroes/doesn't think women can be heroes in vampire stories

Click to shrink...

Yeah, this sucks. I guess he changed his tune, though, since we got Shanoa.

 

[Sub Boss]

1. He was not responsible for SoTN, Toru Hagihara was
2. SoTN is not the best game in the series, that's subjective, and in my opinion it is actually a pretty bad game just with really nice presentation.
3. HoD was pretty clearly bad in my opinion. There is very, very little good about it, almost no redeeming features.

Spot on. What a petty little man.

Click to shrink...

Most of the gameplay ideas like the whole interconnected castle came from Igarashi, even says so Wikipedia, unless you think you know more than Wikipedia

 

[D.Lo]

Like I said, it's abundantly clear they didn't think anything through when making Legends. It didn't even make sense when it was new. So Sonia killed Dracula and then, what, 25 years later he came back again? Even though Dracula's resurgences were almost always separated by a century unless he was deliberately summoned back early?

Click to shrink...

They also clearly did not think anything through when making Vampire Killer/Bloodlines either. Less than Legends, for which only you only have to come up with a quick one line explanation to fit in (Dracula came back early because of a wizard, done). The 100 year rule has been broken, what, 10 times already now?

But to quote another poster about how ridiculous and poorly thought out Vampire Killer/Bloodlines/CastleTrek: The Next Generation is:

Dracula is probably my favorite book. Castlevania is my favorite series. The tie between these bits of media is ridiculous at best. I mean, if you truly just feel a burning desire to link the two, why the hell not just say that the Harkers were some distant relation to the Belmonts or some shit and come up with some fluff to tie it all together? It makes more damn sense than Quincy Morris having a son who witnesses his death.
A son.
Quincey Morris.
The same young, proper, hot-blooded Texan trying to win the hand of Lucy Westenra.
And we're to believe that this same wealthy young man has a son they never mention in the book, and also that he can't seem to afford a babysitter so decides to drag the wee lad along on his continent-spanning holy quest with his bros to kill a great wizard who happens to be a vampire.

Click to shrink...

Essentially Bloodlines is linked to a 'version' of the story covered in the novel, shoehorned in by the devs to try and cash in on the recent Coppola movie. The Japanese box for Vampire Killer even uses a similar 'handwritten in blood' logo to the movie logo, and removes all reference to the 'Akumajou Dracula' series in the title, it's a cheap nasty cash in attempt to look like a sequel to the movie.

Click to shrink...

If any game had plot/canon issues, it's Bloodlines. Legends is small fry in issues compared to that.

Most of the gameplay ideas like the whole interconnected castle came from Igarashi, even says so Wikipedia, unless you think you know more than Wikipedia

Click to shrink...

Appealing to Wikipedia is extremely weak, it is regularly wrong and no real authority on anything. It recently showed Sonic having sold 800 million games, and for several years showed the Dreamcast sold more than were actually produced.

However, yes Igarashi was involved in SoTN and had influence in the direction. Many sources for how much influence he had are interviews with Igarashi himself years later where he talks himself up however, so I don't think they're completely reliable (there is one much more contemporary source which includes input from Hagihara where it's show to be much more of a group effort led by Hagihara). But that's not what I said. I said he was not responsible for SoTN, Toru Hagihara was. Toru Hagihara was the director and is credited as director. Igarashi cannot be credited solely as 'giving us' SoTN.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

They also clearly did not think anything through when making Vampire Killer/Bloodlines either. Less than Legends, for which only you only have to come up with a quick one line explanation to fit in (Dracula came back early because of a wizard, done). The 100 year rule has been broken, what, 10 times already now?

Click to shrink...

It has been broken. But the single most important element of Alucard's character is something they should've been smart enough to not deliberately negate.

Alucard literally sealed himself away for 300 years so that he wouldn't be able to make more vampires in his own bloodline. Why the hell would he ever sleep with Sonia and father a kid with her?

 

[D.Lo]

It has been broken. But the single most important element of Alucard's character is something they should've been smart enough to not deliberately negate.

Alucard literally sealed himself away for 300 years so that he wouldn't be able to make more vampires in his own bloodline. Why the hell would he ever sleep with Sonia and father a kid with her?

Click to shrink...

You're hung up on a detail when detailed character motivations are simply not any major point of a very silly fantasy video game series, they never were and never have been. SoTN and Igarashi's games have their teen edgelord stories that take themselves too seriously, but they can't escape that this is still a series about Conan fighting Medusa, Frank and Death one after another and features a little girl who attacks with magical animal powers.

It's a hammy little B movie caper, not shakespeare, and taking 'Alucard's character motivation' seriously enough to warrant ejecting a game that doesn't fit with that is pretty silly IMO. Igarashi taking the story too seriously creates much more of a problem than any plot or character issue, if he wanted to make it a full connected edgelord melodrama a full reboot would have made 100 times more sense than trying to take Castlevania III's endings as serious plot points in a grand drama.

 

[Zero-ELEC]

Bloodlines should have been dropped if anything.

But yes as it has been said, the reasons for it's removal are either: sexist or petty. Either way not great.

And like don't get it wrong, the game was trash, but so were others that didn't get removed from "canon".

Anyway, it still fits fine. The only Castlevania game that doesn't fit with the timeline is Order of Shadows and even that could easily be made to fit it were to take place in the early-to-mid 1600s rather than late.

 

[Deleted member 16876]

Bloodlines should have been dropped if anything.

But yes as it has been said, the reasons for it's removal are either: sexist or petty. Either way not great.

And like don't get it wrong, the game was trash, but so were others that didn't get removed from "canon".

Anyway, it still fits fine. The only Castlevania game that doesn't fit with the timeline is Order of Shadows and even that could easily be made to fit it were to take place in the early-to-mid 1600s rather than late.

Click to shrink...

But that's the best Castlevania...

 

[Cheerilee]

It has been broken. But the single most important element of Alucard's character is something they should've been smart enough to not deliberately negate.

Alucard literally sealed himself away for 300 years so that he wouldn't be able to make more vampires in his own bloodline. Why the hell would he ever sleep with Sonia and father a kid with her?

Click to shrink...

Sonia would predate that decision by 26 years. And when he woke up after his 300 year snooze, it was another beautiful woman (Maria) who convinced him not to go back to sleep again.

Men do stupid things with their penises all the time. Alucard didn't know Sonia got pregnant. I'm sure he thought it was no harm, no foul. One time was okay and he got away with it, just make sure not to do it again, otherwise someone might get pregnant.

One could say that his encounter with Sonia taught Alucard that he can't trust himself to keep it in his pants, which affected his decision to lock himself away.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Sonia would predate that decision by 26 years. And when he woke up after his 300 year snooze, it was another beautiful woman (Maria) who convinced him not to go back to sleep again.

Men do stupid things with their penises all the time. Alucard didn't know Sonia got pregnant. I'm sure he thought it was no harm, no foul. One time was okay and he got away with it, just make sure not to do it again, otherwise someone might get pregnant.

One could say that his encounter with Sonia taught Alucard that he can't trust himself to keep it in his pants, which affected his decision to lock himself away.

Click to shrink...

I imagine that Alucard would've just killed the kid if he found out he fathered one. He's not gonna go "welp, I fucked up, better just go hide and not do anything to deal with the problem I created" when he's perfectly willing to murder his own father twice.

 

[Zero-ELEC]

But that's the best Castlevania...

Click to shrink...

but it makes no sense to try and fit fucking Dracula of all things into the story

 

[Sapiens]

Because IGA is a moron who was only tangentially involved towards the tail end of SotN and somehow got to run the franchise for a while.

 

[Kalentan]

It is also worth nothing they inflated Miriam's chest the second they thought it would sell better.

Click to shrink...

What they seriously did that?

 

[Laxoon]

I'm all in favor of just keeping the lore that is just cooler. Bloodlines has way better lore than Legends, fighting nazi skeletons, gear machines and elizabeth bathory was just more interesting. I can totally see why IGA chose to keep that and build off it and am super thankful he did cause Portrait of Ruin is fantastic imo. I can't vouch for the Bram Stoker stuff.. dunno much about the novel or why it would or wouldn't make a good fit but I love Bloodlines and PoR.

Also living for this CV Chronology discussion lol. Good thread...

 

[Imran]

What they seriously did that?

Click to shrink...

During the Kickstarter:

After the Kickstarter:

 

[RedDevil]

I always assumed it was a mix of the game being very poorly received and the whole thing about the implications of the Belmont having vampire blood in them not making sense. The other two Game Boy games starring Christopher Belmont are canon though.

I think there was a DS game that was a distant sequel to it.

Click to shrink...

Portrait of Ruin, yes.

 

[Foffy]

Those are hardly dealbreakers.

In the 11th century, Leon defies the Church and renounces his title. 356 years later, in the 15th century, Sonia was said to have been raised by her aristocratic family. Can you really see no possible way to reconcile these two accounts?

Nevermind the fact that Leon's game was made years after Sonia's game was made.

Click to shrink...

But Trevor's character is he's hiding from the public, and his family has been in hiding from the public for generations. They're not aristocrats, they're more like ghosts, like legends. 26 years is not generations.

From the Japanese instruction manual to Dracula's Curse (I edited "Ralph" to "Trevor" because that's his localized name)

This is when a genuine Vampire Hunter from the Belmont family appears to fulfil the Pope's request. The Belmont family, with their tenacious willpower and seemingly bottomless strength were treated no differently from the actual vampires and were just as feared. Because of this, the Belmont family lived far away from common people, becoming almost folkloric. The Pope searched in all directions until he met a man with Belmont bloodline. A long haired young man by the name of Trevor Belmont.

Click to shrink...

You don't become folkloric in 26 years. Sonia's story is that the Belmonts are nobles, Trevor's story is that they're despised by humanity and have hidden from the public for ages, which is part of the story they choose to go with in the Netflix show. These directly oppose one another.

And regarding Alucard, he only opposes Dracula when he stages a war against Wallachia, which starts during Trevor's game, not Sonia's. It's before the start of Dracula's Curse that Dracula obtains the power of a deity which is what allows him to amass an army. It's not been a war for 20+ years. Dracula is an alchemist with no demonic army until Lisa is killed, and she dies in the 1470s. It's after this he aims to obtain dominion over a deity and it's through this he obtains an army and a sentient castle.

Then there's the nonsense of Alucard being a parent to the Belmont family. Wouldn't their own weapons hurt them? Dracula would be their evil grandpa? Nonsense.

I always assumed it was a mix of the game being very poorly received and the whole thing about the implications of the Belmont having vampire blood in them not making sense. The other two Game Boy games starring Christopher Belmont are canon though.

Click to shrink...

Christopher Belmont existed in Castlevania lore as early as the original Castlevania's release. He was a character that existed in that world before there were even other playable characters besides Simon in the series and before he even had a sprite.

 

[RedDevil]

Then there's the nonsense of Alucard being a parent to the Belmont family. Wouldn't their own weapons hurt them? Dracula would be their evil grandpa? Nonsense.

Click to shrink...

I can imagine a parody sitcom of that scenario, "Belmont's".

Christopher Belmont existed in Castlevania lore as early as the original Castlevania's release. He was a character that existed in that world before there were even other playable characters besides Simon in the series and before he even had a sprite.

Click to shrink...

Exactly.

 

[Big One]

Wasn't Alucard not even born yet by the time Castlevania Legends took place in the timeline? I always thought that was the main contradiction there.

 

[Nairume]

You don't become folkloric in 26 years.

Click to shrink...

Given the conditions of the premodern world, something becoming folklore within a generation isn't unreasonable.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

The lengths people are trying to go to justify a bad game's place within the timeline are just silly.

Why don't we just ask Konami to make a new Castlevania with a female Belmont instead of going 'if you just ignore this and this and this and this then it fits PERFECTLY' for a game that's worse than the two Castlevania Adventures?

 

[Nairume]

The lengths people are trying to go to justify a bad game's place within the timeline are just silly.

Why don't we just ask Konami to make a new Castlevania with a female Belmont instead of going 'if you just ignore this and this and this and this then it fits PERFECTLY' for a game that's worse than the two Castlevania Adventures?

Click to shrink...

Given how the castlevania timeline barely works to begin with, this seems a tad insulting to people carrying on a pretty minor discussion.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Given how the castlevania timeline barely works to begin with, this seems a tad insulting to people carrying on a pretty minor discussion.

Click to shrink...

That might have been a bit overly harsh, yeah. It just feels really silly to fight over a game like Legends, of all games.

Believe me, I'm all for female Belmonts, it's just...nothing about that game makes sense or even works. The fact that we're basically saying that to fit it into the timeline at all we'd have to ignore a bunch of things both within and without the game in question just feels like more work than it deserves, y'know?

It's...like trying to finagle a way for Kid Dracula to be canon.

 

[MegaXZero]

It's...like trying to finagle a way for Kid Dracula to be canon.

Click to shrink...

I feel it would be easier to fit Kid Dracula in. He's 10,000 years old, so it could be an apocalyptic future.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

I feel it would be easier to fit Kid Dracula in. He's 10,000 years old, so it could be an apocalyptic future.

Click to shrink...

How would Alucard become a kid again, though?

 

[Pixel Grotto]

It got retconned because IGA is not the god that everyone sees him to be and made mistakes, including saying that games that he didn't like or games that Konami's main team in Tokyo didn't work on (which he is a part of) weren't canon. Circle of the Moon also was sorta declared this for a while. I also think IGA wanted to make the ultimate BELMONT ORIGIN STORY game, hence his efforts on Lament of Innocence with Leon Belmont.

Castlevania timeline is kind of a mess, but a fun one in the same way that comic book timelines and continuity are a mess.

Frankly Castlevania Legends was a poor game, and featured a female protagonist running around in a leotard with no pants. Sonia isn't a bad character idea and even was semi-resurrected in the cancelled Dreamcast Castlevania game, but we didn't really lose much by having her story not be "canon."

 

[Deleted member 4869]

How would Alucard become a kid again, though?

Click to shrink...

Dragon Balls.

 

[MegaXZero]

How would Alucard become a kid again, though?

Click to shrink...

Nuclear radiation.

 

[Mr. Poolman]

How would Alucard become a kid again, though?

Click to shrink...

Not drinking blood.

 

[Big One]

Like seriously when was Alucard born relative to Legends and Dracula's Curse? Cause I remember the Castlevania TV series mentioning that Alucard was a teen in a man's body, lol. I was just wondering if that lined up with the canon video game Alucard or not.

If that did, then Alucard wouldn't have been born yet in the Legends era despite playing a vital role in the game's story. And if he was, he would've been very young....a little bit too young to conceive children don't you think?

 

[Pixel Grotto]

Like seriously when was Alucard born relative to Legends and Dracula's Curse? Cause I remember the Castlevania TV series mentioning that Alucard was a teen in a man's body, lol. I was just wondering if that lined up with the canon video game Alucard or not.

If that did, then Alucard wouldn't have been born yet in the Legends era despite playing a vital role in the game's story. And if he was, he would've been very young....a little bit too young to conceive children don't you think?

Click to shrink...

My best advice is to try not to think about exact dates and ages of characters in the Castlevania timeline, especially vampires, since it's all a mess. Secondly, the Castlevania TV thing about Alucard being mentally a teenager is just Warren Ellis' writing; there's no evidence of that in the games.

Alucard is supposed to be hundreds of years old and could certainly have been a young man during the time of Legends, which I think was supposed to take place in 1450. But honestly, his main presence in Legends was meant as a tie-in with Symphony of the Night, which was the big Castlevania game of that year while Legends was the little one. Alucard's presence in both was cross-promotion and it's not worth thinking about him boning Sonia as anything other than a ploy to tie the Belmonts and Dracula's son even tighter in order to promote a new game that didn't star a whip-using vampire hunter (which was an unusual move for the series at the time).

 

[TreIII]

How would Alucard become a kid again, though?

Click to shrink...

Somewhat serious answer: Easy way to explain it is that Kid Dracula and Galamoth hail from another timeline.

Judgment's entire shtick was that Galamoth (from 10,000+ years in the future) sent the Time Reaper in order to erase Dracula, and everything relating to him, from time itself. If Cornell's presence in that game proved that stuff from other timeline branches (the gaiden games) is fair game, then what's stopping an evil Dragon-Man Time Lord from attempting to meddle in the past?

 

[MegaXZero]

Like seriously when was Alucard born relative to Legends and Dracula's Curse? Cause I remember the Castlevania TV series mentioning that Alucard was a teen in a man's body, lol. I was just wondering if that lined up with the canon video game Alucard or not.

If that did, then Alucard wouldn't have been born yet in the Legends era despite playing a vital role in the game's story. And if he was, he would've been very young....a little bit too young to conceive children don't you think?

Click to shrink...

We were never told anything about Alucard's age, just that Lisa died in the 70s. There is a noticeable contradiction: according to SotN it was Lisa's death the sent Dracula into his rage against humanity. Yet Legends has Dracula conquering humanity decades before her death. Since Alucard is already born in legends, that would mean Dracula was destroying innocent lives while married to Lisa. Doesn't make sense.

 

[Pixel Grotto]

We were never told anything about Alucard's age, just that Lisa died in the 70s. There is a noticeable contradiction: according to SotN it was Lisa's death the sent Dracula into his rage against humanity. Yet Legends has Dracula conquering humanity decades before her death. Since Alucard is already born in legends, that would mean Dracula was destroying innocent lives while married to Lisa. Doesn't make sense.

Click to shrink...

Not entirely true - Legends is supposed to happen in 1450 and there was never an official date given for Lisa's death, at least not until IGA decided to retcon games and came out with an "official" Castlevania timeline (Japanese version here) which only says that Lisa died sometime around the 1470s. (Which is only two decades removed from 1450, really.) Before this timeline came out it was all nebulous dates and times and there was no real reason why Legends couldn't co-exist with the other games in the franchise until IGA flat-out said that it didn't - probably because he had the story for Lament of Innocence in his mind and wanted that to be the "real" start of the Belmont clan.