I can agree with that.
Though I don't it close to heart since this series never was historically accurate.

There was even theory amongst fans at the time, that Mathias died between LOI and CV3 and starting with CV3 it was real a Vlad Tepes.

I had to google to see what the hell was castleroid, why not just call it metroidvania like most normal people?
Castlevania 64, Legends and Circle of the Moon are my favorite games and the only castlevania games I had as a kid and they're all non-canon because who knows why, it's not as if the castlevania history isn't already convoluted as h.ell

I liked Castlevania 64 just fine. There was that annoying bit with the Nitroglycerine but eh. I can't argue with the people who say it doesn't really "feel" like Castlevania "ought to", but I try not to get hung up on that kind of thing.

I remember when Peanut yelled at me and said the fact that I didn't think that game was trash meant I shouldn't be allowed to talk out loud about video games at all. :lol: What a rube.

I only bought the do-over/"apology" version "Legacy of Darkness" not that long ago, and I haven't played it yet. I'll probably like it, since it's a lot more game than the first.

I remember being very confused when those games got generally great scores when they were released, then they never made any more like that and then for years all I read was people saying they were garbage.

I also thought it was nuts how they both came out within a year, but then I read that LoD was essentially the way the first game was always "supposed to be", more or less, and that made sense. I mean they didn't have DLC back then, gotta do somethin'. Although given how LoD ended up shipping within the same year anyway, I still kinda think they could've/should've just pushed the release date back and just released LoD instead of two games. But then they couldn't have gotten everyone's money twice, I guess.

To trigger you, m'dear. :lol:

They were non-canon from the beginning, exactly, because, developers didn't want to built them into pretty convoluted timeline.

LOL.

LOD is worse when it comes to atmosphere and a story, but locations were completely remade to take more advantage of the 3D. They also added controllable camera and tightened controls.

But I can't help, but prefer more atmospheric original version. And I am not fan of Cornell character and gameplay.

It was first 3D game of developers and they kind of "bitten more than they could chew", i.e. attempted to make the game more ambitious than their experience and hardware allowed them. Konami deadlines didn't help either.

I am surprised that Konami allowed them to make LOD at all - it was basically admitting that the first game was very bad (not really, IMO), but it seems Konami REALLY wanted a big 3D Castlevania out there. Didn't quite worked out as they planned.

Also, fan fact: originally LOD was to be called Castlevania: Special Edition in the West. Later Konami felt like it will make the first release obsolete, so they renamed it into LOD.

About, whether or not it is closer to what CV64 was supposed to be it is quite questionable: CV64 was mostly completed. Things that were cut are two characters (turned into bosses) and more elaborate storyline system, like ability to choose various options in dialogues, which influenced endings. Also, some bosses were cut (most likely Medusa and Spider Queen), but it seems number of levels and their structure were the same.

Makes sense.

I do look forward to playing LoD sooner rather than later, since I liked the first one well enough.

I've always been more of a person who admired the franchise from afar rather than an "active participant", but I did buy a bunch of the games in the series over the past year so I can finally get more caught up. As a kid I played the original game sometimes but always died pretty early into Level 2 and never really spent a lot of time with it, until I finally beat it a couple of months ago for the first time. I played (and beat) Super Castlevania IV more than anything else in the series; that one's always been a favorite of mine.

I've had Simon's Quest for a while, but never played it. I think I'm gonna get the "Redacted" version and play that instead.

Oddly, I never got around to playing Symphony of the Night, either, but I promise I will. I'm way behind but I look forward to getting caught up.

Lament of Innocence I think was the single most underrated Castlevania game ever made. It was basically all of the best of all of the Castlevania's at that time - like a "super Symphony of the Night" in many ways.

Symphony of the Night
Lament of Innocence
Lords of Shadow prt 1

Absolute masterpieces. If I ever get some gaming legs back on and feel like I can be absorbed by that crap again in life, I'd be down for replaying all three of those and the Parasite Eve games. Bang. Awesome.

I seem to remember CV64 and LOD were not really the same game. LOD was like a prequel, reusing a lot of the same assets.

I'm not triggered, just never heard of that term and sounds like steroids, metroidvania is already a stupid term but whatever people it.
They were definitely not non-canon when they came out, only when Iga decided he didn't like them, but he's gone so who cares the timeline is a mess and those games have cool stories better than many "canon" ones.

Anywho, I'm not too invested in castlevania, so I don't care too much. I just find it funny that the 3 games I owned as a kid on different platforms are noncanon.

I had C64 but only played LoD once when I rented it so I'm not 100% sure but IIRC LOD is just like an enhanced version a la Super Street Fighter II having more fighters. The Reinhardt/Carrie sections of the game are exactly the same storywise, only with a few things re-arranged. And the werewolf character was indeed a new character with his own story but it was the exact same game, just a different character with a different path on the same game.

Original is perfectly fine, I might say. Well, there is a couple of moments, which can be confusing, but otherwise it is not THAT bad.

If you need any advice you can hit me in PM.

It is not a bad game, just very very braindead easy. Nothing like any earlier Castlevanias.

There are three versions of it: on PlayStation 1, on Sega Saturn and PlayStation Portable. AFAIK, most available version is from PS1.

Sega Saturn version has additional areas and additional playable character, also it makes second half of the game a bit more palatable. But it is harder to emulate and has no English version.

PSP version has additional character and a new dub.

Ironically, I am not fan of either.
LOI is very mediocre game, IMO, and Symphony is not my cup of tea.

It is both: main story featuring Cornell is a prequel and after you complete it, you unlock stories for Reinhardt and Carrie from CV64. Storywise they are identical to the CV64, but they use updated version of levels from LOD.

Completely agree, which is why I prefer term "Metroidlike".

It is hard to say now: CV64 originally WAS supposed to be part of the timeline, but after all development troubles it is hard to say where it goes, especially, since it doesn't feature Belmonts.

Circle was always intended to be a spin-off.

I actually have a very detailed guide for Simon's Quest from one of those Rusel DeMaria books that came out back in the late-80s/early-90s. I think I'd just have more fun with the version of the game where the hints actually make sense and the townsfolk aren't lying scumbags. :lol: We'll see what happens.

I've got Symphony on the Konami Classics Collection on Xbox 360. If it's "easy", that's fine; I'm an old cranky bastard with other sh*t to do, I can't spend a hundred years on anything that doesn't have "Elder Scrolls" in the title, anymore. :lol:

I've also got all the Game Boy and GBA games but I haven't played any of them, yet.

My guide was a thin book, which got most of its secrets stolen from game magazines and some of them were wrong to boot. :D

Most likely it is PS1 version than.
Beautiful game, but can become very boring by the second half.

They are mixed bag:

Short reviews - all opinions are mine:

Castlevania The Adventure is a horrible game, one of the worst in the series. Its main problem that it runs like ****: there is a constant slowdown and controls are barely responsive. Music is decent though.

Castlevania 2: Belmont's Revenge is very good and fixes all problems from the past entry. Must play.

Castlevania Legends is mediocre - it is worse than Belmont's Revenge, when it comes to controls and level design and music is so-so.

Circle of the Moon is one of my favorites - perfect controls, good subsystem, decent difficulty. A bit too much copypasted stairways and corridors, but that's a not a big problem. Soundtrack is pretty good, even, if it sounds like its played by pre-historic gramophone and most tracks are reused from past entries.

Harmony of Dissonance is :sick:
Ugly design, floaty controls, horrible horrible HORRIBLE music.

Aria of Sorrow - good game, interesting locations, good subsystem, decent soundtrack. Story has barely anything to do with Castlevania, though.

DS can be perfectly emulated, so you can play its trilogy too.

Did anyone else ever read the old Scholastic "Castlevania II: Simon's Quest" novel? I think under the "worlds of power" banner? I did. I still keep up with the author of it, too.

Aria of Sorrow, wasn't that the one where Dracula resurrects in the modern day? Guest-starring Alucard? I got pretty far into it but eventually lost interest. It's not a bad concept.

It is very anime. Dracula being resurrected in the body of a Japanese schoolboy is...eh. Especially after previous entries.

AOS, and its sequel Dawn of Sorrow, are good games, but barely Castlevanias, IMO.

Netflix announced a spin-off series today:

Oh good. But this means skipping Simon and such... which I kind of figured they'd do.

Simon is too manly for those soyboys.
No opportunity for him to be ****ed in the ass.

Also, why are they calling it spin-off, when its just another part of the series?

Dracula X was a spin-off at some point, but I don't think it is relevant now.

I don't think Richter is in much jeopardy of that... but definitely Alucard's presence helps that cause.

So who is the new showrunner?

Yeah, that's dumb. It's not a spinoff, it's them doing exactly what they said they were going to do in subsequent seasons right after they finished season 1.

It's coming back as Castlevania: Nocturne. With Richter.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/ne...2Xamda3nqEzc7M



I'm glad they're moving forward but it also seems weird they spent two seasons building up to "Curse of Darkness" only to skip way, way over it.

I haven't watched the series, since the whole thing smelled of "my precious OGs do not TOUCH" + "strong independent Lesbian vampires who don't need no men", but from I understood, they butchered final seasons and made the whole thing about those OGs, giving the story entirely different resolution than in canon.

Also, who's gonna be raped in the new series? :lol:

So "Nocturne" (season 1?) is out on Netflix now. I skimmed the episodes and it looks like neither Dracula or Alucard show up at all in this. Just more female vampires like the last few seasons, that's it.

I don't think I'm going to bother with this. It isn't Castlevania.