I don't own it nor a wii and i wasn't very expectant of this game either but i've seen videos and it looks quite decent, so i want some opinion how is it was it a memorable and classic entrance to the series or will it be forgotten by next month. the only thing that i see i don't like is the character design, they just don't look right, like i don't really see simon belmont looking anything like he looks in judgement
oh i see.... are there any OMG moments in it in the story mode or is it a typical castlevania plot, doe it make sense, is there time traveling involved?
oh i see, btw who else here hated Eric's look in this game i mean c'mon he looks like a little girl instead of an emo boy that is just not right aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!1 o_O
More like who else here hated EVERYONE's look in this game. There's really nothing wrong with the designs themselves - they are actually very good. What makes me pissed is the fact that they take a really cool mummy-ninja and a dark-haired, shield-wielding Ivy and call them Grant DaNasty and Camilla...
The in game looks are better than the art, by far. Carmilla, Cornell, Shanoa, Alt-outfit Dracula, Aeon and, amazingly enough, Grant all look great in game.
due i thought Grant was supposed to be like a pirate or something, not a mummy or something. I liked Alucard's look, and also Trevor's, however i did thought that Simon's look should have been more of a badass warrior, like Trevor, not some Straight out of vouge magazine look, seriously
i like the character models but carmilla her boobs are scary i think death and cornell have the best look i do wish they added in more to the story its so simple
btw, who else is a little mad that for the fifth time they made another refference to 1999 and yet there's still no word about that from IGA (damn you), I saw Alucard's playthrough on youtube and when i saw the ending i was like "And so they do it again" well at now I know that Alucard was actually the one responsible for finally finding the way to destroy Dracula for good, the belmonts and the vimpire killer were but only the finall key to this event, so yea Alucard seems to be way more important to the series cannon than most if not all belmonts in the games
what does everything think of deaths true ending when it says that why is he help out the lord of darkness so much, maybe there's something more evil behind it all i would like it they did a game with more of the back story behind death, why is a immortal simi god that can never be destroyed so bent on serving a vampire even giving 100's of years to help out the vampire
i thought death was just loyal to him because he has the tone they showed mathias with at the end of LoI. they even saiud whoever has it is in control of what death does. so i just always figured he was loyal cause dracula still had the stone. i think it was the crimson one.
Theres a longstanding theory that Death has his own Agenda, and that he seeks what can be considered the Ultimate soul, IE, Dracula's, the one soul he is forever unable to reap.
then why does he keep appearing after AOS, i mean dracula isn't there anymore, if anything he should be bowing to soma and serving him instead being the most annoying boss of DOS. plus Death never really says much about himself so i doubt that there is something more to him, he just happens to be Dracula's servant because dracula has the crimson stone which gives him control over death itmself, hence why he can never die.
then why does he keep appearing after AOS, i mean dracula isn't there anymore, if anything he should be bowing to soma and serving him instead being the most annoying boss of DOS. plus Death never really says much about himself so i doubt that there is something more to him, he just happens to be Dracula's servant because dracula has the crimson stone which gives him control over death itmself, hence why he can never die.fredy1689
1: He only swore loyalty only to whoever has the Crimson stone. Now, officially, the Crimson stone is a red stone with little crater like marks. Unless it somehow turned into that blue necklace he wears, Soma doesn't have the magic rock, just the power of the rock (Crimson stone=Gain power by stealing enemy souls, Dominance=Gain power by stealing enemy souls). Therefore, Death has zero reason to swear loyalty to Soma, giving him a lovely chance to finally take Dracula's soul.Â
2: Dracula can't control death, only Death can. And Death was Death prior to the rock coming along.
the Belmonts have the vampire slayer thats a weapon made to kill evil, so i don't see why it wouldn't have the power to kill death and i haven't heard that theory on death wanting Dracula's soul. i wonder what would happen if he got it somehow
well there probably isn't any deeper meaning to death besides that he is just dracula's sidekick, it would be fun to see death actually serving soma, since well technically he IS dracula.
In what way is Death evil? And I wouldn't say Death is related to the night more than he is to the day... that's just stupid. Then again, video games aren't known for making sense...
How is he not evil? He's the grim ****ing reaper. He kills people for a job.Â
And the Night has long been a dangerous time for humans, from wolves to theives, and people would tend to, y'know, die. Evil has long been synonymous with Darkness, and Death is the most powerful of these evils.
Death is in no way evil. Think about what would happen if he never killed anyone... overpopulation, starvation etc, but even worse, because as you can't die you'd starve/suffer from a horrible illness/whatever for eternity. Hell, Death is a pretty good guy if you ask me.Â
Just because the deed isn't evil doesn't make the person good. Europe was fairly heavily populated during world war 2, and one of Hitlers justifications for that whole kill everything bit was to prevent overpopulation. Clearly, he is a good guy.
Death himself certainly isn't the most evil thing ever, but he's far from a good guy. Good guys don't kidnap other guys girlfriends, toss them in a tower, and serve the Lord of Darkness.
Well as i said before we should take death in this game simply as a given, he is there in castlevania as simply the guy who helps dracula in his evilbidding. I mean, every evil guy needs a sidekick to help him right? or am i wrong?
in the castlevania story death is more evil but in the real life myths he isn't really evil just doing his duty everyone has a time to die its death job to have them die then take there soul to heaven/good hell/bad death only kills when its someones time to die also in castlevania death is more is a servant to the lord of darkness there is a deeper darkness to him with what he is doing and why
Death serves the Lord of Darkness because he has no choice - he has to obey the owner of the crimson stone. He's neither good nor evil, he just does his job. Killing people might not be a very good thing to do, but it's necessary. As I said, video games aren't known for making sense, and even if the reason I can do it is stupid I love fighting the Grim Reaper.
so... how is it that we ended up in this disscussion? because i'm sure that that wasn't what we started to talk about at first right...hahaha, i remember there being something about death looking cool in judgement or something o_0
As far as I'm concerned someone who goes around nomnomnoming souls (and seems to genuinely enjoy it!) isn't a good guy. Simple as that. Grimmy isn't moaning about having to steal the souls in the series, and lets leave standard mythology out of this one. Mythological Death generally is more whiney about it.
But then again, nothing is really "good" or "evil", since each person percieves them differently. Which means this discussion is as useless as one about whether ice cream is delicious or not.
Log in to comment