Ganelon wrote:Geez, I'm not saying it's a matter of life or death or anything. This argument right here is pretty petty IMO, esp. since it was based on a misinterpretation of my original comment.
But just to clarify further: if you read everything, you'd see that I was arguing comparatively that this issue is more important than the release dates of the original games. Isn't it a lot more interesting to know the original focus and started product of a game series rather than the first one that made it out to the stores? I certainly think so. That initially conceptualized game defines the series IMO.
I just said that as a huge CV fan, I (and many others) are interested in knowing the true intent of the CV series. If it was designed solely as a sidescroller, well, then that's what everybody assumed all along. If it was designed with more freeroaming and key-finding...then the recent Castleroids aren't simply bastard offspring but rather as legitimate an heir to CV than the linear CVs. That would shift my whole mindset on the series, as much so as a Mario fan may if they discovered Mario Kart was the original design for Mario.
Because I really enjoy the series, it matters to me, although I won't lose sleep over it if I never figure out. If nobody cared about games, why even bother discussing them? Why remembering any info about CV at all?
Then again, the CV series consitutes quite a few of my fave action games of all time so I can certainly see why people who aren't big fans wouldn't care anywhere near as much and regard all this as trivial knowledge. Since this is Shmups and not CV Dungeon, that makes sense.
Well, it's not like you care and we don't, you know. I'm too a huge CV fan, but I happen to consider the release date more important in this case. Why? because it's a solid fact. The rest is just speculation, and seeing as the two games are only a month distant, not so interesting speculation. Sure, it would be nice to know, but given that the fan community hasn't even got to know the names of the authors...
Ganelon wrote:If it was designed solely as a sidescroller, well, then that's what everybody assumed all along. If it was designed with more freeroaming and key-finding...then the recent Castleroids aren't simply bastard offspring but rather as legitimate an heir to CV than the linear CVs. That would shift my whole mindset on the series
It was designed and planned for two platforms, and it was decided to alter slightly the gameplay. All this groudbreaking differences in the two games only exists in minds of westerners who assumed CV was "a Mario game with whip", like you said. But the idea of CV being just an action sidescroller falls flat since SQ. The non-linear structure was reintroduced into the series from the very second game, so what's the problem? Let me recap: if you eventually discover that MSX2 is just a "later" product, then you'll call castleroids "bastard offsprings" (completely forgetting SQ). If not, if MSX2 was the orginal idea, then this shatter your entire vision of the series?
That doesn't make much sense. Even if MSX2 came later, it still exists, and so does SQ. Why the non-linear should weight more in your opinion if it was the first, or viceversa. And, as sorry as this may sound to you, any product Konami brands with a "Castlevania" logo is legitimate, no matter how different or straying from a certain formula. It's not like they were following the original envisioning of an "Author" for all these years: they were just programming games they hoped to be good, and applying the rule "ain't broke, no fix". The nameless Castlevania programmer isn't Kubrick, nor Peter Molyneux, for that.
