/vr/ - Retro Games

Explain something about PoR's plot to me.

As it turns out, John dies from using the Vampire Killer whip too much, because of some bullshit about the Morris family apparently no longer being related to the Belmonts and/or not having Belmont Warlord Y Chromosomes, yes that's seriously a thing, the game doesn't elaborate on it,, and that's fine and dandy I guess, however dumb it is, but there's something that just hit me recently.

Right before Wind drops the truth on Jonathan and Charlotte, they explicitly state that as far as they know, John died from mortal wounds he got from fighting Dracula or "stopping Dracula's resurrection" as they put it, and they were fairly certain of it. In fact, after their first run in with Death, Jonathan laments how his father only taught him basic stuff about fighting before "getting himself killed", which I always took to mean before going on his Bloodlines adventure and getting "mortally wounded".

And I guess that's my problem with the whole thing, now that I actually stopped and thought about certain dates and the timing of it all. Bloodlines took place in 1917, Portrait of Ruin took place in 1944. John was like 21 or something back then, Jonathan was 18 later, meaning the latter was born 1926. How long is someone supposed to be able to live after a fucking
>mortal wound
because that's at least 9 years just for John to have a son, nevermind having to wait some time to teach him how to fight. I always figured John died soon after Bloodlines, 9+ years is not fucking soon. Have I just been misunderstanding what it actually means to be mortally wounded or is PoR's story even dumber than I thought, and/or I the dumb one? Did the English translation just play fast and loose with this part?

Link to Charlotte-specific dialogue if you want a refresher on how it's presented in game, Ctrl+F to find specific words and all that.
https://castlevania.fandom.com/wiki/Charlotte_Aulin/Dialogue

>>7324554
Probably one the more based takes I've seen on the series as a whole.
>Simon's Quest gets honorable mention, but is not the same kind of game
I don't know, I mean yeah it's different and does things the others don't, and I know SoTNfags like to point to it to as a precursor, but it still strikes me as classicvania even if it doesn't do it very well. It gives far more of a fuck about platforming than SoTN or probably even Rondo.
>I'm not sure I understand the appeal of the other games
You mean the metroidvanias or just about everything after 4 period including the other 16-bit classics? Because to an extent, I'd agree with you either way even if some of them are my favorites in the whole franchise. 4 was the last of the classicvanias that gave a damn about trying to improve on what the NES games did instead of just throwing in wild gimmicks or upping the difficulty thinking hard = good instead of well designed challenge. Then the metroidvanias came in and either only cared about exploration and collecting for the sake of it or actually gave a damn about the series' original design principles and tried to incorporate them.

>>7269738
>negative Castlevania opinion thread
Like almost every other Castlevania thread?

But now that you've brought up Judgment, personally I liked it up until there was nothing more for me to do in single player and multiplayer was a wash, what with the garbage balance between characters and subweapons. You wouldn't initially think that Grants armed with daggers and axes would be so fucking stupid, but here we are.

>>7094763
I honestly really like some of IGA's games, PoR and OoE being a couple of my favorite, even, but yes, fuck his overall game design of exploration and collecting things for no damn good reason, and especially fuck what he did to the lore.

Just give me my actually not fucking alchemy[/spolier] holy whip and maybe some friends with magic sigils, cards, and literal shadow clone bulljitsu and shove off with everything else.