Untitled[edit]

What's this about the game coming out in Japan in 1993? That's ridiculous. The original Japanese Famicom version came out BEFORE the US NES release.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.239.206.148 (talk) 20:16, 20 May 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Check the page again. The "original Japanese Famicom" version was a Famicom Disk System game: it wasn't released as a cartridge in Japan until 1993. This is explicitly stated in the article text. – Seancdaug 03:44, May 21, 2005 (UTC)
Where? It says only at the bottom of the page with that date; the article itself does not explicitly state that there was even a Japanese Famicom cartridge release. The article goes chonologically from the US cart release to 1990's PC version, to 2002. I don't see a specific discussion of the cart re-release other than "February 5, 1993 Japan". It could stand to be better explained in the text, if it was real.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.208.155.223 (talk) 03:55, 19 June 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problem is that there's not really too much information available on the cart rerelease other than that it was, in fact, released. And it's pretty explicitly spelled out that the game was originally released for the FDS: the FDS is listed first in the infobox, and the opening sentence says that the game was "developed and published by Konami for the Famicom Disk System in 1986." It is further explained that the game was later ported to cartridge format for the North American and European releases. While I understand the desire for more information on the Japanese cartridge release, I really don't see what's so confusing about the current presentation. The FDS is mentioned more prominently throughout the article than the original NES, so even a cursory examination of the thing should, I would think, clear up any confusion. With the information we could find, there's not really much to say about the Japanese cartridge release other than what is said in the release date box, and I can't see how restating that information is going to clear anything up. That being said, if you've got some idea of how to edit the article to improve things, go right ahead. Trying to summarize all the platforms this game has been on is tricky, and it's entirely possible that it's not all as clear as I'd love for it to be. – Seancdaug 04:15, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Story Updated/Upgraded a bit[edit]

I updated the story on this game a bit...If you want to fix anything feel free to! --Yahweh 1 July 2005 17:56 (UTC)

Are all of the screenshots necessary?[edit]

They take up half the page, and seem to not add all that much to the actual article itself. Hbdragon88 22:43, 5 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Screenshots look fine to me, always good to have a overview about the different incarnations of a game and how they looked compared to each other. -- Grumbel 02:25, 24 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dracula?[edit]

Could someone clarify the use of the name "Dracula" in the original NES game? I own the original NES American release, and it [i]specifically[/i] avoids calling the vampire "Dracula," and instead calls him "The Count." By the NES American release of "Simon's Quest," he is called "Dracula," but not before. It sounds like there may have been copyright worries here ala Conan/Case Closed. Please note - perhaps the Japanese version of the game used the name "Dracula," but the American version disparity should be addressed. --L. 22:44, 5 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hearts as Mana/SecondWeapon-Energie?[edit]

Not really sure if it is relevant for the article, but one thing I find confusing about the Castlevania series is that they use hearts as mana or energie for the second weapon and not for filling the life energie. Does anybody know why Castlevania does use hearts for that purpose, which seems to conflict with the conventions in basically all other games I know. -- Grumbel 02:25, 24 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MSX2 Vampire Killer the original version?[edit]

Regarding Castlevania, in almost every article except this one is stated that the MSX2 Vampire Killer is the original version of the first Castlevania, which came out before the Nintendo FDS version. IF this is true, shouldn´t it be included here?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.141.237.211 (talk) 12:36, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Remakes?[edit]

It is mentioned that Super Castlevania is a remake/adaptation of the NES Castlevania. However, I've seen little to connect the two as the same game. Sure, they both take place in Dracula's castle and have the same name, but don't most Castlevania games? As stated above, the MSX version of Akumajou Dracula came first, and should also not be listed under this section. Haunted Castle seems distinct enough from the NES game that I wouldn't consider it the same game. It is noted that all the games are distinct from this one; why, then, are we mentioning them here instead of the series article? The Sharp version should be mentioned for its updated graphics, but the others should be left out.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacquismo (talk • contribs) 23:37, 19 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

They are mentioned because it is a general consensus among the fans. Just take a look at the Castlevania Dungeon or other sites like that, like Mr. P's. They are considered "remakes" because they share basically the same idea. Same name, same character (Simon), etc. What makes other Castlevania games "other games" is that they usually feature different names and different main characters. These games here share the same premise: "Simon goes to Castlevania to defeat Dracula, and that's it". It's true Haunted Castle features Simon's wife/bride as well, though, but this is what people generally accept. Remakes.
Might sound strange, but this is pretty much how it works. You said you've seen little to connect the two (NES Castlevania and Super Castlevania IV) as the same game, but well, they are not the same game. That's not what we are saying. Also, the X68000 Castlevania is also a game on its own. It has as much to do with the original game as SCIV does.--Kaonashi 02:28, 20 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's very difficult to track down precise release dates for MSX games, but most places I've looked give a date of October 1986 for Vampire Killer, whereas the Famicom Disk System version was definitely released on 26 September of that year. Very close, but it does appear that the FDS version was the first out of the starting gate. – Seancdaug 02:41, 20 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Vampire Killer[edit]

The article suggests that Vampire Killer is an "adaptation or version" of Castlevania. Vampire Killer is, in fact, the game that spawned the Castlevania franchise. Therefore, Castlevania is an adaptation of Vampire Killer; not the other way around.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.236.30.20 (talk) 18:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aye. Also, someone seems to have added Bloody Tears (Haunted Castle/Simon's Quest, etc) and A Requiem (Simon's Quest) as two of the game's tracks. This is clearly not the case! :p
Perhaps the 20th Anniversary disc is causing some confusion; it seems to be recognised as a different soundtrack (perhaps Castlevania Chronicles') when you run it through Winamp. - Klatrymadon—Preceding undated comment added by Klatrymadon (talk • contribs) 19:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Vampire Killer is the Second Game, I believe[edit]

All the sources I've read that refer to exact release dates point to the following:

Akumajô Dracula- 22 September 1986, Famicom Disk System Vampire Killer- 30 October 1986, MSX2 Home Computer Castlevania- 1 May 1987, Nintendo Entertainment System

This information can be found at Moby Games, among other places. Although I still have these games today and played them when I was much, much younger, I don't remember myself (obviously), the exact release dates of them.

Regardless, there are several other places that attest that Vampire Killer is an "adaptation" of Akumajô Dracula, such as the Castlevania Dungeon and VG Museum.

So, it seems that the "first game" came out in September (whether it was the 22 or the 26) and then was adapted into a more difficult and more RPG-like version called Vampire Killer, named after the whip Simon used. --Yahweh 22:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Simon Belmont[edit]

In this article it is stated that Simon is the great-grandson of Christopher Belmont, but this seems unlikely. Christopher Belmont fought Dracula from 1576-91 and Simon didn't fight Dracula until a century later (1691-98). Thus, it seems more likely that Simon is Christopher's great-great-grandson, or in other words, as stated on the Simon Belmont article, the great-grandson of Soleiyu Belmont (who "came of age" in 1591). --Yahweh 22:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

chronicles manual says he is the great grandson of christopher. end92.14.217.219 (talk) 10:40, 30 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Plot[edit]

The plot section seems to be marketing copy. Even if it isn't, it could use with sprucing up. Lots42 (talk) 06:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Number of Players[edit]

In the Castlevania manual, it states that the game can be played by two alternating players. It also states that by pressing SELECT at the title screen you switch to 2-player mode. Was this a planned feature that was never used? 72.161.200.85 (talk) 03:30, 5 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Contradictory paragraph?[edit]

I don't know much about the Castlevania series beyond the original game, but the second paragraph in the header seems to contradict itself:

"The storyline of Castlevania is part of the fictional universe of the Castlevania series, which features the struggle between the vampire hunters of the Belmont clan and the vampire lord Dracula. The game is set in the past relative to its predecessors and the plot follows the adventures of Simon Belmont, a descendant of Trevor Belmont."

Castlevania being the first game in the series (first released, mind you--I'm given to understand that the stories in some games in the series are set chronologically before the original's), how can it have predecessors? Assuming that what is meant is that these other games are predecessors in the chronology of the series, as opposed to the timeline of the games' releases, then Castlevania can't be "set in the past relative" to those games if their stories precede Castlevania's chronologically. Could someone in the know clear this up? -- Pennyforth (talk) 06:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Early Castlevania-like game on Macintosh?[edit]

I remember playing some sort of side-scrolling, black and white, castle/dungeon game on an early Macintosh computer. I thought it was Castlevania, but I don't see a version that was release for the Mac platform. Does anyone know what game this might have been? Faint memories recall a castle, bats flying around, and similar basic gameplay to most Castlevania games. -Speedeep (talk) 13:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also remember this game, it was well made and a lot of fun. I too thought it might have been called Castlevania, but it clearly wasn't. I'd love to figure out what it was. Dsghi (talk) 01:10, 2 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Value of the Original Castlevania Arcade machine[edit]

What is the pressumed value of the original Castlevania arcade machine, all original, unserviced and in proper working condition? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.28.224.148 (talk) 04:20, 22 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

whats up with the credits[edit]

so, they just took some celebrities' names and changed them at random? what's the point? is that supposed to be funny? was the game made by grade schoolers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.242.135.36 (talk) 22:35, 14 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Orphaned references in Castlevania (video game)[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Castlevania (video game)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "1up":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:30, 3 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 3 external links on Castlevania (1986 video game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:04, 11 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also an arcade game[edit]

I remember seeing this at my local arcade, exact same game as the NES version, however. Should this be noted, maybe it was on one of the playchoice machines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.105.202 (talk) 05:01, 22 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, it would have been one of the PlayChoice units. The only arcade-specific Castlevania game is Haunted Castle, which was rather different as it wasn't initially intended as a Castlevania game but was made into one during development. oknazevad (talk) 09:33, 4 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is it, not a playchoice machine but it was called vs castlevania same as nes, just a few different colors and harder. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/hC-jps-IK2UALkr6TZi1kIrfSWoGAjoDUnB6VGT5ADaFL15n3UFUABs14k5ZLVWEUKqHI4M39K6_zcBhHzb-i_9h17kIBwtTu2OmnA 71.184.110.64 (talk) 01:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requested move 31 January 2024[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved - No consensus for the proposed move. Essentially the primary topic here is disputed. (non-admin closure) FOARP (talk) 09:41, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Castlevania (1986 video game) → Castlevania (video game) – Definitely the most-known game titled simply 'Castlevania'. A google search of "Castlevania" "video game" produces only series articles or articles about this game (It might eventually produce a non-NES article, but I haven't seen it). The video game disambig isn't even used for another game, so it's a bit of a waste, and people can be easily directed to the other entries with a disambignote at the top. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 01:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

While I, of course, support the generally accepted concept of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, I am against incomplete disambiguation. Having stated that, I am aware of the existence of Wikipedia:Partially disambiguated page names#List of reported partially disambiguated article titles and their characteristics, all of which are the result of WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. Thus, if a sufficient number of votes support this nomination, Castlevania (video game) will have the opportunity of joining the list. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 23:01, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose. Completely unnecessary added ambiguity in a place where none currently is. Gonnym (talk) 16:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Categories