The Bottom Line With Dracula X?

By Sam Mills

Dracula X is a complicated creature. From the same seed, we got what is hailed by some as "the best Castlevania ever!" which is the PC Engine's Dracula X: The Rondo of Blood, and what is hailed as the "worst, weakest" game, Castlevania: Dracula X, for the SNES. Personally, I love the PC Engine game, and moderately like the SNES game, but what really interested me is the complication behind the creation of these two very different incarnations.

Like many others have asked, I've wondered a lot about the whole Dracula X and the U.S. issues. After doing some digging, I have tried to understand a little bit more about what the SNES Dracula X was supposed to be. After hearing so many different view points of how this games fits in, I had some idea's. As you probably know, some have called it a semi-sequel, while others call it an unfaithful or free adapted port of the PC Engine game. I think the game was purposely released with a dual purpose in mind.

In Japan, this was sequel to that game. They called it XX, and I think the impression is that Dracula kidnapped Maria and Annette again (though this still doesn't explain why Dracula is still around if he was already defeated. Perhaps he faked his death?) Anyway, if this was the case, it was kind of odd that they used the same soundtrack and such from the previous game.

However, realizing that the U.S. crowd didn't get the original, they decided to package it with the same cover and similar name so that we in the states would assume that this was a port of the original game, faithful or not. This messes up the U.S. line, but not the Japanese line when Symphony of the Night came out because we didn't see the ending to the PC Engine game that preludes Symphony's main action.

So for the universal (I hesitate to limit it to only Japan) the time line would dictate that Richter fought Dracula once, Dracula wasn't dead enough, quickly rehashed his plan, then four or five years later, the incident with Alucard occurs.

This leads to another discussion: How could Dracula come back so soon? It is said that Dracula rises every century. Well, it is possible that as the ages pass, he grows stronger and stronger, and perhaps it takes a few battles to finish him off for another century. Also, considering that the Rondo incident was unnatural, perhaps the rules were a little different. Maybe Shaft invested in Dracula power that was able to rejuvenate fairly quickly? Whatever the reason, it is clear the dark powers cannot always be explained so easily.

So why didn't Konami just remake Rondo of Blood for the U.S. audience? For starters, Konami doesn't like to repeat itself. That is why they have rarely ported the same Castlevania to more than one system (and that has only happened very few times with older games!) I think they figured that each system deserves it's own unique Castlevania that is not shared with any other system, and showcases what that system can do.

For example, lets say that Castlevania: Bloodlines was made for both the Genesis and Super NES. We all know a Super NES version would blow the Genesis game out of the water if they catered to the systems full capabilities, and that would make Genesis gamers feel shunned, right? But if they could get their own game that showed off what their system could do, then everyone is happy. Unless you don't have that system, which is another matter all together.

The point is that if Rondo were brought to the U.S. in it's true form, the SNES would have likely lagged in some ways. We see how the graphics and sound turned out with Castlevania: Dracula X: very good, but not as good as the PC Engine game (and oddly enough, not even as good as Super Castlevania 4!). If SNES were to do the exact same levels as Rondo of Blood, would there be as much contempt? Could the SNES have matched the quality of the PC Engine game a little closer if they spent more time on it? After all, if they had ported an existing game instead of creating a whole new one, I think that they would have had more time to polish and prime it.

But it's all ancient history in video game time. Those who want to play Rondo that bad need to dig or pay for it like an ancient treasure. Why Konami won't release it has eluded many people. Is the game too old for U.S. shores? Is the game too old, and is Konami afraid there is not interest in it anymore? Or is it going to be released here eventually? Having the game myself, it seems that it should no longer matters to me if they bring the game out or not. But based on pure principal, I still with Konami would take a chance on us, and release this game here once and for all.

I may still not know all the facts. But then I guess that represents a lot of gamers out there. It seems we shouldn't have to dig so far for truth, especially as consumers and fans. It wouldn't matter so much if it weren't so clear that something wasn't right, but it was very clear that we here in the U.S. were, and still are, missing a piece of the Castlevania cake. I guess we have two choices here: either ask for our just dessert, or lower our standards.

I paid $130.00 to play Dracula X: Rondo of Blood. I use an emulator that runs too slow on one computer, or without the music on the other, meaning I have to run the music manually. I didn't get the experience the game when it was new, but waited almost ten years, settling for the SNES game as a substitute. The game is great, too much hype in my mind had to settle before I could really enjoy the modest pleasures along with it's grandeur. That's a lot to go through. Hopefully Konami will one day make it easier for us in the United States to enjoy this game without so much effort. We shall see.

Back