"Gaiden" means "Non-Canon" or "Alternate Timeline"
This stems from the belief that when Iga or a producer calls a Castlevania game a "Gaiden" it is therefore non-canon or an alternate timeline and can be dismissed. This, however, is not the case.
The term "Gaiden" merely just means a side story, spin-off, or a separate tale. The term "Gaiden" does not determine the canonicity of a work, it just lets you know if the game is a spin-off/side-story or if it's a main story. Take, for instance, the Kingdom Hearts series. Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories would be considered a gaiden, as it's a side-story and spin-off title that isn't a mainline numbered title, however, it is in all manners canon and important to play to understand Kingdom Hearts II.
The same can be applied to Castlevania itself, Castlevania Symphony of the Night is a gaiden game. Yet it is very obviously canon and pretty important to play to understand more of Alucard's backstory. The idea of a Gaiden game for the Castlevania series itself would be any game not dealing with one of Dracula's main 100-year-resurrections, which in this case, even Castlevania 2: Simon's Quest is in a way a gaiden, despite being completely canon.
This is all to say that Gaiden does not at all mean "non-canon" or "alternate timeline" and should never be treated as such, the term itself has nothing to do with the canonicity of a product.
IGA Statements Quoted by a Fan
Any statements Iga has made about Judgment that don't come from this IGN interview or a sourced and reputable article are not usable. This is, of course, referring to the popular statements used when discussing Judgment's Canoncity about a fan asking IGA about the game's Canoncity on Facebook, here are some of them below:
- Fan: You mentioned Legend of Cornell was an alternate continuity. However, Cornell appears in Castlevania Judgment, which I believe is not an alternate continuity. How does that work? is he from a different universe than the other characters? It is not really explained in the game itself so I was hoping you could give some clarification on the issue.
- IGA: Judgment is a work that surpasses space and time and brings them together.
- Fan: I get it. So, is the explanation I suggested in the previous reply possibly correct?
- IGA: I don't think it's exactly correct. Judgment is a work born of thinking it would be fun to remove all the hedges and bring characters that appeared throughout the series together. I think that you need to view it as an event from another world which does not consider things like timelines or parallel dimensions at all.
Now these seem like pretty clear-cut statements until you start to try to find where these come from.
They come from both a timeline archive discussion on the Castlevania Wiki back on January 15th, 2012 and from a forum post from the same user as the wiki article.
There is no way to find anything sourced or verifiably proven that this person spoke to Iga. Trying to look up the person didn't get any real results either.
Some other issues fall under the inconsistencies within these Iga talks, the person claims that Iga confirmed that Order of Shadows and the Arcade are non-canon because they were intended from the very beginning to be such, however, an officially sourced interview has the lead game designer of Order of Shadows state that Iga was actively involved with ensuring the game was consistent with the current canon, this would be a weird thing to do if he intended it to be non-canon from the very beginning.
He also claims that Iga said Super Castlevania IV was an alternate continuity, when the wiki also notes Iga saying that the games are all legitimate and the same scenario of defeating Dracula, however this quote is also unsourced, they just claim Iga says this with no link or anything.
There is another one not related to the user who spoke to Iga, but a user on reddit who claimed that a magazine claimed that Castlevania: Circle of the Moon was stated to be in a "different time axis". Attempting to get it translated got no wording that said anything like that, with it not even mentioning anything about canon, timeline, time axis, or any other wording of the sort in a machine-translated attempt. Do note however that this is a machine translation so it could potentially be that it is there, but until a reputable and verifiable translator can confirm or deny this translation, the jury is out with it and it will not be used for the canoncity of Circle of the Moon.
Thus all of these quotes are merely hearsay until shown or proven otherwise.
Remakes/Remasters Being Non-Canon
This comes from an Iga quote that says:
- "IGA: FC版とX６８０００版ですが、X６８０００版はFC版をベースにアレンジを加えたものになっています。ゲームのアレンジは、その時に応じて、色々と施されるものですので、正直どちらも正統であると思ってよいのではないかと思っています。結論として、ドラキュラと戦い勝つというシナリオで、中間部分の切り抜きが違うと考えてもよいのではないかと考えています。スーパーファミコン版も違いますし…。どうしてもと考えるのであれば、FC版を尊重すべきかと考えます。
- Translation: Regarding the Famicom version and the X68000 version, the X68000 version is an arrangement based on the Famicom version. The arrangement of a game is the kind of thing where you add a lot of different things as needed, so honestly speaking, it think they both should be considered legitimate. In conclusion, I think they should be considered as the same scenario of fighting to defeat Dracula, just with a different middle part. The Super Famicom version is different as well... If you simply must have a clear answer, the Famicom version must be given deference."
Now the quote itself doesn't state remakes or remasters are non-canon despite what people believe. It's moreso a quote of Iga stating that all of them are the same scenario, just with differences. However, an interesting point is that Iga says the NES version should be given "deference", as in to defer to the NES version.
Of course, though, this has the same issue as the Judgment quotes, everyone claims Iga said this, but there is no source of him saying this. In fact, in Castlevania Chronicles, there's a reward interview you receive from Iga himself where he talks about the game, Iga pretty much explains how the game came to be and never says anything about the game not being canon or to defer to the original[137], if anything he treats this as just an updated version of the original. Interestingly to note too, the original he's talking about is not Castlevania on NES but instead, he's talking about the computer version of Castlevania[138], though it borrows a lot of elements from Castlevania NES.
Overall due to the quote itself having no source, it is unusable. The way we will treat remakes, remasters, or ports here however is that they are all equally canon unless stated otherwise. Most of these tell the same story with the only real differences being extra background information added, such as Haunted Castle having it be Dracula stole Simon's wife, though the same overall story still applies even here. Iga himself has already expressed that the original Castlevania's story is pretty simple[139] and Simon having a wife does not affect anything in the overall narrative. Super Castlevania IV notes that Simon is a vampire, though this was due to a novel writer making him a vampire in their novel. The novel was originally supposed to be an adaptation of Super Castlevania IV but was then dropped and made its own thing. Super Castlevania IV itself is still canon, but the subplot of Simon being a vampire is not. The most recent timeline even acknowledges it as canon[140].
Iga Only Allows Stuff He Works on To Be Canon
There is a weirdly believed idea in the fandom that Iga only considers works he worked on canon, however, an officially sourced interview has the lead game designer of Order of Shadows state that Iga was actively involved with ensuring the game was consistent with the current canon, along with this Iga did not work on a lot of Castlevania games considered canon, such as the NES trilogy and the Gameboy games. In fact, he has only made 12 Castlevania games, out of the 30 Castlevania games in total, and most of them from the older console eras are still a part of the canon. Thus Iga does not only allow stuff he works on to be canon.
Iga is a Producer of Castlevania: Circle of the Moon
A Nintendo Power magazine calls Iga the producer of Circle of the Moon, with Iga talking like he worked on the game in that interview. However Iga can be found nowhere in the credits of the game. Making this Nintendo Power issue questionable as to if they were talking to Iga or if the game was mixed up. Though we have direct in-game proof that Iga was not a producer of Circle of the Moon.
Elements and Statements can be used from Lords of Shadows for the main continuity
This argument comes from Adi Shankar saying that even "non-canon" games are parallel timelines in the overall multiverse, sharing the same spirit and lore[141]. However, the Lord of Shadow games are directly noted in an interview with the lead developer, that the game has nothing to do with the canon, sharing none of the lore or original stuff for the characters. This directly conflicts with Adi Shankar's statement and it was very likely he was not even thinking of Lords of Shadows when making this statement but moreso games like Castlevania Legends. On top of this, Adi Shankar has no actual position within Konami, and being an executive producer for the Castlevania anime, thus he does not have any true say in terms of how Castlevania canon works and can only be used at most as a supporting piece of evidence.
