SoulCalibur VI Storyline Theory Thread

SomeRandomHuman said:
Zasalamel could as well be a bonus character unlocked by completing some game mode or just appear in epilogue, forshadowing the sequel that will focus on SCIII-IV - just include him in the roster!
And Setsuka too, her style is complicated, but I'd like to try her once again.
Click to expand...

Like I said, that's the only way to really reconcile it. However, with the roster only including 20 characters (at least at this point), I'm not getting my hopes up for anyone beyond SC1's original roster. Best to keep things simple and to the point instead of overstuffing things
 
Aiddon said:
Like I said, that's the only way to really reconcile it. However, with the roster only including 20 characters (at least at this point), I'm not getting my hopes up for anyone beyond SC1's original roster. Best to keep things simple and to the point instead of overstuffing things
Click to expand...
It was already stated by the developers that the select screen of the demo is not the complete one, so we WILL have more than 20 characters. Also, according to @Vergeben , the story will not happen in the same way as it did in the original timeline (like the developers said, the keyword is "reboot"), which means that there is no indication that the roster will be limited to SC1 at all.
 
Le_Bello said:
If it IS a reboot then none of the previous character stories will much matter, so it's fully possible Setsuka, Tira, Zas etc could still be included. Possibly even with whole new motivations and everything.

I'm fair certain most people don't care how their favourite ties into the story as long as it means they get included.
Click to expand...
I've never known for other "reboots" to do something of this fashion though.

MK9 was an exception because their story was back in a time where the original source material (MK1-MK3, in this case), was incredibly vague as it is. Plus Past Raiden "sensing" danger from future Raiden causes past Raiden to change most of the story.

But again, Astral Chaos could become more involved to change that, but I just don't see a huge difference in the storyline this time. Maybe the next game.

I see this game's story being a more extended version of SC1's.
 
jtdam09 said:
I've never known for other "reboots" to do something of this fashion though.

MK9 was an exception because their story was back in a time where the original source material (MK1-MK3, in this case), was incredibly vague as it is. Plus Past Raiden "sensing" danger from future Raiden causes past Raiden to change most of the story.

But again, Astral Chaos could become more involved to change that, but I just don't see a huge difference in the storyline this time. Maybe the next game.

I see this game's story being a more extended version of SC1's.
Click to expand...

Reboots have done that before. And, appropriately, they've universally SUCKED because at that point they're not writing the same characters and they're mucking with something that was fine the first time. The SC1 storyline is fine, just going back and properly putting it on screen is perfectly fine to bring things to a new audience.
 
jtdam09 said:
I've never known for other "reboots" to do something of this fashion though.

MK9 was an exception because their story was back in a time where the original source material (MK1-MK3, in this case), was incredibly vague as it is. Plus Past Raiden "sensing" danger from future Raiden causes past Raiden to change most of the story.

But again, Astral Chaos could become more involved to change that, but I just don't see a huge difference in the storyline this time. Maybe the next game.

I see this game's story being a more extended version of SC1's.
Click to expand...
This is fair, but if they scrap the Astral Chaos and all that additional stuff, it's literally a blank slate short of "One sword is bad the other is good and also bad and here are some people who do a fighting."

Honestly though the story was hackneyed anyways. It got far too anime in my own opinion and I would like to see something more consistent and interesting, but if not I won't mind. As long as the gameplay is solid :)
 
Aiddon said:
Reboots have done that before. And, appropriately, they've universally SUCKED because at that point they're not writing the same characters and they're mucking with something that was fine the first time. The SC1 storyline is fine, just going back and properly putting it on screen is perfectly fine to bring things to a new audience.
Click to expand...
The SC1 storyline barely exists. There is only a small selection of events, making anything with it is essentially rewriting it.

Le_Bello said:
This is fair, but if they scrap the Astral Chaos and all that additional stuff, it's literally a blank slate short of "One sword is bad the other is good and also bad and here are some people who do a fighting."

Honestly though the story was hackneyed anyways. It got far too anime in my own opinion and I would like to see something more consistent and interesting, but if not I won't mind. As long as the gameplay is solid :)
Click to expand...
They only ever focused in minor events surrounding each character and, sometimes, having those characters bump on each other, surrounded by a LOT of non-canon stuff. The only time they gave any focus to the canon events was in a rushed game... and we got SC5, which likely isn't what they planned for the canon. Now they'll have a better opportunity to make the story great.
 
Macaulyn said:
Devil May Cry? Tomb Raider? Bomberman? Castlevania? Sonic 2006?
Click to expand...
Tomb Raider by design is a reboot, but is it storywise? Not really. The following games in the reboot are what younger Lara had to go through leading up to her more mature version. It's like comparing Street Fighter 2 Chun-Li to Street Fighter Alpha Chun-Li.

Devil May Cry? Completely different company making a completely different game, and we saw how that turned out.

I never played Castlevania, so I'm not sure what their storyline is.
 
Last edited:
jtdam09 said:
Tomb Raider by design is a reboot, but is it storywise? Not really. The following games in the reboot are what younger Lara had to go through leading up to her more mature version. It's like comparing Street Fighter 2 Chun-Li to Street Fighter Alpha Chun-Li.

Devil May Cry? Completely different company making a completely different game, and we saw how that turned out.

I never played Castlevania, so I'm not sure what their storyline is.
Click to expand...
They still did it, regardless. So its not like a full reboot on the story is a new thing. And in many cases, like in Mortal Kombat, for example (which, ironically, its probably the only fighting game franchise to do that until now), it was a success. As long as the team is competent, they can easily make a reboot work.
 
Macaulyn said:
ike in Mortal Kombat, for example (which, ironically, its probably the only fighting game franchise to do that until now), it was a success
Click to expand...
MK's reboot is successful, because it's still a part of the same universe. It's not really a reboot, more of time-travel shenanigans timeline restart.
The universe is the same and the characters, for the most part, are the same too. But events are different.
The problem with "normal reboots" is that most of the time they end up doing a completely different game with the name that belongs to old beloved franchise, which ruins everything (even when the game itself is good).
New Tomb Raider has more in common with Uncharted than with actual classic TR. And new Lara has so little in common with classic one, that she could as well be called, I dunno, Carol and game a "Islad of Misadventure(or smth, you got the idea)" - nobody would ever guessed it's supposed to be Lara Croft and would've just called it an "Genderbender Uncharted". It's a more or less succsessful try though, because creators were inspired by already successful franchise and didn't purposefully turned everything 180 degree, but instead just done a more realistic (no magical/mystical and over the top 90s movies stuff) and modern adaptation of the game's concept (though this was disliked by some of the old fans too, including me).
DmC is amore severe example of this, where there wasn't even any point calling this game a Devil May Cry, so little it has in common with it.
My point is - new SC6 "reboot" is already a reboot done right in the same way as MK9-X and has nothing in common with examples above, because it doesn't fundamentally changes the characters and universe, but instead revisits old events, while keeping iconic characters, even though with some changes. It's more of a "restart" than actual "reboot".
 
SomeRandomHuman said:
MK's reboot is successful, because it's still a part of the same universe. It's not really a reboot, more of time-travel shenanigans timeline restart.
The universe is the same and the characters, for the most part, are the same too. But events are different.
The problem with "normal reboots" is that most of the time they end up doing a completely different game with the name that belongs to old beloved franchise, which ruins everything (even when the game itself is good).
New Tomb Raider has more in common with Uncharted than with actual classic TR. And new Lara has so little in common with classic one, that she could as well be called, I dunno, Carol and game a "Islad of Misadventure(or smth, you got the idea)" - nobody would ever guessed it's supposed to be Lara Croft and would've just called it an "Genderbender Uncharted". It's a more or less succsessful try though, because creators were inspired by already successful franchise and didn't purposefully turned everything 180 degree, but instead just done a more realistic (no magical/mystical and over the top 90s movies stuff) and modern adaptation of the game's concept (though this was disliked by some of the old fans too, including me).
DmC is amore severe example of this, where there wasn't even any point calling this game a Devil May Cry, so little it has in common with it.
My point is - new SC6 "reboot" is already a reboot done right in the same way as MK9-X and has nothing in common with examples above, because it doesn't fundamentally changes the characters and universe, but instead revisits old events, while keeping iconic characters, even though with some changes. It's more of a "restart" than actual "reboot".
Click to expand...
You explained it better than I ever could.
 
SomeRandomHuman said:
It's more of a "restart" than actual "reboot".
Click to expand...

That's pretty much the best way to describe it. There was nothing wrong with SCI's setup, all they need to do is actually depict the events, like Xianghua traveling with Kilik and Maxi to Europe or Siegfried's little group wreaking havoc to gather the pieces of Soul Edge.
 
A reboot IS a restart. Also, no, they can't "just depict the events" of SC1, because SC1 barely has any actual events to make an actual story mode nowadays, and with the ammount of stuff they must add for it to feel complete, they may as well just rewrite the story.
 
Macaulyn said:
A reboot IS a restart. Also, no, they can't "just depict the events" of SC1, because SC1 barely has any actual events to make an actual story mode nowadays, and with the ammount of stuff they must add for it to feel complete, they may as well just rewrite the story.
Click to expand...
But from the looks of it....they won't "rewrite" the story. Just adding some detailed information for an already vague story. The closest to rewriting they will do is for the sake of the new characters.
 
jtdam09 said:
But from the looks of it....they won't "rewrite" the story. Just adding some detailed information for an already vague story. The closest to rewriting they will do is for the sake of the new characters.
Click to expand...

Yeah, which is why I can't call it a "reboot", it's more of a remake of SCI. And that's probably how it should be considering that there was nothing really wrong with SCI's lore and why going back to it and dramatizing it properly intrigues me. Heck, SC probably has some of the best fighting game lore save for Guilty Gear and Blazblue.
 
Since this thread has degenerated into semantics, here's the definition of reboot directly from Merriam-Webster:
Reboot - restart or revive (a process or sequence, especially a series of films or television programs); give fresh impetus to.

And here are some major reboots from recent memory to give us some perspective:
  1. Star Wars: Disney completely removed the "Extended Universe" storylines supporting the prequel and original trilogies (except for the Clone Wars animated series) from canon after the purchase of LucasFilm and LucasArts. The sequel trilogy and one-off films they've been releasing have added new information and lore about old characters and groups, especially the Rebel Alliance and its leaders. Certain characters have ceased to exist and entire events have vanished from canon, but Disney is taking bits and pieces of old stories and reworking them for new audiences. The story of Rogue One was told in an off-hand, now retconned comment in the original Star Wars ("Many Bothans died to get us these [Death Star] plans"), but the Rogue One film provided more lore and roped in existing and new characters to tell the story of how the Rebellion got the Death Star plans.
  2. Mortal Kombat: NRS rewrote the story of the first few MK games through retcons, and MKX expanded on that story...with a timeskip. Regardless, MK9 covered major plot points from original games in new ways and added new context through the story changes.
  3. Riverdale: an adaptation/reboot of Archie comics overseen by the creator of Archie, meant to reinvigorate the graphic novel series and create a popular teen drama. The show is considered canon now. Riverdale isn't the most comparable example in the case of SC, but the show rewrote characters and plotlines to the point of being unrecognizable and completely changed the tone found in Archie comics.
 
Last edited:
Alright, new trailer is up and they've given us more of the main story cast with Nightmare, Xianghua, and Kilik. With Kilik especially it looks like they're finally showing his struggles with the influence of Soul Edge, which is something I always wanted them to show instead of merely telling us with all of it happening offscreen.

As for Groh, I wonder if he's a new Nightmare underling like Astaroth and Aeon were.
 
I bet Grøh and his Papi are their own faction, apart from either Soul Edge or Soul Calibur. They're either intervening or rebelling against the conflict, either in an attempt to modify history or to set right something that they feel went wrong. The timeline being altered may cause rifts and gaps which would cause the SoulCalibur II and SoulCalibur III stories to be involved, bringing in those characters and events. If Grøh was simply an underling of Nightmare, that would be pretty disappointing, and not interesting at all, if he's truly Kilik's rival and central to the plot.

I mostly fear for Xianghua. I feel like she's in for some sadness and suffering this time around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back