it wont be Castlevania though.
It will be more Castlevania than the current direction of the series. Feel free to find that heartwarming or hilarious. The only current thing the IP has is the brand name; much of what defined it has been removed from the DNA, if the reboot is any indication.
I feel we could be entering a very interesting time, and there was a good example I'd like to entertain. Back in 2001, there was a wonderfully immersive game released on the PC called Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis which was one of the earliest realistic shooters on the market, taking the concept of Rainbow Six and essentially applying it to the entire theater of warfare. This game had two followups, one in gameplay (ArmA) and one in IP name (Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising), and both produced an interesting situation: ArmA literally
played like Cold War Crisis, yet Dragon Rising, the official sequel, really felt like an AAA attempt to retrofit the series to ape other popular games, and as a result feels like the name is simply being used to sell the game. I feel Castlevania has now finally entered in such a place: you have the potential gameplay of past games being continued with Igarashi under a different name, but you also have the name being pumped out for brand recognition. In a way, this is a winwin, but it's a little sad to say how divisive it is for the franchise; what one once loved about it has to be found elsewhere, for Konami doesn't give a fuck about what it used to be, and what has taken its place feels absolutely out of place to what used to be there, like a very weak substitute.
Castlevania used to be my all-time favorite series of games, and I'd make time to replay every main entry at least once a year. After the reboot, I can easily say it stopped being my favorite series, for what it was perpetuating to be, what it was claiming was Castlevania, was filler. Too much of it seemed like it didn't care for the heritage (I feel it even stomped on some of it), and most of all, what was there seemed inconsistent. It felt like it was trying to be Castlevania to a degree, which only evolved with the following midquel, but deep down it really wasn't. I think it's telling that Mirror of Fate, a game only made so people wouldn't have to be laid off, was the most closest to actual Castlevania the Lords series offered, and even then that was a fucking awful imitation. But I guess this is what happens when the person in charge of the reboot isn't even a fan of the franchise; he didn't care about legacy, or keeping concepts that defined the series, but instead aimed to replace them, with often weaker replacements. One of the best things about a company like say, Nintendo, is that they get heritage, they get legacy, and if they revive a franchise, they make sure that they keep the meat of what it once was absolutely in tact. Or they could have done what Fromsoft did; originally, From and Sony were going to make a new King's Field for PS3, but they felt their ideas would have tampered on that heritage, what it meant to really be King's Field. Instead, they still used that inspiration and carved off a new game, a different title that took inspiration but never imposed degradation on its predecessors, Demon's Souls. It is a shame to see Castlevania absolutely and eagerly fail to do this. A generation of gamers will really, somehow believe that some nobody like Satan is the real villain of the franchise, that a Belmont, to the cues of Deviantart-tier writing is Dracula, and this honestly bothers me. But I guess on the bright side is that Igarashi may be the one to keep the spirit of the series alive, even if the brand it was birthed under doesn't care for it anymore.
I guess for me it's a reminder that a brand means fuck all if what made it worthwhile has been obliterated, and that it is key to follow where the people go who make the things worth your attention. I assume this is what Mega Man fans felt a year or so ago.