2011-05-13, 07:07 | Link #983 |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
obviously red can apply to future and past games or only to past games on ryuukishi's whim.
For example the red about "nobody could mistake Kinzo by sight" was still valid in EP5 even if it was said in EP4. However this particular red about Kinzo being already dead apparently follows different rules.
__________________
|
2011-05-13, 11:06 | Link #985 |
Golden Witch
|
I think that some red's can apply to future games, but some can't.
Kinzo is dead at the start time for all games doesn't account for a different gamemaster or someone with a different set of rules. Nobody would mistake Kinzo by sight does account for different gamemasters and different rules, since it's basically a law to the way the game plays out. That's what I think of it, anyway. I don't know if that's really how it works or not.
__________________
|
2011-05-13, 11:42 | Link #987 | |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
The point is more that a statement with a definitive truth value doesn't actually say anything substantive about the context in which it applies. Even Kinzo is dead doesn't actually apply to anything without a qualifier like "in this game." And even then the qualifier is capable of being questioned. I wouldn't harp on this, but Ryukishi did, so it's fair game I guess.
__________________
|
|
2011-05-13, 11:48 | Link #988 |
Living Logic Error
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In the mind of a witch...
|
I just discovered this bit of 'translated dialogue' (which is obviously NOT the real translation to the bits of text) while re-editing the script of EP8, after cheating my way to 18 medals.
Of course, this was discovered in Witch Hunts patch. I don't own anything. Do not read if you do not intend to laugh for the next hour. Spoiler for Easter Egg:
If any of the Witch Hunters has a problem with me putting up the Easter Egg dialogue then I'll delete this post, of course. But as most of the fellow users won't ever see this piece of awesomeness, I thought I'd share it with the forum.
__________________
|
2011-05-13, 13:49 | Link #990 |
The True Culprit
|
What I meant about the reds predicting the future is that things are subject to change even if they were true at the time. An author can say that a character is dead in all the games they wrote or will wrote, but it does nothing to prevent Bernkastel or Battler altering the premise in order to express a different point or objective than what Beatrice had been going for. Note that EP6 was considered the 'final game' by all characters involved.
__________________
|
2011-05-13, 13:58 | Link #991 |
阿賀野型3番艦、矢矧 Lv180
Graphic Designer
Moderator Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Belgium, Brussels
Age: 37
|
I'm personally not too sure why we should take Bern's game as part of Beatrice's premises.
Her game itself is basically a digest "literal game" instead of a gameboard whatsoever, not even close to the "odd" ones with Erika etc.
__________________
|
2011-05-13, 19:46 | Link #992 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
|
Quote:
Perhaps EP8, with Battler presenting the story as such doesn't really qualify as an Umineko game the same way that Beatrice's games do. You can even see how Ange reacted to it calling it fake. I thought it was more about how Battler wanted to show Ange a side to her family more than coming up with a legitimate and accurate 'game' anyways. And anyways, Ryukishi mentioned the mystery part of Umineko was finished as of EP7, so EP8 is more of a story instead, I'd think. EDIT: Oops... that's what I get for sneaking in posts at work... AuraTwilight said it just as clearly... 8) |
|
2011-05-14, 09:42 | Link #993 | |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2011-05-16, 12:20 | Link #997 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
|
Another question I used the Battler/Kyrie/Rudolf answer to get the story to progress as I had been spoiled and I see how it fits with the rules, but why aren't other solutions acceptable, besides Erica's solution, everyone being a culprit and purple not meaning anything would also work, or any combination of 2 families would also work.
Plus I'm confused about the part of the first twilight culprit killing 6 people...... obviously rudolf/kyrie did not kill 6 people in the first twilight so should it be taking as the one who did the killings in the first twilight went to kill at least 6 people during the whole game? |
2011-05-16, 13:26 | Link #998 |
Artist
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Yesterday!
|
For your first question, I believe Ryuukishi was paralleling arc 6's cheese question.
The answer written on the back of the question card was "3". Battler and Erika reached "1". Kyrie/Rudolph/Battler is the answer "written on the back of the question card". Everyone cannot be a culprit, because culprits cannot die yet have to commit murder to be considered culprit. There's other possibilities that works tho, including Yasu. For your other question, it's supposed to be "Rosa/Genji/Hideyoshi/Eva" of the FT + "Krauss/Natsuhi" that makes up six victims. |
2011-05-16, 14:05 | Link #999 | |
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2011-05-16, 15:07 | Link #1000 |
Senior Member
|
Exactly how many questions did Claire ask at the end of E7, and how many puzzles were there in E8?
Some of the puzzles (Rudolf's, Kyrie's) were straight logic puzzles. Some (Kinzo's, Eva's) are open trick questions: they focus on the part that's difficult. Some (Rosa's, Maria's) are hidden trick questions: they try to get you to answer a question that isn't the one being asked.
__________________
|
|
|