[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Higurashi-Z]

Originally Posted by Golden Bug-Hunter

Given that the full sentence of the Battler quote is 'Since I created this gameboard, I can decleare that The family was getting along fine' I think the context makes it pretty obvious that this is a game-board specific red.

I still don't know... If we follow battler's explanation this would be valid for all the games and prime as it is about the image of the characters, and I think that it's because of this that it was explained in this part. For example my parents get along well but it's normal for than( as it's for most humans) to discuss about money. If someone else saw them it wouldn't be strange for them to say that they don't get along, but it isn't exactly like that. In my opinion what battler is saying is that it was the circumstancies that made then act like that. I remember George talking about that in the games when Jessica and Battler were saying that the siblings were acting like that, only thinking about money, and he said that it was natural for them because they were just trying to protect their family as they were with financial problems.

I think that this is one of the points that Battler is trying to make for ange in episode 8. Their family fight a lot of times and they had their own problems but they weren't exactly like that all the time.

My Rosatrice variant is trying to follow the later episodes as closely as possible, and I can't see any way of doing that without multiple personas. In any case, I think it's easier to accept for Rosa considering that Maria seems to directly treat her as having multiple personalities.

Ah right, I forgot that your theory is different from the KNM's . Anyway I think that if any rosatrice follower accept this answer they, at least, can't refute shkanontrice answer using multiple identities.

[Renall]

The family could be getting along fine and still have money problems, or be hiding a murderer in their midst. Or, you know, he's right and it was an accident.

That entire section of the manga is a bit tricky though because it seems like Battler's giving a little too much weight to certain things that contradict the VN to some extent. For example, saying the number of people on the island is something that is always true seems to contradict Lambdadelta's statements about Erika in ep5 and Erika's statements about herself in ep6. Now obviously one can argue an interpretation here that "Erika wasn't supposed to exist on the island anyway," but she's permitted to be there on the boards of ep5 and ep6, and that red can modify this "always true" statement in some circumstances and allow Erika to say things like "I'm the visitor, the 18th person on Rokkenjima" in red.

[GreyZone]

Originally Posted by Renall

[...]For example, saying the number of people on the island is something that is always true seems to contradict Lambdadelta's statements about Erika in ep5 and Erika's statements about herself in ep6. Now obviously one can argue an interpretation here that "Erika wasn't supposed to exist on the island anyway," but she's permitted to be there on the boards of ep5 and ep6, and that red can modify this "always true" statement in some circumstances and allow Erika to say things like "I'm the visitor, the 18th person on Rokkenjima" in red.

"The truth of the present/future overwrites the truth of the past" is a possible explanation for that.

[haguruma]

Originally Posted by Higurashi-Z

I still don't know... If we follow battler's explanation this would be valid for all the games and prime as it is about the image of the characters, and I think that it's because of this that it was explained in this part.

Actually it is made quite clear that we are not supposed to know whether it is the one or the other Red in what Battler continues to explain to us:

But Ange,
whatever of those meanings my Red holds,
the current you wouldn't accept either of them, would you?!
People, they
want to believe in nothing else than what they want to believe in.
For example, if the Red just thrust the truth at you,
in case it is unapprovable you'd deny it, if it is untollerable you might lose sight of yourself,
(Background: You are not Ushiromiya Asumu's son.)
If it is an undesirable truth you might even refuse to see it at all.
If you yourself are not fully prepared to accept it,
no matter how many hundreds of truths I pass on to you, Ange, it wouldn't ever sum up to truth to you, Ange.
It would loose all meaning.
The meaning of these tears,
Ange,
you have to think about and find their meaning yourself.
And then somehow, with unclouded eyes,
I'd wish for you to ascertain your very own truth.

Spoiler for Japanese original:

でも縁寿
俺の赤がどちらの意味でも
今のお前はそれを受け入れはしないだろう
人は
自分の信じたいものしか信じない
たとえ赤が真実を突きつけられても
認め難ければ拒否し耐え難ければ自分を見失ってしまう
（背景；そなたは右代宮明日夢の息子ではない）
望まない真実ならば見ようともしないだろう
縁寿自身に受け入れる心構えがなければ
幾百の真実を伝えようとも縁寿にはどれも真実たりえない
何の意味もないのだ
その涙の意味を
縁寿
お前は自分で考え気付かなくちゃならない
そしてどうか曇りなき瞳で
お前自身の真実を見極めてくれ

EDIT:

Originally Posted by Renall

That entire section of the manga is a bit tricky though because it seems like Battler's giving a little too much weight to certain things that contradict the VN to some extent. For example, saying the number of people on the island is something that is always true seems to contradict Lambdadelta's statements about Erika in ep5 and Erika's statements about herself in ep6.

It doesn't necessarily contradict it, but it is wordplay again, though wordplay that was picked on by several people right at the point when it was said already.
There are theories that Erika was washed ashore on Rokkenjima during that fateful night, so including her is valid and she would increase the counter by one person.
The number of people thing is something that was always phrased in a very obscure manner. "There is no more than...", "No Xth person exists", "Even if we included you, there'd be...".
And even Erika's claim of being the 18th person is more of a title claim. She is the 18th human on Rokkenjima within the cast of people we can choose from, so much is true, but if she were there, there'd still be only 17 people running around.

[Higurashi-Z]

Originally Posted by Renall

The family could be getting along fine and still have money problems, or be hiding a murderer in their midst. Or, you know, he's right and it was an accident.

That entire section of the manga is a bit tricky though because it seems like Battler's giving a little too much weight to certain things that contradict the VN to some extent. For example, saying the number of people on the island is something that is always true seems to contradict Lambdadelta's statements about Erika in ep5 and Erika's statements about herself in ep6. Now obviously one can argue an interpretation here that "Erika wasn't supposed to exist on the island anyway," but she's permitted to be there on the boards of ep5 and ep6, and that red can modify this "always true" statement in some circumstances and allow Erika to say things like "I'm the visitor, the 18th person on Rokkenjima" in red.

Or maybe is not that the number of people on the island need to be always the same but it's impossible to say in red something like: "there's 17 people on rokkenjima" because it go against the right number on other games. It's because of this that every time that erika counted on the numbers of people on the island they always say something on the line as "even if we count you" so it doesn't make a contradiction with other gameboards.

[jTiKey]

Renall, do you know what 2 kinds mean?
I don't undestand how you can misinterpret "There are 2 kind of Red Truth" Two is 2! 1+1!
Not 3, not a,b,c, not 4 or 1, but 2!

I have nothing to discuss about this. Cleary there are 2, one Battler specifies as Death, Scenes and Alibies. The other are general for all game boards.

No more story to tell here.

Umineko cannot be Van Dine compliant

My argument is that the red Dine does work for the reasons above.

how you can explain the ep 8 manga's confirmation of ShKanon,

shkanon is considered as a trap by the author by that theory.

described as revealing Beatrice's heart

Revealing her heard is "revieling the truth" about the tragedy.

To explane what was that move that Bern and Lambda talk about is I need to explane Erikd and games 5 and 6.

Erika doesn't exist on Prime. She is just a "rule" the Game Master and player agreed to add. It's like playing ordinary chess, but adding a rule.

Erika "lived" on Rokkenjima only because of that agreement. There were 18 people on the game board because of the special rule.

The thing, LambdaBern were talking, was killing\erasing from the gameboard, destroying it compitely, denaying that "special rule", by telling the Truth of Rokkenjima Prime where it Erika doesn't exist.

Kanon does not exist in the guest room

He was killed by crazy Erika, like the magic scene showed OR he may destroyed the wall and escaped, since it was told that is was thin.

"Even if you do join us- there are 17 people."

Erika's red truth is aplying only to EP5-6, but Battler's to Rokkenjima Prime.
General truth > local truth.

No, that is untrue.

Actually Leon's genger in confirmed in EP5.
Yasu isn't everywhere.

The family was getting along fine

The crime wasn't done for hating the entire family.
And as a group of people together they got along fine. By they may have individual issues with ech other in particular .

Still, jTiKey I would like to know if you agree with Leafsnail answer.

Nah, Rosa has attacks of angriness, but the uses the Beatrice roleplay consciously. I already explaned the "keep promises".

Meta Beatrice isn't Rosa. Meta Beatrice is a illusion\a witch. Rosa doesn't marry Battler at any point or kills Virgilia.

Dlanor outright says this in the bit I posted on the last page.

Yet she uses Knox with all her force on Beato's game board. =D

and are you really ignoring the fact that Battler solved the riddles ONLY thanks to Knox?

[Renall]

Originally Posted by jTiKey

Renall, do you know what 2 kinds mean?
I don't undestand how you can misinterpret "There are 2 kind of Red Truth" Two is 2! 1+1!
Not 3, not a,b,c, not 4 or 1, but 2!

I have nothing to discuss about this. Cleary there are 2, one Battler specifies as Death, Scenes and Alibies. The other are general for all game boards.

No more story to tell here.

You... really don't understand what's being said there.

"There are two categories of red truth" is not the same thing as enumerating and categorizing all kinds of red truth that exist. Battler never says that. He does indeed say "there are two kinds of red truth." He does not, however, say what you seem to think that he says. He is quite literally and explicitly saying "some things are true locally (such as this, this, and that), and some things are true generally (such as this and that)." The things he lists and categorizes are not an exhaustive list of all things that could fit into one category or another.

His statement leaves a number of things undefined, and all that the statement itself tells us is that those undefined statements are one of the two. But we can't simply say we know which; at best, we can theorize. You are theorizing that Knox is generally applicable, but people have provided considerable contextual evidence to suggest that either it isn't, or it is and Beatrice's game follows it anyway. These positions are more credible than yours, because they're backed by evidence, but regardless of the positions what Battler says on that page can only be read a certain way.

I'm sorry that you're mistaken, but you're not handling this gracefully and I'm not about to equivocate on something that isn't actually an interpretation.

[GoldenLand]

Originally Posted by jTiKey

Revealing her heard is "revieling the truth" about the tragedy.

To explane what was that move that Bern and Lambda talk about is I need to explane Erikd and games 5 and 6.

Erika doesn't exist on Prime. She is just a "rule" the Game Master and player agreed to add. It's like playing ordinary chess, but adding a rule.

Erika "lived" on Rokkenjima only because of that agreement. There were 18 people on the game board because of the special rule.

The thing, LambdaBern were talking, was killing\erasing from the gameboard, destroying it compitely, denaying that "special rule", by telling the Truth of Rokkenjima Prime where it Erika doesn't exist.

Kanon does not exist in the guest room

He was killed by crazy Erika, like the magic scene showed

Okay, but even if I accept your ideas there that doesn't really help. In what way does that reveal Beatrice's heart, even using your explanation of it meaning to reveal the truth about the tragedy? How does "Erika existed because of an extra rule added by the game master" = revealing Beatrice's heart/revealing the truth about the tragedy + revealing the greatest riddle of Umineko which is the same as finally killing Beatrice, and why can it never be used again?

Speaking of the "I am the visitor, the 18th human on Rokkenjima!!" and "Even if you do join us- There are 17 people." reds - the wording of that latter red means that even if Erika is counted among the people on the island, there are still only 17 people. Not 18.

[haguruma]

Originally Posted by jTiKey

I have nothing to discuss about this. Cleary there are 2, one Battler specifies as Death, Scenes and Alibies. The other are general for all game boards.

No more story to tell here.

I suppose you do not know Japanese, so I might just tell you.
The screenshot of the page shown earlier shows that he says:
死亡状況や現場状況アリバイなど、それぞれのゲーム盤でのみ通用する赤
もう一つは人物像や在島人数など、どのゲーム盤にも共通し並立する赤
これは猫箱の外にも通用する疑いようのない事実でもある

The highlighted part is grammar used for incomplete descriptions, which means that "circumstances and state of death, state of crimescenes, or alibis among others" are Red that is limited to one board.
So still, Knox and Van Dine could be both of them, but considering that EP5 gave us incentive to believe that Ryukishi knows about unorthodox mystery, anti-mystery, etc. (you know, actually existing mystery genres), it is very likely to believe that they are board specific.

Kanon does not exist in the guest room

He was killed by crazy Erika, like the magic scene showed OR he may destroyed the wall and escaped, since it was told that is was thin.

It is forbidden for the detective to be the culprit.
And for the room it was said, "No routes for escape, except this door, exist!"
Also, this would break the definition of a locked room that Beatrice gave us in EP3, or might even count under hidden and not formerly announced hidden passage.

[jTiKey]

Originally Posted by GoldenLand

Okay, but even if I accept your ideas there that doesn't really help. In what way does that reveal Beatrice's heart, even using your explanation of it meaning to reveal the truth about the tragedy? How does "Erika existed because of an extra rule added by the game master" = revealing Beatrice's heart/revealing the truth about the tragedy + revealing the greatest riddle of Umineko which is the same as finally killing Beatrice, and why can it never be used again?

Speaking of the "I am the visitor, the 18th human on Rokkenjima!!" and "Even if you do join us- There are 17 people." reds - the wording of that latter red means that even if Erika is counted among the people on the island, there are still only 17 people. Not 18.

Erm... LambaBern talked about a posibility. I gave you one. Beato is already dead anyway.
Reveling the truth would just kill all the gameboard in general. Deny Erika = deny game 6 = destroy the closed room.

As I wrote. General red truth > local red truth.
Erika is the 18th person on game 5 and 6.
She asked to be on Rokkenjima Prime.
But even if she would join them, she is still 0, since she doesn't exist there.
17+0=17

EP5 and 6 made Erika's 0 a 1, that's why 17+1=18(special rule), but 17+0=17(general)

Also:

Spoiler for image:

[Higurashi-Z]

Renall, do you know what 2 kinds mean?
I don't undestand how you can misinterpret "There are 2 kind of Red Truth" Two is 2! 1+1!
Not 3, not a,b,c, not 4 or 1, but 2!

I have nothing to discuss about this. Cleary there are 2, one Battler specifies as Death, Scenes and Alibies. The other are general for all game boards.

No more story to tell here.

I still don't know how you get to this but I can ascertain you that in the japanese there isn't any kind of multiple interpretation as you are saying.

Actually Leon's genger in confirmed in EP5.
Yasu isn't everywhere.

I'm against this idea that its confirmed that Yasu is male. I believe that he is male but if it was something so easy as this it woudn't make much sense for Will( who should THE detective of the story) to don't be sure and say that it is the great mystery of all the story.

The crime wasn't done for hating the entire family.
And as a group of people together they got along fine. By they may have individual issues with ech other in particular .

No it isn't like that. If I get along with my parents but don't get along with my siblings would be allright for me to say that I get along with my family?

Nah, Rosa has attacks of angriness, but the uses the Beatrice roleplay consciously. I already explaned the "keep promises".

Meta Beatrice isn't Rosa. Meta Beatrice is a illusion\a witch. Rosa doesn't marry Battler at any point or kills Virgilia.

Sorry, but you didn't explained. The only thing that you said is that you don't remember any promisse that Rosa broke, and I already answered that. If you answered I'm sorry but can you answer again but more clear?

[jTiKey]

I suppose you do not know Japanese, so I might just tell you.

Translation is thing, that gains context thanks by the translator. I no japanese speaker, so I can't agree or desagree here.

It is forbidden for the detective to be the culprit.

So you do remember the highlight plottwist regarding "detetives authourity" in EP6?

And for the room it was said, "No routes for escape, except this door, exist!"

So I'll stick with dead Kanon.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by jTiKey

So you do remember the highlight plottwist regarding "detetives authourity" in EP6?

Question: If ep6 has no detective, how can it be Van Dine compliant? Two of his rules are "there must be a detective" and "a detective isn't a detective unless he detects." Even if you argue someone other than Erika is ep6's detective, they don't investigate.

Obviously not an issue if ep6 isn't supposed to be Van Dine compliant, but you seem to be of the opinion that it, and everything, is.

[jTiKey]

If I get along with my parents but don't get along with my siblings would be allright for me to say that I get along with my family?

As it seems for Ryu in his mystery novel - yes.

If you answered I'm sorry but can you answer again but more clear?

Meta Beatrice isn't Rosa.

Aka, it's not Rosa who said the "I keep my promises".

[GoldenLand]

Originally Posted by haguruma

It is forbidden for the detective to be the culprit.
And for the room it was said, "No routes for escape, except this door, exist!"
Also, this would break the definition of a locked room that Beatrice gave us in EP3, or might even count under hidden and not formerly announced hidden passage.

Ah, of course. And there's also the other red... Of course. Three people--in other words, three bodies--went in or out. Only you and Kanon entered, and only Battler left.

So, Kanon never left the room. However, Kanon does not exist in the guest room.

Originally Posted by jTiKey

So I'll stick with dead Kanon.

Where did Kanon go? Kanon did not leave the guest room, yet Kanon does not exist in the guest room.

Originally Posted by jTiKey

Erm... LambaBern talked about a posibility. I gave you one. Beato is already dead anyway.

Sorry, but I have to press you on this issue, because you haven't answered the question at all. That scene is stated to be something which reveals Beatrice's heart, and reveals the biggest mystery of the gameboards, which is the same thing as killing Beatrice. It has to be something major. Something vital, which would reveal Rosa's heart and her biggest riddle.

Erika not really existing because she was only there due to a special rule does not even begin to be important enough. Is Erika a part of Rosa's heart, her biggest riddle, and is revealing her to not to have existed on Prime the same thing as killing Rosa? That seems to be what you're saying, but it doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

If Rosatrice theory is to be defended at all, it must be able to account for why the solution to that locked room was so vitally important. Surely, if you believe that Rosatrice is correct, you have no need to shy away from answering that question.

[Higurashi-Z]

Originally Posted by jTiKey

As it seems for Ryu in his mystery novel - yes.




Aka, it's not Rosa who said the "I keep my promises".

. Sorry i'm not following... If it was not Rosa/Beatrice who said that? About who this red is referred?

[jTiKey]

Originally Posted by Renall

Question: If ep6 has no detective, how can it be Van Dine compliant? Two of his rules are "there must be a detective" and "a detective isn't a detective unless he detects." Even if you argue someone other than Erika is ep6's detective, they don't investigate.

Obviously not an issue if ep6 isn't supposed to be Van Dine compliant, but you seem to be of the opinion that it, and everything, is.

EP6 isn't even a mystery story, it's a prank the family did on Erika. There is no culprin we must find. We only have a crazy killer name Erika.

Know what? Every magic scene isn't a mystery story either! It doesn't imply nor Knox nor Dine! EP7 and 8 aren't mystery stories too!

The mystery side of umineko, aka board games do imply Knox and Dine. If you don't like them all, then just accept the red ones.

Originally Posted by Higurashi-Z

. Sorry i'm not following... If it was not Rosa/Beatrice who said that? About who this red is referred?

Read my answer closely and maybe few times. If you don't get it, I'm sorry. I can't explane it more easy.

Where did Kanon go? Kanon did not leave the guest room, yet Kanon does not exist in the guest room.

He is dead. He doesn't exist anymore.

Remember game 5 and the "Kinzo doesn't exist" thus his corsple was on the islant? Why should Kanon's corsple be counted as "Kanon exists"?

That scene is stated to be something which reveals Beatrice's heart, and reveals the biggest mystery of the gameboards, which is the same thing as killing Beatrice. It has to be something major. Something vital, which would reveal Rosa's heart and her biggest riddle.

It were just 2 sentences between witches. Why are you making it a big problem?
The truth of Rokkenjima Prime does delete Erika's existence there, just like Kinzo's in every game.

Actully you may intepret as you wish. It doesn't contradict any red anyhow. If you wan't to corner me, do it with Red Truth, but not stuff that everybody can interpret anyhow.

As a detective, I don't even need to interpret the magic scene of 2 witches talking. They don't exist in the first place anyway.

[Higurashi-Z]

Originally Posted by jTiKey

EP6 isn't even a mystery story, it's a prank the family did on Erika. There is no culprin we must find. We only have a crazy killer name Erika.

Know what? Every magic scene isn't a myster story either! It doesn't imply nor Knox nor Dine! EP7 and 8 aren't mystery stories to!

The mystery side of umineko, aka board games do imply Knox and Dine. If you don't like them all, then just accept the red ones.



Read my answer closely and maybe few times. If you don't get it, I'm sorry. I can't explane it more easy.

I don't remember the number but there is a van dine's rule that say that you can't have a crime without a body. Wouldn't you say that if you have a body there's a crime? Because in episode 6 we have a lot of corpses... Killed by Erika herself. Still there's no detective

[GoldenLand]

Originally Posted by jTiKey

He is dead. He doesn't exist anymore.

Remember game 5 and the "Kinzo doesn't exist" thus his corsple was on the islant? Why should Kanon's corsple be counted as "Kanon exists"?

Because of the following quote:

[Confirming definition. Can I accept 'three people' to mean to the number of bodies? You're saying that three bodies went in or out of the room, right?]
Of course. Three people--in other words, three bodies--went in or out.

Erika asked for confirmation about the meaning of the word people. That means that in that part of the story, "people" are defined as bodies. Which means that not even Kanon's dead body exists in the guest room...yet he never left the guest room.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by jTiKey

EP6 isn't even a mystery story, it's a prank the family did on Erika. There is no culprin we must find. We only have a crazy killer name Erika.

Know what? Every magic scene isn't a mystery story either! It doesn't imply nor Knox nor Dine! EP7 and 8 aren't mystery stories too!

The mystery side of umineko, aka board games do imply Knox and Dine. If you don't like them all, then just accept the red ones.

First, Bernkastel certainly seems to think there's a mystery in ep7, considering she asks Will to solve it.

Second, please provide textual evidence from the VN or an adaptation thereof which states, explicitly, that Knox and Van Dine are applicable to any part of Beatrice's games (that is, episodes 1-4). Please also explain away things like "No Knox, No Dine, No Fair" and the ep5 conversation in which Virgilia admits that neither she nor anyone else can tell Battler with any certainty that Beatrice's game is Knox-compliant.

Because they said that. In the actual script. Which I posted. I'm curious how you go from "there is no way to know if her game follows Knox" to "we can assume that her game follows Knox, and therefore reject any solution that doesn't follow it." Because to me that sounds like disingenuous cherry-picking of the parts of the script you want to be there but aren't versus the parts of the script that actually exist and say exactly the opposite.