[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Used Can]

Originally Posted by chounokoe

But I think that's a thing of perspective and by now I believe that only a part of the Umineko fanbase will actually like the ending. Either the mystery fans are dissappointed because the expected result changed or the character fans are dissappointed because their beloved characters don't get a happy ending.

To be honest, this is what's been rubbing me the wrong way. If the motive will be something like: "They've had painful lives so they put all this people in this situation, because they were desperate and shit, please pity them," then I guess I'll end up with a bad after-taste. I don't know, I'm not the type of person who can take pity on things like these. For me, these sort of motives are extremely selfish and I simply cannot sympathise with people like this, not one bit.

[Renall]

I'm fine with a bittersweet ending as long as at least a few of the right people get what's coming to them.

[Used Can]

Originally Posted by Renall

I'm fine with a bittersweet ending as long as at least a few of the right people get what's coming to them.

But then how does that work with Battler's "there's no bad people" "this isn't a sad/painful story"? Sure, he didn't say it would be a happy one, but if there's a culprit (this being a person from the family or close to them) and victims, then I don't see how can you call this non-sad/non-painful.

I don't know, I cannot shake the impression that this can either be a pleasant surprise, or condensed bullshit.

My main issue here is Yasu's motivation. According to Will and Claire, what pushed Yasu to do all of this took place sometime after (s)he solved the Epitaph and the 1986 conference. However, according to them, this is something that has already been shown "countless times". If the whole thing comes down to his/her feelings toward Battler, Jessica and George, then I cannot help but to think Yasu is some sick, selfish individual I cannot sympathise with, no matter how much love I may try to put into this, yet R07 has been portraying Beatrice, so far, as some sort of tragic heroine. Maybe, I've missed the details where she's portrayed as such... I don't know.

[cmos]

Bern didn't just faked those documents for her theory to work. Those documents are the conclusions from reasoning, from all the facts they gathered during the tale. It's the established "truth" of that tale. They aren't premise for her truth, so she didn't "faked" them.



As for the ending, by Battler's views Beatrice isn't a bad person - he apologized to her. And we know that she was going to kill the people and blow up the island. We also know her motives. Are they good enough? Many people certainly don't think so. Only her miserable fail saved her from becoming the murderer. She's still the trigger for another murderer though.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by cmos

Bern didn't just faked those documents for her theory to work. Those documents are the conclusions from reasoning, from all the facts they gathered during the tale. It's the established "truth" of that tale. They aren't premise for her truth, so she didn't "faked" them.

Conclusions from her bad reasoning taken from Ryukishi's fanbase that has no love for the characters in the story. It's not "a truth" she came up with from reasoning that game. There is nothing in episode 5 that vindicates Natsuhi. These documents were about the facts she manipulated in that game to attempt to vindicate this one character and end it in a way that entertained her. They're full of outright lies and tricks.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Used Can

But then how does that work with Battler's "there's no bad people" "this isn't a sad/painful story"? Sure, he didn't say it would be a happy one, but if there's a culprit (this being a person from the family or close to them) and victims, then I don't see how can you call this non-sad/non-painful.

I don't know, I cannot shake the impression that this can either be a pleasant surprise, or condensed bullshit.

When I said "the right people" I mostly meant in the meta-world. If you know what I'm saying.

My main issue here is Yasu's motivation. According to Will and Claire, what pushed Yasu to do all of this took place sometime after (s)he solved the Epitaph and the 1986 conference. However, according to them, this is something that has already been shown "countless times". If the whole thing comes down to his/her feelings toward Battler, Jessica and George, then I cannot help but to think Yasu is some sick, selfish individual I cannot sympathise with, no matter how much love I may try to put into this, yet R07 has been portraying Beatrice, so far, as some sort of tragic heroine. Maybe, I've missed the details where she's portrayed as such... I don't know.

I didn't really see a lot to suggest to me that Yasu was even a plausible culprit other than the claim that "Yeah, I am." I mean, scapegoating herself was something Beatrice was willing to do all along, so I don't see why a person claiming to be Beatrice wouldn't do the same.

Plus, the Tea Party pretty much denies outright the possibility of Yasu even being a culprit, because it isn't culpably her fault any of that goes down.

If she wanted to convince us that she's the culprit, she didn't do a very good job of it. She's not very sympathetic if she is the culprit and this is her motivation, but it felt like at least one of those claims probably isn't true.

[Used Can]

Originally Posted by Renall

When I said "the right people" I mostly meant in the meta-world. If you know what I'm saying.I didn't really see a lot to suggest to me that Yasu was even a plausible culprit other than the claim that "Yeah, I am." I mean, scapegoating herself was something Beatrice was willing to do all along, so I don't see why a person claiming to be Beatrice wouldn't do the same.

Well, according to Will, she is. Though, he seemed pretty understanding of her.

Originally Posted by Renall

Plus, the Tea Party pretty much denies outright the possibility of Yasu even being a culprit, because it isn't culpably her fault any of that goes down.

Actually, it does. Even if she didn't kill anyone, she's the reason why all these murders began. She's the one who set up the situation for everyone to kill each other.

[erneiz_hyde]

Originally Posted by chounokoe

But I think that's a thing of perspective and by now I believe that only a part of the Umineko fanbase will actually like the ending. Either the mystery fans are dissappointed because the expected result changed or the character fans are dissappointed because their beloved characters don't get a happy ending.

I agree. The way I look at it, I think most will not like how this series is going to end (but hey, isn't Ryuukishi's work like that?). Very little reason can even justify the magnitude of crime happening on Rokkenjima, and none of those reason can stand without the reader's love (I mean, the culprit appearing to be a completely psychotic, lunatic, and on top of that crazy genius, very little reason remain to sympathize with the culprit). I think the mystery fans will particularly get the most damage from the ending.

[cmos]

I'm fine with any ending as long as Ryu doesn't "revive" too many people. Actually, if only Battler, who hasn't been shown killed in Tea Party, survived, that would be enough for a bittersweet ending, in my opinion. Ange gets her onii-chan and some "truth" to settle her mind, we get our bittersweetness. All other fans cry. When they cry.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Used Can

Actually, it does. Even if she didn't kill anyone, she's the reason why all these murders began. She's the one who set up the situation for everyone to kill each other.

By that logic, it's Genji responsible for saving Yasu, then Natsuhi responsible for rejecting Yasu, then Kinzo for blah blah blah all the way up the chain of causality. You can't really call her culpable for existing in the circumstances she had, and besides, she basically offered everyone a happy resolution before the adults screwed it up. How does that make her responsible?

Bluntly, "Beatrice" didn't kill a single person in the Tea Party, nor did she ever do anything that actually suggested she was going to (she claimed she was going to, but a claim is not proof of actual intent in the face of the contrary evidence). And if we go so far as to suggest this is somehow approaching the "truth," it means she only ever did kill anyone in fiction.

[musouka]

Originally Posted by Renall

Her goal is "to relieve her own boredom" and her method is "whatever will do that."

Not quite. This is Bern's stated motive:

Spoiler for picture:

Originally Posted by Renall

Little-Ange basically summarizes what just happened

No, she doesn't. She summarizes nothing of what just happened that we saw, and if you had read it, you would know this already. She tells her brother that kids in her class were picking on her because the television said that her mother had connections to "bad people", and therefore her father and mother were the culprits that killed everyone.

Does accurately sum up the Tea Party and what happened to Will and Lyon? There is never a single point where Battler seems to be aware at all with what Bern is doing with the copy of Beato's board, any more than someone that owns the original chess board could possibly know what kind of game someone is playing in the privacy of their own home.

(Furthermore, if Battler had been watching all this from "somewhere", you would think he wouldn't have to ask why she's so sad.)

Really, Renall, I'm beginning to think this is pointless if you haven't played the game yet.

[Renall]

Then why is he offering her that story? "Oh here's something completely unrelated to what you actually meant, yeah you'll like this one."

There is a clear continuity there, given the last instance in which we saw both of those characters. The meeting and what preceded it isn't a coincidence. I will agree that there is no indication Battler is watching, but I don't think this scenario is just set up to be cute.

Think about narrative continuity for a bit and it starts to add up. Battler's behavior is an essential element of that, and it doesn't reflect that he's just been sitting there on the sidelines of the entire episode metaphorically covering his ears. Whether he saw those actual events or not, he's supposedly gotten himself enlightened to the point that he'd probably grasp the nature of events previously.

Unless you're saying that back in Ange's actual youth this scene occurred?

[chounokoe]

Originally Posted by Judoh

Conclusions from her bad reasoning taken from Ryukishi's fanbase that has no love for the characters in the story. It's not "a truth" she came up with from reasoning that game. There is nothing in episode 5 that vindicates Natsuhi. These documents were about the facts she manipulated in that game to attempt to vindicate this one character and end it in a way that entertained her. They're full of outright lies and tricks.

Oh so now EP5 is manipulated by Bern too?! What next? All of Umineko is just a giant Bernkastel troll and EP8 will just be one long hahaha.wav with a crazy Bernkastel face?
Those documents were court documents, they were documents of a string of reasoning that was in itself and for that game consistent. Bern actually had to forge nothing in that game to make it possible for Natsuhi to be the culprit. It was the same if someone had stopped EP1 after discovery of the 2nd twilight.
Her whole behaviour made her the most suspicious person during those events. She kept insisting to have met Kinzo, what made her the last to see him alive during Episode 1 and before his dissappearance in Episode 5. She was practically vanished for longer periods of time and she insisted on not telling anybody what she was doing during that time.

The tragedy was that Bernkastel and Lambdadelta did not have to 'fake' anything in the first place, because Natsuhi was making herself suspicious very well on her own. It's the same with Rosa in Episode 2 or Eva in Episode 3 (if they're not accomplices).
It's not about fantheories or missing love for the characters. Okay, yes, it is about love. But failing to show compassion for the suspects does not make your reasoning an immediate lie ... therefore any George-culprit theory would have to be stopped because of that, too, because it fails to show love for George.

It's like it was said and like I already quoted once. There are things that you can't see without love, but also things that you fail to see because of love. And many people are trying to hard to find the 'ultra happy ending' solution...it's just as wrong as Bernkastel's viewpoint that everybody is a selfcentered monster.

[musouka]

Originally Posted by Renall

Then why is he offering her that story? "Oh here's something completely unrelated to what you actually meant, yeah you'll like this one."

Because she asks him to confirm that their parents weren't evil monsters.

The truth is that Kyrie probably does have bad connections. Those connections could plausibly give a motive as to why she would kill everyone on the island. But none of those things have to mean that Kyrie is "evil."

So you can tell nothing but the truth, and still spin it negatively to hurt someone. Or you can tell the truth and try to help people understand and cope with it. This doesn't change the truth itself, only in how it's used.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by chounokoe

Oh so now EP5 is manipulated by Bern too?! What next? All of Umineko is just a giant Bernkastel troll and EP8 will just be one long hahaha.wav with a crazy Bernkastel face?

I think there's a not-insignificant quantity of people who would actually (1) want to see this and (2) would be expecting it.

And a number of people who might want to see her get away with it, too.

EDIT: Actually, what the hell has Lambda been up to this whole time? She was barely in ep7 either. I know she wasn't exactly invited, but she doesn't seem like the sort who cares about an invitation.

[Used Can]

Originally Posted by Renall

By that logic, it's Genji responsible for saving Yasu, then Natsuhi responsible for rejecting Yasu, then Kinzo for blah blah blah all the way up the chain of causality.

The difference is that Genji and Natsuhi didn't come up with a plan in which all of the people in the island could be killed. Yasu did. It's because of that plan, and the situation s(he) had created that things ended up the way they did in EP7's Tea Party - well, although, according to Bern, as long as there's an Epitaph and it is solved shit will happen, as we saw it in Lyon's world. But, either way, in her world, Yasu was the one to come up with this wicked plan.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by chounokoe

Oh so now EP5 is manipulated by Bern too?! What next? All of Umineko is just a giant Bernkastel troll and EP8 will just be one long hahaha.wav with a crazy Bernkastel face?
Those documents were court documents, they were documents of a string of reasoning that was in itself and for that game consistent. Bern actually had to forge nothing in that game to make it possible for Natsuhi to be the culprit.

*snip

I don't see what your problem is. Did you read the episode? Everything Bern theorized about Natsuhi in that episode was based off of speculations from the Japanese fanbase. Theories entirely without love and merit. Right down to the implication of her becoming pregnant with Jessica from an affair with Kinzo. I never said Bern faked anything. I said she has no love, and she'll accept and twist any truth and any theory as long as it doesn't involve magic, and it ends in a way that entertains her. That's the same reason she couldn't accept Battler's peaceful resolution in Episode 6.

I also never said I wanted a happy ending either.

Everything that happened in that episode implied that Lambda was doing Bern favors and the only redeeming quality for Lambda in episode 5 is the implication that she was planning to get Battler to switch sides and kick Bern's butt at the end. Each and every piece in play Erika, the Esierne Jungfrau, and the man from 19 years ago, are all pieces that serve Bern's agenda to prove her theory right just fine.

If you don't want to beleive that that's fine with me.

It's not about fantheories or missing love for the characters. Okay, yes, it is about love. But failing to show compassion for the suspects does not make your reasoning an immediate lie ... therefore any George-culprit theory would have to be stopped because of that, too, because it fails to show love for George.

It's about fantheories that have nothing backing them up as well as not having respect for the characters. Natsuhi was dead 3 out 4 episodes and there was no merit or hints for her to be an applicable culprit. Not even a decent implication of her being hateful toward anyone.

I'm a George Culprit theorist exactly because I don't hate his character. I see many ways I can relate with him and I have a lot of respect for the character as he's been presented. I have respect for the type of antagonist he'd become in this story if he was the culprit. I don't think he's been completely unhateful. However he has a lot of implications backing him, and I can see plenty of reason for him to be the mind behind a lot of things in this tale. Much less then I can see it for plenty of other characters.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Used Can

The difference is that Genji and Natsuhi didn't come up with a plan in which all of the people in the island could be killed. Yasu did. It's because of that plan, and the situation s(he) had created that things ended up the way they did in EP7's Tea Party - well, although, according to Bern, as long as there's an Epitaph and it is solved shit will happen, as we saw it in Lyon's world. But, either way, in her world, Yasu was the one to come up with this wicked plan.

A plan she didn't go through with, and if the "truth" were as suggested (right down to the alt-universe where Kyrie's still on a shooting spree), she never actually did.

I have a hard time finding a vague, barely-supported, motivationally-questionable "plan" that never comes to pass in a presentation of questionable merit to begin with as "wicked." If we're going to indict someone for what she claims herself to be capable of doing, there's a lot more guilt to go around. That's really my problem with it. She's acting like this is all her fault, and I can't accept that even if some of it is. It reads like the exact same "Yep, it's me, hate me instead and everything's fine" stuff from ep2 that Beatrice was offering Battler.

Even if we assume her entire plan was true, it had an escape clause, she was earnest and sincere when that clause was met, and it was only because someone else screwed things up that any tragedy befell people. By its very nature, that can't be placed fully on her shoulders.

[musouka]

Originally Posted by Used Can

The difference is that Genji and Natsuhi didn't come up with a plan in which all of the people in the island could be killed. Yasu did. It's because of that plan, and the situation s(he) had created that things ended up the way they did in EP7's Tea Party - well, although, according to Bern, as long as there's an Epitaph and it is solved shit will happen, as we saw it in Lyon's world. But, either way, in her world, Yasu was the one to come up with this wicked plan.

This, I agree with Renall with.

It has to say something that even in a Fragment where Yasu doesn't even exist, everyone still dies. That means that regardless of the actions of Beatrice, people die. To me, that says there is potentially a larger plan in motion, in which Yasu is only a cog, and in which Lyon will get swept up in, regardless of their own actions or how they lead their lives.

[Used Can]

Originally Posted by Renall

A plan she didn't go through with, and if the "truth" were as suggested (right down to the alt-universe where Kyrie's still on a shooting spree), she never actually did.

Even if we assume her entire plan was true, it had an escape clause, she was earnest and sincere when that clause was met, and it was only because someone else screwed things up that any tragedy befell people. By its very nature, that can't be placed fully on her shoulders.

The problem is, (s)he didn't go trough with it, because the Epitaph was solved. Claire said she had entrusted herself entirely to the roulette. So, had the people in the island failed to solve the Epitaph, then Yasu would have started the killings. If EPs 1-4 are of any indication, then (s)he actually does.

Of course, there's the possibility none of these killings were performed by Yasu, and that (s)he never really planned to harm anyone. All the threats were just there to scare the people and force them to solve the Epitaph. However, is there enough evidence to conclude the murders were actually carried out by someone else? Claire and Will said the answer to all of this lies somewhere after Yasu solved the Epitaph and the family conference of 1986. How much evidence do we have to find another culprit?

Originally Posted by Renall

I have a hard time finding a vague, barely-supported, motivationally-questionable "plan" that never comes to pass in a presentation of questionable merit to begin with as "wicked." If we're going to indict someone for what she claims herself to be capable of doing, there's a lot more guilt to go around. That's really my problem with it. She's acting like this is all her fault, and I can't accept that even if some of it is. It reads like the exact same "Yep, it's me, hate me instead and everything's fine" stuff from ep2 that Beatrice was offering Battler.

The problem is, the purpose of EP7 wasn't to hate Yasu, but to understand him/her. Or, at least, that's what I believe R07 intended. Will said Yasu was the culprit - and, I believe he's full of enough love to understand him/her. However, he had no ill feelings toward Yasu, and he seemed to understand why (s)he did all the things (s)he did. Nevertheless, no matter how much he may have sympathised with Yasu, he still said (s)he was the culprit.