[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Renall

Remember that Bern doesn't know everything either (at least at that point). It's very possible even Bernkastel doesn't know how the game works exactly, so she could've been little help to Erika even if she wanted to... and that's the other factor, whether Bern would even tell Erika some critical piece of information if watching her fail would be more amusing. Bern is a dick.

I think Bern knew the rules of the game but not the tricks.
It's like as if she read the instructions of a videogame but didn't know where the secret passages and the traps were (at least not till Ep 7 when she gets to play game master).

So she can do much more than Battler. In Ep 5 she starts the game as a player and Erika likely watches her and learn then she handles the console to Erika and tell her 'have fun'.

By this point I think Bern stopped helping Erika but Erika could watch what she did and learn so she had it 'easier' than Battler that was at first handed the console without no explanations then got some minor tips while playing until he mastered the game on his own.

Originally Posted by Renall

And yes, I don't think Battler knew exactly how Erika was planning to force a Logic Error, but he was clearly trying to give her every opportunity to do it. The Detective Authority was his first offer and perhaps he intended that she use it to somehow entrap him, but his compromise offer is so oddly specific and was so readily agreeable to Erika that he has to have seen her machinations coming. Whether he knew, or suspected, that she'd stoop so low is another matter entirely, I don't know. I'd like to think he suspected it was a way to force a Logic Error but didn't think Erika would be so cruel.

On this I agree.
I get the feeling that, if Battler could have had the game played out entirely the truth would have been that no one died until the bomb exploded though many played dead.

[AuraTwilight]

I think Bern knew the rules of the game but not the tricks.
It's like as if she read the instructions of a videogame but didn't know where the secret passages and the traps were (at least not till Ep 7 when she gets to play game master).

And yet, she doesn't know the Rules X Y Z...

If anything, Lambdadelta told Bern some of the rules when she was gamemastering, since Lambda knows everything.

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

And yet, she doesn't know the Rules X Y Z...

If anything, Lambdadelta told Bern some of the rules when she was gamemastering, since Lambda knows everything.

In the Higurashi Wikia they say a more accurate definition of the 3 rules would be the 3 trends.
From the way they are explained in Higurashi they seem to be the 3 rules that create the worlds of tragedies with rule Y being a possible hint to the culprit.

In Higurashi Rika fought to break the tragedy from happening (and therefore knowing the rules can be useful) but in Umineko apparently there's no chance this will happen.

The game is all about catching a culprit and anyway Bern shows no interest in avoiding the tragedy. Actually she doesn't seem to think there's a way to avoid it.
If Umineko were Higurashi she would say there's no way to save Rika or Hinamizawa, though she can catch who's behind all it (unless you consider Umineko EP 6 as the 'happy ending' in which they all manage to stay alive or be magically resurrected and in which they defeated the culprit... -_-).

So maybe rules XYZ are rules for creating the gameboard/game/setting while the ones Bern knows are the ones to play the game?


... hum... I don't really know. Somehow rule XYZ fails to catch my interest so I can't really think at it that deeply. Feel free to shot down everything I said.

[Judoh]

I would consider the possibility that since Bern doesn't understand rule Z she could be off on her interpretation of one or both of the other rules in that letter. Because the XYZ rules in higurashi are interconnected in their reasoning.

Lamdadelta could even be leading her away from the answer with what she said that made Bern think about rule X.

But that doesn't make the letter pointless. Bern being wrong can be a hint too.

[ErenselTheJester]

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Let's summarize everything that was said okay?
So you said that Beatrice, in a game she created and basically wanted to lose, added the rule that if Battler were to stop playing (not to surrender just to stop playing), she would win (a thing she didn't want), without anything in canon to support this theory but actually going against this (since she claimed she couldn't play without him and stopped playing in Ep 3, she couldn't declare her victory in Ep 4 when Battler was brain dead (nor Battler could declare his victory since she wanted to abandon the game), just to make Bern and Lambda accept the game suspension... sort of... if he couldn't continue and in Ep 5 Bern needed to replace Battler as player)?

Sorry, I can't believe it.

Do you remember when Battler learned the truth? Why do you think he all of a sudden forgave her for everything she did? It wasn't just because of the truth he figured out.

He learned that throughout the entire game, she's been trying to lead him to the truth, but she had to put on this facade in order to do it. In the end, she was consistently saddened and disappointed by Battler's idiocy so in EP4 she basically decided to screw it, have him go under a pit of identity crisis, and let the game end there. Thankfully, Ange was there to push the game forward, however Beatrice didn't want to comply. She wanted to end everything so she pushed Battler with the ultimate mystery. After that, she went into coma- like state signify that she has given up.

How in the world you read EP5 and didn't get that when basically every Umineko veteran here has is beyond me.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

The scene he kept out of pride was the one of the letter, not the one of people having been murdered by Erika.
And if he were to rewrite the scene of the letter he would have admitted what Erika did stopped his trick from being effective, giving Erika a clear hint on which was his trick.
Note he was allowed to rewrite the letter scene but not the one of the duct tape sealing the rooms and that Erika apologized to him because she was the one who had forgot to inform him about her sealing those rooms.
If this isn't a clear hint Erika was free to have her piece seal the rooms without Battler knowing I don't know what is.

In the scene is clearly said that Battler needed to be informed about where piece Erika placed the seals, which would be absurd if he was writing piece Erika's actions.

It isn't. The fact is Battler is god- like existence in his gameboard. He sees everything. Heck, he had an omniscient view of the gameboard before he was GM, so nothing should be able to escpae his sight at this point.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Just at the end Battler began to toss names, though the implication was those names would replace Kirye and Natsuhi's name in the overmentioned sentences.

The sentence was said, Erika heard it and declared it illogic destroying it with the red truth, Battler was allowed to correct it more than once but couldn't fix it until Beato fixed it using Kanon's name.

Battler had written the scene with no savior. After the corpses were discovered, they were supposed to disappear because the chains were broken.

Besides, look at the quote, he was hesitating. If he was sure that was the case, why would he be so unsure?

Originally Posted by jjblue1

The logic error left Battler was trapped in the room when Erika went in.
Beato corrected it by having Kanon replace Battler.



Note that Lambda herself said Beato sent her a revision of the tale.

The Logic Error was the end of the game. Any "revision" Beatrice makes isn't official and is seperate, not a part of the original tale and will just act as an extra piece of the story. Besides, Beatrice was only providing answer, an explanation on how Battler can get out of the room when the door was sealed and chain was set, while no one was in the room.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

You misunderstood me.

Oh, okay.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Hum... you realize your answer is unrelated to my reply?

It does, I read through my arguments thoroughly, so I'm sure it does.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

First, the witch side, who's also represented by the GM KNOWS the truth.
We went through it before so I'm not going to repeat it.
Second the point wasn't if they lie about the truth and give us a magic interpretation or not.
What we were talking about is 'if the human side gives a counter argument that's not the truth the witch/GM side can crush it with red truth in order to win'.

In Ep 3 Battler tries the theory 'Jessica killed Nanjo'.
EvaBeatrice in order not to let him win crushed him with the red truth 'Jessica didn't kill Nanjo'. Then she gave a magic explanation for it which was, of course, a lie.
The point was EvaBeatrice knew the trick used to kill Nanjo and knew Battler hadn't guessed it so she could deny his argument with red.
If Battler had guessed the true trick she wouldn't have been able to do so... unless she were capable to switch to another trick (it's clearly said in Ep 6).

And here's where I make my argument.

It doesn't matter whether the Witches know the truth or not, they can still make their own interpretations, and Red Truths aren't the sign of knowing the truth since they're just based around facts and are only used to destroy another person's logic. For example, the reason why Beatrice was allowed to say the Red without needing any proof is because she's the GM and knows the truth. However, Battler couldn't use it without proof because he doesn't know the truth, he's not the GM and neither was he the detective. Basically, if you're not the GM, then your Red Truths has to come from absolute facts, otherwise its not legit. That's why Eiserne Jungfrau and SSVD exist, they have rules that act as absolutes to defeat a Witch's magical theory and destroy stories with mysteries that don't make sense, giving the Mystery side an edge.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Yes, but it proves that Battler is aware of an extremely famous method to prove you can't deny certain possibilities.
People use devil's proof to say you can't deny the existence of aliens, of God, of everything.
In addition in Ep 2 the devil's proof is used by Rudolf in front of Battler and the cousins began using it when they talk about the possibility of Beatrice and Kinzo having a kid with Beatrice being true or false.
In that same episode Maria also will use Devil's proof to say Battler can't say witches doesn't exist.
All this prior to Battler using it with Beato to say she can't deny the presence of a hidden door... a theory which Beato crushed with red truth.

It's not surprising Battler used the devil's proof to make a theory as he EVIDENTLY knew it well. However using it proves he has no idea of how the rules of the game worked and gave him no advantage. Actually Beato did him a favour using red or he would have kept thinking in the wrong direction.

Actually its quite the opposite because Battler had nothing else to go on. Again, there were no established rules and Umineko didn't turn into a mystery until EP5 so, until EP3, Devil's Proof was all Battler had and the Red Truth was a hindrance. In EP3, Battler realized he had a subtle advantage, though that was destroyed in EP4 and a new rule, the Blue Truth, had to be made up.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Wrong. Umineko was a mystery right from the start and you could solve it prior to Ep 5. The problem with Battler is he wasn't genre savvy.
He believes they are in reality so more than with anti-magic he fights Beato with realism. Which is anti-magic but he's not aware of it (in fact Bern will inform him about this).
He completely fail to understand what he's playing with Beato is a mystery game and, even when he's told about Knox in Ep 5, at the beginning rejects it because Knox is an unrealistic approach to things.

Say that to EP1- EP4 and tell me how it turns out. Seriously, only very few people saw Umineko as a mystery until EP5, at that point it was outright confirmed that it was.

Second, you better take back what you said about Knox.

Lastly, you're talking about the same dude who has seemingly read enough mysteries to make a conversation about them. If he didn't figure it out the first time, then the dude must be alot slower than Umineko gives him credit for.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

In fact in real life if you were to say:

It is forbidden for the culprit to be anyone not mentioned in the early part of the story.

you would sound ridicule. When the police will investigate about a murder it's possible they'll neve come up with the culprit's name through all their investigation.
Only around the end of Ep 5 Battler understands that Beato is challenging him to a mystery game. The poor guy was pasically playing at Beato's game without even knowing which sort of game it was even if Beato gave him hints about hers being a mystery game... and she even said in Ep 2:

I shall state that if I can say the Red Truth in real life, I would be a god. Screw me sounding ridiculous.

Now, in all seriousness, that again makes Battler out to be alot slower than Umineko gives him credit for. Umineko didn't turn into a mystery until EP5 stated that it was the entire time, at that point it was our job to go back and apply that knowledge to the games. Even still, a few people couldn't pick up on that and some of us are still nit- picking at where Ryukishi makes mistakes. And considering EP7 and EP8, its even harder to believe that it is. EP7 had no detective work whatsoever, basically every answer was given to Will and the overall truth of it (Yasu) didn't make sense to some of us. Then there's EP8 whose overall ending message was "how important is the truth?" What mystery says something like that? Don't get me wrong, I like EP8 and what it showed was very helpful to me but in terms of a mystery, that message doesn't make sense.

Originally Posted by Judoh

But that doesn't make the letter pointless. Bern being wrong can be a hint too.

But if she's wrong, then what is she wrong about? We can't tell unless we know the nature of the Rules, but there isn't even hinted at and if we were to take guesses, there would be too many of them. Basically she's the best thing we got.

[Kealym]

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

Say that to EP1- EP4 and tell me how it turns out. Seriously, only very few people saw Umineko as a mystery until EP5, at that point it was outright confirmed that it was.

I take issue with this.
My impression is that while many people didn't bother thinking, because of the magical narrative (which I would judge as a legitimate way to read it - not everyone wanted a questionably fair logic riddle), many other people approached Umineko as a mystery, since the very beginning. I myself was convinced Umineko was a mystery after the Second Twilight in EP2, and the game is perfectly solvable by EP4, especially if one read it's Ura Tea Party.

The story didn't suddenly change genre's in EP5, it just ... started dating TVTropes, whereas before they'd just been flirting.

[UsagiTenpura]

You know strickly speaking, Umineko could be seen as a "mystery that tries to look like a fantasy" or exactly the opposite to that, a "fantasy that tries to look like a mystery".

But the more I think about it, the more I reach the conclusion that Umineko was strickly meta. The gamemaster's tasks is to create tons of small catboxes. By the rules it must be solvable as mystery or as fantasy, but there is no clear absolute answer. Umineko was never about any answers at all. The entire point of endless magic is that Ryuukishi was amazed at all the endless theorizing (like everyone is still doing heavily after arc 8 of Umineko came out, I should add, so it worked as he planned). The more episodes advances the more you are shown various mystery or fantasy interpretation of these catboxes. That's all Umineko chiru really did tho, Arc 7 is an example of a mystery answer you can reach.

Assuming I'm right this is the fundament of Shkanon never being fully denied or confirmed, as well as their gender never been really confirmed either.

Another aspect of this IMO is ... in arc 3 when Battler tries to give an explanation to fantasy scenes before he understand he can deny them right away - his "theories" were so ridiculous anyone would probably have an easier time to accept fantasy then Battler's ideas. It might not be to that extent, but I have the feeling this is also sorta part of the rules - You can solve Umineko as a fun mental puzzle, but once you do, it ends up with theories that are not any less unrealistic then fantasy, so might as well accept fantasy.

I'm going to use for one thing "and then there were none" so...

Spoiler for And then there were none...:

IMO, that Vera committed suicide, that Justice was never caught faking death/has his fake death going fully according to plan and that Vera killed Philip are all basically mad gambles that, being successful, makes the story not any less crazy to me then if it was fantasy.
Edit: But that's nothing next to the overall why dunnit. I for one think Justice's why dunnit is really over the top the kind of things you'd only ever see in fiction. "Lolgold" is a crappy motive and one that makes everyone stupid, but it's still much better then "lolquestforjustice" at the cost of their own life and over people he never even met before and thus has 0 personal history with (yet managed to predict their reactions in depth as if studying them had been his life's achievement).

I'm not saying this to insult the story or say that reasoning is impossible, because that's exactly it - being unrealistic doesn't prevent the story from being something you can reason out.

I think of Umineko's gameboard as a world where figurative things takes on literal meaning, so you can probably think of it as a poem. If you try to accept the poem as something with absolute literal worth you'll end up reaching a "world" full of crazy things - just like Rokkenjima. If you accept the poem as having a figurative meaning and to hide concepts and feelings rather then physical facts and truth, you can actually reach an understanding of the poem. This is what I think "Battler has done wrong" (trying to translate fantasy into mystery truth rather then meta truth) until he understood the truth.

However, the author of a poem is not going to explain it later on most of the time. They will leave to their readers to make whatever they want out of it.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

EP7 had no detective work whatsoever, basically every answer was given to Will and the overall truth of it (Yasu) didn't make sense to some of us.

Interviewing and questioning people is detective work.

And I'm interested in hearing about how Yasu didn't make sense to you.

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

But if she's wrong, then what is she wrong about? We can't tell unless we know the nature of the Rules, but there isn't even hinted at and if we were to take guesses, there would be too many of them. Basically she's the best thing we got.

We can judge for ourselves. We can (nay, should) consider things like Bernkastel's world view, perspective, and trustworthiness in doing so.

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

But the more I think about it, the more I reach the conclusion that Umineko was strickly meta. The gamemaster's tasks is to create tons of small catboxes. By the rules it must be solvable as mystery or as fantasy, but there is no clear absolute answer. Umineko was never about any answers at all. The entire point of endless magic is that Ryuukishi was amazed at all the endless theorizing (like everyone is still doing heavily after arc 8 of Umineko came out, I should add, so it worked as he planned). The more episodes advances the more you are shown various mystery or fantasy interpretation of these catboxes. That's all Umineko chiru really did tho, Arc 7 is an example of a mystery answer you can reach.

I half agree. I think mini cat-boxes was a very large part of Umineko, but I also think actually solving logic problems Mystery-style is a big part of it, too... as well as the simple "fun" of the various fantasy narrative.

[Kealym]

Hm.

There certainly are alot of things to be said about Umineko (as in, not just the narrative, but the entirety of the thing itself, if that makes sense) in the spheres of literary criticism and artistic value and even Ethics, a bit...

...but being an art major in school has sort of soured me on talking about that sort of thing for too long , so I'll just say that Will has one of the best and most appropriate lines in all of EP8 :

"The purpose of a mystery novel is your own amusement. If you have fun, that's all that matters."

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

It isn't. The fact is Battler is god- like existence in his gameboard. He sees everything. Heck, he had an omniscient view of the gameboard before he was GM, so nothing should be able to escpae his sight at this point.

Sorry, still nitpicking. BATTLER never had an omniscient view of the gameboard before EP6 - he had Piece-Battler's perspective, and whatever golden-butterfly-tinted fantasy Beatrice fancied showing him.

On another note - Genius Battler explains why he "doesn't" have full control of the Gameboard in EP6, because he wanted Beato to accomplish something ... can a similar thought be applied to his game being hijacked in EP8, and him wanting Ange to accomplish a certain something? I haven't thought too hard about this yet, actually.

[Kylon99]

By the way, regarding the term 'Mystery,' I should point out that there are at least two kinds of Mystery Fiction that we could be discussing. I think wikipedia provides a good description:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystery_fiction

1. It is often used as a synonym for detective fiction or crime fiction— in other words a novel or short story in which a detective (either professional or amateur) investigates and solves a crime mystery. (etc...)

or

2. Although normally associated with the crime genre, the term "mystery fiction" may in certain situations refer to a completely different genre, where the focus is on supernatural or thriller mystery (the solution doesn't have to be logical, and even no crime is involved).

I think we've all discussed about the properties and features of #1 here. But as for #2, I was reminded about it from the way Stephen King novels were also called mysteries when there were obviously no detectives and not always a reveal of the mystery itself. In fact, the opening of Alan Wake was what reminded me of this: "Stephen King once wrote, ‘Nightmares exist outside of logic, and there’s little fun to be had in explanations; they’re antithetical to the poetry of fear’." Alan Wake itself was a mystery game (that, I suppose if you lose and die turned into horror... 8) ) and it's interesting to note that not everything was explained. (Although we're getting more with the new one.)


It's arguable whether Umineko fits #1 or not, but Umineko fits #2 at least, which is why in the past I've said that it's a Mystery story. Of course, I think Umineko tried to go down the path of explanation, which was what episode 7 gave us; a backstory for Yasu. Also, I'm not saying that Umineko needs to or needs not give explanations either. Please don't read anything into my post here. Thank you. 8)

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Kealym

On another note - Genius Battler explains why he "doesn't" have full control of the Gameboard in EP6, because he wanted Beato to accomplish something ... can a similar thought be applied to his game being hijacked in EP8, and him wanting Ange to accomplish a certain something? I haven't thought too hard about this yet, actually.

"Everything is Meta, there is no R-Prime" would account for this in a way, by having Battler intentionally show Ange something which is obviously ludicrous for what she thinks is "really possible" but which is, in fact, equally as possible as her own perceived existence. It's so egregious that he expects her to reject it, and she has to reject it and see the aftermath to realize that she is a strictly fictional character just like everyone else. An aftermath which, of course, Battler is not actually worried about, because it's all part of his plan to free all the characters from the chains of the basis of their imprisonment in the witches' game (that is, the belief that any of it really happened and that there's a "truth" to find).

But that'd just be crazy talk, wouldn't it?

Spoiler:

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

How in the world you read EP5 and didn't get that when basically every Umineko veteran here has is beyond me.

First, you could avoid politely implying I'm dumb.
Second, I get that perfectly fine, thank you very much. What I say is I don't buy that Beato made a rule that's never applied or mentioned in all the game to cause Battler to lose when she didn't even want him to lose.

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

It isn't. The fact is Battler is god- like existence in his gameboard. He sees everything. Heck, he had an omniscient view of the gameboard before he was GM, so nothing should be able to escpae his sight at this point.

Please provide the quote that says he is. Otherwise this is just your interpretation.

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

The Logic Error was the end of the game. Any "revision" Beatrice makes isn't official and is seperate, not a part of the original tale and will just act as an extra piece of the story. Besides, Beatrice was only providing answer, an explanation on how Battler can get out of the room when the door was sealed and chain was set, while no one was in the room.

The game was resumed. The game can be resumed and that's what happened.

"Th, there's no need to say 'so long'...! We'll...we'll think of a trick right away, and the game will resume! We won't take up your time...! So stay here a little longer...! Please...!!"
"......We've heard those same words from many witches in the past. ......And I've heard of hardly any who've actually managed to resume their games. ......As far as I know, the only two are me......and Bern."

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

It doesn't matter whether the Witches know the truth or not, they can still make their own interpretations, and Red Truths aren't the sign of knowing the truth since they're just based around facts and are only used to destroy another person's logic. For example, the reason why Beatrice was allowed to say the Red without needing any proof is because she's the GM and knows the truth. However, Battler couldn't use it without proof because he doesn't know the truth, he's not the GM and neither was he the detective. Basically, if you're not the GM, then your Red Truths has to come from absolute facts, otherwise its not legit. That's why Eiserne Jungfrau and SSVD exist, they have rules that act as absolutes to defeat a Witch's magical theory and destroy stories with mysteries that don't make sense, giving the Mystery side an edge.

You first say:

It doesn't matter whether the Witches know the truth or not

Then you say:

Beatrice was allowed to say the Red without needing any proof is because she's the GM and knows the truth.

The witch/fantasy side is always the GM in all the games. Ergo the witch side has to know the truth and the truth has to be a human trick not a fantasy story although the witch side will present a fantasy story that can also not be related to the human trick.

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

Actually its quite the opposite because Battler had nothing else to go on. Again, there were no established rules and Umineko didn't turn into a mystery until EP5 so, until EP3, Devil's Proof was all Battler had and the Red Truth was a hindrance. In EP3, Battler realized he had a subtle advantage, though that was destroyed in EP4 and a new rule, the Blue Truth, had to be made up.

Beato said in EP 2 she respected Knox and Van Dine. They were already part of the rules starting from EP 2.
And Ryukishi said the games were solvable as a mistery prior to EP 5.

I agree that Battler failed to realize he could use Knox and Van Dine and, at first, will do so in EP 5 as well, in which his first feeling is to reject Knox but this doesn't mean there weren't rules, just that Battler refused to use them at his advantage (probably because he hadn't understood/believed in them as rules).

Battler himself admitted the more Beato used red the more he had an advantage.

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

Say that to EP1- EP4 and tell me how it turns out. Seriously, only very few people saw Umineko as a mystery until EP5, at that point it was outright confirmed that it was.

Say that to Ryukishi.

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

Second, you better take back what you said about Knox.

Because really, in real life, you'll always be given clues to solve a murder?
Knox is great in misteries but if the police where to use it when investigating it would be laughing stock.

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

Lastly, you're talking about the same dude who has seemingly read enough mysteries to make a conversation about them. If he didn't figure it out the first time, then the dude must be alot slower than Umineko gives him credit for.

The problem with that dude is that he seems to refuse this is a mistery game and not reality. When you face a mistery you aren't desperate because people died, you expect them to die. The problem with Battler was exactly that.

He refused the mystery approach for 4 long games and a half.

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

I shall state that if I can say the Red Truth in real life, I would be a god. Screw me sounding ridiculous.

Of course the red was merely used to imply that was a 'rule of life' or better that it would be if Knox could work in real life.

Sort of like 'fishes live in water'.

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

Umineko didn't turn into a mystery until EP5 stated that it was the entire time, at that point it was our job to go back and apply that knowledge to the games.

I think you should discuss this with Ryukishi. He was the one disappointed when people didn't start solving Umineko with mystery tricks at the end of EP 4 and had to make clearer the message that Umineko was solvable in EP 5.
Though if I'm not wrong, he blamed himself for not delivering the message in a clear enough manner.
The same goes for all you're disappointed about with EP 7-8.

Many complained about how Umineko isn't a mistery according to their definition (yes, me too) but the point is Ryukishi wrote it as a mistery. If you don't agree go blame him for poor writing.
I'm not really suitable for this sort of conversation as I'm not completely satisfied with the Umineko mistery but I'm not the one with enough authority to go tell him he should move it to another genre of litterature.

[LyricalAura]

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Please provide the quote that says he is. Otherwise this is just your interpretation.

I don't have the exact text, but in EP8 when Ange disappears after the party, Battler and Beatrice both explicitly say that it's impossible for something to happen on a gameboard without the Game Master's knowledge. The only reason Bern could get away with the kidnapping was because she was co-GM for that game only.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

I think you should discuss this with Ryukishi. He was the one disappointed when people didn't start solving Umineko with mystery tricks at the end of EP 4 and had to make clearer the message that Umineko was solvable in EP 5.
Though if I'm not wrong, he blamed himself for not delivering the message in a clear enough manner.

You've misunderstood that interview. Ryuukishi stated that people didn't realize that enough clues had been provided by the end of EP4. It's not that people thought it wasn't solvable, but that they thought it wasn't solvable yet.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by LyricalAura

I don't have the exact text, but in EP8 when Ange disappears after the party, Battler and Beatrice both explicitly say that it's impossible for something to happen on a gameboard without the Game Master's knowledge. The only reason Bern could get away with the kidnapping was because she was co-GM for that game only.

It really limits the viable interpretations for how Erika did her killings in EP6 with Battler seemingly not in the know.

I know there is the idea that Erika was unaware that Battler could not be unaware of what she was doing, although I tend to think it was something else: I tend to think that Erika actually had influence on the Gameboard and that she could, depending on the situation, use it retroactively. In other words, that the Meta-World the event hadn't happened until Erika said it did (even if for the pieces on the Gameboard it had already happened), thus until that very moment there was no event for Battler to be unaware of. After all, it's not strange that a writer would present information/scenes from a story in non-chronological order.

[AuraTwilight]

Originally Posted by Renall

"Everything is Meta, there is no R-Prime" would account for this in a way, by having Battler intentionally show Ange something which is obviously ludicrous for what she thinks is "really possible" but which is, in fact, equally as possible as her own perceived existence. It's so egregious that he expects her to reject it, and she has to reject it and see the aftermath to realize that she is a strictly fictional character just like everyone else. An aftermath which, of course, Battler is not actually worried about, because it's all part of his plan to free all the characters from the chains of the basis of their imprisonment in the witches' game (that is, the belief that any of it really happened and that there's a "truth" to find).

But that'd just be crazy talk, wouldn't it?

Spoiler:

I love you so much.

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by LyricalAura

I don't have the exact text, but in EP8 when Ange disappears after the party, Battler and Beatrice both explicitly say that it's impossible for something to happen on a gameboard without the Game Master's knowledge. The only reason Bern could get away with the kidnapping was because she was co-GM for that game only.

Okay, I went through EP 8.

First we've a scene where Little Ange was grumpy. She and Battler stay behind and it turns into a meta discussion about how Ange isn't showing Battler what she wants to see.
Little Ange's grumpiness seems more a result of MetaAnge's grumpiness than something Battler wrote in the story.

Battler at first find the parlour locket. He had no idea who had locked it and thought it was Ange who locked herself inside but wasn't confused in the slightest by how he didn't know what had happened with that door.
He and Shannon go try opening the parlour and he still seems to have no idea what's going on inside it. They see the window is open and Battler says:

... I've a bad feeling about this. This shouldn't be happening. I'm the game master of this game board. So why are we in a situation that the Game Master can't understand...?

and later:

"Ange's gone. Even I, the game master, don't know where she went."
That's insane...! Isn't it your game?! That doesn't make sense...!"
"... if Ange disappearing isn't a scenario created by Battler,... that means there must be another game master."
"Is that even possible...?!"
"Oh, yes. I was surprised myself. ... Just when I opened the game board to start a delightful came of my own, I found that Battler had started up this bizzarre game at the same time. ... What a crazy world we live in..."
"In other words, ... you're admitting that you hid Ange away somewhere."
"... It would seem so. After all, no one could create a scenario not invented by the Game Master... except for another Game Master."

This seems to imply that, in Battler's last game, scenarios weren't supposed to happen without him knowing and he knows this as well as Beato, Lambda and Bern.

However game 8 is a rather weird game and not just because there are two gamemasters but also because Ange isn't really supposed to play, just to watch at least till the point where she would get to make a choice (it would be no choice if the GM would write down what she were to chose).

So my guess is that although Ange could move little Ange without Battler knowing... she wasn't really supposed to.
It's Bern that inform Ange she's actually a player and that if she just watch she swallows everything Battler says and that's it and pushes her to realize this can be a fight between her and Battler.
Ange herself admitted she was passive in the game.

There's another thing to add. Apparently PieceAnge left Battler's gameboard and ended up on Bern's.
I don't think Pieces can leave a Gameboard without the GM's permission... or another GM's intervention.

And when Ange choses to believe that the game is not about comunication (Battler's idea of a game) but fight (Bern's idea of a game) Featherine also said:

Certainly, this is more my kind of tale than one with an Ange who does whatever Battler says.

When Ange is back Battler is unaware she is and needs Genji to inform him and that all the actions Ange does afterward are likely her own choices.

So my theory is:
As long as Ange, although being a player, doesn't attempt to move her piece, her piece falls under the direct control of the GM and it can't do anything without him knowing. As soon as Ange plays and decide to move her piece, the GM loses his control on its actions.

Though definitely game 8 confuses things quite a lot.

Originally Posted by LyricalAura

You've misunderstood that interview. Ryuukishi stated that people didn't realize that enough clues had been provided by the end of EP4. It's not that people thought it wasn't solvable, but that they thought it wasn't solvable yet.

Ops. Sorry then. Still this doesn't change Ryukishi though it was a mistery even prior to EP 5, right?
... and I must re-track down the interviews...

[haguruma]

Originally Posted by Kealym

...but being an art major in school has sort of soured me on talking about that sort of thing for too long , so I'll just say that Will has one of the best and most appropriate lines in all of EP8 :

"The purpose of a mystery novel is your own amusement. If you have fun, that's all that matters."

Yeah, he basically quoted one of the better known mystery authors of contemporary Japan (he writes detective and horror mysteries). He had one of his main characters in his first novel say on the first few pages:

The best material for detective fiction, may they be called old-fashioned, are master detectives, large mansions, suspicious residents, grissling murders, unsolvable puzzles, unbelievable plots .... they are made-up? Even better. The point is to enjoy ourselves in this world of reasoning. But intellectual prerequisites must be completely met.

And concerning the ever-present question of whether it is mystery or meta...why can't it be accepted as both? Meta-detective-stories are an accepted genre in Japan with some very well known entries in that literary sub-group. Like for example Ayatsuji's Murder in the Labyrinth Mansion (迷路館の殺人) or Kurasaki Kîchirô's The Serial Locked Room Murders in the Black Swan Mansion and White Swan Mansion in Misaki (三崎黒鳥館白鳥館連続密室殺人), both heavily reliant on how their main story itself is presented as a mystery story within a mystery story and both dealing with how writing can change the perception of actual events in the real world.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

In other words, that the Meta-World the event hadn't happened until Erika said it did (even if for the pieces on the Gameboard it had already happened), thus until that very moment there was no event for Battler to be unaware of. After all, it's not strange that a writer would present information/scenes from a story in non-chronological order.

From a meta-perspective I'd say that the whole gameboard is in never-ending process. You change it by thinking about it differently, you rearrange pieces, put new elements on the board and discard old pieces. The basis of this idea is the basic principle that every arrangement of the board is different (this means the individual Episodes). They are all played on the same board (Rokkenjima) but what is placed on it depends on how the two contrahents argue. Eva-Beatrice for example was a piece that was basically discarded from the gameboard because of the mutual agreement of both parties (Beato and Battler) that there was no element like that.
Thus this is like talking about a stories that has obvious blanks in it's narrative and discussing how you could fill them.

[ErenselTheJester]

Originally Posted by Kealym

Sorry, still nitpicking. BATTLER never had an omniscient view of the gameboard before EP6 - he had Piece-Battler's perspective, and whatever golden-butterfly-tinted fantasy Beatrice fancied showing him.

Actually, he kind of did. In EP3, he saw Eva- Beatrice kill Rosa and got ticked off at how Beatrice could look at this and enjoy it. So he stopped playing, and Beatrice became guilty afterwards.

Originally Posted by Kealym

I take issue with this.
My impression is that while many people didn't bother thinking, because of the magical narrative (which I would judge as a legitimate way to read it - not everyone wanted a questionably fair logic riddle), many other people approached Umineko as a mystery, since the very beginning. I myself was convinced Umineko was a mystery after the Second Twilight in EP2, and the game is perfectly solvable by EP4, especially if one read it's Ura Tea Party.

The story didn't suddenly change genre's in EP5, it just ... started dating TVTropes, whereas before they'd just been flirting.

I know, I said all that in my posts about it. What I'm saying is that it might as well have been a genre change since it was hard to implement the genre to it during the first arc. Which why I said "Say that to EP1- EP4," because if you look at them, its hard for those who haven't read alot of mystery to tell that its a mystery. Take me for example, I have read a good amount of mysteries and know of the genre to form some commonalities that'll help me identify the genre. However, I did not see those commonalities in Umineko. I was able to conclude that EP1 was a proper mystery becuase it followed the basic structure, but the end of the episode and beyond was what threw me off. So its okay to conclude that Umineko did consider itself a proper mystery until EP5. Before then it was only a personal assumption whether it was a mystery or not.

Like I said, I'm not saying it took a genre change, but it just might as well have.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

First, you could avoid politely implying I'm dumb.
Second, I get that perfectly fine, thank you very much. What I say is I don't buy that Beato made a rule that's never applied or mentioned in all the game to cause Battler to lose when she didn't even want him to lose.

I apologize, if it seemed that way, but I wasn't implying that you were dumb. I'm just saying that its just weird how you didn't get that until now.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

The game was resumed. The game can be resumed and that's what happened.

It didn't, after the Logic Error was fixed, Erika lost the battle and ceased to exist, then they celebrated Beatrice's resurrected. The game was over.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

The witch/fantasy side is always the GM in all the games. Ergo the witch side has to know the truth and the truth has to be a human trick not a fantasy story although the witch side will present a fantasy story that can also not be related to the human trick.

Not particularly, the GM could be on either side or can act as a third party. EP5 proves this because Lambda, the GM, wasn't a part of the argument between Bernkastel/Erika and Battler. Same thing in EP6 where Battler wasn't a part of the Logic Error debate. In both cases, neither side knew the truth, the difference between to the two is that the former is a mutual debate while the latter had the Witch Side that proposed a theory while Erika tried to destroy and propose a human theory.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Beato said in EP 2 she respected Knox and Van Dine. They were already part of the rules starting from EP 2.
And Ryukishi said the games were solvable as a mistery prior to EP 5.

Just because she said it doesn't mean that she follows the rules, she just simply respects them. Otherwise, if she did follow the rules, why didn't she use them?

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Say that to Ryukishi.

Ryukishi wouldn't have told me.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Because really, in real life, you'll always be given clues to solve a murder?
Knox is great in misteries but if the police where to use it when investigating it would be laughing stock.

That's why they call literary Mysteries "Detective/Crime Fiction." And in that genre, rules have to be in place. Heck, it was the establishment of rules that help boosted the golden age for the genre. So you can believe otherwise, but Knox obviously has its place and is significant in that regard.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

The problem with that dude is that he seems to refuse this is a mistery game and not reality. When you face a mistery you aren't desperate because people died, you expect them to die. The problem with Battler was exactly that.

He refused the mystery approach for 4 long games and a half.

That again shows that it displayed itself in a different genre until EP5, where it became clearer for Battler. Beforehand, there was very little in the games to pick up on it being a mystery. And plus, Battler was in a reality where his family constantly killed and tortured in a continuous cycle, and the only way to save them was by proving that Beatrice didn't exist on the island. Not to figure out some overall truth, not to figure out who the culprit is, to just prove she didn't exist. That was the game, that's all his objective was, the idea of the game being a mystery probably didn't cross his mind because a mystery is a game, to him this was real.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Of course the red was merely used to imply that was a 'rule of life' or better that it would be if Knox could work in real life.

Sort of like 'fishes live in water'.

I would like to note that Reds are mere facts, not anything permanent. So that Red can be destroyed by saying "But fishes can evolve so that they can live in land.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

I think you should discuss this with Ryukishi. He was the one disappointed when people didn't start solving Umineko with mystery tricks at the end of EP 4 and had to make clearer the message that Umineko was solvable in EP 5.
Though if I'm not wrong, he blamed himself for not delivering the message in a clear enough manner.
The same goes for all you're disappointed about with EP 7-8.

Many complained about how Umineko isn't a mistery according to their definition (yes, me too) but the point is Ryukishi wrote it as a mistery. If you don't agree go blame him for poor writing.
I'm not really suitable for this sort of conversation as I'm not completely satisfied with the Umineko mistery but I'm not the one with enough authority to go tell him he should move it to another genre of litterature.

I don't blame the author because the author tried his best, I would rather blame the story. The way I approach mysteries is by going along for the ride, then before the detective gives his answer, I go back and form my own. So the way Ryukishi had written things is fine with me.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by ErenselTheJester

I would like to note that Reds are mere facts, not anything permanent. So that Red can be destroyed by saying "But fishes can evolve so that they can live in land.

That's technically incorrect, you know, by the time they can live on land they're not longer fishes, they're amphibians or reptiles.
In fact... that's precisely what happened.

[ErenselTheJester]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Let me get this strait. You think that Beatrice's/Shannon's love for Battler is not the main cause of the Gameboard's existence?

No, I don't.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

How do you know? None of the Rules X, Y, and Z have been verified, so the only way you can claim this is by assuming your own argument.

Bernkastel is getting her assumptions from Lambdadelta, who knows the truth of the game, so I'm going to assume that she's right. Otherwise, I don't see how any of us can come up with an objective answer.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Prove what? That "Rule Z = Without love it cannot be seen" fits with "Rule Z masks Rules X and Y"?

Yes, I don't understand that logic.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Not only does it not make any sense for Battler to "forget" things he wrote himself, but it doesn't make any sense as to how Erika would be fooled. She would have to be brain-dead to actually believe that Battler was caught off guard by any of her piece's actions.

She's so prideful that she ignores alot of stuff. EP5 makes that clear.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Interviewing and questioning people is detective work.

Not when you shake the person's hand and their entire lifestory is shown to you.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

And I'm interested in hearing about how Yasu didn't make sense to you.

I don't believe in Shkanon. I recognize it as a theory, but its definitely not the answer. so, of course, Yasu doesn't make sense to me either.

@Jan- Poo: Good point, but that's when subjectivity comes into play and we have to ask, "what defines a fish?" Not that I'm saying that I believe that a fish is anything other than what it is, I'm just stating a point.