[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[musouka]

Originally Posted by Renall

But really, do tell: What has Bernkastel done to ever earn credibility?

She was made GM on the condition that she tell Featherinne the truth. I don't see how filling a game full of nonsense and lies would fulfill Featherinne's desire for the "guts" of the story. It's not a matter of Bern herself gaining credibility, it's her role in the story being clearly outlined in the previous EP's ura Tea Party.

Originally Posted by Renall

What is her motive?

To expose all the dirty things about the story. Telling horrible truths is much worse than any lie you could make up.

Originally Posted by Renall

Why is she, and not a character with distinctly more credibility, presenting this information?

All the credible characters have personal reasons not to expose the truth. Only a character that has active malice towards Beato can rip her guts open and expose her secrets. Those that love her, like Battler, don't want to hurt her once they understand her.

Originally Posted by Renall

Why would the writer use her - about the closest thing the series has to a primary antagonist - as a vehicle for information?

Who are you suggesting they use? Bern has been consistent in her goal from the very first episode. It has always been about exposing the things Beato has been hiding. Killing her in any way possible and showing "the truth". To this end she used Battler. To this end she used Ange. To this end she used Erika. To this end she used Will.

Under your scenario, Bern is lying because, uh, she's a bad person and bad people lie? Because she wants to be mean to the new characters? Because telling lies is somehow more painful than actual secrets?

I would rather have a consistent character.

Originally Posted by Renall

I will choose to be suspicious. It rubs me wrong, and I don't think I'm misreading her character (such as it is).

I'm not saying Bern is a good person worthy of trust. I'm saying that in this scenario, she has many reasons to tell the truth, and no good ones to go to the trouble of lying. (Except in scenes where she wants Will to do what she wants.)

Which reminds me, what purpose do Will and Lyon serve under your scenario? Pointless idiots that decided to die and live respectively for a lie? Filler characters that Bern brought in to torture and then kill for shits and giggles? Saps that bought into an elaborate lie created to fool ONLY them?

Like, you might have a point if the main character of the game was Ange or something. But it's not. It's Lyon and Will. Their existence is pointless if you want it to be a lie. They just become agents in feeding the lie to the reader, nothing more. Ryukishi is laughing at the people that cried at their last stand, two people that loved Claire enough to want to live for her happiness at all costs, and died defying the idea that she was doomed to be miserable?

Well, okay, if that's the sort of story you want.

[TehChron]

Originally Posted by musouka

TehChron,

You do realize you are comparing moments in previous games to an entire game, right? We're not just talking about a scene with a girl named Yasu, we're talking about two-thirds of the game going into extreme detail about how she started and how the end result was Beatrice as we know her.

What you are saying is like if the entirety of EP3 was taken up by the Vigilia+Beato magic fight.

So, yes, that means if those scenes were an elaborate troll by Bern--Who is she trolling? Will, Lyon? Why is she trolling them? Why should we care if she is?--they were ultimately pointless. That means we didn't just sit through a fifteen mintute or so fight scene, we sat through an entirely pointless game of Bern trolling brand new characters for no discernible reason.

Every other "troll" in the series has operated on more than one level. This? I have no idea what the point would be if it wasn't true.

My essential point is that since the entirety of the episode is such a blatant troll as a concept (fusion of Kakeras, one-in-a-million Leon, Will being there in the first place, Kinzo is still alive or isnt he? Shannon BSOD, etc etc) as to be considered suspicious in the first place.

We're supposed to see it as a troll.

What you are saying is like if the entirety of EP3 was taken up by the Vigilia+Beato magic fight.

And the main crux of that was to indicate that Kumasawa acted as a mentor for Beatrice, and she also died on the first twilight.

There are facts being obscured by the presentation, and our objective should be to sift the actual facts from the embellishment. You're the one that questioned the potential for embellishment, and that's my argument for how there is room, in even the most seemingly irrelevant and minor details.

So, yes, that means if those scenes were an elaborate troll by Bern--Who is she trolling? Will, Lyon? Why is she trolling them?

She's trolling Ange, and by extension, us.

Based on Ange's role in both Episodes 4 and 6, Ange can be considered a stand-in for the reader, as someone who is reading these stories, and also trying to break open the cat box of Rokkenjimma, thereby uncovering the one "truth" of what happened during those two days.

So if Ange is the stand-in for the reader, and Bern is trolling Ange, then therefore, she is also trolling us. Ryukishi has made no bones about treating the readers as involved parties in the story, and that theme was first introduced in Episode 6.

There's opportunity and it's within the scope of the character to pull such a stunt. I don't understand why you're blinding yourself to that distinct possibility.

[musouka]

Originally Posted by TehChron

She's trolling Ange, and by extension, us.

Then why wasn't Ange the main character?

[TehChron]

Originally Posted by musouka

Then why wasn't Ange the main character?

In a mystery, the main character isn't the Reader, it's the Detective.

[musouka]

Originally Posted by TehChron

In a mystery, the main character isn't the Reader, it's the Detective.

Ange wasn't the reader. She only appeared in the Tea Party. The Tea Party continued after her death. It obviously wasn't being put on for her. She was not the one being trolled, because she had no expectation of anything good from Bern, and she hadn't seen any of the previous game.

[TehChron]

Originally Posted by musouka

Ange wasn't the reader. She only appeared in the Tea Party. The Tea Party continued after her death. It obviously wasn't being put on for her. She was not the one being trolled, because she had no expectation of anything good from Bern, and she hadn't seen any of the previous game.

So what's the point of Ange, then?

Just being made into Ange burgers? Creating bizarre ships? Hallucinating about ass-neechans?

Unlike you, I like to believe what Im reading has a point.

[musouka]

Originally Posted by TehChron

So what's the point of Ange, then?

Just being made into Ange burgers? Creating bizarre ships? Hallucinating about ass-neechans?

Unlike you, I like to believe what Im reading has a point.

The point of Ange in the Tea Party is to deconstruct the purpose of her character. Ange has been defined, even more than Battler, as wanting to find the "truth" behind Rokkenjima, mainly because she has a certain idea of the "truth".

She's there in the Tea Party because it was important that she be confronted with the fact that her cherished dreams about the truth and the nature of her "happy family" were just that. Dreams.

In other words, that moment is the same moment as Battler in EP5, realizing that "beating the evil witch" actually meant "torturing and murdering the woman I love."

If you mean the point of Ange as a character, she was there to mainly explain the theme of magic and how it functioned in EP4. She functions as an ultimately tragic character because of her inability to move on from the tragedy that defined her life. In EP6, she also functioned as a reflection of the readers. But that's not all she has been, and probably not all she will be. I think, in the last ep, she will be a reflection of the purpose of "love" (fiction) in our lives.

EDIT:

Originally Posted by Used Can

So, EP7's Tea Party may be true, but that doesn't mean we've got the full scope of things from Bern. As she said, she's got no love, so she can only see so much.

Agreeing with this, completely. The Tea Party might be true on a technical level, but there's no doubt in my mind we have more to learn about things. And the things we learn will probably transform our understanding of what we saw.

[Used Can]

I think Bern was more set on mindfucking Lyon than Ange in EP7's Tea Party. Ange just seemed like unfinished business for Bern, but not the main deal. Bern was mostly focused on Lyon during EP7's Tea Party.

[chounokoe]

Originally Posted by Renall

And what if she, you know, does exactly what she did? Shouldn't he do something other than laugh about it?

Or are we going to trot out the tired old "went completely insane / wouldn't put it past him" chestnut like we always do to explain Kinzo's completely incongruous behavior.

And we are disbelieving the fact that he never laughed it off just because it says so in EP7?!
What we know is, that after Natsuhi refused to take the baby Kinzo had no further contact with it. He got informed that the baby fell down a cliff and died, while Genji and Nanjo organized a forged identity to smuggle the child back into Rokkenjima via the Fukuin orphanage.
Kinzo had never any part in that, at least according to EP7. He was desperate and lonely and had a total breakdown once he learned that the last Beatrice was dead.

But I forgot, it's one of the "epic trolls" that is EP7...

OT: The only good thing when Umineko is over is that hopefully the word trolling will go back where it belongs >_>

[Renall]

So then we have inconsistent information. Again. And about Kinzo. Again. If you look, you'll find a lot of that. I wonder what that means?

For instance, look at the two completely different claims Kinzo is depicted as making about Beatrice-1's death. Being Kinzo, of course, we can't really easily corroborate either, but still, how curious.

Has it occurred to any of the Bernkastel Fan Club that what Featherine has, wants, or is getting is no more provably what is true than what is expected? Again, there is a massive disconnect in capacity to understand the difference between a fact and a claim. What someone says they will do is not necessarily what they will actually do when they are a known deceiver. We have to watch their words and their actions carefully, and we cannot take their stated motives at face value. This applies not just to Bernkastel, but to Featherine, and at this point in the story even to Battler (I certainly question how he can claim a story like this isn't bad or scary, but I guess we'll see). There aren't a lot of people whose claims can be readily trusted. Please understand the differences between evidence, facts, and claims. If you think someone has no reason to lie because of the objective they have stated, consider whether that objective is entirely honest.

[erneiz_hyde]

Judging from how the discussion is going, it's no wonder Ryuukishi had to release ep6 at all. Almost everyone here really is forgetting the one essential element that fundamentally made this whole story. If Ryuukishi's trolling anyone, he's trolling people who thinks like us who have no love.

[Used Can]

Originally Posted by erneiz_hyde

If Ryuukishi's trolling anyone, he's trolling people who thinks like us who have no love.

B-but... I love Bern. I love trolling and getting trolled. I love tragedies. I love slaughter. I love irony.

What about my love?! Huh?

[erneiz_hyde]

At this point in the game, I have lost interest to the how or who　dunnit.

I will not accept any theory that doesn't present big enough reason for the culprit to carry on these murders.

心が無いミステリーなんて絶対えに認めねえ。

[Jan-Poo]

Musouka, normally I'd agree with you, but it seems you are not looking at the big picture if you ask me.

I'm totally for the idea that an author can't tell us a bunch of lies, but that's unless he gives us some element to understand they are lies. We have some very strong elements to distrusts what bern has shown to us.

Now if the tea party ended with the death of Lion from Kyrie I'd totally agree with you. But what do we make of Will outright denying Bern's story and calling it "fantasy"? What do we make of Battler telling Ange that the truth of Rokkenjima isn't a scary story?

I'm not refusing to believe to what the characters said, I simply choose which among two clearly contradictory statements made by characters I want to believe to.
Now let's see whom I want to believe to? Bern and Featherinne or Will and Battler? Uhmmm hard choice!

If I then add to this that the story shown in Bern's tea party is as credible as an alien conspiracy theory, then the matter is settled for what concerns me.

There might still be things that are true on Bern's story, well one thing I'm sure it's true, unless that Ange Lion saw was a fake. If she was a real Ange and not an illusion made to fool Lion (but I don't really believe so) then the 1km wide crater is true.


I'll have to ask you this mousoka. If you really believe that Ryuukishi wouldn't show something for no reason, then why do you think he showed us Will denying the "truth" Bern presented? Why he made Will use quotation marks if it was the truth? Why he made Will saying that it's fantasy?

[chounokoe]

Originally Posted by Renall

So then we have inconsistent information. Again. And about Kinzo. Again. If you look, you'll find a lot of that. I wonder what that means?

I'm still puzzled where you see that 'inconsistency' that you keep talking about concerning Kinzo. Where was he ever depicted as an inconstistent character?!
He's sad because he lost Beatrice. He's happy everytime he gains Beatrice back. He's angry with his family because his stuck with them instead of Beatrice.
Where is the inconsistency?!

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

I'll have to ask you this mousoka. If you really believe that Ryuukishi wouldn't show something for no reason, then why do you think he showed us Will denying the "truth" Bern presented? Why he made Will use quotation marks if it was the truth? Why he made Will saying that it's fantasy?

I think most people who prefer not to write EP7 off as a giant troll (god how I despise this word by now) think that there has been a certain amount of truth to every event we've seen so ar, even though it might only be a hint.
Of course there never were 7 different events happening on Rokkenjima at the same time and just happened to combine into one future after the explosion again, probably none of the events we've seen so far is 'what really happened', but that still does not mean that it isn't something that could have happened. What bothers me the most is that the Tea Party is cast away by so many as a flat out lie, without even considering what could be the worth in that story to us as a reader. Ryukishi is not Bernkastel and we are not Ange, that means there is no use in showing that event if it did not have any merit at all.

We still have to remember that the difficulty of EP7 is implied to be a little bit above EP6 by Ryukishi...

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by chounokoe

I think most people who prefer not to write EP7 off as a giant troll (god how I despise this word by now) think that there has been a certain amount of truth to every event we've seen so ar, even though it might only be a hint.
Of course there never were 7 different events happening on Rokkenjima at the same time and just happened to combine into one future after the explosion again, probably none of the events we've seen so far is 'what really happened', but that still does not mean that it isn't something that could have happened. What bothers me the most is that the Tea Party is cast away by so many as a flat out lie, without even considering what could be the worth in that story to us as a reader. Ryukishi is not Bernkastel and we are not Ange, that means there is no use in showing that event if it did not have any merit at all.

We still have to remember that the difficulty of EP7 is implied to be a little bit above EP6 by Ryukishi...

I quote myself

There might still be things that are true on Bern's story

However what Will definitely disagree with (and so does Battler) is the theory of Kyrie and Rudolf being the culprits.
And if they are not the culprits then you can't deny that almost everything that was shown in the tea party is false.


Let's stop pretending that this is a matter of believing to the author or not. The author gave us two truths: Bern/Featherinne's truth and Will/Battler's truth. The only difference is that the first truth was explained in detail while the second truth is merely a negation of the first, but still a truth.

This is a matter of which truth you want to choose. Or rather which truth you think is more probable according to your reasoning.

My reasoning tells me that Bern's truth is 95% wrong.

[TehChron]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

My reasoning tells me that Bern's truth is 95% wrong.

Precisely, the challenge issued to us is to figure out what 5% is correct.

[erneiz_hyde]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

My reasoning tells me that Bern's truth is 95% wrong.

When you refer to Bern's truth, do you refer to the Tea Party or the main game itself?

[Jan-Poo]

The tea party alone. Will never had any problem accepting the truth of the story Claire narrated, of course Will probably interpreted easily the magic scenes.

However Will strongly denies the validity of a story showing Rudolf and Kyrie as the culprits. There must be a reason.

Precisely, the challenge issued to us is to figure out what 5% is correct

Well I already highlighted one thing that must be true: the 1km wide crater

There are then a few facts that do not make sense in a story created by Bern to give Ange the worst possible answer.

1) George marriage proposal.
2) The total lack of an explanation to what happens to Battler.

[erneiz_hyde]

Right, the tea party alone. I also deny Bern's truth from the tea party, though I carry a different approach. My theoretical truth is achieved by negating every fact in that tea party (aside from previously established facts, whatever that maybe), it will become something like:

- the siblings never found the gold
- Kyrie and Rudolf never killed anyone (though the fact that the victims die is undebatable, else it won't be a mystery story)
- George never proposed to Shannon
- Shannon doesn't love George more than Battler
- Eva is not a sole survivor
- There is only one culprit
- There is no bomb
- and so on...

Outrageous, I know. But it's better than believing Kyrie killed everyone. I refuse to believe that Kyrie had enough reason to murder the siblings, the cousins, and even all the servants, for 1 billion where she could've gotten money without killing if the gold were to be divided as planned.