AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Discussion > Older Series > Retired > Umineko

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2010-07-15, 09:12   Link #13901
Sniesk
It's Hammertime!
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Italy (Neaples)
Also thinking of the parlor scene, there is some red there that also seem to disprove ghosterika theory.


# Furudo Erika only increases it by one person. (This refers to the number of people)
# Besides her, the number of people on this island is exactly the same as it was in the previous games.


So she actually increases the number of people by 1. You could say that she is just "overlapped" with another person of the 17 but the second red should also disprove this
Sniesk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 09:44   Link #13902
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
That's where the theory that Erika washed on the island still alive and then died kicks in.

In that case Erika did increase the number for a brief moment. However from her death onward Erika becomes one of the other persons.

I kinda found a way to explain this strange turn of events with my medium theory, but yeah it's still far fetched as any other theory we have right now.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 11:37   Link #13903
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniesk View Post
I hava a question for those who support the Shkannon theory.
In ep5 there a scene with everyone, including Erika in the same room. Since Battler is not the Detective, it is not strange that we can see 2 different people as Shannon and Kanon. Howerver Erika is already the detective, so she should know right away thanks to her "true sight" that there are no Kanon and Shannon but just one single person. Then how come that in ep6 she clearly doesn't know anything about it?
A few points on this. First off, remember that while EP6 is a game between Battler and Erika, EP5 is technically a game between Beatrice and Battler, with Lambda and Bern playing the place of the other team. Secondly, we only see the replay in EP5, and we know that there must have been some sort of deal between Lambda and Bern to allow for the detective's authority in the first place which wasn't shown. Third, it's reasonable to assume that Lambda didn't want Bern to know about Shkanon, and is far less stupid than she pretends to be.

Since Erika wasn't officially the player and the Game Master does choose which scenes to show the players, it's possible that Bern and Erika watched the majority of EP5 through Battler's perspective. Erika probably needed to see her piece when moving it, but few of those scenes were supposed to have both Shannon and Kanon in them and those that did occurred much later on, when Erika was already cornering Natsuhi. You might have noticed that she was pretty ridiculously single-minded by that point, ignoring even the fact that Kinzo was dead. Even the detective is allowed to ignore vital clues until "it's too late" if they get caught up on the wrong track.

And I do have some evidence for all of this here. Remember the scene where Battler sees everyone in the parlor? The question here isn't why are Shannon and Kanon together, but "why are we viewing this from Battler's perspective?" If this is supposed to represent a scene from Bern's and Erika's game, shouldn't it have been shown from Erika's perspective?

Also, remember that this is the scene used to introduce the 'detective' to Battler, but if Erika is controlled by Bern, she must have known about the detective thing well before this scene. In other words, the conversation that leads to the red text "everyone is in this room" would not have happened in the first time through the game.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 11:43   Link #13904
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
And I do have some evidence for all of this here. Remember the scene where Battler sees everyone in the parlor? The question here isn't why are Shannon and Kanon together, but "why are we viewing this from Battler's perspective?" If this is supposed to represent a scene from Bern's and Erika's game, shouldn't it have been shown from Erika's perspective?
That doesn't prove that Erika is seeing stuff from Battler's perspective. I can't really see any hint of that. Rather there are several hints about Erika having a completely separate perspective from Battler.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 11:47   Link #13905
UsagiTenpura
Echo of Noise
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Yesterday!
Send a message via Skype™ to UsagiTenpura
A rather crazy theory, but heh.
Going with the "author" theory, what I seem to get is that basically there is no "truth", however as long as a truth is possible, then the "logic" isn't broken. Meaning in any given arc there isn't a single truth, but there's various possibilities that Beatrice and Battler's fight gradually thins out. Beatrice's goal is to find an "elegant truth" for her mysteries.

Batter's role is thus to "complete" Beatrice's story. The biggest goal of his is... to decide who is really Beatrice's piece (Beato in arc 4 saying "who am I" in the red flashing at the end + Battler saying he thinks she hoped for him to drag her outside the gameboard... makes me feel that way).

In arc 1 Beatrice would've hoped that Battler understood that already, and complete the story already. In arc 2 Beatrice is trying to force things (including asking him directly "who did the murders then?" to which he refused to answer) so that Battler does his "job", even if he doesn't want to. However Battler frustrates her with his denial that his family are possible culprits and loses at least momentarily her own objective in anger. Battler is about to give up and she realizes she needs to make sure he doesn't, thus making him angry enough to start a new game. In ep 3 she tried to make magic something more then a means of murder to get Battler to try to understand how it works, but it worked too well and he ended up accepting magic blindly. That would've resulted in the "tale" becoming a fantasy so she had to make sure he didn't accept that again. In arc 4 she gradually loses hopes that it will give any results and ends up with the mentality "okay do whatever you want with the story I don't care if you use ridiculous bombs theories anymore" and basically accept that the story will be a silly one and gives up on it.

After that, others are free to do what they want with the story, LD and Bern start to write it in a way that there's a new main character and the culprit is a bullied victim, basically both changing the protagonist and antagonist and telling a new tale, "scribbling on the board". Battler manages to take it back and turn it into a Beatrice-like game again. Then he wants to show Beatrice he understood the game and create a nice final chapter, however Erika tries to make the entire game crash by turning it into a story that does not make logical sense, thus forcing it to become a useless draft to trash or start again from scratches.

With what Beatrice said in the 6th arc's ending I'd say she will play the role of the "cruel witch" in arc 7, that is the unforgivable culprit, and that of a loving wife in the final arc. Cruel witch being what Bernkastel wants her to be portrayed as, and loving wife being Battler's wish for the final story.

That theory isn't complete enough to explain the meta world (tho I think the future world isn't the truth either, and I think arc 6's impossible memories/events was there to prove that it's not different from the gameboard) and even less Battler's sin and/or relation to Beatrice from 6 years ago, but I still can't help but feel that's what's going on, more or less.

That's why the core arcs aren't answer arcs, it's because the final truth about arcs haven't been decided yet, and that's why endless magic is so endless. That probably means that sometimes Battler found Beatrice's trick but she already had "back up explanations". Schrodinger's cat's both alive and dead status at the same time seems to represent that well. I'm wondering if when Ronove stopped her from saying a red in arc 3, it was because she was about to make the story one that could still be logically explained, but forced it to become less interesting and possibly ridiculous.

As an argument I'll use Ryuukishi's letter about anti-fantasy vs anti-mystery. The explanation that there is no absolute truth... yet... is very anti-mystery, but the gameboard still has to follow logic making it very anti-fantasy. It never was one or the other, it was always both walking in hand.

On a side note I'm more or less wondering... maybe the "board" follows all of Dine and Knox, but that story behind the board is a romance story and doesn't really follow either (without being a fantasy story either).

Unrelated, I can't help but think Featherine is lying about writing arc 3-4-5-6 or having figured out the truth on her own. She said she understood everything from arc 1-2 alone, yet 07151129 for instance only appears in arc 3 onward... where was any hint in arc 1-2 that lead her to understand these things that had no mentions in any ways before arc 3 +?
UsagiTenpura is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 11:59   Link #13906
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
That doesn't prove that Erika is seeing stuff from Battler's perspective. I can't really see any hint of that. Rather there are several hints about Erika having a completely separate perspective from Battler.
I'm talking about meta-Erika here. If she and Bern are playing on Battler's behalf, then having Erika as a piece must have been something that Lambda allowed them to do. Since Lambda doesn't want them to know about Shkanon, it makes perfect sense that she would restrict this privilege in a way that hides the deepest secrets of the game.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 12:20   Link #13907
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
I'm also talking about Meta-Erika. Meta-Erika makes claim about what she has done that were never shown from Battler's perspective. Hinting that she has access to piece Erika's perspective.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 12:57   Link #13908
matteas
Member Member
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Czech Republic
Age: 22
There is no doubt about the fact that Meta-Erika knows about a lot of things that only Erika knows about. But there's still the possibility that Lambda can control what Meta-Erika sees. In other words, she can show her different events from different people's perspective in a way that is favorable for her. It may depend on specific circumstances under which the perspective is switched.

But yet another possibility has sprung to my mind. What if Meta-Erika really sees the game from Battler's perspective? Meta-Erika makes claims about Erika's actions which no one else knows about, but when Erika tells the others about what she's done, it enters even other people's perspectives, thus making it possible to make claims about Erika's solitary actions from Battler's perspective.
matteas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 12:59   Link #13909
Klashikari
Swords•Maidens Maniac
*Graphic Designer
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Europe, Belgium, Brussels
Age: 27
Send a message via Skype™ to Klashikari
Quote:
And I do have some evidence for all of this here. Remember the scene where Battler sees everyone in the parlor? The question here isn't why are Shannon and Kanon together, but "why are we viewing this from Battler's perspective?" If this is supposed to represent a scene from Bern's and Erika's game, shouldn't it have been shown from Erika's perspective?
It is still doesn't make any sense for Meta Erika not being linked with Piece Erika's perspective.
The reason is that Bern, and by extention, Meta Erika, know that Beato's game is full of trickery and whatnot. Since they declared Erika is the detective, they ought to stick with her perspective, since she is basically a cheat mode allowing to bypass most of Beato's "noise": the story telling, while Battler is stuck with his piece.

If Erika doesn't have her own piece perspective in Episode 5, this is the most moronic move Bern and Erika can do.
I will give you that Lambda's vague red about the number of humans on Rokkenjima is arguably a ploy to not reveal the exact number of people. Even so, the former point really makes Bern's strategy completely meaningless.

As Jan poo explained, we have more evidences that Meta Erika is using her pieces perspective, otherwise, Erika is basically shooting in the dark in Episode 5.
Klashikari is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 13:06   Link #13910
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klashikari View Post
If Erika doesn't have her own piece perspective in Episode 5, this is the most moronic move Bern and Erika can do.
But you're assuming that Bern was the one who set up Erika's piece and how it worked in the first place. I don't see how we can make that assumption. After all, Battler could never use the detective's authority in EP1-4. Why can Erika? They make it clear that there was some sort of agreement between Lambda and Bern, and Erika seems to be part of the agreement. So, as to the terms of that agreement, your guess is as good as mine.

Even so, considering the overwhelming advantage that the detective's authority gives, I doubt Bern would complain too much if many of the scenes were shown from Battler's perspective.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 13:11   Link #13911
Klashikari
Swords•Maidens Maniac
*Graphic Designer
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Europe, Belgium, Brussels
Age: 27
Send a message via Skype™ to Klashikari
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
But you're assuming that Bern was the one who set up Erika's piece and how it worked in the first place. I don't see how we can make that assumption. After all, Battler could never use the detective's authority in EP1-4. Why can Erika? They make it clear that there was some sort of agreement between Lambda and Bern, and Erika seems to be part of the agreement. So, as to the terms of that agreement, your guess is as good as mine.

Even so, considering the overwhelming advantage that the detective's authority gives, I doubt Bern would complain too much if most of the scenes were shown from Battler's perspective.
The fact Battler couldn't use the detective authority is irrelevant. Who in their right mind would expect such convenient power from the beginning? All of us were basically dumbfounded that Erika could have such insane privilege, despite we have followed Battler's advent for 4 episodes already.
Battler simply -didn't- set himself from a backbone mystery position, therefore there was no reason for him to expect such possibility, especially he is really ground to reality, looking for anything that can deny the possibility of a hidden door for instance (anyone would have done that, unless you have that mystery position mindset from the beginning).
As Bern explained, if he was basically using the base rules of detective mystery (aka knox rules), he wouldn't have been tormented by Beato by trivial "closed room" portions.

The whole introduction of the detective authority looks rather like of a "cheat code" that has been implemented in the game from the very start, but has to be found out.
The fact it follows the red truth is the proof that it -does- fall within Beato's will, since she is "the world" so to speak (allowing ange to take part of the brawl in Episode 4 etc).
The fact Lambda was a GM doesn't mean she modified the game as she please: as we were shown in Episode 6, the GM is absolutely not "god" and has to carry out a lot of responsibilities in weaving a gameboard. Therefore, I really doubt Lambdadelta could grant the detective authority without it being implemented originally.

Finally, Erika "could" use the detective authority in Episode 6 if she wanted, which means that it is a privilege that can be used regardless of the GM or the circumstances, unless the one who wants to use such privilege has a status which goes against any knox rule or any red.
Of course, it obviously has a condition, which is the backup of a witch to elevate the status into pure Red truth, instead of possible 99%.
Erika is the prime user of such convenient privilege, because she was found/created by Bern in such fashion that everything she witness/do cannot be falsified.

Therefore, it really doesn't make sense for Bern not to use such privilege in order to steamroll Beato's game, despite she has the blatant tools for that.
Trapping Natsuhi is one thing, but if "shkanon" was true, pursuing them would have been much better for Bern: you have potentially 2 victims to brutally torture with red truth, but also the fact it would be extremely ugly for George and Jessica. Therefore, the Shkanon lead would have been the best scenario for Bern.

Last edited by Klashikari; 2010-07-15 at 13:22.
Klashikari is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 13:49   Link #13912
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
@Klash: Well, right now, we're at the point where we have two conflicting blue truths. You have a theory for how the game works, and I have mine. Both theories have evidence pointing towards them, but neither has any definite proof behind it. That means neither of us can disregard the other's theory.

As for the cheat code thing, if that is the case, how exactly did Bern find out about it? We know that she likes mystery, but that is by no means proof that the whole thing follows the rules of mystery, much less a slightly altered yet very specific version of the Knox rules. EP6 proves that it's possible for the GM to hand out special rules to aid the opposition, and that the only other way for the other side to use the red text is by this mysterious detective's authority. However, it's also the case that Battler wanted Erika to use that authority since the beginning. So we still have no evidence that the human side can use any red except for things like decapitation killing you.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 14:09   Link #13913
Klashikari
Swords•Maidens Maniac
*Graphic Designer
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Europe, Belgium, Brussels
Age: 27
Send a message via Skype™ to Klashikari
Considering Bern was never shown in her own brainstorming, I will assume she found out about that cheat code with trial and error.
Bern stated that she found the solution of the epitaph after using several kakera. Considering she claims to be on the mystery side, it is highly possible that she had knowledge about mystery rules, and tried in Red if it could be applied (that or contacting Dlanor).

As for the GM position, Battler only altered the game so elements of the story can be elevated as red truth.
Battler never gave the red truth directly. He had to ask Dlanor what kind of stuff would be enough for Erika to have something akin to Red truth.
Klashikari is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 14:24   Link #13914
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klashikari View Post
Considering Bern was never shown in her own brainstorming, I will assume she found out about that cheat code with trial and error.
Bern stated that she found the solution of the epitaph after using several kakera. Considering she claims to be on the mystery side, it is highly possible that she had knowledge about mystery rules, and tried in Red if it could be applied (that or contacting Dlanor).

As for the GM position, Battler only altered the game so elements of the story can be elevated as red truth.
Battler never gave the red truth directly. He had to ask Dlanor what kind of stuff would be enough for Erika to have something akin to Red truth.
Well, I think Battler did give them the ability to use the red truth with those seals. I don't think that the stickiness of the tape is really what was tampered with so easily. I think it more likely that Battler just removed the rule which said that duct tape seals are equivalent to the red truth.

Also, I can understand how trial and error could tell you how the Knox rules might work, but that's miles away from proving that they must always work, and being so confident that you can use the red text. No amount of pattern searching could possibly do that unless you have another source of information.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 14:42   Link #13915
Sniesk
It's Hammertime!
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Italy (Neaples)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
A few points on this. First off, remember that while EP6 is a game between Battler and Erika, EP5 is technically a game between Beatrice and Battler, with Lambda and Bern playing the place of the other team. Secondly, we only see the replay in EP5, and we know that there must have been some sort of deal between Lambda and Bern to allow for the detective's authority in the first place which wasn't shown. Third, it's reasonable to assume that Lambda didn't want Bern to know about Shkanon, and is far less stupid than she pretends to be.

Since Erika wasn't officially the player and the Game Master does choose which scenes to show the players, it's possible that Bern and Erika watched the majority of EP5 through Battler's perspective. Erika probably needed to see her piece when moving it, but few of those scenes were supposed to have both Shannon and Kanon in them and those that did occurred much later on, when Erika was already cornering Natsuhi. You might have noticed that she was pretty ridiculously single-minded by that point, ignoring even the fact that Kinzo was dead. Even the detective is allowed to ignore vital clues until "it's too late" if they get caught up on the wrong track.
Wait a second. Lamba didn't use Shkannon in her game, or at least i think she didn't. They (he, or she as you like) were probably not involved with the crime, and it isn't strage for Erika to ignore them when reasoning on the crime.
Regarding the game perspective, we are without doubt bound to Battler's. But Erika has her own perspective from witch she perceives the events. What is the point of the detective autority if she can't use her perspective? It's useless to put a Detective, with all his "bonuses" in the game, if she can't use her own perspective.

Quote:
And I do have some evidence for all of this here. Remember the scene where Battler sees everyone in the parlor? The question here isn't why are Shannon and Kanon together, but "why are we viewing this from Battler's perspective?" If this is supposed to represent a scene from Bern's and Erika's game, shouldn't it have been shown from Erika's perspective?
And this proves what? And also, it doesn't answer my second question. Why Battler fakes his perspective about them?

Quote:
Also, remember that this is the scene used to introduce the 'detective' to Battler, but if Erika is controlled by Bern, she must have known about the detective thing well before this scene. In other words, the conversation that leads to the red text "everyone is in this room" would not have happened in the first time through the game.
I don't understand what you want to say here.
Sniesk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 14:47   Link #13916
Kylon99
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniesk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronotrig
And I do have some evidence for all of this here. Remember the scene where Battler sees everyone in the parlor? The question here isn't why are Shannon and Kanon together, but "why are we viewing this from Battler's perspective?" If this is supposed to represent a scene from Bern's and Erika's game, shouldn't it have been shown from Erika's perspective?
And this proves what? And also, it doesn't answer my second question. Why Battler fakes his perspective about them?
I'd have to agree with Sniesk. Sorry for meta-quoting here. 8)

We do have a lot of instances where the narrator shifts perspectives and it is annoying. But can this be an indicator of sorts? Well if this is supposed to be 'evidence' of something I think there would have been some kind of pattern or clues available from EP1-4. Or even better some kind of answer from EP5-6 about this.

But I haven't seen any idea about what the narrator shifting is supposed to indicate other than to give certain theories an excuse to disregard whole swaths of text as 'fake.'
Kylon99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 14:56   Link #13917
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniesk View Post
And this proves what? And also, it doesn't answer my second question. Why Battler fakes his perspective about them?
Actually, there's a really good reason for why he'd fake his perspective. I think Battler found out about the Shkanon secret in EP5, though he didn't know about it at the time of this first scene (remember, lies can be made based on future information). As has been discussed here at length before, it seems very likely that either Shannon or Kanon gave Battler the ring of the head sometime around midnight. If they did that, it would then be a question of how they got it, and several of their secrets would undoubtedly get out. In that situation, and considering that Battler is now the family head, it would be no surprise if he figured out the Shkanon secret and helped to protect it. Since we already know that Battler is a part in an even greater illusion (we know he lied about seeing the corpses), this should come as no great surprise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniesk View Post
I don't understand what you want to say here.
People assume that since we're shown a scene with everyone in the same room, then Erika must have been shown the same thing from her perspective and heard the same red text. However, it's impossible for that scene to have played out the same way both times. In the replay, Battler was there, and Bern and Lambda needed to explain how the detective piece worked to him. Since the scene is shown from Battler's perspective in the replay (meaning that the replay was an unreliable viewpoint), Shkanon only hits a snag if nearly the same scene was also shown during the first play-through. Since we know for a fact that some aspects of the scene changed during the replay, there's absolutely no proof that the "counting everyone up to see who's here" part also happened in the first playthrough. And if that scene did happen the exact same way both times, it would have been through Battler's perspective.

In other words, it's fine to make a theory that Erika saw that scene through piece Erika's eyes, but to say it must have been so is dubious to say the least.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 15:21   Link #13918
Kylon99
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
In other words, it's fine to make a theory that Erika saw that scene through piece Erika's eyes, but to say it must have been so is dubious to say the least.
No, the reverse is true. We haven't had any reason to doubt what the detective sees is false until EP5. Perhaps EP6.

Why suddenly are we in doubt? There must have been clues that a different perspective indicated something from EP1-4. It seems like the sole reason we suspect it now is only to make the Shkannon theory work, like banging a cube into a circular hole with a mallet.


No, chronotrig, it is dubious to say that suddenly now what the detective sees is fake.
Kylon99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 15:26   Link #13919
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kylon99 View Post
No, the reverse is true. We haven't had any reason to doubt what the detective sees is false until EP5. Perhaps EP6.

Why suddenly are we in doubt? There must have been clues that a different perspective indicated something from EP1-4. It seems like the sole reason we suspect it now is only to make the Shkannon theory work, like banging a cube into a circular hole with a mallet.


No, chronotrig, it is dubious to say that suddenly now what the detective sees is fake.
I am suggesting that piece-Erika never saw Shannon and Kanon together. That meta-Erika only saw them together when viewing scenes from Battler's perspective, and didn't pay it too much mind the rest of the time (since she was so focused on Natsuhi). If so, the only tricky part is the one scene where everyone was explicitly gathered together and each person's existence was commented on in turn. As long as that one scene did not happen the same way in the original game or as long is it did not happen from Erika's perspective, there is no contradiction.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-07-15, 15:31   Link #13920
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
If Meta-Erika does not insist upon at least review of her own piece perspective, she is an idiot and Bern is an idiot for not demanding it, especially given that the detective privilege is in play there.

Erika's ep6 behavior, taken at face value, shows she can follow her piece's perspective without the game narrative following it. So the notion that Erika couldn't "see" what she saw in ep5 is absurd if she is even remotely competent.

Unless she did see something at odds with the replay, and she and Bern kept quiet about it for their own ends.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 16:30.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.