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 2010-08-31, 13:47   Link #16861
Will Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmos View Post
There is no, actually. After the inspection they immediately went to the meta-world, where Battler confirmed the people who entered the rooms. And retroactive seal is just that - it seals the room "in the past", when Erika completed her inspection.
And this solution isn't better than 'gap between guesthouse rooms' sealing'.
There is still a small gap. A few seconds is all that's needed for this theory to work. I'm not saying it's better than anything. I'm just saying it's possible.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but if Erika only placed the seals when she investigated it, we just have to remember that she didn't go into the room while Krauss and the others could still catch her entering it. That is a few seconds gap.

Quote:
He only used 2 of his rules, and we have no TIP about the rest of them. Bern just used him as a detective, she didn't rely on his rules, unlike with Knox.
His rules were said in red, and he used 3 of them. If his rules don't apply, then having him in the first place is a stupid move. Having Wright as a detective? Sure. But don't make him use his rules if they ARE NOT VALID. And having something said in red not be true would be just terrible writing.

Quote:
I didn't know that asthma causes your head to explode.
It was never confirmed that was her body to start with. One could easily make an argument that it was actually Shannon's body dressed as Jessica's.
Will Wright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 14:02   Link #16862
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
On the messages in the bottles.

The point Renall raised about the lack of reliability of such a method to convey a message is consistent with Beatrice's personality which was explained in detail many times.

Beatrice entrusts everything to fate, if then her objective goes wrong because of "fate" she's ready to accept it. She prefers a method that has a chance to fail than a method that will work for sure, because if then it works she can believe fate had a part on it.

So the messages in the bottle were used by a Beatrice that was well aware that they might have gone lost. She was ready to accept that risk. Then she probably sent several bottles, at the very least they were more than two, at least three I'd say, else there would be little point into writing different stories.

The kind of system she used to send the money was yet another non reliable system. She didn't even explain a thing in the letter so the chances that they'd be ignored or tossed was high (in fact). Beatrice probably thought that only those favored by fate would have the right to actually get the money.


Now this is the part I'm sure of. The rest... not so much. But I can try:

1) The content of the message in the bottle wasn't considered relevant. The story was obviously ridiculous, and no logic relation could be made about the explosion. Just a joke story which by some strange chance just happened to predict somehow the death of all the family members (and not even accurately since Eva survived). The first message was still kept as an evidence because it was found near the site, plus no one was there to claim it, unlike the diary and the stake.

2) Maria's diary can't possibly have been found on the site, it would have vaporized unless Eva for some reason took it with her, but that's unlikely.
Rather it's more plausiblee that the diary comes from Rosa's house. That means that was an older diary and not the most recent one which Maria took with herself.
The stake should also come from some other place. I don't think a 30 dollar junk can be that sturdy to survive an explosion that left a crater 1km wide. However it's very hard to imagine why that stake was found in a different place...

Now the fisherman story is the only one that leaves me with some doubt, but we know very little about that fisherman and his reasons. That apart this story doesn't particularly strikes me as false. Not as close as the 900tons of explosive story anyway.


On shkanon explanation
I must say that the explanation for how shkanon came into play doesn't seem to make much sense especially after EP7. Even the magical explanation is ridiculous.

I mean... Beatrice said: "I'll give you a younger brother to fill up the void that Battler left". But was it really necessary? Couldn't she fill the void with... I don't know... another boyfriend? Okay even if there wasn't any readily available boyfriend at that time, there certainly was another later, doesn't this mean that at that point Kanon was no longer needed?
Well to be honest I fail to see the logic of this to begin with. Wasn't it easier to strengthen the bonds with already existing persons like Kumasawa and Jessica?
The best cure for a broken heart is friendship, certainly, that's what normal people do, they don't create fictional friends, even less impersonate them. People don't seem to like the idea of DID, but seriously this girl is messed up regardless of the existence of DID as one of her psychological disturbs. At the very least she's psychotic.

Now Shannon replies that she doesn't accept that, she doesn't want her love to die. So Beatrice comes up with another idea: "I'll take your love in myself, so that love will still live in me, I'll give it back to you should Battler return, in the meantime you'll forget about it". Perfect. But then if now we have this plan B why do we still need plan A? I mean Shannon wakes up and forgets why she even cried! So why does she still need that younger brother?

Above anything else, why this young brother needs to be Kinzo's favorite fukuin servant? Does this have anything to do with Shannon's heart problems? Is a Kinzo's henchman more fitted for the role of Battler memory eraser? I don't know maybe I'm stupid, I don't get it.

Usually magic scenes still have some grain of truth in them, but in this case I fail to find any plausible interpretation.

Next thing we see is that Shannon wakes up and she says that a new servant (Kanon) is showing up that very day.

Now let's say for a moment that shkanon is false. Then this new servant just showed up by himself, and Shannon just made up in her mind that his existence was created for the purpose of relieving her pain.
But then I don't get why Kanon doesn't exist in Lion's world. Kanon has to be related to Beatrice somehow. No Beatrice = No Kanon. So if Kanon exists, then he must have been hired for Shannon's sake.

On the other side if shkanon is true, I guess it could be easily explained if Shannon just asked Genji and Kumasawa to help her with her absolutely crazy idea to work twice as normal on top of her school duties (actually she just finished school that year? Maybe that's how it went, she suddenly found herself with too much time! I guess she couldn't have that...). The only "little" problem is that as we see later Shannon/Beatrice/Yasu didn't know at all who she was, she believed herself to be just a servant, who the hell gave her the authority to tell Genji what to do?
Certainly Shannon couldn't do that by herslef... I mean not even a master of tricks like her could pull something like that without any accomplice.

In both cases we need to assume that at least Genji is acting to fulfill Shannon's desires. However this makes absolutely no sense. It would have been all a lot easier with the assumption that Yasu can have the cooperation of Geni and Kumasawa, or even better if the whole shkanon idea was Kinzo's will. However Episode7 destroyed both, and now shkanon makes even less sense than before.

Ironically Episode7 also gives some strong hints about shkanon being true, and destroyed Kinzo/Kanon in the process.

I'm still certain as before that shkanon is true... but for the life of me I can't explain it. Either Ryuukishi is going to give us an unsatisfactory explanation or this is the toughest mystery to solve he ever came up with
__________________


Last edited by Jan-Poo; 2010-08-31 at 14:15.
Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 14:11   Link #16863
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by musouka View Post
This is a fallacy. In any work of mystery fiction, there are always alternatives. Rather than any other solution not working, the correct solution will have the most elegant explanation. You are not only asking for a solution, you are asking for it to somehow wipe out all of the other solutions people come up with. In other words, you are asking for the impossible.

That is why no one has been able to convince you, not because the evidence isn't there.
I disagree. The right solution will make alternative solutions, even if capable of being forced to "fit" something, seem hollow compared to the actual solution, provided the actual solution is any good.

Complaints to the difficulty of the task do not make my suggestion any less valid, and other than chronotrig, I know of no one who has even tried. I didn't like what he had, but he did have it.
__________________
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
Old 2010-08-31, 14:17   Link #16864
cmos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Will Wright View Post
His rules were said in red, and he used 3 of them. If his rules don't apply, then having him in the first place is a stupid move. Having Wright as a detective? Sure. But don't make him use his rules if they ARE NOT VALID. And having something said in red not be true would be just terrible writing.
He used the first rule twice, which is basically Knox's 8th. His 11th rule was used in some other story, different from Umineko. And the 7th "there must be a corpse" doesn't say anything about the means of death. When did he said his rules about accidents/suicides in red? Probably because they don't apply he can't say them in red.


Quote:
It was never confirmed that was her body to start with. One could easily make an argument that it was actually Shannon's body dressed as Jessica's.
Oh, ok, I see how you could make it work. Small bombs logic in use is a wonderful solution, definitely better than Shkannotrice.
cmos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 14:22   Link #16865
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
I disagree. The right solution will make alternative solutions, even if capable of being forced to "fit" something, seem hollow compared to the actual solution, provided the actual solution is any good.

Complaints to the difficulty of the task do not make my suggestion any less valid, and other than chronotrig, I know of no one who has even tried. I didn't like what he had, but he did have it.
If you ask me Renall a lot of mysteries already solved and that were predicted earlier did sound a lot more reasonable than the other theories.

For example after EP5 Shannontrice was a lot more sensate than Jessitrice or than the pony theory that assumed Beatrice existed as an individual.

However not everyone seemed to realize it. What I mean to say is that the "answers" so far looked definitely better than the other theories, but it seems that a good lot of people just couldn't accept them.

And guess what, this is exactly what Ryuukishi said he wants. He definitely said that he wants to give hints that will be only understood by those who found the truth, and still remain oblivious to those who are far from it.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 14:32   Link #16866
Will Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmos View Post
He used the first rule twice, which is basically Knox's 8th. His 11th rule was used in some other story, different from Umineko. And the 7th "there must be a corpse" doesn't say anything about the means of death. When did he said his rules about accidents/suicides in red? Probably because they don't apply he can't say them in red.
Can't and didn't are two very different things.

Quote:
Oh, ok, I see how you could make it work. Small bombs logic in use is a wonderful solution, definitely better than Shkannotrice.
My point is not that it's a better theory, just that Shkanon can't be taken as the one single solution. You can't deny it either. The only way to win this game is with a theory machine gun, rather than the sniper rifle you use in most mystery novels. Also c'mon, smashed head is a bit better than small bombs! Just a bit!
Will Wright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 14:40   Link #16867
musouka
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
I disagree. The right solution will make alternative solutions, even if capable of being forced to "fit" something, seem hollow compared to the actual solution, provided the actual solution is any good.
See, that last line negates anything you said above it. The solution exists independent of your judgment of its worth as a narrative device. EP7 directly points this out with a talk between Will and Lyon. Lyon refuses to accept Claire's story when she first appears, saying there can be no explanation good enough. Will responds by saying that's a judgment only Lyon can make, but that he should try to keep an open mind and understand.

It doesn't matter if you don't like Shkanontrice. It doesn't matter if it's [Solution X] and you don't like it either. No one can negate your personal judgment, but the story will be what it is and the solution will be what it is.
__________________
雨の日も晴れの日も
いつの日も愛してた
それだけは 今もまだ
ずっと変りはしない
musouka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 14:46   Link #16868
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
On the messages in the bottles.

The point Renall raised about the lack of reliability of such a method to convey a message is consistent with Beatrice's personality which was explained in detail many times.

Beatrice entrusts everything to fate, if then her objective goes wrong because of "fate" she's ready to accept it. She prefers a method that has a chance to fail than a method that will work for sure, because if then it works she can believe fate had a part on it.

So the messages in the bottle were used by a Beatrice that was well aware that they might have gone lost. She was ready to accept that risk. Then she probably sent several bottles, at the very least they were more than two, at least three I'd say, else there would be little point into writing different stories.
I'm not entirely sure that's the lesson we ought to take of Beatrice's character, as the Beatrice who stands out most (the meta-world one) is something of a conglomerate of all the various "ideas" that make up Beatrice conceptually. We wind up with a fickle witch who keeps her promises, who is endlessly cruel yet wants to guide Battler to the truth in love. I'm just not sure the real person is so plausible when viewed through that lens.

Also, it reinforces the concept of the meta-fictional Beatrice to "entrust everything to fate," but that doesn't prove that any "real" person set things adrift. Again, if there's a hoax going on, it would have to reinforce the conception of Beatrice that the message bottle writer wants people to have. In that sense, there'd be no way to tell for sure.
Quote:
The kind of system she used to send the money was yet another non reliable system. She didn't even explain a thing in the letter so the chances that they'd be ignored or tossed was high (in fact). Beatrice probably thought that only those favored by fate would have the right to actually get the money.
Or she thought people might still be alive to know what to do with them. Granted, were she the killer or a bomber that would be quite unlikely, but I don't see how she'd have to be either.
Quote:
Now this is the part I'm sure of. The rest... not so much. But I can try:

1) The content of the message in the bottle wasn't considered relevant. The story was obviously ridiculous, and no logic relation could be made about the explosion. Just a joke story which by some strange chance just happened to predict somehow the death of all the family members (and not even accurately since Eva survived). The first message was still kept as an evidence because it was found near the site, plus no one was there to claim it, unlike the diary and the stake.
I don't disagree as such that it is ridiculous and strange, although it depends which message bottle the police actually got. Did they get Legend or Turn, or something else entirely? Legend, at least, doesn't read like some crazy supernatural nonsense as such. Either way, a mysterious explosion just occurred and you found a story about everyone dying. Surely you'd at least consider that somehow relevant, right? And if the police did, and that's why they held on to it, how'd it leak out?
Quote:
2) Maria's diary can't possibly have been found on the site, it would have vaporized unless Eva for some reason took it with her, but that's unlikely.
I agree.
Quote:
Rather it's more plausiblee that the diary comes from Rosa's house. That means that was an older diary and not the most recent one which Maria took with herself.
Yeah, but once we get to the point of "the diary came from x," we really don't know for sure. There was a diary. It was given to Ange. Ange thinks, or appears to think, it was from Maria. The diary is later shown to Ootsuki, who links it to the message bottles. That's about the only provenance we have for that thing. We don't know where it actually came from, just who wrote in it (or wrote it).
Quote:
The stake should also come from some other place. I don't think a 30 dollar junk can be that sturdy to survive an explosion that left a crater 1km wide. However it's very hard to imagine why that stake was found in a different place...
It's a valid question. The writer of the message bottles is familiar enough with the stakes, and the stakes, at least apparently, actually exist. But where did they exist, and were they ever used for anything? Did they exist at all, or was that a meta-fictional detail added to the story of Ange's 1998?
Quote:
Now the fisherman story is the only one that leaves me with some doubt, but we know very little about that fisherman and his reasons. That apart this story doesn't particularly strikes me as false. Not as close as the 900tons of explosive story anyway.
It's not that I don't think it could be true, I just think it's a very sketchy and shady story. No one who ever talks about these bottles in ep4 has them on hand, no one can cite direct evidence as to who actually provided them - Who in the police released the bottle they had? What was the fisherman's name? Did Ange ever try to meet him? - and so forth.

If a person wanted to create a hoax, it would be difficult to do if the message bottles were released immediately upon discovery. There would be a weird story, but without the Kinzo occult library rumors and the foundation of the Rokkenjima Witch Hunt, there might not have been an audience. Mix that in and now you have a group that will believe anything you say because it runs counter to the "official" explanation. Now, and only now, do the message bottles have their full impact, and it's exactly at this time that they appear. Even though they've allegedly been in people's possession for some time.

I dunno. That rubs me wrong. It sure is convenient.
Quote:
I mean... Beatrice said: "I'll give you a younger brother to fill up the void that Battler left". But was it really necessary? Couldn't she fill the void with... I don't know... another boyfriend? Okay even if there wasn't any readily available boyfriend at that time, there certainly was another later, doesn't this mean that at that point Kanon was no longer needed?

Above anything else, why this young brother needs to be Kinzo's favorite fukuin servant? Does this have anything to do with Shannon's heart problems? Is a Kinzo's henchman more fitted for the role of Battler memory eraser? I don't know maybe I'm stupid, I don't get it.
That's what bugs me. Sure, a little brother, okay whatever, I'll accept that... why not a magical boy who lives out in the forest? A curious young child who lives in the chapel? Anybody but an actual, visible, actively employed servant. If Kanon gets created then he has an existence and now he has to do stuff. He can't appear and disappear to comfort Shannon when it's convenient for her now. She's tied him down for no clear reason to the whims of Natsuhi and the juggle that is playing multiple roles, where she'd have none of that to deal with if she hadn't put him in that circumstance to begin with.

Surely her imagination is better than that, as the entire Yasu story up to that point suggests she's quite imaginative.
__________________
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
Old 2010-08-31, 14:48   Link #16869
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by Will Wright View Post
The only way to win this game is with a theory machine gun, rather than the sniper rifle you use in most mystery novels.
That's what I call brute force method.

Kinzo is the culprit
Krauss is the culprit
Natsuhi is the culprit
Jessica is the culprit
Eva is the culprit
Hideyoshi is the culprit
George is the culprit
Rudolf is the culprit
Kyrie is the culprit
Battler is the culprit
Ange is the culprit
Rosa is the culprit
Maria is the culprit
Nanjo is the culprit
Genji is the culprit
Shannon is the culprit
Kanon is the culprit
Kumasawa is the culprit
Gohda is the culprit
Yasu/Lion is the culprit
Asumu is the culprit
Maria's dad is the culprit
Kinzo's wife is the culprit
Okonogi is the culprit
Kasumi is the culprit
Manon is the culprit
Renon is the culprit
Reinon is the culprit
Runon is the culprit
Berune is the culprit
Asune is the culprit
Kawabata is the culprit
Nanjo's son is the culprit
The Maid that got hurt falling from the stairs is the culprit
The Maid that was carrying the baby is the culprit
Beatrice2 is the culprit
Beatrice Castiglioni is the culprit
Nanjo's granddaughter is the culprit
Amakusa is the culprit
Ootsuki is the culprit
Kumasawa's son is the culprit
Hachijo Tooya is the culprit
There is no culprit


Good one of my "shotgun bullets" must have hit the center. Wasn't that the greatest display of detective logic?
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 14:54   Link #16870
Leafsnail
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
How many times have I said "assuming <theory> is true," even for things I don't like? A lot. And when I take those theories places, they don't get where people say they should be getting. How often does someone in favor of this purposeless identity assume it false and demonstrate how many things simply don't work without it? Almost never. What conclusion can I draw from that? That they refuse to? That they can't? That they could but won't?
I do it quite a bit, but hit a brick wall after realising that everyone has been a red-guarenteed victim of the first twilight... which would seem to imply there's some kind of shenanigans going on. I guess "Kanon ran into the closet and commited suicide" does work, it's just... deeply unsatisfying. How does it solve anything in the series except for itself?
Leafsnail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 14:54   Link #16871
Oliver
Back off, I'm a scientist
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: In a badly written story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
That's what I call brute force method.

[..]

Good one of my "shotgun bullets" must have hit the center. Wasn't that the greatest display of detective logic?
That's the brute farce method, not quite the same. Sure, one of those probably hit. Did any penetrate the armor even a bit?
__________________
"The only principle that does not inhibit progress is: anything goes."
Paul K. Feyerabend, "Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge"

This link has been determined hazardous for the spoiler averse
by the Department of Education.
(updated 2010-08-24)
Oliver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 14:57   Link #16872
Will Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
That's what I call brute force method.

Kinzo is the culprit
Krauss is the culprit
Natsuhi is the culprit
Jessica is the culprit
Eva is the culprit
Hideyoshi is the culprit
George is the culprit
Rudolf is the culprit
Kyrie is the culprit
Battler is the culprit
Ange is the culprit
Rosa is the culprit
Maria is the culprit
Nanjo is the culprit
Genji is the culprit
Shannon is the culprit
Kanon is the culprit
Kumasawa is the culprit
Gohda is the culprit
Yasu/Lion is the culprit
Asumu is the culprit
Maria's dad is the culprit
Kinzo's wife is the culprit
Okonogi is the culprit
Kasumi is the culprit
Manon is the culprit
Renon is the culprit
Reinon is the culprit
Runon is the culprit
Berune is the culprit
Asune is the culprit
Kawabata is the culprit
Nanjo's son is the culprit
The Maid that got hurt falling from the stairs is the culprit
The Maid that was carrying the baby is the culprit
Beatrice2 is the culprit
Beatrice Castiglioni is the culprit
Nanjo's granddaughter is the culprit
Amakusa is the culprit
Ootsuki is the culprit
Kumasawa's son is the culprit
Hachijo Tooya is the culprit
There is no culprit


Good one of my "shotgun bullets" must have hit the center. Wasn't that the greatest display of detective logic?
What I meant was along the lines of "one argument for each person" since no theory here "shines above the rest" like in most mystery novels. In most mystery novels you just focus on one theory and do your best with it. Here it's more of a "IF I GUESS THAT BILL CLINTON IS THE KILLER, THAT'S 1 PERSON LESS TO WORRY ABOUT" kind of deal.

...BUT YOU MISSED ONE PERSON.

The killer is the reader. Because they want to read this twisted story, people die in it.

Seriously though, even if you keep an open mind everyone has some kind of pet theory. I like the Krauss-theory the best.
Will Wright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 15:09   Link #16873
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver View Post
That's the brute farce method, not quite the same. Sure, one of those probably hit. Did any penetrate the armor even a bit?
No. But that's exactly my point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will Wright View Post
What I meant was along the lines of "one argument for each person" since no theory here "shines above the rest" like in most mystery novels. In most mystery novels you just focus on one theory and do your best with it. Here it's more of a "IF I GUESS THAT BILL CLINTON IS THE KILLER, THAT'S 1 PERSON LESS TO WORRY ABOUT" kind of deal.

...BUT YOU MISSED ONE PERSON.

The killer is the reader. Because they want to read this twisted story, people die in it.

Seriously though, even if you keep an open mind everyone has some kind of pet theory. I like the Krauss-theory the best.
Well the way I see it, if the true theory doesn't stick out as particularly sound compared to other false theories then the mystery story wasn't well conceived.
Now I'm not expecting that the true theory will shine like a sun in a world of darkness, but at least a bit shiny than the rest, yeah I'd expect at least that much.

I think that "coming up with theories" is the easiest work of a detective, and the less detective-like job. That's because it's possible to come across the true theory by mere chance using a brainstorming technique. And finding the answer to a mystery by mere chance is actually an infringement to the knox rules.

The true praiseworthy detective skill comes later when you actually try to discern the truth from the sea of lies, but that means the truth must be seen somehow.
That doesn't mean that the truth must be seen by anyone, but it must definitely be seen by someone who has the skill to see it, and not just by someone who had the luck to just fancy that theory more than the rest.

When you create a bulk of theories like a shotgun round, you practically just create a sea of lies, with possibly a single truth in them. But creating lies is not what a detective should do, a detective job is to find the truth.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 15:15   Link #16874
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Well, you forget, a truly clever witch can deflect the entire shotgun approach with a flurry of reds that will avoid excluding as many people as possible while making it appear that the red has made it impossible for every single person to be the culprit. Indeed, "x is the culprit" alone might be insufficient, because the witch side can pull out the one thing they were not involved in and say "Aha, but x didn't do y!"
__________________
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
Old 2010-08-31, 15:18   Link #16875
Will Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
No. But that's exactly my point.



Well the way I see it, if the true theory doesn't stick out as particularly sound compared to other false theories then the mystery story wasn't well conceived.
Now I'm not expecting that the true theory will shine like a sun in a world of darkness, but at least a bit shiny than the rest, yeah I'd expect at least that much.

I think that "coming up with theories" is the easiest work of a detective, and the less detective-like job. That's because it's possible to come across the true theory by mere chance using a brainstorming technique. And finding the answer to a mystery by mere chance is actually an infringement to the knox rules.

The true praiseworthy detective skill comes later when you actually try to discern the truth from the sea of lies, but that means the truth must be seen somehow.
That doesn't mean that the truth must be seen by anyone, but it must definitely be seen by someone who has the skill to see it, and not just by someone who had the luck to just fancy that theory more than the rest.

When you create a bulk of theories like a shotgun round, you practically just create a sea of lies, with possibly a single truth in them. But creating lies is not what a detective should do, a detective job is to find the truth.
There was a similar discussion about this in the episode 7 thread. I'm all for a single solution that shines above the rest. But that isn't very clear with Umineko.
There are thousands of possible theories here, the clues are vague at best, and the light is covered by darkness.

I accused Ryuukishi of cheating on this very basis that the only way to find an answer being the machine gun approach, which violates Knox and Dine. I don't remember who pointed out that Japanese literature yadda yadda.

I think we are going to get some random solution that we could have reasonably deduced but had no incentive to believe in it over anything else. I don't believe Umineko is a fair mystery. You either use the shotgun or you hope for your single theory to be that 1-to-1000 miracle shot, as everyone here agrees that Umineko isn't a fair mystery.

A single theory isn't enough, because even if it contradicts absolutely nothing, it has a small chance of being true.

The best theory the fandom has so far is that we have an androgynous psychopath on the loose. Umineko isn't a fair mystery. It's cheap.

We are not the detectives. If we had the chance to use actually say things(I don't even need blue, give me black and white and I'll take it) and investigate the world for ourselves, sure. Then we could actually find the truth hidden in the sea of lies.

But as it is now, it's more like finding a drop of water in the Ocean. It's not the impossibilities that are the problem. It's the possibilities that make it impossible for a single solution duel like in most fair mysteries to be possible.
Will Wright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 15:23   Link #16876
LyricalAura
Dea ex Kakera
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sea of Fragments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
Good one of my "shotgun bullets" must have hit the center. Wasn't that the greatest display of detective logic?
Indeed. And the witch's response is: "Yeah, sure, uh *rolls a D20* Rosa is the culprit. She teleported into the locked room and carved the victims up with a lightsaber. Your turn."
__________________
"Something has fallen on us that falls very seldom on men; perhaps the worst thing that can fall on them. We have found the truth; and the truth makes no sense."
LyricalAura is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 15:24   Link #16877
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
The actual problem is that none of those statement directly denies magic.

But I was making a more general example about the shotgun method. Of course you could say "saying the culprit doesn't suffice" but then it just becomes a matter of time, I can add to the variables the motive and method, so to get in the end a theory with a whydunnit and howdunnit as well. I could actually create a program to make all the possible combinations for me, the list would be enormous of course.

The point is that given enough time I could definitely compile a list of theories where I'd most probably hit the right solution to this game at least partially. I don't think I actually need to do that, I think the example I made before should suffice to make you understand what I'm saying.

What I'm trying to say is that the shotgun method is certainly effective if used to its full potential, maybe even more effective than any other method. But even so it's a worthless method, it's a brainless method. What matters is not the goal but how you reach it.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 15:27   Link #16878
Will Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
The actual problem is that none of those statement directly denies magic.

But I was making a more general example about the shotgun method. Of course you could say "saying the culprit doesn't suffice" but then it just becomes a matter of time, I can add to the variables the motive and method, so to get in the end a theory with a whydunnit and howdunnit as well. I could actually create a program to make all the possible combinations for me, the list would be enormous of course.

The point is that given enough time I could definitely compile a list of theories where I'd most probably hit the right solution to this game at least partially. I don't think I actually need to do that, I think the example I made before should suffice to make you understand what I'm saying.

What I'm trying to say is that the shotgun method is certainly effective if used to its full potential, maybe even more effective than any other method. But even so it's a worthless method. What matters is not the goal but how you reach it.
The riddle here is that your opponent is hiding behind a wall. There are about 1500 walls, and around 800 of them have footprints leading to them. If you want to take a single shot against it, feel free to. But your chance is small, even if your deductive reasoning is perfect.
Will Wright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 15:30   Link #16879
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
If it wasn't small there wouldn't be any merit in getting it right.

Conversely getting it right through a 100% sure method would hold no merit at all.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-08-31, 15:35   Link #16880
Will Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
If it wasn't small there wouldn't be any merit in getting it right.

Conversely getting it right through a 100% sure method would hold no merit at all.
If it's small to the point where you have to leave it up to luck rather than your deductive skills, then there is no merit at all. You shot blindly and hit the target. That doesn't make you an expert marksman. It just makes you a lucky person. If it has to be guessed rather than solved, it isn't a mystery.

Getting it right by solving clues with a 100% method was it? There is no such a thing as 100% in mysteries. A fair mystery should be 50-50 in the writer vs reader duel. The writer must mislead the reader while allowing him to see the right answer at the same time. The reader must see through the illusion.
Will Wright 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 11:26.


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