Quote:
Originally Posted by Marina2
Maybe mastermind didn't care about whether Chisa was Hope or Despair. Even Junko killed Mukuro as part of her plan without telling Mukuro .
|
Yeah that one was totally different though. Junko wanted to taste the despair of killing her own sister (as shown in despair and said in DR 1). - there is atm no hint that Chisa has such a connection to the culprit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stray
I was wondering this... but Monokuma was very obviously prerecorded so the game really does seem unattended for now. I'm really sort of wondering if its actually being broadcast though and if so to where or to who. Sort of have a batshit theory I'm trying to piece together.
|
I will look where the counter started being off tomorrow - I really hope there is something greater going on then Tengan being the culprit - tbh that one would really suck and require a really good explaination on how he could hacve survived that final blow too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dengar
And this matters, why? You're supposed to watch the shows together.
|
Love it when people raising pick my sentences and leave out the essential parts... I will repeat the problem again:
While we as viewers could have theoretically solved the case, there was no sign of the detective having been able to do so as he has never been shown to know about the mind control. A proper mystery however should be solvable by having the same knowledge the detective actually has - something DR and SDR where both rather consistant with. So its not really much to ask for this continueing to be the case here too.
Edit: The aditional problem here is that the detective never had a chance to aquire said knowledge as its existance has been kept secret by Chisa, Juzou and Mitari.As such Kyouko was unable to solve the entire mysstery while you as viewer were, which is why a mystery should be solvable with knowledge you know the detective has. Take Agatha Christie for example: You always knew she knew a lot about plants as she kept a garden of her own - thus when she solved the murder in a certain case you could easily rest and say 'yeah she said she knows about that'; In other words the detective was actually able to solve all the mysteries on their own and readers didn't need any knowledge the detective has never been hinted to have to an extend where they could use said knowledge to solve the case.
Yet in a proper mystery you should be able to do exactly that - solve the case with the detective's knowledge.
Except you want to argue that this is another perspective trick like in DR 1 and the real detective is Mitari; that however would be even worse since he never conducted an investigation of his own and is in addtion an accomplice.