[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Mali

Do You think? I see your point if Umineko has a frame story (which I don't know...).
I'm not a literature expert, but I regard the tales on Rokkenjima as whole books, including the meta world. There are enough scenes where gameboard, magic world and meta world overlap.
It does not feel "wrong" if you look them as a whole, and it's not wrong if the author wanted to describe his feelings in the story.
In the end it doesn't matter because we, the reader, could grasp the whole thing.

Thanks for clearing up what happens with Ange.

Through Umineko it is explained that the books Tohya wrote and the Episodes we read have differences inside.
For example Tohya's version of Banquet contains also Eva's escape to Kuwadorian (which instead we'll read in Alliance).
Also, Tohya's tales were, for their form, the closest to the message bottle tales. The message bottle tales are never described as containing something as odd as the meta would be, but just as describing a mysterious and gruesome incident in a way realistic enough if they had included Eva's survival they could have been considered true accounts.
The story in the message bottle tales is narrated by Maria... while through the episodes the narrator is often Battler.

The manga adds some info to this. Banquet was deliberately written to pin Eva as the culprit and it's said that Tohya will grasp the pain the forgeries caused to Ange only later on, after he had written more than one forgery so at best post Alliance, therefore it wouldn't make sense for him to include it in Banquet or Alliance.

In addition the manga tells us that after Sayo died her soul, in the shape of Beatrice and Battler's ended up in the purgatorio (witch's room, meta, whatever), with Battler suffering amnesia. At this point Beatrice began to challenge him to games in hope he would remember, starting with Legend. Tohya can't know what Sayo's soul would do with Battler's soul so he can't include it in his tales.

Ange also views her adventure in Ep 3-4-6-8 (and in the other episodes) as an adventure of her soul to find her own path, not as something she read in Tohya's book.

But well, feel free to view the episodes as you prefer.

Originally Posted by marianx

can someone explain to me how the rules were made to help battler.also im having trouble understanding beatrice heart as a whole, if anyone can give me some hints id appreciate it. specifically what i need help with is understanding beatrice moves/ the patterns she uses

If with rules you mean the red truth, the red truth worked to give him some 'secure stones' to form his reasoning. Beatrice wanted him to solve the game but without some facts being certain you can doubt everything and therefore can end up with dozens of theories.

Think at the number of people on Rokkenjima. If Beatrice hadn't stated that there are no more than 18 people Battler could have assumed that a whole army was hiding in the forest in Rokkenjima.

In Ep 5 Knox rules are added. They too help Battler as they remove some possibilities without needing a confirmation in red. For example through Knox we know there are no secret passages so you've to think to a way to get in/out of closed rooms that's different from secret passages.

As for the pattern, Beatrice murders following the epitaph.
Her techniques involve bribing people, blackmailing people or tricking them into thinking it's a game to do her bidding.
Lies are also a recurring plot device.
Victims are often killed with a gun. Stakes are just 'decoration', Beatrice shot the person that place in the wound the stake.
She varies the accomplices and the method of killing and sometimes she had others do the murders for her.

I hope this helps.

[Mali]

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Through Umineko it is explained that the books Tohya wrote and the Episodes we read have differences inside.
For example Tohya's version of Banquet contains also Eva's escape to Kuwadorian (which instead we'll read in Alliance).
Also, Tohya's tales were, for their form, the closest to the message bottle tales. The message bottle tales are never described as containing something as odd as the meta would be, but just as describing a mysterious and gruesome incident in a way realistic enough if they had included Eva's survival they could have been considered true accounts.
The story in the message bottle tales is narrated by Maria... while through the episodes the narrator is often Battler.

The manga adds some info to this. Banquet was deliberately written to pin Eva as the culprit and it's said that Tohya will grasp the pain the forgeries caused to Ange only later on, after he had written more than one forgery so at best post Alliance, therefore it wouldn't make sense for him to include it in Banquet or Alliance.

In addition the manga tells us that after Sayo died her soul, in the shape of Beatrice and Battler's ended up in the purgatorio (witch's room, meta, whatever), with Battler suffering amnesia. At this point Beatrice began to challenge him to games in hope he would remember, starting with Legend. Tohya can't know what Sayo's soul would do with Battler's soul so he can't include it in his tales.

Ange also views her adventure in Ep 3-4-6-8 (and in the other episodes) as an adventure of her soul to find her own path, not as something she read in Tohya's book.

But well, feel free to view the episodes as you prefer.

Thanks for explaining. I would to urging further. What happens to Chiru with the "manga" view? The manga is still an adaption (even it's holds the "official" answer with all the implication, it isn't necessarily right). It seems what appeared in the manga now is rushed. Look at the anime of Umineko... Natsuhi's room scene. Manga and anime were supervised by Ryukishi.

Don't take it badly, but I think it's poorly explained that the meta world is just a different universe apart from the tales.

The "endroll" of EP1 sounds like a ending of a book, look, this means the message bottles could be altered by the founder (Tohya). We had no proof that the notebooks weren't released and represented as the true originals.

It was definitly shown that (some) meta world scenes are part of "fragments"/tales, ironical in the meta world, too. And including the souls aspect on the game board aka fictional tales makes no sense because Beatrice offered Battler all solutions if he resigned.
But it is left to the readers imigination.

Maybe Tohya mixed up some things? This is absolutely a plothole.

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Mali

Thanks for explaining. I would to urging further. What happens to Chiru with the "manga" view? The manga is still an adaption (even it's holds the "official" answer with all the implication, it isn't necessarily right). It seems what appeared in the manga now is rushed. Look at the anime of Umineko... Natsuhi's room scene. Manga and anime were supervised by Ryukishi.

Hum... I'm not sure what you mean with 'what happens to Chiru'.

The manga is not rushed in the revealing of the truth and was chosen as a medium by Ryukishi for the revealing of the truth, differently from the anime.
Ryukishi stated that the answers the manga gave are the OFFICIAL answers from him, ence they are right.

Ryukishi's involvement with the anime was way smaller than the one he had with the manga and it shows as the anime ends up cutting vital infomations to solve the murders and making some murders possible only if you use magic while the same can't be said for the manga which included all the important information, added some and NEVER messed up a murder.

Originally Posted by Mali

Don't take it badly, but I think it's poorly explained that the meta world is just a different universe apart from the tales.

I have no reason to take it badly but I can't see how it's poorly explained. Even with just the VN info it's pretty clear that the tales we read aren't the same that Sayo or Tohya wrote. The manga even makes it all clearer.

Originally Posted by Mali

The "endroll" of EP1 sounds like a ending of a book, look, this means the message bottles could be altered by the founder (Tohya). We had no proof that the notebooks weren't released and represented as the true originals.

Tohya didn't author Legend or Turn. The manga confirms that his first forgery is Banquet, written with the intent to pin Eva as the culprit. The VN also never tried to push on him the authorship of Legend or Turn, claiming he only wrote and released to the public Banquet, Alliance and End.
If a corrispective of Legend exist in Prime it is, very likely, one of the two messages in the bottle Sayo wrote and that were found later on.

However that corrispective of Lengend doesn't match the Legend we read. The message in the bottle was meant to be written from Maria's point of view while actually we read it mostly from Battler's point of view and in the endrolls it ends in third person, describing how a message was found and what was inside it.

Also, since it was a message written by Sayo as one of her plans in her murder game it didn't need to contain the meta. Her challenge to Battler was meant to happen in Rokkenjima, not in the purgatorio.

It gets even more marked in Ep 2 where there's a huge amount of meta that had no reason to be in a message Sayo would write.

Tohya isn't even the founder of the forgeries. Forgeries, as stated also in the VN, existed prior to him starting writing one as people in the net had already started writing them.

Tohya is merely one of the most famous, if not the most famous forgery writer not the first one.

Originally Posted by Mali

It was definitly shown that (some) meta world scenes are part of "fragments"/tales, ironical in the meta world, too. And including the souls aspect on the game board aka fictional tales makes no sense because Beatrice offered Battler all solutions if he resigned.
But it is left to the readers imigination.

Maybe Tohya mixed up some things? This is absolutely a plothole.

It becomes a plothole only if you go and assume that the tales we read are also the ones Tohya wrote.

If you go by what the VN implied and the manga pushed forward that Tohya's tales are NOT what we've read (though it's implied they're close enough to the gameboard parts of the tales) there's no plothole.

Beatrice, creating the games, can insert fantasy scenes in which it looks as if she's on the gameboard, giving to Battler and to us the impression she's interacting with it... and in a way she is as she's writing it and can change things in it.

Tohya's tales (and also the message bottles tales) are described as differing from the ones we read. As they differ from them we can't claim they contain the meta or interaction between the meta and the gameboard. Actually it's more likely they don't contain the meta at all as, if it wasn't for Eva's surviving, the message bottles could have been exchanged for realiztic narrations of what had happened on the island and they didn't need to contain the meta as they were merely plans for Sayo's mystery game in which the battle between her and Battler should have taken place on the real world as the mystery game was going on, not in the meta.

[Mali]

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Hum... I'm not sure what you mean with 'what happens to Chiru'.

The manga is not rushed in the revealing of the truth and was chosen as a medium by Ryukishi for the revealing of the truth, differently from the anime.
Ryukishi stated that the answers the manga gave are the OFFICIAL answers from him, ence they are right.

Ryukishi's involvement with the anime was way smaller than the one he had with the manga and it shows as the anime ends up cutting vital infomations to solve the murders and making some murders possible only if you use magic while the same can't be said for the manga which included all the important information, added some and NEVER messed up a murder.

First of all he said by himself (for the manga AND the anime version) there are no "misconseption of the prestentation this time". You cannot say that the manga is the right, pardon me, official answer from him and leaving out the anime version.

Chiru has several statements from characters (on game board) they had to know from
the meta world. Left out meta elements and you get your plotholes.

Tohya didn't author Legend or Turn. The manga confirms that his first forgery is Banquet, written with the intent to pin Eva as the culprit. The VN also never tried to push on him the authorship of Legend or Turn, claiming he only wrote and released to the public Banquet, Alliance and End.
If a corrispective of Legend exist in Prime it is, very likely, one of the two messages in the bottle Sayo wrote and that were found later on.

However that corrispective of Lengend doesn't match the Legend we read. The message in the bottle was meant to be written from Maria's point of view while actually we read it mostly from Battler's point of view and in the endrolls it ends in third person, describing how a message was found and what was inside it.

Also, since it was a message written by Sayo as one of her plans in her murder game it didn't need to contain the meta. Her challenge to Battler was meant to happen in Rokkenjima, not in the purgatorio.

It gets even more marked in Ep 2 where there's a huge amount of meta that had no reason to be in a message Sayo would write.

Tohya isn't even the founder of the forgeries. Forgeries, as stated also in the VN, existed prior to him starting writing one as people in the net had already started writing them.

Tohya is merely one of the most famous, if not the most famous forgery writer not the first one.

You misunderstood. I wrote he could altered Legend and Turn. Both of them also tried to pin the adults and servants as the culprits, Land tried Battler... and why should the police believe BEFORE they found Maria's message and her jaw that the children could be alive?

The question is whether Tohya wanted people to get the Truth by their own or get their own truth. Well, is is shown it seems Battler doesn't want to share his Beatrice...
but EP7 lights on "the hard cold truth" again.

I have no reason to take it badly but I can't see how it's poorly explained. Even with just the VN info it's pretty clear that the tales we read aren't the same that Sayo or Tohya wrote. The manga even makes it all clearer.

How? The VN is pretty vague with it. It's a mix up. Please make fine statement about it so I can wash my doubts away.

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Mali

First of all he said by himself (for the manga AND the anime version) there are no "misconseption of the prestentation this time". You cannot say that the manga is the right, pardon me, official answer from him and leaving out the anime version.

Okay let's go by quotes.

By no means is the manga version a individual interpretation. It is an official answer from me, Ryukishi07. [Say It In Red! An Interview with Ryukishi07]

This clearly imply that the manga is right in his answers.

Now let's see what's said about the anime:

“Will people be able to enjoy ‘the fun of speculation’ in the anime and manga versions too?”

Ryukishi: Of course. I have been supervising those very carefully. In Higurashi, there were some problems with presentation, and they were allowed to do as they pleased in certain areas. But this time, I have been checking very carefully to make sure there are ‘no misconceptions in the presentation’ this time, so I think people will be able to significantly enjoy speculation in those as well.

Keiya: In that case, will people who only watch the anime be able to speculate about the series?

Ryukishi: There is an overwhelming difference in the amount of information contained in an anime and the original work, so it will probably be best to play the original as far as ‘the number of hints’ is concerned. [Ryukishi07 interview translated in 23/07/2009]

Then something more recent, sadly not litterally translated but just summarized.

When supervising scripts of the anime, Ryukishi would try to put in too much dialogue, which doesn’t work in that medium.
He would supervise the script, but ultimately leave the final version up to the pros.
He was really active, though, in making sure the voice actors got the intonation right. [ACen 2015 07th Expansion Panel #1: When They Cry, The World of Ryukishi07]

Note that the anime ran from July 2, 2009 to December 24, 2009.

The interview you quoted was given before the anime was finished, ence his involvement might have changed by December... but let's pretend it didn't.
The interviews confirm that the anime reduced the amount of info that were given and that ultimately he didn't have full control on the script.

The manga ADDED informations.

You're basically saying that the manga in its added information isn't right, when we were told over and over that the manga wasn't an individual interpretation but Ryukishi's official answer by comparing it to how the anime had to remove a lot of stuffs, and the removal was not always done by Ryukishi but by other people.

The anime was never used to give answers, Ryukishi even suggested that it's better to look at the VN instead than at the anime if you want to solve the mystery.
The manga was chosen as the medium to reveal the truth.

R I am actually thinking about revealing the part about the gun in one panel in the comic-version of EP7 which is in production right now. The fight between Will and Clair in the comic is still at least one year away, but I think by that point it will be okay to make this public.
K So you plan on revealing the truth for those who keep demanding for it, slowly, bit by bit?!
R Basically yes. [Answer to the Golden Witch]

In short Ryukishi himself viewed the two medium as completely different, claiming that if you want to find answers you'll better read the Vn than watch the anime but that the answers that weren't given in the VN will be given in the manga.

The extra answers in the manga aren't 'adaptations'. They're official answers purposely added by Ryukishi.

Originally Posted by Mali

Chiru has several statements from characters (on game board) they had to know from
the meta world. Left out meta elements and you get your plotholes.

I think you're not understanding me. The Game boards we read about are created by the Meta character. Ep 3 & 4, as we see them, were written by Beatrice. Ep 5, as we see it, was written by Lambda. Ep 6, as we see it, was written by Battler.

What we don't see is Banquet, Alliance and End written by Tohya (and we don't know if he ever wrote a Dawn, a Requiem and a Twilight).

Originally Posted by Mali

You misunderstood. I wrote he could altered Legend and Turn. Both of them also tried to pin the adults and servants as the culprits, Land tried Battler...

Why and how should Tohya alter Legend and Turn? They were released to the public by the press and the police so they're known by it.

It seems that magazines and the like have reported on the contents of that message bottle repeatedly. [Ep 4]

We've no info about Tohya writing his own version of them as such version is never credited to him.

In her latest forgery, 'End', she killed off seven of my relatives, at least during the actual story. No, if you count 'Alliance' and 'Banquet', the other forgeries she's made before now, then she's killed off most of my family in horrible ways, over and over again... [Ep 6]

See? No mention of Tohya rewriting Legend and Turn.

Legend and Turn are meant to be solved with the Sayotrice culprit theory, not with the 'insert name of the adult'-trice culprit theory. Beatrice's purpose is, after all, for Battler to find out her identity, not to pin the blame on someone else.

Also Land was a message bottle that was never found. It wasn't a story written by Tohya.

Originally Posted by Mali

and why should the police believe BEFORE they found Maria's message and her jaw that the children could be alive?

It's confirmed that the first message bottle was found the same day the police started their investigation.

...it was confirmed that a similar message bottle had been recovered from the nearby ocean on the day of the accident by the police in their search for lost articles... [Ep 4]

It's possible they first discovered the message bottle and than that Eva was alive. The exact timeline of if the message bottle was found prior or after finding Eva was never given. Ence reading the message they assumed that the children had survived, but when a more throughout check was performed on the island, Maria's jaw and a huge amount of corpses showed up and they discharged the idea the children survived.

Also, when Eva was found alive, they likely discharged the possibility the message bottle was a truthful depiction of how things went (according to Legend Eva died with a stake in her head, her death confirmed by Nanjo and by the other witnessers).

Originally Posted by Mali

The question is whether Tohya wanted people to get the Truth by their own or get their own truth. Well, is is shown it seems Battler doesn't want to share his Beatrice...
but EP7 lights on "the hard cold truth" again.

It is confirmed that when he wrote Banquet he wanted to pin Eva as the culprit.
Later on though he understood through how much pain he pushed Ange and became convinced he had to lay both the Rokkenjima mystery and the truth of that day to rest ence the whole thing with the diary.

Originally Posted by Mali

How? The VN is pretty vague with it. It's a mix up. Please make fine statement about it so I can wash my doubts away.

I've already told you. Ep 4 described the messages in the bottles as different from Legend and Turn as Maria is the narrator, they could look like true account of what had happened (this wouldn't be the case if they had meta in it) and they contain the story only starting from the 4th of October (Turn starts with events prior to it... and Legend's prologue is also prior to it) to the island being 'swallowed up by the Golden Land (exploding)'. No mention of the Meta with which end both Lengend and Turn or even of what happened on the 6th, when the police came to investigate which is contained in Legend.

Many scraps of paper had been stuffed into both of the wine bottles.
It was an extensive notebook written by someone calling themselves Ushiromiya Maria who wasn't Maria, and which told of the events starting the day before the accident and up until the day of the accident in a diary-like way.
And its contents had been the beginning of 'the Witch's Legend Serial Murder Incident', as well as 'the Golden Witch Beatrice's Puzzle'.
"This bizarre diary-style notebook described how the Ushiromiya family members, nailed down on the island by the typhoon, were caught up in a ceremony for the resurrection of a witch, and killed one by one in inexplicable ways.
And in the end, the Golden Witch Beatrice revived, and swallowed up everything into the Golden Land. ......It was written almost as though it was a complete account of the events on that day.
Also, it depicted the current situation on the island at the time in great detail, and the former servants who used to work for the Ushiromiya family gave testimony that it had definitely been written by a human who knew the inside details of the island." [Ep 4]

"......I'm pretty sure I heard that the fisherman's scraps of paper and the police's scraps of paper had completely different contents."
"Correct. Due to that, interest in the Rokkenjima mystery increased even further. Inside both bottles were diary-style notebooks on which was written an account from the day before the accident until the day of the accident. However, while both of their contents were about the same two day period, they were completely different.
It was as though one was the truth and one was a lie. Or perhaps both were lies. In any event, the beginnings and endings alone matched each other. In the beginning, the 18 relatives are sealed up on the island by the typhoon. And in the ending, everyone dies, the Golden Witch is revived, and everything is swallowed up into the Golden Land."
The contents of both message bottles wrote about the events of the day before the accident and the day of the accident.
But the details were completely different.
Both diaries outline a serial murder following the epitaph of the witch, but the order of the sacrifices, the ways they died, and even 'the tale of the two days' was different.
However, in both, everyone died in the end and the witch revived, making for the same circumstances. [Ep 4]

Ep 6 described Banquet differently from how we read it, as:

In particular, Itouikukuro's first forgery, 'Banquet of the Golden Witch', managed to show everything, including Ushiromiya Eva's escape to Kuwadorian. [Ep 6]

which is not included in our Banquet at all.

Way before the manga reached its end members of this message board had figured out that Tohya's tales didn't match with the tales we read just with the VN info... even if back then people still had different theories about what the meta was so as you can see the manga merely confirmed what many had already figured out just by the VN.

[Mali]

Please wait.

When supervising scripts of the anime, Ryukishi would try to put in too much dialogue, which doesn’t work in that medium.
He would supervise the script, but ultimately leave the final version up to the pros.
He was really active, though, in making sure the voice actors got the intonation right. [ACen 2015 07th Expansion Panel #1: When They Cry, The World of Ryukishi07]

The panel started with:

And finally, here’s the first panel from Friday. In this one, Ryukishi07 went over the history of 07th Expansion’s creation, as well as all the hard work and crazy stories that went into the creation of Higurashi.After surprising the audience by hopping out from behind a screen, Ryukishi07 sat down and began the panel to loud applause.

You simply carried over....He didn't specifically speak of the Umineko anime. The #1 panel is not about Umineko, but rather about Higurashi.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

Note that the anime ran from July 2, 2009 to December 24, 2009.

The interview you quoted was given before the anime was finished, ence his involvement might have changed by December... but let's pretend it didn't.
The interviews confirm that the anime reduced the amount of info that were given and that ultimately he didn't have full control on the script.

The manga ADDED informations.

You're basically saying that the manga in its added information isn't right, when we were told over and over that the manga wasn't an individual interpretation but Ryukishi's official answer by comparing it to how the anime had to remove a lot of stuffs, and the removal was not always done by Ryukishi but by other people.

The anime was never used to give answers, Ryukishi even suggested that it's better to look at the VN instead than at the anime if you want to solve the mystery.
The manga was chosen as the medium to reveal the truth.

From wikipedia: Umineko's anime episode #11 II-VI Back Rank Mate originally aired on September 10, 2009. It is dated before he had the interview. This episode showed us clearly than Shannon was pierced. I don't think Ryukishi intended to look over the anime when it had been finished.

The anime still offers "fun of speculation". It was confirmed by Ryukishi and he didn't confirm the anime is wrong. So crucial informations were present to solve the games (on your own). I believe back in these days Shkanontrice isn't wide known.

The extra answers in the manga aren't 'adaptations'. They're official answers purposely added by Ryukishi.

Yes, the mediums are different, but they are still solvable. You may not care but because of this people didn't believe Ryukishi, but in his troll form. That's why people are still saying Skannontrice is not possible, believing in other theories. Even the japanese wiki of Umineko has speculations and theories (in contrast to the English Wiki where some Shkannon fans are got pissed of a certain fan theory and decided to erase it).

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Mali

Please wait.

The panel started with:

You simply carried over....He didn't specifically speak of the Umineko anime. The #1 panel is not about Umineko, but rather about Higurashi.

As the interview was dated 2015 and the dialogues aren't litterally translated but just summarized I assumed he talked of his experience in both anime. I might be wrong though and he might be negletting mentioning his experience in Umineko. It's possible, yes.
If you've a better translation though I would love to see it.

Anyway this doesn't change that in the previous interview dated 2009 he claimed if you want to guess things you'll do better look at the Vn instead than the anime.

Originally Posted by Mali

From wikipedia: Umineko's anime episode #11 II-VI Back Rank Mate originally aired on September 10, 2009. It is dated before he had the interview. This episode showed us clearly than Shannon was pierced.

As I've said when I quoted the interview I saw the interview translated on a post dated 23/07/2009. The interview is OLDER though, as the poster claimed the translation wasn't done by him but he took some other place and it was a translation from an interview done some time before (I can't find the original translation though).
Ence the interview was released at best in July 2009 or prior to it.
As you can see an episode released in September 2009 was clearly made after the interview was released.

In addition to this in the interview itself Ryukishi says:

This story will be fun to read over again. The anime will start very soon, won’t it? People with certain suspicions might say “Ah!” and clap their hands at certain points in the anime.

Confirming the interview was released prior to the START of the anime.

Usually in Japan they don't start releasing the anime after this is completed but while they're still working on the episodes so it's more likely that, by the time Ryukishi released that interview Ryukishi hadn't seen most of the Umineko anime yet because it still didn't exist in its complete form.

Originally Posted by Mali

I don't think Ryukishi intended to look over the anime when it had been finished.

I'm not sure what's your point here. If you don't think Ryukishi intended to look over the anime when it had been finished you seem to imply he didn't check on it to see if there were mistakes.

Regardless of what you're meaning though I think we're losing the point of the original discussion.

The anime is not the manga. You're trying to push forward the idea that if in the anime it was done a sloppy work, the same must have happened for the manga but the fact that the anime did a sloppy work can't be used as a proof to state that certainly the same happened in the manga.

Not only the interview you're using as basis for your thesis was given at best prior to the 5th episode of the anime being released (but likely much earlier) and when the manga hadn't even started releasing Ep 8 but the two are two different media handled by different people.

Even if you were to find proof that Ryukishi babystepped the anime from ep 1 to ep 24 and still missed some mistakes this wouldn't work as a proof there are mistakes or whatever else you think there is in the manga.

Originally Posted by Mali

The anime still offers "fun of speculation". It was confirmed by Ryukishi and he didn't confirm the anime is wrong. So crucial informations were present to solve the games (on your own). I believe back in these days Shkanontrice isn't wide known.

Skipping the fact he couldn't claim the anime was wrong otherwise no one would have watched it, back when he has released the interview he couldn't know that the anime would contain mistakes as the anime hadn't started yet.
You can't grant that something will happen in the future with certain... unless you're Lambda.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say with 'crucial informations were present'. Are you trying to imply that the mistake in Ep 11 was crucial information?
Or that the anime contained all the crucial informations?
Because granting that you can have fun speculating doesn't insure you'll have all the crucial informations. And if Ryukishi himself, even before the anime was completed, is recommending the VN over the anime he likely already knew important informations would be missing (the best case is Alliance were all the investigation Battler does in the Teaparty is removed from the anime).

It's confirmed Ryukishi was aware the servants were suspected when Ryukishi released Ep 3 VN version. When the anime started Running Ryukishi was about to release Ep 5, so VN readers had already all the elements to solve the story (we know that the story is solvable just with the first 4 episodes) and some already did.

The theory that Shannon & Kanon are the culprits is actually pretty old in Japan, I know someone here mentioned exactly when it started and it was definitely prior to the release of Ep 5 (I can't remember if people also speculated they were a single person).

Of course as the VN hadn't confirmed it yet, it wasn't the only one theory.
Ryukishi though had already decided on such theory and even explained it to Beatrice's voice actress so she could give a fitting performance.

... however I don't really get what you were trying to say with ShKannon not being widely known. That people would want to try and guess who was the culprit? If that's the case, as said before, Ryukishi recommended trying to go for the VN instead than using just the anime.

Originally Posted by Mali

Yes, the mediums are different, but they are still solvable. You may not care but because of this people didn't believe Ryukishi, but in his troll form. That's why people are still saying Skannontrice is not possible, believing in other theories. Even the japanese wiki of Umineko has speculations and theories (in contrast to the English Wiki where some Shkannon fans are got pissed of a certain fan theory and decided to erase it).

Dear God, was all this meant to reach the point that ShKannon is the wrong theory? Please, tell me this isn't were you were aiming to get.

If we go by the 'we don't believe in Ryukishi' tangent, then we can't solve anything. If we don't believe in Ryukishi then we can say he deliberately lied in everything he said and that he lied when he said the game was solvable.

As for the wiki: personally I'm not interested in reading fan theories in a wiki. As far as I'm involved a wiki should post information on the series, not on speculations by the fans... (unless it's a wiki specifically done for posting fan speculations) expecially if 'speculations by the fans' means just 'posting one speculation by the fans' over which its supporters can't even agree as I've seen way too many Rosatrice theories.

And, said this, I'm also pretty annoyed at how the Umineko wikia reported the ShKannon theory adding here and there speculations (as well as mistakes) in their so called truth page for each episode.

Personally I think that yes, if they were to put speculations in the truth pages, they could have also left up the Rosatrice theory. As for me though I wouldn't have put either.
In a wikia, if you don't know how something went, the best way is to admit that the truth is unconfirmed.

[Mali]

Hi jjblue,

I wanted to reply it sooner but I changed my answer. I looked up to look for the source of the interview on 7th exp and Keiya's homepage. and some proper translations of the Acen interview. I failed with that.

Well about the anime, you may not feel this because you openly dislike this and read the VN first, it made Umineko in a certain degree popular in the west because youtube videos were more accessable than the VN. Even if it's not well done by Deen. It has still effects on the watchers , but they cannot be blamed for that.

"Crucial information" was a bad term I used. If I recall correctly the anime didn't properly intruduced every character. And the mistakes...but these things are a thorn in the eye if you are a fan of Umineko. Q: Why should Ryukishi say such things in the interview? It's odd if he cannot know how the final product will be. Did he just overview the raw script and alpha state?

In terms of the Shkannon theory I don't know if animesuki was the core of speculations nor where the theories of the Japanese came from. But wasn't Ryukishi aware of people's theories by looking on the internet?

Dear God, was all this meant to reach the point that ShKannon is the wrong theory?

No, I felt I must write that Umineko lives from speculating If Ryukishi really wanted the reader to get the truth of Sayo, why didn't he included that and the additional red truths in the VN to start with?

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Mali

Well about the anime, you may not feel this because you openly dislike this and read the VN first, it made Umineko in a certain degree popular in the west because youtube videos were more accessable than the VN. Even if it's not well done by Deen. It has still effects on the watchers , but they cannot be blamed for that.

Sorry but you got your info wrong. I actually started with the anime, moved to the VN and then read the manga. If I hadn't apprecciated the anime at all I wouldn't have bothered to read the VN. However when I read the VN I realized the difference in quality between the two media as well as the mistakes in it I was forced to see how the anime, despite being an interesting anime per se, is bad as a trasposition of the VN.

Originally Posted by Mali

"Crucial information" was a bad term I used. If I recall correctly the anime didn't properly intruduced every character. And the mistakes...but these things are a thorn in the eye if you are a fan of Umineko. Q: Why should Ryukishi say such things in the interview? It's odd if he cannot know how the final product will be. Did he just overview the raw script and alpha state?

Likely Ryukishi checked over the scripts. We also know he checked over the dubbing, giving tips to the voice actors. He however likely wasn't around during the drawing part (which is in many anime often mostly not even done in Japan). At best he might have watched the storyboards but whose can be very sketchy so he might not have been able to realize that in some situations times were off or that the stake really pierced Shannon's head when it actually couldn't.

What likely replied was likely his expectative about how the anime would be as well as his plan on how the anime were supposed to turn. He might have thought that just being involved in the script would be enough. In a way it likely insured that some mistakes were avoided but Ryukishi probably overlooked the power of timing up the scenes correctly and of visuals.

Originally Posted by Mali

In terms of the Shkannon theory I don't know if animesuki was the core of speculations nor where the theories of the Japanese came from. But wasn't Ryukishi aware of people's theories by looking on the internet?

The Japanese fans had their own forums and Ryukishi confirmed he checked them. I've been told in the Japanese forums the theory that Shannon and Kanon were the culprits came up pretty early on, though I'm not sure about the theory of them being the same person. It's also to say though that some people checked and Ep 1-5 can be solved just by using the two of them as culprits, without needing them to be one and the same.

Originally Posted by Mali

No, I felt I must write that Umineko lives from speculating If Ryukishi really wanted the reader to get the truth of Sayo, why didn't he included that and the additional red truths in the VN to start with?

Because in the beginning Ryukishi wanted the readers to figure out the Truth by themselves, same as Beatrice who could have told Battler about everything directly but instead presented him riddles and wanted him to figure out truths.
Later on it seems he changed his mind and decided that, after leaving people some more time to speculate over things, he would reveal the truth through the manga.

Umineko after all is, in a way, a project that also evolved according to the input he received (think at how Land was scrapped and replaced with Banquet).

In a way his thinking process in regards with the truth create an interesting parallel with Battler in Ep 8.

In the VN version of Ep 8 Battler, instead than telling Ange the truth, proposes her his game, Ange doesn't get his message, things happens, Ange read the book of the one truth and when they meet again Ange had understood everything and was fine with what Battler had done and Battler didn't regret doing it.

In the manga version Battler gets reproached by Erika and Beatrice for chosing this method, things happens, Ange read the book of the one truth and when she reaches the Golden Land she'll need Beatrice and the others to help her to understand his message. Battler too will also clear up to her some things. At this point Ange will accept his brother meant well and although she'll claim she would have preferred for him to be more straightforward she will be all right with what he did.

If you want the two versions can mirror what Ryukishi thought it would happen after he were to release the VN (everyone will get his purpose after a while without help) and what it truly happened instead (his message resulted too obscure so people needed help to understood it and apprecciate it).

[Levani]

Alright, I've been reading EP5 manga and... what's going on here, I forgot.

I know that we are not shown Erika's POV in EP5 and Battler and Lambda are unreliable narrators but why does not Erika question Shkannon regardless? Manga constantly has panels of Erika being with them in the same goddamn room. I know we're just seeing Lambda's false narrative but this should not matter to Erika, even if we do not see her POV. Is she invested on the Natsuhi hate bandwagon so much that Yasu trolled her this hard? Erika of all people?

And if Lambda removed either Shannon or Kanon in the 5th game, Erika would question this new character in EP6, so we do know that at some point she saw them both and acknowledged that they're there. However, in the study for example, where manga depicts Shkannon being together with Erika, there's no way that she would be seeing both of them. One of them is missing and she is silent about this? That's just so un-like Erika.

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Levani

Alright, I've been reading EP5 manga and... what's going on here, I forgot.

I know that we are not shown Erika's POV in EP5 and Battler and Lambda are unreliable narrators but why does not Erika question Shkannon regardless? Manga constantly has panels of Erika being with them in the same goddamn room. I know we're just seeing Lambda's false narrative but this should not matter to Erika, even if we do not see her POV. Is she invested on the Natsuhi hate bandwagon so much that Yasu trolled her this hard? Erika of all people?

And if Lambda removed either Shannon or Kanon in the 5th game, Erika would question this new character in EP6, so we do know that at some point she saw them both and acknowledged that they're there. However, in the study for example, where manga depicts Shkannon being together with Erika, there's no way that she would be seeing both of them. One of them is missing and she is silent about this? That's just so un-like Erika.

It seems that the first time Erika played Ep 5 she apparently did it close to how Battler plays Ep 1 and Ange plays Ep 8, watching the scene from her piece and not just listening to the narrator.

In fact in Ep 8 is said that she realized the trick when, after Ep 6, she returned to look at Ep 5, but this time she did so from an 'outside perspective'. Due to this she heard that the narration was done by Battler and that it didn't match what she saw with her inside perspective.
In Ep 5 Erika, thanks to her inside perspective which is also reliable as she was the detective, knew that Kanon wasn't in the parlour and she was also told that this was because he was preparing the guestroom for her... which clashed with how, once she looked at Ep 5 from the outside, she heard Battler narrating about how Kanon was in the parlour.
Erika comments how in Ep 5 she never saw Kanon and Shannon together... yet the narrative described them being present at the same place with her more than once.
However, as she was ordered by Bern to tail Natsuhi, during Ep 5 she didn't pay attention to them and to the fact they were never seen together at all.

When Erika realized the truth she was quite angry at how she was trolled so thoroughly...

[Levani]

That makes so much sense, thank you.

What information was Erika given in the study? Parlor I understand, but Lambda depicts Shkannon in the study. Oh and what about the red truth that Lambda gave about the count of people during the parlor scene?

All this information comes from EP8 manga right? During Battler VS Erika?

[jjblue1]

[QUOTE=Levani;5676359]That makes so much sense, thank you.

What information was Erika given in the study? Parlor I understand, but Lambda depicts Shkannon in the study.

After discussing the parlour scene they don't go into the details of the other scenes. Erika just says each time she was given a different explanation about why Kanon (or Shannon) weren't present and, as she didn't care about them, she just let it slide.

Originally Posted by Levani

Oh and what about the red truth that Lambda gave about the count of people during the parlor scene?

That red truth is 'outside information' given when Erika wasn't present so, the first time she played Ep 5, she didn't hear it. Bern heard it but she likely didn't care the same way she didn't care about how Kinzo was supposed to be dead and yet she let Erika use him for her theory.

Originally Posted by Levani

All this information comes from EP8 manga right? During Battler VS Erika?

Yes, during the Battler vs Erika battle we're basically given the solutions of Ep 5 & 6 ShKannon tricks. It's a reading I recommend as it's awesomly done.

[Levani]

Yes, during the Battler vs Erika battle we're basically given the solutions of Ep 5 & 6 ShKannon tricks. It's a reading I recommend as it's awesomly done.

Don't really wanna read the fan-translation. I'll read it once Yen Press gets to it ... which will take forever.

[Levani]

Sorry for the double post, but do we have a solution for the EP5 knock and letter placement? I was under the impression that there was no knock and Lambda was trolling both Bern and Erika really hard but this red truth...

From the manga official translation : none of them mistook the knock for anything else
Japanese : そして、彼らは誰もノック音を誤認しない

It implies that knock did happen?

[AuraTwilight]

It's intentionally misleading. You can say they didn't mistake the knock for anything else because there was never a knock to mistake.

[Y Ddraig Goch]

Spoiler for Claire; Sayo question:

Claire said that, had Battler come earlier or later, a smaller tragedy in comparison to the disaster that happened on Rokkenjima could've happened instead. What did she mean exactly? Sayo was suicidal. Was she just going to kill herself?

Also, Sayo doubted her relationship with George from the start, yes? Why did she get into a relationship she, as aforementioned, doubted from the start?

[Rudolf Ushiromiya]

IIRC they say that if Battler had returned a year earlier or later the disaster would not have happened. A year later and Shannon would have already won, married George, and left the island. A year earlier and Kanon and Jessica's relationship would not have really started. It would just be a struggle between Beatrice and Shannon, which is a straight duel, not a deadlock.

[Rudolf Ushiromiya]

I do have a few questions, first off, I'm reading episode 8's manga and came across this scene, what's going on here?


Second I am still wondering what Rudolf meant when he stated he would likely be killed in episode one; was he talking about what he was scared Kyrie may do to him once he told her and Battler his secret?

Lastly, What did Rudolf even do for his job, same with Kyrie? Rudolf mentions Kyrie frequently fights and can defend herself, Kryie mentions that she had to take care of women who were after woman and Rudolf seems to work with some shady guys. So does he have an actual job, like what business is he in?

[Witch of Uncertainty]

What do you mean? Rudolf is about to tell Kyrie about Battler in that scene. The scene above is Rudolf having sex with women everywhere.
And same with EP1. That was him just being dramatic (or maybe not).
Their specific jobs were never specified.