Is Ultemicha Rinoa's great grandaughter or were her powerz passed on to some1 else?

For people who have clogged the games and know lots about it, heres something for you to think about. Ultimechia is from the future. Squall and co go and kill Ultimehcia in the past and then come back to there own time and live happily ever after. But if its true about sorceress passing on there powers before they die then Rinoa must have had to pass them on. Now just say Squall and Rinoa had a daughter, perhaps RInoa passed her powers onot her or perhaps she passed them onto someone else. Just say she passed them onto her daughter as she did to hers and it kept going on until Ultemchia was born became a syco and honed her power. So her Great Realation Grandmother in Rinoa. One more thing all the sorceress are human, edea, adel and rinoa but the final form of ultemichia is like a monster my only theory on this is that she transformed after absorbing all the other witches you fight before going to her castle.

The theory in which I believe is Squall dies at the end of the game and the ending is Rinoas ideal perfect world (the party scene). So I dont believe they had family,etc. But thats what Ive always believed, so dont anyone start the bashing cause I'll just inform one of the Knights. This is my opinion on the matter. You dont like it, tough.

While it is possible that Ultimecia is Rinoas great-great-great-grand daughter or something, there isn't anything which indicates that this is in fact true, so we can only assume Ultimecia is not related to anyone in the main party. Further, I highly doubt that Rinoa would want to give her powers to her daughter, as she clearly does not desire being a sorceress herself....

As for Ultimecias final form, what you say is correct, and it actually says if you scan her final form: "Transformed to absorb time and space....."

Sapphire: I don't know if you want to start a discussion here, but I was wondering what exactly is in the game which makes you believe that theory? Because as far as I can tell, there is nothing indicating that the ending is anything but reality...

its possible but there is no evidence in the game ot back it up so it more than likely to be false.

I just thought of this. In disc 4 on the ragnarok when you talk to Rinoa she says her powers will eventually reach ultemicha. And perhpas Sir Bahamut is right, Rinoa wouldnt have passed her powers onto her ddaughter but perhaps somelse. which eventually reached ultimechia.

Sir B. has already pointed out that, while not impossible, there is nothing in the game to suggest that Ultimecia is a descendent of Squall and Rinoa. What's notable, however, is that FF games have a tendency to make "mysterious relationships" fairly obvious (Laguna and Squall, for example, or Shadow and Relm). As such, it's unlikely that Ultimecia was intended as a descendent, given that there is no hint of this.

SapphireStar, not to be an obdurate ass, but you can't call it both a theory and just an opinion. Of course, it would have to simply be your opinion, since it's a grand deciever argument, and fails by default.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ryushikaze

SapphireStar, not to be an obdurate ass, but you can't call it both a theory and just an opinion. Of course, it would have to simply be your opinion, since it's a grand deciever argument, and fails by default.

---

Wow.



Regarding the title of this thread, I would recommend that next time it is not so revealing or possibly spoiling, if you know what I mean.

-LYCHON

Quote:

---

SapphireStar, not to be an obdurate ass, but you can't call it both a theory and just an opinion. Of course, it would have to simply be your opinion, since it's a grand deciever argument, and fails by default.

---

It is a theory because it is on the Internet and others believe it also. And in my opinion, I believe that theory to be correct. Im reporting you to Leeza cause as I said thats my opinion and the theory I believe.

~SapphireStar~ I don't quite understand why you needed to report this. It's your opinion/theory, but he also has a right to his own and I didn't see anyone bashing you. Unless I'm totally missing something as I have never played this game.

Theory implies evidence- IE objective.
Just an opinion means purely subjective- IE totally nonobjective.


And if we do treat it as a theory it requires what we are shown in the end of the game to be a lie- IE: a grand deception- it is incredibly disadvantaged. Oh, and just because other people believe it does not make it true. Appeal to popularity is a logical fallacy. Evidence is all that matters in theories.

I'm not saying you can't believe it, but understand that as a theory it is INCREDIBLY weak.

I'm confused! >_<

Actually, you don't have to have any proof to have a theory. Proof would turn a theory into fact.

No, you don't have to have any proof to have a hypothesis. Evidence is required for theory, and LOTS of evidence is required for 'fact'

Granted, people use the term 'theory' loosely quite often, but the point remains, Opinion and Theory are seperate.

Actually, while opinion and theory are seperate, you are still not completely correct. All you need is something that hints at a possibility to have a theory. A hypothesis doesn't even require that much. Once you gather enough evidence to prove said theory, then it becomes fact. Evidence and proof are not completely the same thing.

Opinion, requires no proof or even any logic. I can say that cheese tastes like dog[img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img]. I will never have to taste dog[img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img] to hold this opinion. Hell, i can eat dog[img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img][img]/xxx.gif[/img] and know for a fact that I'm wrong and still hold that opinion.