Printable View
Has anyone thought that Odine could be wrong?
I mean, honestly, the guy is just speaking out of hyperbole when he claims there is an invention that he hasn't invented yet... That's... Yeah, that's more than... uh questionable... Kinda like in the same context that he 'knows' the Ultimecia is 'many generations' ahead 'our' time...
Hey! Hey, I'm not sayin' it's 'fact'... I'm just sayin' it's questionable. Again the entire games story is questionable.
There is nothing in the game that refutes anything that Odine says at any point. If Square intended for him to be wrong about anything they would have at least put something in there to disprove him.
The R-U can be discuss, that is the fun about it, But is so balanced between the vague an the obvious that no one really can say that is it true or false, only square can do that, and no matter what we think, if square says that squall is ultimecia, we all shut up and accept it, but nothing like that will happen in such a balanced topic like this, this is a matter of interpretation, and each one of us can have our own, ask the guy that think quisitis is ultimecia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
About the ultimania guide, there is a lot of contradicition in the game about that, beginning with " a witch should pass his powers to die" and showing the process with ultimecia, but this inmortality issue is confusing, can she die for aging ? or she must be killed with a silver sword ? there is vague information about that , so , a lot of official information that contradict each other, and the rest of it is interpretation of hairs colors. inmortality , time compression yeah ! , easy topics.
all your questions will be answered here:http://forums.eyesonff.com/showthread.php?t=91575
You're going to have to back up this claim, because as far as I see it, logical and rational reasoning can allow us to determine top a fairly large extent what is "true or false".Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilder
That's true, but this is a rational debate, not a simple "sharing of interpretations", and as such, any interpretation that is to be considered valid MUST be logically justifiable. If you don't actually have any arguments for R=U besides "it's just my interpretation" than that's fine, but it does not in any way make R=U generally valid in any way.Quote:
this is a matter of interpretation, and each one of us can have our own, ask the guy that think quisitis is ultimecia.
Oh really? Take a look at the Ultimania again:Quote:
About the ultimania guide, there is a lot of contradicition in the game about that, beginning with " a witch should pass his powers to die" and showing the process with ultimecia, but this inmortality issue is confusing, can she die for aging ? or she must be killed with a silver sword ? there is vague information about that , so , a lot of official information that contradict each other, and the rest of it is interpretation of hairs colors. inmortality , time compression yeah ! , easy topics.
Doesn't sound very confusing to me. It's stated black on white with no ambiguity whatsoever. Not vague at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Square-Enix
Well, dude, look honestly, Odine was wrong about Time Compression. Ultimecia could not compress 'all time'... She could only compress the present moment and the past, no all time which would encompass the future. Yeah this is a minute little 'fact' but the fact is Odine is as zealous as the R=U enthusiasts and haters. I mean, he wears the gayest Queen of England what the helled-horrors were the character designers thinking collar EVER... Are really gonna take him seriously? No... I didn't think so... LOL:pQuote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
q=u thats all i have to say hahaha
It canīt be proved true or false sir bahamut. letīs take an example, what about taking exactly the same FFVIII, but , lets say that nowhere in the game laguna is mentioned in text as squall father, nowhere, but some shy guy suddenly says , hey laguna looks like squall, why ? and then the rest jump over him saying therīs no prove , every character looks the same !.
I personally donīt think rinoa resemblance to ultimecia is the strongest point of the theory, because square keep using sort of a patron to the faces, but, you could analize every single point of theory, and the only thing that would sound racionally to you is a dialog text saying "rinoa is ultimecia".
You have said it for me bahamut, normal life spams but they must pass the powers to be able to die, so, if they donīt pass the powers, they donīt die, in peace or not, they donīt die. and you see in the game how ultimecia is defeated, but no witch dying for aging is named.
I think I'll wait (hope) until rationality once again restores itself to this thread before contributing much in the way of argument. I will say though Wilder, that although I defend R=U's plausibility, one can not simply assume that it can not be found to be true or false. Unfortunately, as with many theories, it would be far easier to prove it false than true, I just don't think such a thing has been acheived (nor do I think it has been shown to be massively unlikely).
finalfantasyguy4ever why do you insist on repeatedly posting short, unfounded, and largely off topic posts? You have set up your own thread about Q=U for whatever reason you had, why feel the need to post your idea here? People are enjoying this thread, and although you may not like R=U, it thread is not being forced on you. If you don't like the thread, why try and spoil it for others?
Is it possible to write a letter to Square? Or an email...
Yeah, the truth is that all my answers have been answered.. :rolleyes2Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
Anyway, about R=U, i'm really not a supporter of this theory, but spectulations will always be! Although i don't really understand how can Rinoa and Ultimecia can be the same person, if they co-exist in the same world! The words say it, it's "compression", which means future and present become one, they are not separated!
I'm sorry, but I don't understand the point of this example.Quote:
It canīt be proved true or false sir bahamut. letīs take an example, what about taking exactly the same FFVIII, but , lets say that nowhere in the game laguna is mentioned in text as squall father, nowhere, but some shy guy suddenly says , hey laguna looks like squall, why ? and then the rest jump over him saying therīs no prove , every character looks the same !.
Don't be absurd. I have several times referred to an FAQ going through each single point demonstrating their flaws. Your claim that I am merely overly stubborn is ridiculous. I advise you stop coming with such inane statements in the future.Quote:
I personally donīt think rinoa resemblance to ultimecia is the strongest point of the theory, because square keep using sort of a patron to the faces, but, you could analize every single point of theory, and the only thing that would sound racionally to you is a dialog text saying "rinoa is ultimecia".
Go back and read the quote again. Actually, forget that, lemme restate it here, and bold the important bit:Quote:
You have said it for me bahamut, normal life spams but they must pass the powers to be able to die, so, if they donīt pass the powers, they donīt die, in peace or not, they donīt die. and you see in the game how ultimecia is defeated, but no witch dying for aging is named.
It says it right there. A sorceress cannot outlive a regular human being. The implication is that when a sorceress reaches death, either by old age or defeat in battle, the body will force the sorceress to give up her powers in order to die "in peace" as it were. You'd know that if you read the FAQ, but apparently you are rather content with merely coming with vague, wishy washy statements and accusations towards me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Square-Enix
Iīm not trying to atack you Sir bahamut, Iīm just enjoying the game.
what I tried to say with the laguna example is the possibility that something that we all know confirmed in the same game, like the fact that laguna is squallīs father, would have been not confirmed in text but everything else remains the same, or maybe created to cause this confussion as a part of the way the story is told. In that case, Threads with the title " Laguna is squallīs father " and the theories to prove it true or false would exist.
But, R-U Case is a different one, because, what would happen if square hipotetically says that Rinoa is ultimecia officially ? that would mean that all the points in the theory are really hints to take the player to this conclusion. I said hipotetically because I doubt that official statement will exist to prove it false or true, this discussion is good for the sales.
Hey, and Iīm reading all the long guides and the ultimania quote, I know that each point have a counterpoint, some of those are very smart and elaborated and really prove the theory is an interpretation of some players, but those are interpretations too. Nobody can make a statement about the absolute meaning of the last FMV, and in some of those guides Iīve read something like that.
The quote from ultimania is a strong counterpoint, A Sorceress' lifespan is the same as a normal human's, however they cannot die until they have passed on their power to the next Sorceress. but I keep asking , what happen if the witch dont pass her power ?, And I know what you are thinking, she must run and give her powers to somebody obligatory, but what happens in ultimecia universe where is nobody else to pass the torch. (there comes the time travel theories)
I don't remember it being stated anywhere that she was only able to compress the present and the past. Evidence plz.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
What I'm saying is that she can only compress the present to the past but she can't compress the future because she hasn't gotten there; if she did, she would either already be dead or somehow escaping her fate by altering the future; which of course we know that she doesn't. The only 'evidence' I have is that she didn't compress the 'future' that couldn't be possible. Of course, at the time of his statement, Odine may have been referring to the future from their current time perspective, but either way it still stands she did not compress the 'future'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian HitcherI don't remember it being stated anywhere that she was only able to compress the present and the past. Evidence plz.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
Seriously, I don't care how much to type the character is, he can't make invalid predictions of the future. Heck Reed Richards doesn't do anything like that... Odine could be wrong, its a possiblity.