1. There's nothing in the game that says Snow vaguely remembers his mothers name.
2. If Snow lost his parents when he was young that means they died.
3. Snow knew nothing about Nora or her name when his happy game was named N.O.R.A.
Printable View
1. There's nothing in the game that says Snow vaguely remembers his mothers name.
2. If Snow lost his parents when he was young that means they died.
3. Snow knew nothing about Nora or her name when his happy game was named N.O.R.A.
Oh, OK. *Goes off to find Cloud and Squall in FFIX, figure out what guided Squall and Rinoa to an airship that just happened to be floating around in VIII etc*Quote:
Originally Posted by Future Esthar
Not necessarily.Quote:
2. If Snow lost his parents when he was young that means they died.
And my probability aproach debunk your other two points.
Coincidences like this happen because Square-Enix makes them happen for plot reasons.
That is the circle of life.
*dies*
I would very much like to know what you just said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Future Esthar
Yea so Im going to point out again what someone else did already... The Team is N.O.R.A. and i quote Lightning here.
"It's a stupid acronym. Their little code. Stands for "No Obligations, Rules, or Authority."" —Lightning
NORA - The Final Fantasy Wiki has more Final Fantasy information than Cid could research
Ok can we end this now?
Exactly.To show indirectly that Snow is Nora´s son.Quote:
Coincidences like this happen because Square-Enix makes them happen for plot reasons.
That is the circle of life.
Not JUST because of literary style reasons.
They make it so it's another reason for Hope to be mad at Snow, NOT because Snow is Nora's son.Quote:
Originally Posted by Future Esthar
I agree with Brennan and think you're on the losing side of this argument, FE. But it is a nice little theory that would inevitably come up from yourself and at least had some basic reasoning for it, so I'll give you that. But I think it's safe to say that Snow and Nora are not related.
They can´t do that.Creating impossibilities like that just to color the story is bad storytelling.Quote:
They make it so it's another reason for Hope to be mad at Snow, NOT because Snow is Nora's son.
Makes a lot of sense to me.
"The army's no match for NORA!" says Snow to Hope, who gets very angry at that point because, obviously, the army effectively killed Nora. Hope's interest in why the group was called NORA in the first place - he asks Lightning because it's his mother's name. And when he's told what it means, he gets angry. This is all to do with NORA having the same name as his mother: It gives Hope even more reason to get angry at him, even more reasons to want to kill him.
But the coincidence must be explained rationally.Otherwise it´s horrible storytelling.
You can call it horrible storytelling and are fully entitled to that opinion, but that's the way it was told.
What would be genuinely horrible storytelling would be having Snow be Hope's brother without ever even mentioning the vague possibility within the story.
Join this event with Nora saying "moms are though" and smiling before falling.
Even though the latter is less likely to prove anything it is amplified when added to the strong evidence of the former.
Everytime Square creates these impossibilities one should know there is some thing underlining.
Ragnarok rescuing Squall and Rinoa is a good example.