Maybe... Maybe Not. We'll never know anyway (or maybe we will...)
Printable View
Maybe... Maybe Not. We'll never know anyway (or maybe we will...)
NO. Just say No kids.
You shall not hide the truth! The people have the right to know!
By the way, of course it's not really an important issue. But some peopel LIKE to discuss such issues about books and movies...why should a game be exempt. it's fun, and fun is what the game is all about. What is the use of discussing R=U you ask? The same as PLAYING Final Fantasy VIII. None, it's for personal enjoyment, (both the discussion and the inevitable realisation that WE are right of course ;))
Phoenix, yeah, that post was a bit rash, I agree; I was already mad at random electronic objects that day (particularly attempting to catch monsters on FFX...:mad2: ), and I can easily avert anger from one thing to another. I apologize. So let me rephrase what I said...
It doesn't matter. It's only a game.
Being annoyed at an FFX minigame is an excuse for murder in my book. Thanks for the apology though.
Well, after reading this theory at Apocalyspe, I'm beginning to see the possibilites. I'm not entirely convinced, but this article does have very good points, you might want to check it out.
That article outlines it, but misses out huge parts of the theory and evidence, it also uses the Doomtrain example which I personally don't like.
As I said pretty much the entire theory is being discussed in an active thread (thanks to the mods for that).
It doesn't matter. It would make for an interesting sequel if it was true, but it's not fascinating enough for me to want to delve that deeply into the game. It's fun to play for the story that's there.
wouldn't it be possible if rinoa/ulti just created griever.after all she did bring 2 staues to life during the parade..
It is, and I'll say again. THERE IS AN ACTIVE TOPIC ON THIS, here isn't the place to discuss it. The mods are being kind allowing twwo but it's been said specifically this will get closed if people argue.
If there was any actual evidence for the R=U theory I'd consider believing it. Since it's based on people who just like to poke at things and stretch them, I have to say that it's garbage.
Would it make my last post pointless if I pointed out that none of what Demandred said was accurate?
I think square intended for this to happen... but anyways i think maybe yea....
Why? Because I have a different opinion on the R=U theory? I believe that there is nothing, absolutely nothing in the game that actually backs it up. Everything I have ever read on the matter is taking material from the game and stretching it so that it fits the idea that R=U. I find the theory, and the "evidence" supporting it to be nothing but a joke. Support it if you want, you're more than welcome to, but the fact that Square has never said R=U, and that the game itself doesn't directly state it either, doesn't make it true. I don't see any evidence to back it up, so my points are just as accurate as the next person since the game doesn't actually state that this is true.Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixAsh
Would it make my last post pointless if I pointed out that none of what Demandred said was accurate?
Well I'm not defending it in here because there's a perfectly good thread for that, but I might as well back up my point.
There is evidence, you just don't accept it. So given there IS evidence and you have dismissed it you can't have considered believing in it. So none of that sentence is true.Quote:
If there was any actual evidence for the R=U theory I'd consider believing it.
It's based on explaining many things in the game that don't make sense without some kind of theory. Even if the first half of your sentence was true, noone is forcing you to call it garbage so that is also innacurate.Quote:
Since it's based on people who just like to poke at things and stretch them, I have to say that it's garbage.
That was all you said so I stand by my statement.