Well, I still can't see exactly how the theory works, and im quite relutant on accepting it, so I wonder if anyone wants to explain it for me?
Thanks
Printable View
Well, I still can't see exactly how the theory works, and im quite relutant on accepting it, so I wonder if anyone wants to explain it for me?
Thanks
It doesn't, really. The Ultimania Guide book states that Sorceresses have normal human life spans. Most people who spout the R=U theory claim that Rinoa somehow lives into the time of Ultimecia to become her. This simply can't be true.
It's false, because according to Future Esthar, Rinoa is a propagator.
No, she's the REAL Ellone. While the one sending everyone to the past is a cyborg. (According to FE anyway. And it's Squall that's the propogator, isn't it? xD)
Though does it really say WHEN Ultimecia's time is? Suppose its only 50 years in the future. Rinoa might be old, but I'm sure she could live till then.
Well, the idea portrayed by the theory is that after seeing Squall and all her friends die of old age, Rinoa will slowly go insane and one day become Ultimecia in the far future. This theory came into existence for several reasons. The first and most important one (that makes the whole thing seemingly possible) was the misinterpretation of one of Edea’s lines that states that Sorceresses will never die unless they give up their powers first. This was thought to mean that sorceresses don’t age, thus making it possible for Rinoa to exist in the far future despite the fact that we have already been told by Laguna that none of the characters could technically live until Ultimecia’s time. This was further supplemented by the fact that the character model of Edea in FMVs didn’t look all that older than that of Rinoa, Quistis and Selphie.
After this, people began to go through the game and pick out some of Rinoa’s lines that could be re-interpreted in light of the new theory. One of the main ones was when Rinoa states that she “Doesn’t want the future” and that “She might be one day forced to fight her friends” (this is paraphrased of course. Hell if I can remember the actual lines). Another key scene is when Rinoa asks Squall to meet her outside of Edea’s House one day. This happens to be the point in which Ultimecia has anchored her castle in the future.
The problem with the theory is that the whole thing hinged on the idea that sorceresses didn’t age. This was recently proven untrue by the FFVIII Ultimania Guide which corrected Edea’s passage to say that sorceresses do age, they just can’t die until they give up their powers. This of course makes the entire theory pretty much pointless.
The reason the theory was created by fans in the first place was always thought to be because most saw it as an attempt to give the game’s antagonist some actual depth. One of the most criticized aspects of FFVIII was the fact that Ultimecia didn’t really have anything in the way of a background, making her a rather cliché “bad guy in the caste at the end” type villain. Many considered her inferior to her predecessor in the last game (ie Sephiroth), who received a lot more scene time and thus character development. FFVIII fans probably leapt on the R=U theory as a way of saying “Hey, it turns our bad guy has depth to, so stfu you Sephiroth fanboys!”.
There are of course people who still believe that the connection is a valid one and try to present a new case for it. These people are usually barked down pretty quickly though as any attempts to reconstruct the theory while avoiding the original point of sorceresses being unable to age is almost unanimously seen as ‘beating a dead horse’.
I didn't really find Ultimecia undeveloped at all. When possessing Edea in Galbadia in Disc One, she basically says (something to the effect) that Sorceresses have been hunted down and persecuted for generations. We even see that the SeeDs were hunting her down across generations, and now even freaking time itself. She's fed up with it, and is going to take extreme action via Deus ex Machina 'liedk omg nihilism!1one'. Granted, not the most detailed villain, but there's more to her than meets the eye.
It says that she lives many generations in the future, and since Rinoa has a normal lifespan it is impossible for her be Ultimecia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vyk
For a full breakdown on the R=U theory, please read the R=U section of the "Time/Ultimecia Plot FAQ" found here:
http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/psx/game/197343.html
Lilliputian Hitcher gave a good summary of the situation, but if you want to know exactly what arguments were used on both sides and such specific details, check out the FAQ.
Even if she was Rinoa then someone still as to explain me how did Rinoa change her speech...because Ultimecia as the habit of using the letter "K" instead of "C" or something like that.
And this argument is more than enough to destroy the R=U theory.
Well, basically yeah. It didn't used to be a problem, because before you could argue that language changes naturally over lots of time anyway, so Rinoa merely changed along with the mainstream. However, since now the only way for R=U to work is by freezing down Rinoa, she'd wake up in the future still retaining all her habits from the games era, thus invalidating the argument.
One might argue that she hung around enough after being awoken in the future to assimilate the new dialect or whatever, but this is obviously an incredibly weak argument.
Unless, of course, instead of Squall & Co rescue Rinoa in Estar, she be frozen in that machine for many generations.
Unlikely... but ok.
But get this, Rinoa and Sorceress Ultimecia are nothing alike, even the wings are not the same as Rinoa ''not to mention the color!''
And Ultimecia's Final Form... You better not tell me that cute little Rinoa can turn into this monster.
It makes no sence, if it really were Rinoa, why did she said to Squall ''Who's there, Get out!'', if it were Rinoa, she would know Squall and not ''Who's there.''
When you challenge Ultimecia, she says SeeD six time, Rinoa isn't a SeeD, and Irvine isn't quite a SeeD either.
Why go against your friends? (Felt Betrayed? no.)
The R=U theory doesn't stand on it's feet.
And please don't talk about this, there are better theory that makes more sense and are more 'provable' than this... (Except Time-Travelling...don't even start.)
R=U is a theory that gets an unfair amount of stick. It's reputation is possibly more tarnished by the way people act in R=U threads. Unfortunately as people opposing the theory aren't labelled as such, despite many acting equally badly or worse than the proponents, it is the theory that gets bashed.
Lilliputian Hitcher gave a pretty fair account of what is wrong with the theory, although a few things I would consider important were left out or glossed over. The most important of which in my opinion being Griever. Frankly I just don't like the most common explanation for the anti- R=U stance, that being that he is created to intimidate Squall. I remember hearing that the Japanese text actually confirmed this, but even so I still think its a bit stupid.
The Ultimania guide does cause massive problems for the theory. Rather than try and work around them, if I were to try and support the theory, I think personally I would reject the guide as part of the story, even if it is officially canon.
No it isn't obvious, and I have rarely seen anyone try and say that the theory must 100% be true. However it was, at least before Ultimania, defendable, and for many people made the story better.
Note that I haven't given all of the arguments for the theory, and my stance to it was always more subjective approval than objective. Do try to give it a fair view though, as although many arguments for the theory may seem tenuous, many arguments against it have been worse. I don't know how many times I've seen someone adamently stating that R=U is false because Ultimecia gets killed and Rinoa doesn't instantly die...
EDIT: Just quickly to answer King-Killer's points. Ultimecia presumably was not born looking like that (or named like that either). Adel and to a lesser extent Edea, both presumably changed appearance as well. Ultimecia had to start off as someone. The fact that she doesn't recognise Squall and co. I believe was generally taken to be due to her losing her mind (which Ultimecia quite defendably has).
Why did people actually come up with this theory. It's a game, I doubt the creators ever EVER thought that someone would come up with this type of theory.
the theory doesnt work. can we get on with our lives now?
id like to see this ultimania guide. does anyone have a link? i think the theory would make sense if rinoa didnt age though. but the paradox of ultimecia fighting rinoa (who is her younger self.) is so confusing. it backs up the "FF8s future is set in stone and unchangable." theory becuase if ultimecia kills rinoa she kills herself so its almost like they are destined to win.
here is some proof that rinoa is not ultimecia (sorry if someone has already said that.) ultimecia tries to kill rinoa by sending her into space but squall saves her. ultimecia killing herself just makes no sense. it would rewrites history means edea never becomes a sorceress. this is all so confusing. time is one of the most confusing things ever!
i think it would be good if the theory made sense but they would have to change the text a bit to make there more solid proof because its still a theory right now.
im getting headaches just by thinking about this so i wont continue writing my opinions on this. too much complexity.
I would personally advise against this. Not including plot points that have been considered canon for the sake of a theory would be like disregarding Squall's gender in order to prove that he was really Celes. Ultimately theories that go against canon are a waste of time since:Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAsh
1. They can't possibly have been the intentions of the original writers, since it refutes they official material and;
2. No one would take the theory seriously.
Changing game facts is fine for fanfiction, but game theories have to actually work along side what has already been considered canon; not work against it.
Actually if anything (though I donit think it does, so I doubt I'd try and use it), that scene SUPPORTS R=U. Rinoa doesn't die, so there is no paradox, meaning no argument against R=U. Furthermore the ridiculously low probability of what happens with Squall saving her almost points to the event being fate, Rinoa COULDN'T die, which is exactly what R=U states.Quote:
Originally Posted by boys from the dwarf
EDIT: Lilliputian Hitcher I would agree. If one were trying to argue what the canon story was, then R=U seems very unlikely due to Ultimania. Taking the game itself as an isolated story, with all its gaps left to be filled, R=U IMHO becomes a quite plausible, and attractive way of filling them.
I disagree. Even without the Ultimania the theory is not at all strongly suggested by the game to be true. All the so-called "hints" used are very shaky, and if they don't have much more reasonable alternate explanations offered by the game itself, they simply don't stand strongly enough to constitute a plausible case. I believe the FAQ referred to shows this.
The thing with R=U, you see, is like you say; people think it's an attractive way of making the game better. So instead of starting with what the game tells us and inferring that R=U, people start with the conclusion that R=U and work backwards to try and show where it is implied. This is how ALL the 'hints' came to be, I can guarantee you. Unfortunately, this is very bad logic, and so the theory falls too short of being plausible. The Ultimania Guide was just the final nail in the coffin really...
Until someone can explain me with a fair and reasonable explanation about the change of the speech between Rinoa and Ultimecia i will never believe the nonsense that is R=U. Nobody could explain it in the other thread of R=U and nobody can explain it now and that´s the bottom line!
Well, I would say the bottom line is that it isn't actually suggested by the game so there's no need to discuss it to begin with. But if brought up, that is certainly a major problem of the theory...
Was the speech impairment in the original Japanese? I thought she just randomly added the word 'Fufu' to her sentences or something.
That's a good question, so I decided to dig up all the japanese-translated quotes I have by Ultimecia:
1. Ultimecia: Your feelings, I shall summon the most powerful of things [from them]! The more strongly you feel, that will be what shall torment you. Fufu.
2. Ultimecia: Fufu. Are your memories fading to nothing? This is not the dreadfulness of the true GF. The GF's true ferocity, let me instruct you [in it]! That power, show it to them! Griever!
3. Ultimecia: The introductions are over! Now, I shall junction myself to Griever!
Unfortunately, she doesn't say any words beginning with strong c's (like compression or curse) so it's hard to deduce anything from this. And "fufu" merely signifies laughter, so that's not anything to be considered...
Well you have to observe that it´s hard to give a different type of conotation in japonese so the point is still valid.
Okay the speech change thing. I really don't see why its a problem. Generally changing environment results in slight change in the way people talk, or accent. I've seen it more than once in people who've gone abroad for any significant period of time. Such a change is actually addressed directly by some Guados in FFX.
To say that it isn't hinted at is unfair. Some of Edea and Rinoa's lines in Edea's house show very strong foreshadowing,as if I remember correctly, does a scene where you see white feathers turn black, though I can't remember much about that. Though if the writers didn't intend R=U at all, these lose most of their force. Griever on the other hand is quite a big pointer. It's a symbol that only really connects to Squall and Rinoa, and I still think the intimidation explanation is just pointless.
The game does leave holes in its plotline that people fill in or work out. Squall's parents and history being a fairly simple example. The gap between the 'present' and Ultimecia's time is not hugely delved into, and it is not uncommon in stories involving time-travel for persons to meet themselves. It is creative filling yes, and Ultimania is a massive problem, but to completely dismiss R=U without it is in my opinion unjustified.
Oh, and I forgot about the fact that GFs induce memory loss in my earlier explanation of why Rinoa couldn't remember Squall and co.
Except none of these scenes explicity express the notion that Ultimecia is Rinoa. It's only looking at these scenes with this thought already in mind that one starts to draw parallels.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAsh
In the original Japanese version, it is stated that Ultimecia drew Griever from Squall's thoughts. It wasn't to intimidate him; she was just using what was already within his mind to create a powerful opponent.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAsh
Unlike the R=U theory, there are several specific moments that undeniably link Squall to Laguna.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAsh
Laguna states within the game that the gap is too big for such a thing to happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAsh
Everytime they save the world they do something differently but ultimately end up with the same ending which is Ulti dies and SeeD is created. In one of their trips back Squall could have never made it back and Rinoa could have gone el loco about it. She could have studied time magic and stuff and time compression (which she already knew about thanks to Ulti) and then became Ultimecia kind of.
Another thing I heard is that Squall lived but Rinoa still became evil and Squall stood by her side to protect her (some say she turned him into Griever).
Time loops suck.
I am aware of that (though some cases less than others), hence I followed it with...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
Why? What purpose could this serve, and how could it better justify the attention that Griever recieves throughout the game than R=U?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
Again I am well aware of that, hence I called it 'a fairly simple example'. My point was that there are elements of the game that can be thought into, and my example was one generally agreed upon as being worthwhile and conclusive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
I do not remember that, so I can not comment without knowing the context. You may be correct. Though it certainly seems possible that Laguna could be incorrect, or was referring to people with a normal human lifespan. My point was simply that stories involving time-travel frequently involve such occurences, and that the apparent oddness of R=U is lessened by this fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
Sephiroth's Cage: I may have misunderstood you, but unless there is an external or seemingly random element involved in the time-loop, then I don't really see how it could change... I certainly don't see how such a change could result in Ultimecia's existence in all of the cycles, as Ultimecia is required 'prior' to the change.
I like the Squall/Griever idea, though I don't support it due to references earlier in the game to Sorceresses going bad not having knights. The idea of Rinoa becoming Ultimecia is supported by the idea that IF she did somehow outlive normal humans, at some point she would lose Squall, and thus have a good chance of becoming evil. I don't see a good reason why she would turn evil despite Squall's presence.
Until someone comes up with hard facts that Ultimecia IS Rinoa, then I won't believe it. It's all well and good saying "This is a big pointer or this is a symbol towards this case"
Until someone can actually get something from the game which links Ulti to Rinoa in anyway stronger than "there are plotholes" I'll maybe give the theory some thought. Unlikely though seeing as there is a guide which says a soceress has a normal human life span, but oh no, we know more than the game creators.
I mean you could just as easily say that Irvine is a girl since he has long hair.
It was just what I heard once.
the complexity of this is unbearable! its a nice thought and deserves a few fanfics and stuff like that but no matter how much you argue, rinoa will never be ultimecia.
... Is why does this theory bother people so much? I rather like the theory and it fulfills a lot of hat-tossed holes in the 'plot' of FFVIII. I'll voice my views on this 'theory' later on...
Can you tell me what plot holes are filled by the R=U theory?
It's really simple you know. If you wanted to summon something to pit against your enemy, what would you summon? Well, you'll probably agree that pitting your enemy against the one thing he considers invincible might be a good idea, because it gives you a strong psychological advantage, no? Well, Griever is what Squall considers to be the strongest creature ever, so it is perfectly logical that when she scans his mind, she decides to summon exactly Griever.Quote:
Why? What purpose could this serve, and how could it better justify the attention that Griever recieves throughout the game than R=U?
There's no arguing about this really. Just look at what she says in the japanese version:
Ultimecia: Your feelings, I shall summon the most powerful of things
[from them]! The more strongly you feel, that will be what shall torment
you. Fufu."
It says flat out that she intends to pit Squall against what he considers to be the strongest thing ever to "torment [Squall]". The game offers this excellent and highly logical explanation without any need for "R=U" assumptions.
Griever doesn't get THAT much attention really. He is supposed to symbolise the values Squall admire, and fighting Griever is thus a symbolically potent battle. But there's nothing more to Griever than that; he's hardly payed as much attention as you seem to imply.
Definitely. Ultimecia's background and motives are very worthwhile to look into, but the game itself (backed by the Ultimania) offers a perfectly good explanation if you look closely enough, and logical arguments can easily demonstrate that although R=U may be a neat idea, it simply doesn't hold up. It's that simple.Quote:
My point was that there are elements of the game that can be thought into, and my example was one generally agreed upon as being worthwhile and conclusive.
No, I'm afraid it isn't, for two reasons.Quote:
My point was simply that stories involving time-travel frequently involve such occurences, and that the apparent oddness of R=U is lessened by this fact.
1) Your implication here requires timetravelling to the future, which is something we never see outside of TC. In other words, there's nothing in the game suggesting that after TC is finished, Rinoa would have any way of travelling to the future in order to become Ultimecia.
2) It isn't implied that Rinoa will go to the future at any point.
The fact that timetravelling occurs in FF8 doesn't in any way make the theory plausible. One could argue that it makes it "possible", but then anything is "possible" if you think hard enough.
EDIT: By the way, there is not a single "plothole" in FF8 that R=U 'answers' which does not already have a much simpler and more reasonable answer offered by the game itself.
I thought so. But even then, what are these plotholes that people think are filled by R=U. Any plotholes that this fills or could have a chance of filling, is lost on me at this moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
You put your argument well... though I have to say I've become less impressed by the Japanese text this time around. I remember it being more conclusive that Griever was summoned from Squall. In the quotations you posted, it seems at least fairly ambiguous what she is actually referring to. It also wasn't important enough to be retained in the translation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
I still just don't see Griever as Squall's greatest fear. From what I remember, its just a lion (not a GF) according to Squall, and in no way does he seem scared of it. Plus, why is only Griever summoned? Not to mention that this is Squall, leader of SeeD, and unlikely to be scared by a monster. Solitude maybe, but a monster... no.
It just seems a really bad idea for a final boss.
Creator: "Hey look its Griever! Ooooooh"
Player: "Who?"
Creator: "You know from Squall's ring?"
Player: " The... the lion thing? Did it even have a name?"
Creator: "Yeah remember you named it two discs ago, we didn't mention the name since, just assumed you'd remember it. Anyway, as you know Squall said he was intimidated by it."
Player: "No he didn't."
Creator: "Well its big and scary."
Player: "And in no way resembles anything Squall described..."
Creator: "Well he was quiet back then, pay attention to the story!"
Player: "Uh....huh."
Apart from Ultimania, I have yet to see anything which convinces me R=U is even close to impossible or even very unlikely. You can infer how a random individual could have become Ultimecia, but that seems a lot less interesting, and far less involved in the 'fate' theme running through the story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
I have never suggested Rinoa travelling to the future, all R=U theories I know of work around her surviving to the future (hence the problem posed by Ultimania). The time travel I was referring to was in fact TC. Squall and co. go to 'the future' and meet someone, storywise it isn't that strange that they should have met them (or a relation) before.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Sephiroth's Cage I apologise if I came across as attacking you. I know you were not advocating those ideas (not that I'd have attacked you either way :D), I merely wanted to explain why I disagreed with them.
licence: The theory derives from filling plot-holes, and following hints. Plot holes include where Griever came from, who Ultimecia is, and why she doesn't have a knight. I believe there are others, though I have forgotten them. Hints include several lines of dialogue which heavily imply R=U, the fate theme, again Griever, the position of the castle (never was a huge fan of that argument myself), the feathers scene, claims of Rinoa and Ultimecia's similar appearances... Again I'm fairly certain there are a lot more.
Ok but if Rinoa was in fact Ultimecia and assuming she survives until Ultimecia time, then shouldn´t Ultimecia be an old woman?
In the present time Rinoa is 17 so in the future (and assuming the 50 year difference mark) she would be 67. My point is that Ultimecia does not look in any way like a 67 year old woman she looks like she is her late 20s or early 30s,so unless Rinoa was frozen in some place there is no way she could be Ultimecia.
Strange, when i fought Ultimecia, i didn't had these talkings about Griever. All I did was beat her to crap with Limit Breaks and Apocalypse magic until she died over and over. Of course, casting a few Regens and Full-Lifes so the party remains alive. Any ideas on that? Maybe I didn't refined a weapon or something, I don't know.
Actually she'd have to be a lot older than that I think. I'm not sure how specific the dialogue is, but I always took it that Ultimecia existed at least 100 years after the game's main events, I can't actually remember why though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Dark Aeons Slayer
It was generally taken (at least by me :D), that Sorceresses either had longer lifespans than normal, or could sustain themselves magically. Evidence for this being the fact that Edea doesn't look nearly as old as she should, and arguably neither does Adel. Ultimecia in particular has a special relationship with time, though I can't remember exactly what it was, so I can't really back much up with that. I think the story of Hyne also might point towards such survival capabilities, but again, I've forgotten it.
Anyway, I don't know exactly what Ultimania says, but it seems to discredit at least a lot of the above speculation.
EDIT: DfKimera, the quote Sir Bahamut posted is from the Japanese version I believe. If I remember correctly then in one of the versions you get something similar through 'Scan'.
I don't go with the Sorceress's Don't Age thing either... But I gotta tell ya... Something asthetic is gotta be going on there. The horns and the wings of all Sorceresses... And Edea became a Sorceress over about 18 years ago, and she still looks hooooyawt! With all the physical changes in all Sorceresses, maybe the Sorceress Power causes a permanent 'look' while they still age naturally. Like Linda Carter... Wonda-WHOA-MAN!!!!!!!! LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Dark Aeons Slayer
This just a thought.... More on the next episode of... (Insert Title Here)
Well you have to consider that Edea is in her late 30s and as such her image corresponds to a late 30s year woman, as for Adel she was indeed in a "frozen like" state which would explain why she remains the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAshActually she'd have to be a lot older than that I think. I'm not sure how specific the dialogue is, but I always took it that Ultimecia existed at least 100 years after the game's main events, I can't actually remember why though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Dark Aeons Slayer
It was generally taken (at least by me :D), that Sorceresses either had longer lifespans than normal, or could sustain themselves magically. Evidence for this being the fact that Edea doesn't look nearly as old as she should, and arguably neither does Adel. Ultimecia in particular has a special relationship with time, though I can't remember exactly what it was, so I can't really back much up with that. I think the story of Hyne also might point towards such survival capabilities, but again, I've forgotten it.
Anyway, I don't know exactly what Ultimania says, but it seems to discredit at least a lot of the above speculation.
And the explanation that you give about Ultimecia is correct to a certain extent, Ultimecia can launch her "spirit" to the past but she cannot send her body and as such she would age if she was Rinoa and could not remain that young.
Don't worry I didn't feel attacked PhoenixAsh. ;)
Is Edea late thirties? I honestly don't know, but she still looks pretty young if she is. Someone mentioned that Sorceresses can't die unless they pass on their powers, which I hadn't heard of before this thread, but its quite interesting given how isolated Ultimecia was...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Dark Aeons Slayer
As I have said before, and Pharoh Amon Khan III more recently. There IS something odd about the way sorceresses look, and the fact that Ultimecia doesn't look old, really doesn't hurt R=U much.
Adel was frozen yes, fair point, she can't be referenced for ageing... although she can be regarding appearance.
Sorceresses can´t die in spirit unless they pass on their powers their physical bodie dies if you kill them but their spirit which holds their power and wisdom is passed to another person, so the physical statement is still valid i think.
I don't know if this is relevant or not but I remember another theory which said that the GF's of the game are actually all future versions of all the characters and they get summoned to battle by their past selves.
Kind of like the characters(gfs) are trying to help beat Ultimecia by somehow turning themselves into the GF's which they are familiar with.
Just a thought.
I have also heard that theory that: Zell=Ifrit and stuff like that...but if you ask me it doesn´t make sense at all, GF are summonable monsters and i fail to see any spiritual resemblence or evidence given in the game of such a thing.
Maybe GF's are here because of Time Compression.
We really do not know where they come from.
i see your poin but greiver is linked to squall where the other GFs arent obviously linked to anyone. there are some theorys on eden and i think that square based some of the GFs on the game possibly.
heres one thought. how did ultimecia even know that greiver was what squall considered to be the most powerful thing in existence? 3possibilities.
1. she is rinoa and has been frozen or somehow kept alive until this time and has gone insane but still remembers what squall thinks is the most powerful monster. (im not a supporter of the R=U theory so dont flame me for this. im just looking at things from every viewpoint.)
2. she used some sort of sorcery to read his mind or something.
3. she looked at his necklace. which would explain why the greiver (in some peoples opinion.) doesnt look much like the thing on the necklace
then again i doubt squall made greiver up all by himself. there are bound to be books and stuff that have legends about greiver.
Nah, it was a lion that represented Dquall's grief.
Makes sense eh?
Um, how is that ambiguous? Look at it again:Quote:
though I have to say I've become less impressed by the Japanese text this time around. I remember it being more conclusive that Griever was summoned from Squall. In the quotations you posted, it seems at least fairly ambiguous what she is actually referring to. It also wasn't important enough to be retained in the translation.
Ultimecia: Your feelings, I shall summon the most powerful of things
[from them]! The more strongly you feel, that will be what shall torment
you. Fufu."
She says to Squall that she will summon the strongest thing from his feelings, and that the more strongly he feels, the stronger the summoned thing will be. She then proceeds to summon Griever. Where exactly is the ambiguity?
I never said he was either. I said Squall considers Griever to be the strongest creature. I agree that Squall probably doesn't have nightmares about Griever, but he makes it clear what he thinks of him:Quote:
I still just don't see Griever as Squall's greatest fear.
Squall: "It's not a monster. It's a lion. Lions are known for their
great strength and pride."
Although he doesn't explicitly say that Griever is the strongest creature ever, this background information is enough to justify Ultimecia's summoning of him.
As for the translation, it is implied (vaguely I'll admit) in the scan info that Griever is from Squalls mind, as it says "In Squall's mind, the strongest GF", but really it doesn't matter what the translation did and did not edit. The fact is that the japanese version is necessarily going to be closer to the truth.
It certainly isn't "impossible", because anything is strictly speaking possible. The only problem is that it isn't actually implied by the game to be true to begin with, which is why it IS unlikely. You agreed yourself that the hints for the theory come from backwards reasoning, which is enough in itself to demonstrate why the theory is unlikely to be true. If it isn't suggested by the game, it cannot be considered a valid theory. It's that simple.Quote:
Apart from Ultimania, I have yet to see anything which convinces me R=U is even close to impossible or even very unlikely. You can infer how a random individual could have become Ultimecia, but that seems a lot less interesting, and far less involved in the 'fate' theme running through the story.
As for the theme of fate, the game itself readily implies a background for Ultimecia which links strongly into the theme of fate. That is, that Ultimecia was persecuted before doing anything because her fate was known to the public (she died in the past, remember, so she would have been as known to the FF8 world as say Hitler is to us), and in an attempt not only to get revenge on the people, but also to avoid her own supposed fate of dying at Squalls hand, she tries to inititate time compression, thus setting in motion the events that lead to her death. Perfectly fits in with fate, is implied by the game AND the Ultimania and doesn't require any baseless assumptions about Ultimecia really being a main character. It just doesn't make sense to try looking for technicalities that can allow R=U to work when it isn't really backed up by the game and the game itself offers a perfectly reasonable background to begin with!
The expanded theory described above can be read in the FAQ referred to.
If you never meant to imply that Rinoa travels to the future I'm afraid I fail to see how the fact that timetravelling occurs in the game somehow makes R=U more plausible.Quote:
I have never suggested Rinoa travelling to the future, all R=U theories I know of work around her surviving to the future (hence the problem posed by Ultimania). The time travel I was referring to was in fact TC. Squall and co. go to 'the future' and meet someone, storywise it isn't that strange that they should have met them (or a relation) before.
EDIT: Oh, and the Ultimania explicitly states that sorceressess have human lifespan, so it is impossible for Rinoa to be Ultimecia unless some necessarily baseless assumptions are made. Arguments such as Edea looking young don't mean anything against the Ultimania I'm afraid...
It lies in the fact that Griever isn't a feeling. I don't know if something is lost in Japanese translation or what, but Griever, whilst fitting the timing and word 'summon' perfectly (depending on when Ultimecia says this), just doesn't fit the description. The description, though I can't at all justify this as a theory, would fit far better with Squall's isolation after the fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
EDIT: Squall thinking Griever stands for strength and pride... well it does in a way make sense that Ulti would summon it, but it is very tenuous IMHO. I admit R=U is tenuous as well, but I find it a much more appealling and neat explanation./EDITQuote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Used together with the Japanese text, then this would seem to confirm that Griever is from Squall's mind. Given the vast difference in the translations, I would be wary of assuming they CAN actually be used together to point to the same meaning, but thats a debate that would go nowhere slowly. This would really be a question of what counts as canon, what the writers intended, and such and such. As I honestly don't much care what the writers intended in this context (what they say they intended or what they say is canon IS canon, but not neccessarily the most reasonable, or attractive interpretation of their creation FFVIII).
I haven't read the Ultimania, so I have no idea how much of that theory is from there. It makes sense, and is quite cool, though I honestly don't know why it is more founded than R=U. Its late here though, I might read the FAQ on it tomorrow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Because the party time travels (ish) during TC, and during the Laguna sequences. Its a story involving time travel, and Ultimecia is from the future, that is all I was saying, and is all that is needed to point out that some things become less odd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
I've already said Ultimania is a massive problem for R=U, and that the theory only really stands up as a possible speculation on what could fill the gaps if the game is taken as stand alone. R=U was being refuted long before the Ultimania translations surfaced, and I am merely defending it against those arguments. They were, in my experience far less convincing than the ones you have offered in the current thread, and the theory and its proponents are treated with an unfair amount of criticism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Everybody calm down... Let's just voice our reasons why we think/believe/percieve Rinoa could become Ultimecia; let's stop putting out the "Why She Is Not". I for one think it's about time this theory be given a fair and free discussion. We can pickout "why not" later.
Because when you think about, most just counter with why it can not be; and never give a fair shake as to why it can be...
It's fantasy, kids, it's not gonna ruin you someone sees it different...
Jeez, it's not religion; 'so-called Christians' verus Judaism.
It's fantasy, and I want to voice and hear mine and others' opinions/view on how this could be.
This doesn't seem like 'Theory' thread to me.
Now, I'm still working on my one thesis on this, I wrote it years ago when the game first came out. Ask Dr. Unne, she/he knows.
Have fun kids and goodnight, I've got work in the morning.
Well, considering that she says she will summon something from Squalls feelings, and she then summons Griever, it's clear enough that Griever was what she saw within Squall. Whether or not it's a feeling or a thought or whatever is basically just semantics anyway. The crystal clear implication is that Griever came from within Squall's mind and emotions, and was used against him by Ultimecia.Quote:
It lies in the fact that Griever isn't a feeling. I don't know if something is lost in Japanese translation or what, but Griever, whilst fitting the timing and word 'summon' perfectly (depending on when Ultimecia says this), just doesn't fit the description. The description, though I can't at all justify this as a theory, would fit far better with Squall's isolation after the fight.
You finding R=U more neat and appealing does not count as an argument to it's validity, I'm afraid. The fact of the matter is that the explanation I am defending for why Griever was summoned is the explanation offered to us clearly by the game, and as such is harsly 'tenuous'. You haven't offered one valid theory which explains Ultimecia's words in any other way than that she summoned Griever as a psychological move against Squall. How you can then call it "tenuous" I'm not sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut View Post
though I have to say I've become less impressed by the Japanese text this time around. I remember it being more conclusive that Griever was summoned from Squall. In the quotations you posted, it seems at least fairly ambiguous what she is actually referring to. It also wasn't important enough to be retained in the translation.
Um, how is that ambiguous? Look at it again:
Ultimecia: Your feelings, I shall summon the most powerful of things
[from them]! The more strongly you feel, that will be what shall torment
you. Fufu."
She says to Squall that she will summon the strongest thing from his feelings, and that the more strongly he feels, the stronger the summoned thing will be. She then proceeds to summon Griever. Where exactly is the ambiguity?
It lies in the fact that Griever isn't a feeling. I don't know if something is lost in Japanese translation or what, but Griever, whilst fitting the timing and word 'summon' perfectly (depending on when Ultimecia says this), just doesn't fit the description. The description, though I can't at all justify this as a theory, would fit far better with Squall's isolation after the fight.
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut View Post
I still just don't see Griever as Squall's greatest fear.
I never said he was either. I said Squall considers Griever to be the strongest creature. I agree that Squall probably doesn't have nightmares about Griever, but he makes it clear what he thinks of him:
Squall: "It's not a monster. It's a lion. Lions are known for their
great strength and pride."
Although he doesn't explicitly say that Griever is the strongest creature ever, this background information is enough to justify Ultimecia's summoning of him.
As for the translation, it is implied (vaguely I'll admit) in the scan info that Griever is from Squalls mind, as it says "In Squall's mind, the strongest GF", but really it doesn't matter what the translation did and did not edit. The fact is that the japanese version is necessarily going to be closer to the truth.
EDIT: Squall thinking Griever stands for strength and pride... well it does in a way make sense that Ulti would summon it, but it is very tenuous IMHO. I admit R=U is tenuous as well, but I find it a much more appealling and neat explanation./EDIT
If your interest is not in finding out what the writers intended but to find out the most attractive theory, then I'm not sure why you are debating this. This argument is based on the premise that the writers intended something specific, and we are trying to find out what. It doesn't matter if you don't think their intended story was all that attractive. If you want to make attractive theories, then that's fine, but then it belongs to fanfic discussion, not logical arguments such as this.Quote:
This would really be a question of what counts as canon, what the writers intended, and such and such. As I honestly don't much care what the writers intended in this context (what they say they intended or what they say is canon IS canon, but not neccessarily the most reasonable, or attractive interpretation of their creation FFVIII).
Some things, sure, but those things have no impact on the possibility or plausibility of R=U whatsoever.Quote:
Because the party time travels (ish) during TC, and during the Laguna sequences. Its a story involving time travel, and Ultimecia is from the future, that is all I was saying, and is all that is needed to point out that some things become less odd.
I agree. Many people who mock R=U do so on a bad premise (ie. using bad arguments), and do sometimes mock the defender and not the theory. I know, because I used to defend the theory myself a long time ago. But "those arguments" have as far as I'm concerned been refuted, thus invalidating the theory even without the Ultimania. The counter to all the R=U arguments can be found in the FAQ referred to.Quote:
R=U was being refuted long before the Ultimania translations surfaced, and I am merely defending it against those arguments. They were, in my experience far less convincing than the ones you have offered in the current thread, and the theory and its proponents are treated with an unfair amount of criticism.
Firstly, everybody's calm as far as I can tell. Secondly, people have been voicing reasons for why the think/believe/perceive Rinoa could become Ultimecia, and other people have been refuting them. You have to expect both sides in a debate. You can't just say "Everyone who don't believe it stop posting" or whatever. Thirdly, the theory HAS been given a fair and free discussion for years and years. The conclusion most people agree with after all these years of debate simply happens to be that the theory is invalid. Besides, I have covered all R=U arguments in the FAQ referred to, so it's all there anyway.Quote:
Everybody calm down... Let's just voice our reasons why we think/believe/percieve Rinoa could become Ultimecia; let's stop putting out the "Why She Is Not". I for one think it's about time this theory be given a fair and free discussion. We can pickout "why not" later.
...I don't get it. If someone thinks the theory is not implied by the game and thinks it's basically impossible within the natural framework of the game, then obviously that someone doesn't think it "can be". I agree that everyone should openmindedly review the arguments on both sides, but if someone concludes that the theory is invalid, then what's wrong with that?Quote:
Because when you think about, most just counter with why it can not be; and never give a fair shake as to why it can be...
Anyway, in the FAQ referred to you can find a "fair shake" as to why it can be, before the debunking.
It's fantasy, but it's also a written work that can be analysed. If you want to share your opinions on the theory you can't expect no one to come in and disagree with you. The moment you start making arguments based on the premise of a logical and rational debate, you're setting yourself up to be disagreed with. If you don't actually WANT any form of rational or logical debate then you shouldn't be making logical arguments to begin with.Quote:
It's fantasy, and I want to voice and hear mine and others' opinions/view on how this could be.
Because it's completely absurd of you to try and dissuade any R=/=U believers from arguing so that all the R=U believers can post away in freedom.
please drop the R=U
To attempt to clear up a few things:
I think you're referring to the very ending of the opening scene here. Feathers fly up across the screen when Squall slashes Seifer's face, and if I remember right they turn black and the opening fades out. Really, I don't think this is symbolic of anything, rather it's experimentation with the FMV technology of the game. Alot of the opening scene of FFVIII seems experimental (the theme, the text, the way the name of the game is presented (flashes of it in between scenes), Edea fading in and out of focus, etc. etc.). Tetsuya Nomura even said himself that he added the feathers to Squall's outfit because he thought 'it would be a challenge to show in the FMV movies'[source below].Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAsh
You remember that probably because Laguna says "Ultimecia exists in a time in which none of us can exist" (or something to that effect), she is too far in the future for any of the characters from the 'present' time in the game to survive, including Rinoa.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAsh
Also, Edea looks just as old as she should, after all she could very well only be in her late thirties - early forties. She especially looks her age when she goes back to being the good old 'matron' and dressing in her plain black dress. Furthermore, Edea was designed before Final Fantasy VIII was even conceived, thus lending light to why she may appear younger than she actually is.
Adel was sustained in a frozen reality, which explains why she did not age.
The only special relationship Ultimecia has with time is through Junction Machine Ellone. Without JME Ultimecia would have no access to the past or time in any way which discredits your statement.
Hyne also has nothing to do with this arguement, basically all it says is that Hyne made the world and his/her descendents are the sorceresses.
If I remember right, the part of the game you're referring to has Edea saying something like "a sorceress cannot rest in peace if she does not pass on her powers". She can't rest in peace, this doesn't mean she can't die and be uncomfortable in some sort of afterlife.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Dark Aeons Slayer
--------------
I would also like to try and debunk some of the "Ultimecia and Rinoa both have wings!!!" stuff.
Tetsuya Nomura started designing characters before Kazushige Nojima and Yoshinori Kitase began to flesh out the characters and storyline. Nomura even had some input on the personalities of the characters (especially Rinoa's).
When Nomura first designed Squall he felt he needed to add something to him to make him more memorable, this is where Squall's scar came from. Nojima was left with the task of determining the origin of this scar in the game's story.
Nomura created Rinoa with the intent of making her memorable over her cute girlishness over a girl remembered over how beautiful she was, thus explaining Rinoa's attitude.
So, if Nomura had all that sway over the characters when the game was still in pre-production stages, it's plausible (although not confirmed) that the wings upon Rinoa's back were there all along and have nothing to do with Ultimecia's wings.
It's just an idea, a rather weak one, but I think it has some credibility.
Sources:
http://flaregamer.com/b2article.php?p=81&more=1
http://rinoa.nu/rinoa
http://www.wikipedia.org
Okay a few things before I get into some responses, I'd say it'd clear things up to read this, but if you want to skip, my counter-arguments are highlighted below:
1) I still haven't read the FAQ, I am sorry for this, when I get time I will try, but I wanted to at least respond to what has been said in the meantime. I appreciate it may mean people having to offer answers already in the FAQ, and I am sorry.
2) I am completely calm, and ignoring a few unhelpful/off topic posts, I am quite pleased and impressed by the level of respect and argumentation in this thread.
3)
Okay, this is just my stance, so if you don't find it agreeable, then fair enough. Basically no I don't think it matters what the writers intended (if they intended anything at all), it matters more what FFVIII the product indicates. If the question was "What did the writers intend?", then I would, based on Ultimania, say either nothing, or R=/=U. However if the question is "Based on the evidence presented in FFVIII the game, how strong/appealing is the possibility of R=U?", then this is a whole different ball game, is one that CAN be logically debated, and in my opinion is a worthwhile question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
This is a highly simplified example, but consider I offer this statement:
"I am a polygon with four sides of equal length."
Now I could be a rhombus or a square. Argueably one is more likely than the other, and a square is possibly (analogy is tricky here so bear with me) a neater answer. I could not be a triangle.
Now if it turns out I intended the answer to be a triangle, then you would not be forced to agree because it is my statement. If it turns out I intended to be a rhombus, then you would have to admit that I was a rhombus, but could still claim that based on my statement, a square was a more likely/appealing candidate. Though it might not be a very interesting discussion :D.
Right... thats the field of play I'm suggesting, if you find fault with it fair enough, and if such a debate does not appeal to you, fair enough. With Ultimania, then I concede that it is unlikely that R=U. I am only defending the plausability/appeal of R=U in terms of what is presented by FFVIII.
Also, given the way aisle_s described how the characters and story were created, I feel we may be better off using my method rather than appealing to the artistic integrity and vision of the writers methods :D.
COUNTER-ARGUMENTS:
Well, you may be correct here. I'm not confident on how and when it is presented in the Japanese version, or how well it is translated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
However, I would not dismiss my problem with the word 'feel' as semantics. If the specific word summon was changed, then the statement would not obviously point to Griever at all, so the strength of that word in supporting one version, seems to carry only equal weight as 'feel' does in debunking that version.
As for an alternative account, well, either an idle threat. The statement wasn't important enough to be translated properly, so this isn't that ridiculous. Or, though this is more reaching, she is talking about Squall's isolation after the fight. I can't back that up well, but it fits the description of both summon, and feeling, AND it is far more reasonable as something with which to intimidate Squall.
My description of the ‘summoned from Squall’s mind interpretation’ as tenuous, is simply because it just seems to me to be a really bad explanation. I just don’t see why Ultimecia would do it, or why Squall would be intimidated by Griever, or how the Griever summoned vaguely resembles Squall’s description.
My argument that TC makes R=U less odd as a theory: Time-travel stories often involve meeting future selves/ fate/ and what seem to be paradoxes. TC makes FFVIII a time-travel story. Therefore it is not that odd to suppose that FFVIII could feature meeting future selves/ fate/ and what seem to be paradoxes.
aisle_s regarding the feathers and the way in which characters were designed etc. I didn’t know that they designed characters before the game, and I find that very interesting. Before Ultimania I might have used the examples to suggest the writers intended R=U, but given that and what you said, it would seem silly to do that. I would say however that as symbols within the game, they do still benefit R=U, as the theory offers them an explanation with more substance than simply looking pretty. If you allow for symbolism to occur without the writers’ intent, then they support the theory by indicating it.
Regarding what Laguna says, and how Ultimecia relates to JME. I actually can’t remember the script. I still think Laguna is perfectly free to be wrong, or talking about normal humans rather than Ultimecia. I also don’t know the script well enough to say much. You may be right, and her relation to time is completely normal. Just how Rinoa survives to Ultimecia’s time is a very tricky issue, and I don’t want to try and defend it without proper knowledge.
Don't worry about it. I do strongly reccomend reading the entire section on Ultimecia there, because it will save us a lot of time, but please don't feel any need to rush. It is admittedly rather long after all =PQuote:
1) I still haven't read the FAQ, I am sorry for this, when I get time I will try, but I wanted to at least respond to what has been said in the meantime. I appreciate it may mean people having to offer answers already in the FAQ, and I am sorry.
Well, I can appreciate that stance, even though I usually concentrate more on finding the intention of the writers when I analyse these things. Now, I agree that the issue can be logically debated and that it is certainly worthwhile, but I don't think the R=U is strong or appealing based entirely on the actual ingame facts either. The FAQ will demonstrate why, I suppose.Quote:
Okay, this is just my stance, so if you don't find it agreeable, then fair enough. Basically no I don't think it matters what the writers intended (if they intended anything at all), it matters more what FFVIII the product indicates. If the question was "What did the writers intend?", then I would, based on Ultimania, say either nothing, or R=/=U. However if the question is "Based on the evidence presented in FFVIII the game, how strong/appealing is the possibility of R=U?", then this is a whole different ball game, is one that CAN be logically debated, and in my opinion is a worthwhile question.
Perhaps. It's certainly arguable, but I feel that either way the theory falls short, so I guess it doesn't really matter to me that much.Quote:
Also, given the way aisle_s described how the characters and story were created, I feel we may be better off using my method rather than appealing to the artistic integrity and vision of the writers methods
I suppose that's understandable. My translation here was given by a GameFAQs user a long time ago, and it's obviously impossible to really know the extent of its validity, but I think we can safely assume that it expresses the general points.Quote:
Well, you may be correct here. I'm not confident on how and when it is presented in the Japanese version, or how well it is translated.
This could be argued back and forth I suppose, but in the end, Ultimecia says she will summon something from Squall, and she then summons Griever. It would be absurd to think that her threat of summoning "the most powerful of things" from Squall is in fact entirely unrelated to her summoning of Griever straight afterwards, when you consider that Squall has previously said that Griever is known for his "great strength". That would make no sense at all:Quote:
However, I would not dismiss my problem with the word 'feel' as semantics. If the specific word summon was changed, then the statement would not obviously point to Griever at all, so the strength of that word in supporting one version, seems to carry only equal weight as 'feel' does in debunking that version.
Ultimecia: "Hey Squall, I will now summon something very powerful from you and have you face it in battle.
*summons Griever*
Squall: "Oh noes, you summoned the creature I consider to be very powerful and strong! Your threat was not empty!"
Ultimecia: "Foolish SeeD, Griever came from somewhere entirely different lolz"
I just don't see it happening =P Merely calling it an "idle threat" still goes entirely against the fact that she summons Griever straight afterwards, and the loneliness Squall faces is due to TC and not Ultimecia, who iactually dies before Squall goes to that desert place. There simply MUST be a direct correlation between her threat and Griever. Her threat is like a gun, and Griever a bullet. The logical suggestion is that she actually fired the gun, but you are suggesting an entirely different gun was used.
As established in my last post, Squall thinks of Griever as a very strong creature, quite possibly the strongest creature of his daydreams/imagination. He says as much in the game. You agree then that it would be highly reasonable that Ultimecia would set Squall up against that thing he considers so strong. It makes perfect sense from a tactical perspective, which is how Ultimecia would be thinking. Why Squall considers Griever so strong isn't up for debate, since he says it himself (see the quote in my last post). As for how Griever looks, well, Ultimecia probably embellished him to make him look even more intimidating.Quote:
I just don’t see why Ultimecia would do it, or why Squall would be intimidated by Griever, or how the Griever summoned vaguely resembles Squall’s description.
Not odd, sure, but not suggested to happen either.Quote:
My argument that TC makes R=U less odd as a theory: Time-travel stories often involve meeting future selves/ fate/ and what seem to be paradoxes. TC makes FFVIII a time-travel story. Therefore it is not that odd to suppose that FFVIII could feature meeting future selves/ fate/ and what seem to be paradoxes.
There is a symbolic explanation for the wings much simpler than R=U which is really much more plausible. You see, Ultimecia and Rinoa ARE connected in the sense that they both have the same set of powers (remember, this is without the initial assumption that R=U, in which case the game itself says that Ultimecia will inherit Rinoas powers eventually). However, the game shows the two possible outcomes of a sorceress with these powers. Ultimecia represents the outcome where the sorceress turns to evil. Rinoa represents the outcome where the sorceress stays good. This is seminal to Rinoa's developement when she becomes a sorceress; she recognises that she might well go down the same path as Ultimecia. However, in the end her knight Squall is able to save her.Quote:
I would say however that as symbols within the game, they do still benefit R=U, as the theory offers them an explanation with more substance than simply looking pretty. If you allow for symbolism to occur without the writers’ intent, then they support the theory by indicating it.
Now where do the wings come in? Well, Rinoa and Ultimecia are symbollically connected through the wings, and since we have already establishes that Ultimecia is the evil sorceress and Rinoa is the good one, Ultimecia gets black wings and Rinoa white wings. It's merely classic good vs evil symbolism where black is bad and white is good.
This interpretation is highly intuitive, implied by the game and far more reasonable (in the sense that it's something Square tend to use in their games). Saying that the wings imply that Rinoa and Ultimecia are in fact the same person is simply taking a far too large leap. The symbolism is there, but it hardly extends as far as to suggest R=U.
PS: If you want a gamescript, you can find two here:
http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/psx/game/197343.html
So many long arguments...:eep:
I was just wondering again...if Rinoa was Ultimecia how did she got wings? Because we see Rinoa with wings when she performs her limit break but those are spiritual wings while Ultimecia wings seem pretty real.
I see your point, and if we allow that the timing and translation are as strong as you suggest (again something I'll check later, but if you know, does she literally say it before the Griever fight, as in after you defeat her first form?), then very compelling. However I would suggest the analogy is slightly weaker than you suggest even in this case. It seems more akin to Ultimecia saying she will shoot Squall, aiming a gun at him, then a knife hitting Squall from the direction of the gun.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
I admit I don't have a better explanation, and the isolation after the fight, though it fits better IMHO, does require quite a stretch, but the 'obvious' interpretation does have quite a gaping hole in it regarding the word 'feel', and given it was a final boss, you'd think that explanation should carry through a translation.
Well... I'm torn here. There are times when I agree with you, and times when it still just seems completely daft. I know Squall says lions are strong, and given the (Japanese) text, it kinda fits... But still, if you iignore that text and just consider the actual situation... Is Squall likely to be intimidated by a figment of his imagination (or any monster for that matter)? Is there any real indication that Squall ever imagined Griever to be anything other than a lion, and even then, as something scary? Why would Ultimecia only summon Squall's worst fear, and how could she junction herself to it (something vague regarding Tiamat is flashing in my head as a counter to that second part, but I'll leave it for now..) Does the slight mention of Griever two discs prior really justify its position as 'what Squall considers strongest'? Even if it did then, would it still by Disc 4?... I'm sure this list goes on, and I know the text adds weight (arguably) to your version, but without it, it just doesn't really seem to stand up that well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Oh no, not at all. The TC/story stuff was merely to show that R=U shouldn't be dismissed as too outlandish, because in this type of story it isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Yeah you win that :D... The feathers take on another layer meaning if R=U is true, but other than that you pretty much killed them as any kind of supportive tool :D.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Actually it just occurred to me... Does Adel have wings? I'm pretty sure Edea doesn't. If only Rinoa and Ultimecia have them, then whilst this is by no means conclusive, and you're right the symbolism of light versus dark still applies, then that fact does at least tenuously indicate a stronger relationship between Rinoa and Ultimecia than that they are both sorceresses.
Just evolution really. Rinoa can fly(ish) with those wings, so they have at least some physical potential. Plus Ultimecia has clearly physically changed due to her powers (unless future people are very scary looking :D), so presumably if R=U, then Rinoa simply developed more physical wings along with all her other changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Dark Aeons Slayer
ok i got a few points
if rinoa was ulti how she transform yet in the game she can do nothing near that but call her dog
if ulti was rhinoa what happened to her dog
if rhinoa was ulti how did she get her wings out all the time
if rhinoa was ulti how did she get so smart as to build her own caasle
if rhinoa was ulti then how did rhinoa go from a nice little 17 year old to a 20 somewthing year old.
if rhinoa was ulti how did rhinoa learn all the adavanced maggics like apocolyse and malstorm if she was deep frezzed
if ulti was rhinoa why would she attack rhinoa in the final batttle it would be like her attacking her self
if rhinoa was ulti when did she start saying fufu
if rhinoa was ulti why did she give up her favorie weapon the pinwheel thing
if ulti was rhinoa when did rhinoa go from her blue robe to the skimpy clothing that ulti has
how would rhinoa habve learned so much power as to block off every city in the game
if rhinoa was ulti y did rhinoa have rinkles when u fight her many say that she used magic but when did she learn this magic so it seems prety crazy to say rhinoa was ulti
i think this whole thread was just a person wonder aboput the theroy but it is turning into another ru thread so i want some peace before another war starts
Well later on in the game, Rinoa can infact use Angel Wings as her Limit Break. Also, she is meant to be older, people can become more knowledgable when they age, so perhaps she learnt more magic which allowed her to transform.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
It died...dogs are known to have a life span of about 18 years, a lot less in some breeds.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
That's a point which has been argued throughout the topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
She was a soceress with powerful magic, I doubt it wopuld've been hard for her.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
You do know that you fight Ulti in the future? Meaning that Rinoa would have aged.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
I don't know what you mean. Rinoa wasn't frozen at the end of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
That's a point I agree with, but it could be said that in the ending, Rinoa lives. Gameplay is different from storyline.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
Earlier in the thread it was said that that noise was simply meant to be a kind of laughing noise. Also it could have something to do with her insanity.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
She now has powerful magic, why the hell would she want to use a pinwheel.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
People can change their clothes, you know.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
She could have learnt this magic over the years that gap between the present and Ulti's timezone.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
I don't believe that R=U, but I had to reply to your post since the majority of your arguements minus 2 are quite trivial.
Yeah guys, i already got the theory :)
Still don't agree with it. First, because there are huge holes in it that nothing have filled yet, and second, because Rinoa is my favorite character :love: and making her be also the villain does not please me :p
True, if we ignore the text then the idea seems a little less likely...but I could ignore alot of things in FFVIII and just as easily say that Quina = Ultimecia. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAshWell... I'm torn here. There are times when I agree with you, and times when it still just seems completely daft. I know Squall says lions are strong, and given the (Japanese) text, it kinda fits... But still, if you iignore that text and just consider the actual situation... Is Squall likely to be intimidated by a figment of his imagination (or any monster for that matter)? Is there any real indication that Squall ever imagined Griever to be anything other than a lion, and even then, as something scary? Why would Ultimecia only summon Squall's worst fear, and how could she junction herself to it (something vague regarding Tiamat is flashing in my head as a counter to that second part, but I'll leave it for now..) Does the slight mention of Griever two discs prior really justify its position as 'what Squall considers strongest'? Even if it did then, would it still by Disc 4?... I'm sure this list goes on, and I know the text adds weight (arguably) to your version, but without it, it just doesn't really seem to stand up that well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Adel does not have wings. However, the good vs. evil can still apply. Sure, they could've given Adel the black wings, but really Adel is only on the screen for about 15 minutes in a battle sequence and then never seen again so putting emphasis on her wings isn't going to be noticed as much as putting wings on the main female character and the main villain. Besides, Adel still does kind of have what could be likened to 'wings'.Quote:
Yeah you win that :D... The feathers take on another layer meaning if R=U is true, but other than that you pretty much killed them as any kind of supportive tool :D.
Actually it just occurred to me... Does Adel have wings? I'm pretty sure Edea doesn't. If only Rinoa and Ultimecia have them, then whilst this is by no means conclusive, and you're right the symbolism of light versus dark still applies, then that fact does at least tenuously indicate a stronger relationship between Rinoa and Ultimecia than that they are both sorceresses.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1b/Adel.PNG
Hmmm, just a thought but maybe receiving soceress powers changes the person's appearance in different ways, varying from soceress to soceress.
For example - Adel is massive in height and muscular compared to Ulti who maintains a human form (until her final transformation) but simply gains black wings.
Y'know what I love and don't understand is that everyone accepts all other views of how the story ended, but this is the only view that's put to the test of 'theory' or 'proven 'theory'.
The ending is the where this argument begins and it's sad that it's birthed and unending feud.
Some people see the ending as Squall seeing Time being Uncompressed.
Some see it as Squall dying and his life flashing before his eyes.
But this Rinoa is Ultimecia idea is the only one that get slammed with hatred. Why? No other view are disputed except this one? Why?
It's madness. Each 'proof' of approving and disapproving are just as interperative as the one before and the next...
I'm still writing my essay, and I'll post it as soon as I can. Have fun kids. But in the meantime... Why do you love/hate it so?
Well, as I said before, I hate the theory because I love the character. And I love the way the game was put together, without the aid of any theories.
It's not that I hate it, it's just that it doesn't seem completely plausible. But neither do the other two endings.
What I believe is different between this and the other theories though, is that people can interpret the ending on how they see it. R=U on the other hand just seems a little bit of a stranger theory because of the time gap between Rinoa's time and Ulti's time.
Yeah I know, I tried to phrase my point better to avoid that response... guess I failed :). I know the text IS relevant, I just wanted to highlight that ignoring the text, the summoning of Griever from Squall's mind isn't actually that logical. Because the text is there (and it IS vague), it can be taken for granted that the mind explanation is completely reasonable, which arguably isn't the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Oh and those things on Adel's back look a lot like wings to me. I just wondered if that was an avenue worth venturing down, guess not :D.
finalfantasyguy4ever: licence answered most of your points, but to add:
"if ulti was rhinoa why would she attack rhinoa in the final batttle it would be like her attacking her self"
Yes it would. The assumption being that she doesn't recognise herself. Rinoa can not die unless you get a game over, so there is no way for a paradox to arise.
I think that it is generally taken for granted that something along those lines occurs. It doesn't exactly 'support' R=U, but it does at least help it seem less abstract an idea as Ultimecia had to start off normal looking (and arguably with a different name), R=U merely posits that the normal person was in fact Rinoa.Quote:
Originally Posted by licence
EDIT: Three whole posts since I started typing! I can see why the theory gets stick, and I have to say it appealed to me far more a couple of years ago, when I preferred stories a little darker. Now I quite like a happy ending :D. I'm mainly defending the theory now because I am yet to be convinced that it is made unlikely by the game, and I think it gets an unfair amount of stick. I would however agree that it is very unlikely given Ultimania. Arguments in this thread against it have certainly been stronger (or at least better phrased) than ones I remember from past threads though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aisle_sTrue, if we ignore the text then the idea seems a little less likely...but I could ignore alot of things in FFVIII and just as easily say that Quina = Ultimecia. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAshWell... I'm torn here. There are times when I agree with you, and times when it still just seems completely daft. I know Squall says lions are strong, and given the (Japanese) text, it kinda fits... But still, if you iignore that text and just consider the actual situation... Is Squall likely to be intimidated by a figment of his imagination (or any monster for that matter)? Is there any real indication that Squall ever imagined Griever to be anything other than a lion, and even then, as something scary? Why would Ultimecia only summon Squall's worst fear, and how could she junction herself to it (something vague regarding Tiamat is flashing in my head as a counter to that second part, but I'll leave it for now..) Does the slight mention of Griever two discs prior really justify its position as 'what Squall considers strongest'? Even if it did then, would it still by Disc 4?... I'm sure this list goes on, and I know the text adds weight (arguably) to your version, but without it, it just doesn't really seem to stand up that well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Adel does not have wings. However, the good vs. evil can still apply. Sure, they could've given Adel the black wings, but really Adel is only on the screen for about 15 minutes in a battle sequence and then never seen again so putting emphasis on her wings isn't going to be noticed as much as putting wings on the main female character and the main villain. Besides, Adel still does kind of have what could be likened to 'wings'.Quote:
Yeah you win that :D... The feathers take on another layer meaning if R=U is true, but other than that you pretty much killed them as any kind of supportive tool :D.
Actually it just occurred to me... Does Adel have wings? I'm pretty sure Edea doesn't. If only Rinoa and Ultimecia have them, then whilst this is by no means conclusive, and you're right the symbolism of light versus dark still applies, then that fact does at least tenuously indicate a stronger relationship between Rinoa and Ultimecia than that they are both sorceresses.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1b/Adel.PNG
All the Sorceresses had wings and horn. Be they clothing by design, ethereal representation, or physical mutation.
Edea had a headdress or mutation of her skull for her horns, and she wore a veiled cape in the style like wings.
Adel, also wore a horn style headress or physical mutation, and also wore a wing-motiff that hovered behind her seemingly 'attached'.
Rinoa... Though she does not have a horn motiff, she does have Ethereal Wings, when using the Sorceress Power.
And Finally, all the "Succession of Witches" have had the wings and horns and evolved through time (be it transition of Rinoa or not) to the Ultimate End of the Successsion: Ultimecia.
So, all Sorceresses have had and/or will have the horns/wings be they real or not, are a representation of a Sorceress... By what I can tell...:D
BTW: How the hell did Adel get so... Huge?
More later...
Quote:
Originally Posted by licence
What I meant in my questioning is not the validity of the 'interpetation' but this was the immediate response for those that had just beaten the game. All had a different interpertation more or less like the ones I mentioned.
It was like the multiple interpetation of the ending of FFVII. Everyone had 'theories' but the bottomline is they were looking for solidity in their interpetation of the ending with like-minded people. And when questioned by their belief some willingly accepted the new ideals, while others stead-fast rejected them and found clues and 'facts' to hold their ground.
Most who are vehemtly against the R=U theory seem to not have the same views on how the story ended, but just that R=U is... to put it bluntly: Blashphemy.
Almost like "Virginia" trying to find proof that is a Santa Claus...
Let me give an personal example:
I never saw "Passion of the Christ". I felt I didn't need to. Most of the people I met that had seen it, repeated every word I had heard before. "It will change you life."; "The Jews Murdered Christ!", and on on... My reaction to the statement of 'murder' had me respond with..
"The Jew's did not murder Christ." I was often met with confusion or rejection with that statement, but I continued. "Technically it happened the way it was suppose to have happened. How else did you want him to die for your sins?"
Now my point is... Is that I just changed their general interpetation of a movie... Some were angered and accused me of atheism; others were so taken 'out of their box' or 'unplugged' that they stopped and thought turning away the general concensus and regaining individual thought again... I wondered why the anger versus the calm?
Please... Tell me.... What was your interpetation of the ending?
Phoenix
Although I can agree that "feel" is perhaps a somewhat ambiguous word in this context and not the most appropriate word ("mind" or something would have been better), it is far less a stretch to say that it really refers to Squall's minds/thoughts than to say that Griever came from somewhere completely different. And given the two choices, I'm rather prone to picking the one which is more reasonable and much less of a stretch (I wouldn't personally call it a stretch at all though).Quote:
I see your point, and if we allow that the timing and translation are as strong as you suggest (again something I'll check later, but if you know, does she literally say it before the Griever fight, as in after you defeat her first form?), then very compelling. However I would suggest the analogy is slightly weaker than you suggest even in this case. It seems more akin to Ultimecia saying she will shoot Squall, aiming a gun at him, then a knife hitting Squall from the direction of the gun.
I admit I don't have a better explanation, and the isolation after the fight, though it fits better IMHO, does require quite a stretch, but the 'obvious' interpretation does have quite a gaping hole in it regarding the word 'feel', and given it was a final boss, you'd think that explanation should carry through a translation.
As for the translation, well, we don't really know the first thing about that. Maybe there was confusion, or they thought the scan info was enough to convey the same meaning, or they were also puzzled by the word "feeling". Maybe it was a bit of bad writing by the Japanese scripters. Who knows? At the end of the day, we're better of sticking to the Japanese bit as far as I'm concerned.
As aisle said, and you agreed, the text IS important. Of course it wouldn't make much sense without the text because then Griever would come out of nowhere, but as it is, we have at least a reasonable case to make based on the text. You may think it's daft, and that it wasn't made a big enough deal of in the game to warrant it becoming a final boss (I agree on the latter), but hey, Square aren't always perfect (not nearly always really). They could have made it more clear, but were perhaps a bit sloppy. However, upon critical analysis, it is clear enough that the most plausible explanation is that Griever was summoned from Squalls mind because Squall considers it to be the strongest thing he knows of. If anything, the superiority of this explanation becomes apparent by the fact that there really aren't any alternate explanations which don't require huge baseless assumptions or simply are huge stretches.Quote:
Well... I'm torn here. There are times when I agree with you, and times when it still just seems completely daft. I know Squall says lions are strong, and given the (Japanese) text, it kinda fits... But still, if you iignore that text and just consider the actual situation... Is Squall likely to be intimidated by a figment of his imagination (or any monster for that matter)? Is there any real indication that Squall ever imagined Griever to be anything other than a lion, and even then, as something scary? Why would Ultimecia only summon Squall's worst fear, and how could she junction herself to it (something vague regarding Tiamat is flashing in my head as a counter to that second part, but I'll leave it for now..) Does the slight mention of Griever two discs prior really justify its position as 'what Squall considers strongest'? Even if it did then, would it still by Disc 4?... I'm sure this list goes on, and I know the text adds weight (arguably) to your version, but without it, it just doesn't really seem to stand up that well.
As for why Ultimecia would only summon Squall's worst fear, well, he is the leader, and if you go by the idea that she was aware of her fate of dying at Squall's hand (a theory supported by the game and the Ultimania, as stated previously), it makes perfect sense to single him out. Even without that theory as a reference, it makes sense simply because Squall is the leader of the group. Finally, the question why she could junction herself to him isn't really relevant; she's a sorceress, she can do lots of strange things =P
I still have to disagree though. TC stuff makes some stuff not outlandish, but I can't see how it lessens the outlandishness of R=U in any way.Quote:
Oh no, not at all. The TC/story stuff was merely to show that R=U shouldn't be dismissed as too outlandish, because in this type of story it isn't.
PAK:
I don't know what experiences you have, but I "slam" the theory that Squall dies as much as R=U. Of course, the difference between interpretations on the ending and R=U is that the oddity of TC itself will always leave room for a certain amount of leeway. R=U however does not have that benefit as it is examined as something relevant throughout the ENTIRE game, instead of just the ending. Because of the fact that the theory then simply isn't implied throughout the game, it will thus be called invalid quicker than most theories examining only the ending.Quote:
Some people see the ending as Squall seeing Time being Uncompressed.
Some see it as Squall dying and his life flashing before his eyes.
But this Rinoa is Ultimecia idea is the only one that get slammed with hatred. Why? No other view are disputed except this one? Why?
EDIT: Of course, a lot of animosity has been built up against the theory because many less patient people start stereotyping all R=U defendants as being unwilling to see the facts and that they are blinded by their near religious belief in it. Unfortunately, that's true for some people, and has led to some unfortunate stereotpying.
Oh, and please, before posting your full essay here, I would strongly recommend reading the referred to FAQ. Not that it's the best thing since sliced bread or anything, but if your essay merely repeats what's in there without the counterarguments or ignores everything in there alltogether, then your essay will be pretty pointless and really just a waste of your time, because I'll only respond with "Read the FAQ".
this has become the r=u thread without viator wasnt this thread closed or something before leave rhinoa alone its a game
For someone with a username like "finalfantasyguy4ever" you're not the best person to judge this discussion (on a board intended for discussing games, mind you) for being about a game. :rolleyes2
I think we have the right to expeculate as much as we want both the defenders of the theory and the offenders of the theory. Those who do not which to participate don´t need to post in this thread and can keep theirv thoughts to themselfes.Quote:
Originally Posted by finalfantasyguy4ever
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
I always seen the ending as Squall losing hope in his friends and perhaps reaching near death until he started to envision Rinoa. Which helped pull him out of the desert place. Didn't he also end up in the flower field so he started to think of Rinoa waiting for him, in a place that she said she would always be.
Bear in mind, I finished the game months ago and can't remeber everything from the ending.
Also I'd like to add that this has been one of few discussion threads I have seen so far that has been pretty calm and well debated.
I never thought the end of the game was Squall's death...in fact, I dislike the idea alot.
I always thought that the end was Squall not following Laguna's advice...you know when he said to get back you had to believe in your friends and go where they are or whatever? Well, Squall's a loner so he got lost in the uncompression of time (perhaps why he ended up at Edea's orphanage first). However, once he remembered Rinoa he successfully came back to the present.
The ending was Squall getting lost in time, then having a series of hallucinations over a number of other ways past events could have gone, then he falls down, then Rinoa finds him.
As for why R=U is frowned upon, it's an outrageous claim with insufficient evidence. Der.
Okay! I'm actually in a slight hurry but I though I should at least say something towards the debate, even if its only half-ready.
Basically I realised that for the most part of this debate I was getting my ass handed to me :D. A large reason for this I think, is that I've been playing defense. To try and rectify this I checked out the FAQ, though I admit, due to time constraints, I only read the responses to the pro-R=U arguments, and skimmed the rest. This has left me with a couple of points to make:
First of all, whilst I do have a lot of respect for the way that FAQ is written (I skimmed the time theory bits, and its pretty clear that a fair grip on theories of time going on), I don't feel it gave R=U as fair a trial as it could. My main problem with it is that although it gives each argument a fair trial (and much more informed than I could have, I learnt quite a bit reading it), it repeatedly treats each argument individually, but acknowledges their strength. had they been otherwise supported. The problem with this is that there are a lot of arguments for R=U, which on their own certainly don't indicate R=U, but cumulatively might. I at least didn't see a point (other than after a couple of examples, one of which the FAQ 'claimed' to be refutable which I'll discuss in a moment) where the arguments were considered as a whole. This just doesn't seem fair to me. R=U relies on many arguments working together, of course they can't stand on their own.
Although this only partly applies to my point, and isn't something I'd rely on to support what I just said, here is a direct example:
"Ultimecia behaves completely different from Rinoa, to the point where they might as well be considered different people even if you assume R=U. Considering that Square would certainly want to try and make
people understand their plot, it seems somewhat odd that they then failed to make Ultimecia give us even the tiniest indication that she was once Rinoa."
Now this is all well and good... however it only applies if one has already rejected Griever as evidence. Griever can only be rejected as evidence if one assumes R=/=U, something the above statement is trying to support.
Now onto my second point. The guide dismisses a lot of evidence that sorceresses have extended lifespans, and it does so (not entirely I admit), but certainly as part of its final blow, by relying on Ultimania. I know that the guide's purpose was to show that Square do not suggest R=U, so it is perfectly reasonable to use Ultimania. However, as I think we have agreed, our purpose is to debate whether FFVIII itself indicates R=U.
Anyway, as I've rushed this, my point may not be as clear as I'd like. R=U relies on many separate, but co-supporting arguments to defend itself. A table stands on four legs, if you take away a leg it will fall. But equally one can not expect a table leg to stand up on its own.
Just a side note: I want this thread to stay open as much as anyone, can people avoid defending this in posts that don't talk about anything else. Unfortunately the case to keep these threads open is far weaker than to close them, and the only way we can show that this thread isn't like previous ones is by staying completely on topic, even if ironically this might mean that we are limited in our ability to defend it :D.
PS. Sorry I haven't actually directly responded to anyone, or really offered any direct arguments, I really am in a hurry, and felt that the above things took priority.
So much for a hurry XD
Anyway, I like to see these theories evolve... Makes a game that was published in 1999 still feel alive.
Haha, well, it's not really that bad ;) At least you have the honesty and integrity to admit to faults, unlike many R=U defenders.Quote:
Basically I realised that for the most part of this debate I was getting my ass handed to me . A large reason for this I think, is that I've been playing defense.
That's a fair enough point I suppose. The FAQ does indeed focus more on demonstrating the weaknesses of each individual argument than the arguments seen as a whole. Perhaps it could be edited somewhat to give a bit more focus on their possible cumulative effect.Quote:
First of all, whilst I do have a lot of respect for the way that FAQ is written (I skimmed the time theory bits, and its pretty clear that a fair grip on theories of time going on), I don't feel it gave R=U as fair a trial as it could. My main problem with it is that although it gives each argument a fair trial (and much more informed than I could have, I learnt quite a bit reading it), it repeatedly treats each argument individually, but acknowledges their strength. had they been otherwise supported. The problem with this is that there are a lot of arguments for R=U, which on their own certainly don't indicate R=U, but cumulatively might. I at least didn't see a point (other than after a couple of examples, one of which the FAQ 'claimed' to be refutable which I'll discuss in a moment) where the arguments were considered as a whole. This just doesn't seem fair to me. R=U relies on many arguments working together, of course they can't stand on their own.
Now, I agree that the theory relies on several 'hints' to argue for its validity, but I believe the FAQ demonstrates that ALL these so-called hints either have perfectly reasonable explanations which do not hint at R=U or simply are too weak to be considered a hint. Even when you add up all those hints which are considered too weak, the argument is still too shaky though as it rests on a highly shaky foundation. I mean, compare it to say the theory that Laguna is Squall's dad. None of the main hints used to back up this idea have alternate explanations which are at all reasonable. The hints, once spotted, can be seen to virtually unambiguously point towards the same conclusion. This is not so with the R=U theory, yet if true, it would be even more important to the plot than Laguna being Squalls father.
Although one or two of the hints may be reasonable enough (eg. the possible origin of Ultimecia being Artemisia) in themselves, considering the boldness of the statement "R=U", they are not nearly enough to make a convincing case.
But it's true though that the FAQ focuses more on demonstrating that the theory was certainly not intended by the authors (hence the focus on the Ultimania), so you raise a valid point. If you feel that the points DO add up to make case though, you're going to have to argue for it =P
The rejection of Griever as evidence is not based on the assumption that R=/=U, I would think that much is clear after he has been discussed at such length. The rejection of Griever is based on the fact that the game (especially the japanese version) readily offers an explanation for the summoning of Griever which does not imply R=U in any way.Quote:
Now this is all well and good... however it only applies if one has already rejected Griever as evidence. Griever can only be rejected as evidence if one assumes R=/=U, something the above statement is trying to support.
Well, the regular arguments for extended lifespan are all discussed, although not nearly at as great length as they used to be, due to the Ultimania. Without the Ultimania, it is possible to make a case for extended lifespan (albeit not a VERY strong one, as I believe the relevant counterarguments in the FAQ demonstrate), which is really the quintessential step in even beginning to make a case for R=U.Quote:
Now onto my second point. The guide dismisses a lot of evidence that sorceresses have extended lifespans, and it does so (not entirely I admit), but certainly as part of its final blow, by relying on Ultimania. I know that the guide's purpose was to show that Square do not suggest R=U, so it is perfectly reasonable to use Ultimania. However, as I think we have agreed, our purpose is to debate whether FFVIII itself indicates R=U.
As for the purpose of this debate, I suppose if we can agree that the theory was clearly not intended by Square when they wrote the story, we may well debate the plausibility of the theory based entirely on the game itself. In that context, I would say that although a case for the theory could be made, it would not really be very plausible at all, especially because the alternate theory of Ultimecia's background ("The Unjust Persecution" as discussed in the FAQ) still stands as far more plausible all things considered.
PS: Don't worry about having to post quickly or anything. If you don't feel you have the time to cover all you want, just wait. There's no timelimit to the debate or anything.
Never seen things from that perspective...but if you want to kill Rinoa just kill her in the middle of some batlle that´s what i did:D (yes i know it was a naughty thing).Quote:
Originally Posted by f f freak
I just think there are to many counters to the R=U and her speech and appearance to me (as i have already stated on this thread) are the most relevant.
Yeah I know that was a weak example, its just it was the only one I could give directly reference the text for. Though I do stand by that IF you allow R=U around a 50% probability (which I know needs to be defended still), then Griever makes far more sense in that camp. That argument needs some work. In a rush again, just can't resist posting :D. I do want to go through the extended lifespan arguments when I get time though, I think they need a more thorough workout...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Oddly enough, out of all the actually valid arguments I find those two the least problematic. Appearance is seen to change through sorceress powers, and its just natural for speech to change with environment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Dark Aeons Slayer
Yeah, I don't see appearance and speech as a big against for the argument. The one that I think is the most problematic for the theory is the life span argument.
Bu you see i think speech is problematic and i´ll explain why...Ultimecia is and evil badass sorceress right?And as far as i remember she lives all alone with her magic guardians in a flying castle...so call me ceptic if she doesn´t really have interaction with other people...but if in fact she doesn´t interact with anybody how could her speech change?
She perhaps hasn't lived in the castle alone all that time.
If this theory is true (I don't believe it and don't really know why I am defending it to an extent) there is at least a gap of like 100 years between Squall knowing Rinoa till Ulti's time. So for 100 years, maybe less, maybe more, she could have lived with people and developed that accent as she spiralled into her insanity.
Perhaps...but assuming that Ultimecia is like what about 30 years old?And taking the consideration that she had to dig up a castle or built it and all i would say she never really had any friends...to practice her accent.
Okay, we're talking about someone that can "COMPRESS TIME" a "Castle" is doesn't seem to be that much of a challenge... ROFLOL:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Dark Aeons Slayer
Hey, hey, hey... I'm not disputing, but... yeah, possibly I am, but my point is... She's ATTEMPTED, yes attempted and failed, to 'compress' time to a singular moment. A castle wouldn't be that much of a feat for someone for , oh say, Soreceress Edea to walk through walls. But my ultimate point is... The castle is nothing compared to what Ultimecia was trying to accomplish... The REAL question is... "WHY"? Or maybe that's not the question.
P.S.: Also about the Squall/Griever thing: I look at it like this: If Satan popped up in front of me... I'm be a little be more than just... Hmm... This could be a problem... Wait, I probably would... I've said my piece on that, so... Go on kids...
More later....
Quote:
That's debatable
The truth is... Jenova is Ultimecia.
Yep, FFVII's 'background villain' is actually Ultimecia.
There is IRREFUTABLE PROOF in both games.
Jenova can survive travel through space. Thus, Jenova could get from one world to another. If the worlds of FFVII and FFVIII are in fact the same world, then this is fine too - Jenova can survive for millennia, buried in solid rock.
"But Jenova was destroyed!" you all cry. Actually, Jenova's body has the ability to re-form when it's dismembered - even when it's apparently dead.
Both Jenova and Ultimecia are female, and both want to attain God-like power and rule over an entire world.
Jenova has the power to change her form. Ultimecia transforms, as well. Jenova can alter her appearance, gaining the appearance and voice of other people. Jenova and Ultimecia look nothing alike, which proves that they are one and the same, just using different forms.
This is utterly, completely, irrefutably, incontrovertibly, undoubtedly, undeniably, undisputably, indubitablly, unquestionably true.
Coz I sez so.
EXACTLY!!! YES!! THAT'S IT!! THAT'S EXACTLY... ... ... No wait, that's not what... Uh... Yeah... LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Christmas
Christmas proves that the answer to all theories is Jenova yet again.
And there ya go... Th... th... that's it! I mean... There ya GO! There's no denying it!!! And CHRISTMAS FOR CHRISTMAS SAKES! WHO ARE YOU TO DENY IT!!! DARE YOU QUESTION CHRISTMAS?!?!?!! DON'T YOU DO IT!!! I'M PUT MORE THAN A LUMP OF COAL IN YOUR STOCKING CON-SERNIT!!! WAITAMINUTE DON'T SHUSH ME SANTA!!! LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christmas
Sorry... Uh... I just saw an oppurtunity to... uh.... Y'know... make/have some fun... Um... Y'know... take a break and I guess keep the discussion lively... ... ... ... ... KEFKA RULES... (runs away).....
Why is this thoeory still alive? It's full of holes, but the biggist one is this:
In a game, featureing a grand story of love, conquering evil, THIS WOULD NOT BE HOW IT ENDED. It's vomits all over the theme of the rest of the game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Blue
You mean like "Romeo and Juliet"? I rather like to believe that some see the R=U theory as seeing this as a tragic romance with a happy resolution.
I can live with that... But like most 'parents' believe that this is a 'bad' influence amongst young players/readers to imitate art...
Is THIS why the R=U is so hated? I want to know... :choc2:
R=U is hated for many reasons, depending on the person.
For many, it is simply ridiculously in violation of parsimony.
For others, it simply would destroy the story as written.
Then there are those who think it's stupid.
Oh, and R&J is NOT a 'grand story of love, conquering evil'. It's a story about two romantic yutzes, one of them a preteen, who destroy their lives by rushing headlong into a wanna-romance without any gorram clue of what they were doing.
Okay, retranslate that for the rest of us...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryushikaze
You missed the one where people are just plain sick of a theory that's been around for years and persists to come up every few months on every FF board, with little to no additions.
And apparently you missed that 'fact' that is will persist because it is perspective just like all the 'proven' 'factual' 'truths' of 'how' the ending occuerred. From all the people that have posted and shared, there is no ONE conclusive, evident, secular, ending to FFVIII. That is why I'm trying to understand the vehement loathing of the R=U "Theory" other than that there are those they don't won't others to see it as that and only just out of that hatred of that vision. I truly hope I am wrong as that I don't want to be wrong. I just want to UNDERSTAND.... And then come to some sort of amerliration...
I just think it'd be logical, that if Square intended on Ultimecia being Rinoa, they would make it more noticeable, so most people would understand it and see it. If it's something THAT big, like Ulti being Rinoa, they would have made it obvious, and would have throwns tons more stuff in the game to at least hint at it, if they didn't want to be direct. It's just not enough.
The "Theory"; just like the STORY... It's full of HOLES!!!! I'll get more into detail of that later if you want me to... But let's face it... This was the most weakly constructed story since... well the first thing that comes to mind is... Street Fighter (The movie) or "House of the Dead" (the movie), or Dukes of Hazzard (the movie starring Johnny Knoxville and Jessica Simpson, and co.) to name a few; that was a possible good idea, but just wasn't followed through properly... Some of you may disagree, but... yeah... Read a book...
Quote:
Originally Posted by G SpOtZ
How was it 'not noticable' and yes, I can see how it 'was noticable'?
I can see both sides of this endless debate because I was 'neutral'. I did not like the STORY of FFVIII. The R=U gave a... something, (don't judge me like that!) that wasn't there. I saw and viewed, and understood all the interpretations that others had of the game's 'story' simple before the R=U 'Theory" even came up... And y'know what... For me... It explained some... 'questions' I had during the game play... Hey, I just gotta tell ya.... It happened... and I THANK GOD for Final Fantasy Tactics (Not that crappy imitation FFTA) to restore my faith in Final Fantasy, to continue on (after finishing FFT) through FFVIII... But nonetheless, I finished it because it was a FF... Hopeing to be satisfied.... I'll explain myself later... I'm getting ahead of myself; seeing as I"m writing my 'essay' now... Later kiddles....
The game ending has almost nothing to do with the R=U theory. In fact, apart from a brief scene involving Ultimecia's face (as well as Edea's and Seifer's) appearing over Rinoa's, it is almost never used to try and substantiate the theory. In fact, the R=U theory generally conforms to the accepted notion of what happens in the end. It the events that would theoretically take place after the ending that it refutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
Also, you missed the point of my post. I said that most people are sick of the theory because it gets brought up so often, not because loath the 'vision' it portrays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
Hey batta, hey batta, hey batta, HEY!!!!
You missed my point. WHY... is the R=U perspective so vehemently ATTACKED? No other views are so vicously attacked as this one... Why? I'm looking for perspective... Give me some...:eep:
As I said, it's so people will finally shut up about it.
PAK, you continously ask the same question yet many people have already answered it repeatedly. How many different answers do you want before you're satisfied?
The theory is "hated" by some because they think it is an entirely invalid theory with no supporting evidence which regardlessly is defended by 14-year olds with bad grammar who say nothing but "it's all opinion lol" in threads that invariably end up as massive trollfests because every FF board has at least one exceedingly stubborn supporter who won't ever back down.
That's why. It's simply because most peoples experiences with the theory and it's supporters has given it a severely negative connotation. That and the fact that many find it frustrating that so many people believe it for no reason when it is clearly NOT supported by the game.
Is that a satsifactory answer or does someone else have to repeat it again? :rolleyes2
I like HATED theory and it is pretty obvious that Ultimecia is JENOVA. :bigsmile:
That would not be possible because Jenova is purple and as an eye in one of her boobs...(yes i noticed that)Quote:
Originally Posted by Christmas
I'll just keep on asking it until I get a satisfactory answer.:rolleyes2 :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Did anyone ever tell you you're unreasonably demanding? :rolleyes2 The correct answer/s have already been given several times, and yet you dismiss them because they're not what you wanted to hear? Sorry, but that's your problem, not ours, so you're wasting everyones time by continously interrogating everyone as to why they dislike R=U.
Nope. Not meeting my satisfactory demands. :rolleyes2 :D Next...!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
This is just like the time I gave my 'facts' (really opinions, yeah turn on me , I know ya wanna :D )
Anyway, this is just reminds me of that time when someone said something to the effect that Selphie could be a Sorceress... That's... Not possible... People argued that to the teeth and I was one of the none believers too,... wait for it... BUT.... I did agree with the possibility she could be in line of the "Succession of Witches"... Boy did I get flamed for that one too. At this point, I realized that this was exactly what you accuse me of... Wanting people to 'see it my way'... Yeah, that was just like the Para-Magic discussion where other bombarded me about the JME theory of Para-Magic when I didn't agree, but I understood. There were no 'facts' to support a JME in conjuction with Para-Magic, but I could understand the origin of that theory...
HOWEVER... when I suggested that Para-Magic was an innate ability... Again,... boy did I get slammed.
There were no facts for the JME being used for Para-Magic by the military, no more than my natural ability...
Point being... It's all inspiration from a game/story we all love/hate...
That's why I say views. My quest is to understand why people hate the view of R=U... So called 'facts' don't prove anything...
Hey! Sorry my internet died for the last week... man this thread went to Hell quickly... Its a shame, it was going so well...
I'm not gonna try and get this debate going again, unless it sparks to life somehow, though I would like to make a brief comment on the recent discussion.
I know, that you were simply explaining why people hate the theory, and that makes the above perfectly valid, but I do feel it reflects an overall unfair view (perhaps not your own but in others) of the R=U debate. It is VERY often the opponents of R=U who offer nothing productive in posts, and often fail to refuse to drop completely invalid points (Rinoa not dieing when Ulty does for example). I won't point them out, but there are numerous examples in this thread, and this one has been relatively mature.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
I'm not saying advocates of R=U don't act like you described, but they do get a disproportionate amount of stick IMHO.
PS. I quoted you because it was the easiest to construct a general response to, not because I disagreed with what you said.
For future reference, you are not as witty as you seem to think you are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
Junction Machine hypothesis, not a Junction Machine Ellone theory. And yes, it does have evidence, such as magic support tech, Junction Machine Ellone, Robots using Magic, etc.Quote:
Anyway, this is just reminds me of that time when someone said something to the effect that Selphie could be a Sorceress... That's... Not possible... People argued that to the teeth and I was one of the none believers too,... wait for it... BUT.... I did agree with the possibility she could be in line of the "Succession of Witches"... Boy did I get flamed for that one too. At this point, I realized that this was exactly what you accuse me of... Wanting people to 'see it my way'... Yeah, that was just like the Para-Magic discussion where other bombarded me about the JME theory of Para-Magic when I didn't agree, but I understood. There were no 'facts' to support a JME in conjuction with Para-Magic, but I could understand the origin of that theory...
Because we have direct evidence that suggests that it is not so, at least for terrestrial organisms, namely, the playable party.Quote:
HOWEVER... when I suggested that Para-Magic was an innate ability... Again,... boy did I get slammed.
There were facts AGAINST your postulate. JM Hypothesis, with no contradictory elements, wins by default.Quote:
There were no facts for the JME being used for Para-Magic by the military, no more than my natural ability...
You've been given several reasons. But let me wrap it all up into the answer I suspect you want. "IT'S TEH STOOPID, LOLZ!"Quote:
Point being... It's all inspiration from a game/story we all love/hate...
That's why I say views. My quest is to understand why people hate the view of R=U... So called 'facts' don't prove anything...
Seriously, we hate it because 1- It violates parsimony, specifically that we have no reason to believe sorceresses are immortal- aside from one line which must be taken out of context to mean so, and which is invalidated by Adel's search for a successor- and Ultimecia never had a knight, unlike Rinoa. It is an incredibly extraordinary claim, requiring some really solid evidence that its supporters have never been able to provide.
2- it would require Rinoa to have such a complete change of personality that Ulti would only share a body with the Rinoa we know.
3- It really just doesn't do anything at all for the story.
4- There isn't any official support for it, and official evidence against, given the explicit "Sorceress's have a normal human lifespan"
Somehow I knew that would draw you out... And everything you just said is... well... B.S. There's no 'evidence' and Yeah... Rinoa still COULD be Ultimecia... That's it. No matter what you say or whatever "facts" you come up with you can't change my or anyone's mind. There's not sense in me explaining it to you because you're always gonna just called it a 'postulate' or whatever...
You and your's treat this as if it should not even be spoken about, like it's 'against the law'.
Why is that?
Now, you can keep spouting all you want... I've heard it all before... For once SOMEONE is going to post their beliefs about the R=U and admit that there is NOTHING you and yours can do... You can't stop me and mine from thinking, believeing or whatever about no more than a Christian can 'convert' a devout Muslim.
So sit back... flip through your thesaurus... Cuz, it's on...:love:
Mommy put the kids to bed and break out the "His" and "Hers" paddles, DADDY'S HOME!!! (It's a new quote I'm working on. Just tryin' it out):greenie:
It's a stupid theory which kills the story of FFVIII. Rinoa is not Ultimecia, Square has never said so. If the game makers don't mention it and didn't intend it. It isn't true.
Ryushikaize's arguments were not BS, they were the arguments that kill the R=U theory.
Congratulations, you've just won the idiot of the month award. Sorry, but claiming that everything that someone else has posted is BS, without evidence, does not make you right. Quite the opposite, it makes you an moronic stubborn jack@$$ who is unable to formulate a logical reply and must thus stick to petty insults. In fact, such a response, from someone who apparently didn't even bother to read the post he was responding to, makes me wonder if there is any point to going on with this at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
The reason we hate hearing about it, is because we have yet to hear a single, coherent, logical explanation that would explain why the R-U theory could possibly be true.
In order to have a theory which anyone will be willing to listen to, you must have one that can find a way around these facts:
1. Ultimecia lives many generations in the future.
2. Square explicitly stated that the lifespan of a sorceress is no longer than that of an average human.
Every R=U theory ever presented, even before Square gave us the second fact I listed and made the theory completely impossible, has made a great series of assumptions to support their theory (and yours is no different). And, quite frankly, that is enough to ruin the theory right there. When presenting a theory, the burden of proof lies with the person formulating the theory. The more assumptions your theory makes, the less acceptable it is. Prove your theory with quotes and canon evidence. Otherwise, we will continue to ridicule you, for you will be continuing to be deserving of that ridicule.
... You asked for it "Richard"... But it's gonna be pointless. No matter what I say or post... You're never gonna accept it. Which is why these are views and nothing else. And the bottom line is... You just don't want people to see it any other way than yours. I'm not saying that Rinoa is "Definitely" Ultimecia... Only that I, YES, I can see that as possibility. And one LAST TIME... I AM NOT MAKING "THEORIES"...Quote:
Originally Posted by SkybladeCongratulations, you've just won the idiot of the month award. Sorry, but claiming that everything that someone else has posted is BS, without evidence, does not make you right. Quite the opposite, it makes you an moronic stubborn jack@$$ who is unable to formulate a logical reply and must thus stick to petty insults. In fact, such a response, from someone who apparently didn't even bother to read the post he was responding to, makes me wonder if there is any point to going on with this at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
The reason we hate hearing about it, is because we have yet to hear a single, coherent, logical explanation that would explain why the R-U theory could possibly be true.
In order to have a theory which anyone will be willing to listen to, you must have one that can find a way around these facts:
1. Ultimecia lives many generations in the future.
2. Square explicitly stated that the lifespan of a sorceress is no longer than that of an average human.
Every R=U theory ever presented, even before Square gave us the second fact I listed and made the theory completely impossible, has made a great series of assumptions to support their theory (and yours is no different). And, quite frankly, that is enough to ruin the theory right there. When presenting a theory, the burden of proof lies with the person formulating the theory. The more assumptions your theory makes, the less acceptable it is. Prove your theory with quotes and canon evidence. Otherwise, we will continue to ridicule you, for you will be continuing to be deserving of that ridicule.
I'm simply stating... "Yeah,... That makes a whole lotta sense. This explains a lot a questions to an already crappy puzzled story."
And again, I ask the questiion... Why can't people have the freedom to talk/post, great helled-horrors, even think about R=U?
Stop spittin' at me about 'theories' and 'facts' and all that, cuz that's not gonna work with me. I want to know why you don't allow people talk about it? Why is it so wrong to you and yours?
But at any rate, I'll just keep posting... Hell, consider me the 'villian' that gives you 'heroes' something to do while you sit around in your mansion sippin' tea. (That analogy kinda trailed off, but I think you get my point).:mad: :love:
Well, I suppose you're right in asserting that anti R=U debaters can be just as moronic as R=U believers. But to be frank, I can't help going easier on moronic anti R=U debaters, simply because with them I only get frustrated by their bad arguments. With R=U believers, it's not only bad arguments, but an obvious unwillingness to admit the faults of the theory because they clearly WANT to believe it so bad.Quote:
I know, that you were simply explaining why people hate the theory, and that makes the above perfectly valid, but I do feel it reflects an overall unfair view (perhaps not your own but in others) of the R=U debate. It is VERY often the opponents of R=U who offer nothing productive in posts, and often fail to refuse to drop completely invalid points (Rinoa not dieing when Ulty does for example). I won't point them out, but there are numerous examples in this thread, and this one has been relatively mature.
I'm not saying advocates of R=U don't act like you described, but they do get a disproportionate amount of stick IMHO.
[/QUOTE]Well, I suppose you're right in asserting that anti R=U debaters can be just as moronic as R=U believers. But to be frank, I can't help going easier on moronic anti R=U debaters, simply because with them I only get frustrated by their bad arguments. With R=U believers, it's not only bad arguments, but an obvious unwillingness to admit the faults of the theory because they clearly WANT to believe it so bad.[/QUOTE]
See, that's what's I'm talking about... I can see the faults of R=U and I can see the faults of "Anti-R=U" as well as all the other views of how the ending goes... I mean, c'mon... There's countless versions of the following but... NO ONE can explain the "Exploding Space Helmet"!
And that's fine... I just like hear all the different view and interpetations
I like Rinoa is Ultimecia... I just don't see why it can't be? It sense to me; and somehow that rubs people the wrong way. Again, much like Christians and Muslims... Why?:confused: :love:
Hehe, I guess thats fair (if perhaps a little biased :P). They annoy me too because they make the theory look bad :D. I still think they get an unfair amount of stick though. Some non-believers do seem to able to get away with far more arrogance or abuse seemingly because their interpretation is more widely accepted. For example wandering into a thread and saying nothing other than demanding it be closed would generally be considered mod-whoring or worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
Yeah, I can't help being somewhat biased. But you're right about it being a bit extreme demanding the topic be closed. Again though, it's got to do with previous experiences, but I suppose the failure of previous topics cannot wholly be placed on supporters of the theory.
That's not correct. The technical reason as to why it appears is fairly trivial really, but the symbolic interpretation is another matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by PAK
The fact that you think it makes sense doesn't mean it does. The comparison to religion is absurd; a rational debate on the validity of the theory is NOT based on belief, it is based on logic and rational thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by PAK
Mi first post in loong time. The R-U theory haters and lovers are just trying to prove their points without understanding that the two sides are right, the theory is not made up, it is sugested by that FMV, and a FMV incerted in the end of the game is official material, you can´t just say that rinoa is not switching with ultimecia in those frames, but if we begin to deal with tons of time travel theories or lifespam guides, inmediatly the point get lost. The intro and the ubication of ultimecia´s castle, official, is right there. Quistis talking about the Guardian´s effect on memory and Ultimecia using Guardian is right there( wich one is irrelevant ) , she could have lost her memory. Now, can rinoa live to become ultimecia according to the trillion of lifespam and time travel theories? that was so ambiguous in the game that anything could be true. The guides? ultimania ? Square is contradicting the whole FF7 ending with the FFVII compilation, stretching the story, creating backwards characters to make more sequels, so if you ask them you´re going to get only political answers like, if rinoa is ultimecia would you buy a movie about that ?. R-U Is not true or false, and thats what makes FFVIII a work of art.
Okay, see, you're doing it again.
You're picking apart anything I post. I never said that was true. I just said it makes sense to me. I don't what's with that.
Your responding post is perfect example of my original statement. Let it go, aight?
I just want to post what I think and share it with others instead of being hesitant, or afraid, because of the 'haters' and have it closed because of the results flames... It's not gonna go away. You can't change my mind and I don't want to change yours'. Just let people be. I could 'disprove' the JME but I don't want to because of the resulting flames, much when I just said that "I THINK" that Para-Magic is a innate ability to answer the question of "HOW DO GALBADIAN SOLIDERS USE PARA-MAGIC".
I don't need to do that. I believe that R=U 'theorists' are like "Sorcersses"... We're hunted down by you "SeeDs". You see us as nothing more than your missonary belief to "Kill All Sorceresses" and we not all bad.... We just want to discuss this and have fun. But some reason, this tempts you to attack... Again, just like so-called Christians vs. Muslims... (Yeah, I'm gonna keep making that reference hoping you'll understand what I'm gettin' at).
I never started this post... Someone else did. And I thought I would/could share my views on the subject without being singled-out, hemuliated, chastised, belittled, and just basically trashed, stomped, and drug through the mud.
Why can't this ever be discussed? Because you simply loathe the idea of it so? Why?
Now, I want you to know, I've been working on my R=U 'essay', but I'm seeing more and more evidence as to "Why Am I Writing This?" and "Why Should I Post It?"
I know by that statement I've opened myself up. And I've made similar statements previous for people focus on and piece out for a retort. And I'll keep doing it. Until I get my answer and I feel that R=U spectators get their fair shake.
MOMMY! PUT THE KIDS TO BED AND BREAK OUT THE WHIPS AND CHAINS!! DADDY'S HOME! (That one work better? I like the previous one more though).:love:
Y'know what? (pats chest) From here on out... You my N-word! Aight! That's what I'm talkin' 'bout! K-Sah-Rah-Sah-RAH! LOL!!!!:love: :D :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Wilder
If the haters hate this so much... Why else would they even bother coming to these threads after all these years other than to trash an idealic view FFVIII, than to make themselves feel good? And y'know, that's probably what it's all about... Dominant 'God-like' power to crush dreams and souls. They even got a 'Bible' that goes against R=U.
Alla gotta say is: Hey, Jacks, if you don't like the food here, IHOP is just around the corner.... LOL (Waitaminute, should I use that as a quote?)
excuse me Mr Khan if my crappy english scared you, is because I am still trying to learn it, and the American - English difference is the last thing I worry about. And my comment was about not giving the reason to one or another but to see the theory on both sides. if you have fun trashing R-U ignoring the facts in the game, that is even more sad than your sense of humor. ;) peace yo !
I don't know how much of this is repetitive or just plain weird, but I kinda wrote something on the whole R=U theory a few months ago. It's nothing like many of the replies here but it's just some of my thoughts on the matter:
http://members.cox.net/flowergrlk/fr...t/rinulty.html
Anyways, when all is said and done it's still just a game...there are a lot more important issues worth fighting for. Of course, this IS an FF8 forum but still...
That was so funnie !, Hey stop fighting this is just a game, you should worry about the war !, now, read my 200 lines toughts about R-U :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco Potato
Ah, ok. I misunderstood you. First off, despite your claims, I dislike people arguing against the R=U thoery just as much as I dislike people arguing for it. It feels like listening to two people arguing about what color water is. One person says its magenta, the other says its blue. They're both idiots, one for stating an obvious falsehood , and the other for bothering to sit around arguing about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
The other reason why the R=U theory gets on my nerves is because there hasn't been an original argument for it in years. Every argument presented in favor of it has been gone over several hundred times and been countered several hundred more. Eventually, you get sick of it. But still there are people who wouldn't admit that the R=U theory is false even if Square-Enix came out and said "Rinoa is not Ultimecia, now get a life you obsessive freaks". There are people who so want to believe these crackpot theories that they will do anything, come up with the most complex BS the world has ever seen, and ignore any evidence to the contrary just to make themselves seem correct. And people like that really piss me off.
Please. Spare me the whole "I am being unfairly persecuted" riff. You are free to post whatever the hell you want. But, guess what? Such freedom goes both ways. We are also free to post whatever the hell we want to. You are free to post your theories, and we are free to criticize them (and you), provided we don't break the rules. That's the way it works, and if your delicate sensibilities can't accept that, tough. Free speech means free speech for everyone, not just for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
Draw me out? I'm not hiding. Are you having delusions of conspiracy?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
If by B.S. you mean Bloody Sound, then yes, it was. Otherwise, no.Quote:
And everything you just said is... well... B.S.
Not for R=U, no.Quote:
There's no 'evidence'
And so could Irvine with all the hoops you gotta jump through to get there.Quote:
and Yeah... Rinoa still COULD be Ultimecia... That's it.
You certainly don't have anywhere near enough empirical support to consider calling it a theory, so yes, postulate is accurate.Quote:
No matter what you say or whatever "facts" you come up with you can't change my or anyone's mind. There's not sense in me explaining it to you because you're always gonna just called it a 'postulate' or whatever...
I treat it like the outlandish and unsupported idea that it is. I'd do the sameif someone suggested that Selphie was a crack ho.Quote:
You and your's treat this as if it should not even be spoken about, like it's 'against the law'.
I believe in rational thinking.Quote:
Why is that?
1- Yes they will.Quote:
Now, you can keep spouting all you want... I've heard it all before... For once SOMEONE is going to post their beliefs about the R=U and admit that there is NOTHING you and yours can do...
2- No, I- I have no 'mine'- will not.
No, but I can point out that all of your beliefs are grounded in irrational thinking, lack empirical support, and are all sorts of ridiculous, as I would do to both the christian and the muslim.Quote:
You can't stop me and mine from thinking, believeing or whatever about no more than a Christian can 'convert' a devout Muslim.
Oh, and get off this 'muslim' schtick. No one cares.
If you want to try clever wordplay, expect the cold mercilless fist of rational thought to go into overdrive.Quote:
So sit back... flip through your thesaurus... Cuz, it's on...:love:
No. Seriously. You are not funny. It is in your best interests to stop attempting to be witty.Quote:
Mommy put the kids to bed and break out the "His" and "Hers" paddles, DADDY'S HOME!!! (It's a new quote I'm working on. Just tryin' it out):greenie:
pointless. Somebody explain to me why Squall don´t have a hole in the place edea putted an ice stick , or why you want ignore the ubication of the ultimecia´s palace, or rinoa´s wings turning black ( being rinoa and ultimecia the only characters that have wings ), or the ridiculous 3 frames of ultimecia FMV ( the only ones in the whole game, and I supose nobody noticed it at first) flashing between rinoa´s eyes, if you modeled a character on FMV, and not any character, the freakin final boss and put it less than a second flahing on rinoa face, that got to be something planned, oh yeah, and don´t forget just after that scene you see squall crying, :confused: clear enough to make a theory ?.
I'll be hereWhy?I'll be waiting... here...For what?I'll be waiting... for you... so...If you come here...You'll find me.
promise.
So the time has come. You're the legendary SeeD destined to face me?
Enough to talk about it
Full Cure. NEXT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilder
, or why you want ignore the ubication of the ultimecia´s palace,[/quote]
Decidedly away from the 'there of the promise'. And just say 'place'.
1- When do Rinoa's go Black? andQuote:
or rinoa´s wings turning black ( being rinoa and ultimecia the only characters that have wings ),
2- Adel has wings. Edea has feathers and birdlike talons.
And how many other characters flash by as well? You're ascribing too much signifigance to an FMV without taking it into context.Quote:
or the ridiculous 3 frames of ultimecia FMV ( the only ones in the whole game, and I supose nobody noticed it at first) flashing between rinoa´s eyes, if you modeled a character on FMV, and not any character, the freakin final boss and put it less than a second flahing on rinoa face, that got to be something planned,
Squall is crying because he can't get his memories straight, and as such, can't get home to his honey. Seriously, folks. Parsimony.Quote:
oh yeah, and don´t forget just after that scene you see squall crying, :confused: clear enough to make a theory ?.
And she does.Quote:
I'll be hereWhy?I'll be waiting... here...For what?I'll be waiting... for you... so...If you come here...You'll find me.
promise.
Yes. Not 'promise fulfilled', not 'You left me waiting', just 'So you are the one'.Quote:
So the time has come. You're the legendary SeeD destined to face me?
But not enough to give it any merit under a rational inquiry.Quote:
Enough to talk about it
Wilder:
You should read the R=U section of the Time/Ultimecia Plot FAQ found here:
http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/psx/game/197343.html
Although Ryu already answered your questions more bluntly, the FAQ will answer you more indepth, hopefully indepth enough to convince you.
I was actually gonna recommend that link to everyone. Although I have expressed my concerns over its methodology, it gives a fairly comprehensive account of the arguments in favour of R=U as well. Whether you agree with the counter-arguments or not (I agree with them in part, but not overall), it might prevent people claiming that R=U is based on nothing.
Full cure ? come on !! :eep: lets use a phoenix down on aeris then !. And the FMV is a point that you can´t ignore because the R-U begins there. What I meant about squall being atacked by edea is a strong theory about things that can´t happen in the FFVIII universe, and a counterpoint to those who say that is ilogical that ultimecia had forgotten her own young face, and even the possibility of killing herself. When square make that game about time travel I´m sure they knew the paradox were going to be infinite. When you complete the game, you realize that this characters are destined to do the whole plot over and over, and that´s exactly what the last FMV mean, the same scene repeating over and over. two characters should die in the process, squall and rinoa ( the space scene ), or at least , this is what square want us to think, but they magically don´t die, so far the circle can´t be broken, Ultimecia can´t kill herself if she´s rinoa. Later you see squall, edea, young squall, and ultimecia in the same scene, this causes so many paradox !!, Squall is trying to kill ultimecia and stop the process but is not possible. But, what happen in the mind of young squall and edea for them to forget the face of old squall and ultimecia ? . And about that interpretation of squall crying because he love so much rinoa and he miss her, if we are going to get psicological about the interpretation of the video, at least take in consideration the 3 frames of ultimecia, the rinoa images fading and deforming, the way those repeats and repeats, and the tear just right after the ultimecia - rinoa flash.
Wilder, you seriously need to read that FAQ. Although PhoenixAsh has raised some valid criticism of certain aspects of it, it will at worst help clarify a lot of what you think of as "paradoxes" and explain the fallacies of some of your arguments (eg. Ultimecia's face flashing over Rinoa is hardly worth considering, seeing as Edea's face also flashes over it immediately before). Because quite frankly, you seem to have a very confused view on the matters you are addressing.
By the way, PhoenixAsh, I feel compelled to discuss in a bit more length the argument you raised about the splitting up of hints vs. combined power thing whenever I next have time to update the FAQ. Unfortunately, that won't be for a while, due to school, but just thought I'd let you know. I will, for the record, still maintain that the theory is not valid, but will in any case give more attention to that particular argument.
didnt i say this was the r=u thread when this thread began and people said i was wrong this looks like it though
u guys sound mlike little kids
r=u rinoas ulti
r-u no shes not
r=u yes she is
r-u no shes not
r=u yes she is
r-u no shes not
and they argued happily ever after the end hahahaha
The problem is that there will always be supporters even if the creators came and said look Ultimecia is not Rinoa there would still be people saying that she was...
Personally i think that almost every answer given in regard to the fact that Rinoa could not be Ultimecia are enough to destroy such a theory and much more accurate than the explanations given by the defenders of such an annoying theory.
if the people who made it said it ant true its not if u r=u fans want to go on with this make ur own video game then u can be the creators
Sir Bahamut - yes I would like to go into that as well. I'm going to be fairly limited in access to EoFF after next week, but hopefully should be able to get on to discuss it. The FAQ did a very good job of breaking everything down and discussing pros and cons, but it would be nice to see how the theory stands with its arguments united. Also, parsimony might side with R=U if it explains lots of different things in one foul swoop (okay thats not very likely but still, it might prevent parsimony being such a reason against it)
finalfantasyguy4ever we have already discussed that it is perfectly possible to debate whether or not one can hold that the game suggests R=U without holding that R=U is cannon when everything else is considered. From what I remember this is one of the most calm and reasoned discussions (apart from the recent bickering, which actually seems to have resolved itself) I have seen. If you do not wish to take part in such a discussion, then no one will force you. If you do wish to take part, then please offer further reasons for your opinion of why R=U is wrong (those you offered earlier were fairly well refuted IMHO).
i say the r=u is wrong because the people who made the game said its not true how much more do u want
I don't want this thread to stay off topic, so I'm only posting this because it summarizes earlier discussion of the scope of an R=U debate, and thus is of assistance to people who haven't read the whole thread. This thread is discussing whether or not R=U stands up from the evidence in the game (perhaps some might defend it fuller than that, but I haven't seen such an attempt), and also if, and if so the reason why, the theory and its proponents get unfairly persecuted.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixAsh
EDIT: perhaps that was a little too limited, I apologise to anyone (particularly the original poster) who feels that the thread has other purposes, that just how I've interpretted it.
than y would people support something that the people who made the game said it ant true if they say its true then ill believe it if they dont then i ant now y keep going on
Well here is a post by Squall of SeeD from FFShrine.
http://forums.ffshrine.org/showthread.php?t=25525
I believe it is a piece of Sir Bahamuts FAQ.
Some of those answers are just desperate responses, you just have to read it all to find out that the R-U theory is there, is not a stupid tought or an illusion we all created, now, the answers, you can clearly see that the autor is trying his best to say no to everything no matter what, rinoa warped - bad traduction , ultimecia castle ubication - Seeds corpses :confused: , FMV with rinoa ultimecia - there is nothing there to see is just ultimecia faces flashing over rinoa face , Ultimecia name ( in the european version translated drastically to Artemisa ) - that meaning is just in your mind, bring the real ultimecia and I´ll ask if that´s true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magus of Zeal
my friends, the theory exist, it can not be proven true or false, but for those who try to erase it, come on !!, accept it, it exist.
finalfantasyguy4ever, There is no official Square response about the topic so stop your claiming
How exactly are any of the responses "desperate"? Unless you demonstrate why, they still stand as perfectly valid counterarguments which demonstrate the flaws of the theory. If you're going to dismiss the whole thing without any sort of justification, YOU are the one sounding desperate.
Now, of course no one is denying that the theory "exists" (or else we wouldn't be having this discussion now would we?), but it is wrong to say it cannot be proven right or wrong. The moment you begin a rational debate on this, you are agreeing to the premise that it is possible to judge the validity of a theory, and hence R=U can be demonstrated to be invalid.
If you do not accept that premise you shouldn't even be arguing here to begin with.
Y'know... Maybe Ultimecia is another lost fragment of Ihadurca? Or maybe their cousins.
Ihadurca is the primary antagonist of another game I was playing while drudging through FFVIII. So off and on I played FFT and "Evil Zone" otherwise more commonly known as "Eretzvaju".
Ihadurca is "The Absolute Existence"; she can exist in multiple dimensions at the same time. In the game we focus on Lea's incarnation in the world of I-Praseru. Her original name was Ihadurca Il Immella and was a court magician in a state of I-Praseru before Lea possesed her. She was sealed away by the inhabitants of I-Praseru. Recently she has been nearing escape from Evil Zone therefore the people of I-Praseru began to summon warriors from other dimensia to destroy her.
As we play through the story mode of Ihadurca's story, we discover that Ihadurca isn't necessarily 'evil' but more so feared by others. This eventually drives her, IMHO, not 'insane' but more just fed-up with all these 'heroes' coming to kill her only on the provocation of fear.
I see Ultimecia in the same sense that maybe it was the Sorceress Power that ultimately just did not want to end. I know all about the arguments of whether the Sorceress Power was sentient and I'd rather not get into that because it's talking about something we can never be sure of, much like most of FFVIII's questionable story.
I personally do not think that Ultimecia was 'evil' but simply driven mad despair. She apparently knew that she was the last line in the succession and that her death would not be 'peaceful'. This is why after murderous rampages of "SeEdS Must DiE!" she is remorseful in the end after failing to make "The Everlasting Moment" aka "Time Compression".
Be she Rinoa or no, I think she simply just didn't want to die... Just like Ihadurca...
Even her episode lists seem to me closely to Ultimecia...
* Episode 1: "Gorgeous Goddess" (vs Ihadulca)
* Episode 2: "Unique" (vs Erel)
* Episode 3: "That's Why I Am Alive" (vs Keiya)
* Episode 4: "The Corruption Of Esperanto" (vs Linedwell)
* Episode 5: "Pentration Mark Or The Second Original Sin" (vs Danzaiver)
* Episode 6: "Hiding The Feeling And Enduring The Pain" (vs Alty)
* Episode 7: "Why, Did I Say Why?" (vs Gally)
* Episode 8: "The Name Of Ihadurca Il Imella" (vs Midori)
* Episode 9: "Memory Is Like A Kaleidoscope" (vs Setsuna)
* Final Episode: "Do You Still Cherish The Memory Of That Day in Your Heart?" (vs Kakurine)
So there ya go, Ultimecia was another version of Ihadurca... No... Not at all... But it was something that crossed my mine when I was going through my old PS game box... (sigh) memories... Y'know I'm not serious about this, right? It was just a thought that crossed my mind...
Now there some things I wonder if Ultimecia actually made emotional bonds with the Sorceresses she possessed, like when Rinoa possessed Adel, she said that she "was" young Adel... That's another endless rant because we don't know what she experienced. Maybe Ultimecia fell in love with Squall via Rinoa. There's nothing to support this at all... but it's just a thought... And this leads me to another thought.
Why out of all the Sorceresses that follow Sorceress Rinoa does/ can she only possesses with Rinoa and Edea without the help of Ellone...
My guess is that she can possess Edea so readily because Sorceress Edea is ultimately whom she passes her power to... Which questions how did she possess Rinoa over time and space.
She only needed Ellone to find Sorceresses preceeding Sorceress Adel's reign but could take control of everyone with the Reign of Rinoa/Edea's time. This is going to turn into another bit of 'evidence' to support but don't bother. I just consider it something to wonder about and have fun with.
Another thing I find funny is how this story mirrors itself just like the White/Black Wings Motiff...
Sorceress Edea had a love of her life who could have been her knight, but she and he are seperated and she turns 'evil'. As speculated by most R=U supporters. But how could Rinoa turn evil if Squall is here Knight? Well I see it like this....
Sorceress Edea has a 'pseudo-Knight' in the form of Seifer "The Chaser of Hopeless Dreams" :p
Now even though Siefer is or is a former member of Balamb Garden, his fellow Balamb Gardern SeeDs attack him. I believe the same thing could happen to Squall and Rinoa because SeeDs kill Sorceresses which I think is just asinine. (Boy did I open myself up with that one).
But anyway, this again makes me think that Rinoa and Squall could be persecuted through generations whether she becomes Ultimecia or not or until she passes on her Sorceress Power.
Now, I want to make it clear that I'm not trying to 'prove' anything but just saying what I think because apparently no matter I say it's just going to get sliced and diced for no reason other than something as petty as
"No. Seriously. You are not funny. It is in your best interests to stop attempting to be witty."
Or
"Congratulations, you've just won the idiot of the month award."
And on and on..
I was serious when I said I was trying out a new quote, it came to me when I visited the local arcade that day and people have come to expect me to say or do something to the effect of making them laugh. If I've done that, my job is done. I thought I'd try it out here to lower the tension and show I have a sense of humor as well. The insult was totally uncalled for. Whoever you are... he's another quote I've been tossing around and people like it so far... "You getta STFU".
That's just petty and makes it pointless for me to even say anything if all that's gonna happen is that I get insults like that.
I like and speak about the R=U theory because it requires imagination. I don't see anything wrong with thinking or believing it no more than not believing in it. People treat this like it's a sin to imagine something that could be... Or just to imagine at all. There is no supporting 'official' evidence for it or against it. I say let it go, because the ending much like most the story is just spawning more questions than answers.
Maybe I am Ultimecia... Don't bother... I was playing the violin myself before you even thought about it... LOL
And so...
MOMMY, PUT THE KIDS TO BED AND BREAK OUT THE WHIPS AND CHAINS! DADDY'S HOME!!! (I tried that one today, it went well... Well recieved):love:
I hope you realize that ^ sounded really sick and wrong, in various ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
That's kinda the point. It totally acknowledges that mommy and daddy still have an active life and why kids bedtimes are so closely linked to when daddy get's home. Hey, it wasn't the stork that brought ya home.Quote:
Originally Posted by G SpOtZI hope you realize that ^ sounded really sick and wrong, in various ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
If you have any other comments on this, please restrict them to the PMs, okay Johnny? Thanks. Now back to our show...:love:
I wasn't saying that the quote was sick, I was saying it was sick how you added that you "tried it."Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan IIIThat's kinda the point. It totally acknowledges that mommy and daddy still have an active life and why kids bedtimes are so closely linked to when daddy get's home. Hey, it wasn't the stork that brought ya home.Quote:
Originally Posted by G SpOtZI hope you realize that ^ sounded really sick and wrong, in various ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
If you have any other comments on this, please restrict them to the PMs, okay Johnny? Thanks. Now back to our show...:love:
And who the hell is Johnny? =P
What I meant was that I tried out the saying the quote. WTH did you think I meant? ... Y'know what I probably don't want to know but... Yeah. And I always randomly say things like "Johnny" and what not to people I don't know... Hell, I've even called someone "Cornflakes" and it stuck as a nickname with HIS FRIENDS... I can't apologize enough for poor Cornflakes... But again, use the PMs (Private Messages) Johnny.Quote:
Originally Posted by G SpOtZI wasn't saying that the quote was sick, I was saying it was sick how you added that you "tried it."Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan IIIThat's kinda the point. It totally acknowledges that mommy and daddy still have an active life and why kids bedtimes are so closely linked to when daddy get's home. Hey, it wasn't the stork that brought ya home.Quote:
Originally Posted by G SpOtZI hope you realize that ^ sounded really sick and wrong, in various ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
If you have any other comments on this, please restrict them to the PMs, okay Johnny? Thanks. Now back to our show...:love:
And who the hell is Johnny? =P
Now cue that theme song from Short Circuit by El Debarge "Who's Johnny"... :love:
Speaking as someone who loves that game, that was pointless, and will honestly not register with most of the people here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
Most of the story is not questionable, though it has a few unanswered elements. Oh, and the Sorceresses power is self preserving. It forces the host to pass it along before the host goes kaput. A bening, once communicable virus.Quote:
I see Ultimecia in the same sense that maybe it was the Sorceress Power that ultimately just did not want to end. I know all about the arguments of whether the Sorceress Power was sentient and I'd rather not get into that because it's talking about something we can never be sure of, much like most of FFVIII's questionable story.
I think attempting to compress, consume, recast, and rule over all of existence is pretty damn evil, no matter WHAT led her to the state she's in.Quote:
I personally do not think that Ultimecia was 'evil' but simply driven mad despair. She apparently knew that she was the last line in the succession and that her death would not be 'peaceful'. This is why after murderous rampages of "SeEdS Must DiE!" she is remorseful in the end after failing to make "The Everlasting Moment" aka "Time Compression".
Of course she didn't want to die. That's why she compressed time. To gain control over destiny and existence along with it.Quote:
Be she Rinoa or no, I think she simply just didn't want to die... Just like Ihadurca...
Reminds me more of Squall, actually.Quote:
Even her episode lists seem to me closely to Ultimecia...
* Episode 1: "Gorgeous Goddess" (vs Ihadulca)
* Episode 2: "Unique" (vs Erel)
* Episode 3: "That's Why I Am Alive" (vs Keiya)
* Episode 4: "The Corruption Of Esperanto" (vs Linedwell)
* Episode 5: "Pentration Mark Or The Second Original Sin" (vs Danzaiver)
* Episode 6: "Hiding The Feeling And Enduring The Pain" (vs Alty)
* Episode 7: "Why, Did I Say Why?" (vs Gally)
* Episode 8: "The Name Of Ihadurca Il Imella" (vs Midori)
* Episode 9: "Memory Is Like A Kaleidoscope" (vs Setsuna)
* Final Episode: "Do You Still Cherish The Memory Of That Day in Your Heart?" (vs Kakurine)
Quote:
-SNIP-
And Squall 'was' Laguna. I don't see the signifigance.Quote:
Now there some things I wonder if Ultimecia actually made emotional bonds with the Sorceresses she possessed, like when Rinoa possessed Adel, she said that she "was" young Adel...
And since there's nothing to support it, there's no reason to really give more than a passing fancy.Quote:
That's another endless rant because we don't know what she experienced. Maybe Ultimecia fell in love with Squall via Rinoa. There's nothing to support this at all... but it's just a thought... And this leads me to another thought.
She possesses everyone without the help of Ellone. She uses JME to travel back into the past, but Ellone can only piggyback, so she must be doing it on her own willpower. Now Ellone was required to send Ulti's mind farther into the past to give her what she wanted, to, yadda yadda Laguna's plan goes here, but she had nada to do with Edea or Rinoa's possession.Quote:
Why out of all the Sorceresses that follow Sorceress Rinoa does/ can she only possesses with Rinoa and Edea without the help of Ellone...
Sheer force of will combined with the link of the sorceress power would be my guess.Quote:
My guess is that she can possess Edea so readily because Sorceress Edea is ultimately whom she passes her power to... Which questions how did she possess Rinoa over time and space.
Upon being possessed by a megalomaniacal crazy lady from the future. I don't see how this is relevant. Also, why WOULDN'T you consider Cid to be Edea's knight? The only known job description seems to be keep them safe and sane, which he did well enough before mind control kicked in.Quote:
Sorceress Edea had a love of her life who could have been her knight, but she and he are seperated and she turns 'evil'.
As speculated by most R=U supporters. But how could Rinoa turn evil if Squall is here Knight? Well I see it like this....
Yet Edea as herself never met up with the adult Seifer. Ultidea was the one who kept interacting with him.Quote:
Sorceress Edea has a 'pseudo-Knight' in the form of Seifer "The Chaser of Hopeless Dreams" :p
Yes, Cuz he's a dick, allied himself against them, and generally did everything he could to make them miserable while serving Ulti.Quote:
Now even though Siefer is or is a former member of Balamb Garden, his fellow Balamb Gardern SeeDs attack him.
Actually, their purpose is to combat. Not kill. Killing might be required, but combating does not just mean 'slaughter all the sorceresses, go go'.Quote:
I believe the same thing could happen to Squall and Rinoa because SeeDs kill Sorceresses which I think is just asinine. (Boy did I open myself up with that one).
Yes, but what aside from the idea that it might support R=U would lead you to believe that this is so?Quote:
But anyway, this again makes me think that Rinoa and Squall could be persecuted through generations whether she becomes Ultimecia or not or until she passes on her Sorceress Power.
Funny how that line WAS NOT IN RESPONSE TO A DAMN ONE OF YOUR POINTS, which I have been addressing. You weren't funny. You were frankly being obnoxious.Quote:
Now, I want to make it clear that I'm not trying to 'prove' anything but just saying what I think because apparently no matter I say it's just going to get sliced and diced for no reason other than something as petty as
"No. Seriously. You are not funny. It is in your best interests to stop attempting to be witty."
If you're going to complain that I'm doing something, make sure I'm actually doing it before you shoot your mouth off.
Riiiiiiight. Besides, I know who's winning that award, and he don't go here.Quote:
Or
"Congratulations, you've just won the idiot of the month award."
Blatant over the top stupid is not the way to lower tensions in this sort of situation.Quote:
I was serious when I said I was trying out a new quote, it came to me when I visited the local arcade that day and people have come to expect me to say or do something to the effect of making them laugh. If I've done that, my job is done. I thought I'd try it out here to lower the tension and show I have a sense of humor as well. The insult was totally uncalled for. Whoever you are... he's another quote I've been tossing around and people like it so far... "You getta STFU".
If you avoid the irritating tangents, I will avoid calling them such.Quote:
That's just petty and makes it pointless for me to even say anything if all that's gonna happen is that I get insults like that.
It's not imagining it, it's about thinking that it's true. It's an idiotic and irrational belief and such things really ought to be fought against. ESPECIALLY when the believers are incredibly fervent about said belief.Quote:
I like and speak about the R=U theory because it requires imagination. I don't see anything wrong with thinking or believing it no more than not believing in it. People treat this like it's a sin to imagine something that could be... Or just to imagine at all.
Ultimania- Sorceresses have normal human life spans. Thank you, I'll be here all week.Quote:
There is no supporting 'official' evidence for it or against it.
Only because you fail to apply Okkam's razor and the suspension of disbelief.Quote:
I say let it go, because the ending much like most the story is just spawning more questions than answers.
If it weren't for the threat of being banned I would call you a Biyatch right now, only because that's all you're doin' right now: B***ing! Oh wait, I guess I sorta did go there... Oh well... Excuse me Mods... I plead for a warning... Otherwise... Please consult with me in PM. Thank you.
All you're doin is slicing and dicing things that I say to make yourself look smart. You're not even including my full statements.
I already said that I wasn't serious about this and that this was just thoughts that crossed my mind and it wasn't anything to be put as 'proof'.
But you just took it that way and played the role of the 'holier than thou'.
Dude, it's just fantasy. There's no need to take it this far or any further because the only landmark we're gonna reach is nowhere and ultimately 'closed and banned'.
I'm trying my best to state my beliefs without being 'biased' as most are but that's just not good enough for you, is it? (shakes head in sadness).
For the love of Mike... You're really just gonna drag this down once again to this level to why these threads are closed aren't you? Well I won't be party to that. I'll just keep posting what I say and we'll see what happens, k? I could slice and dice your responses like you did mine but I don't see that worth my energy. You're really just being petty and that's it. I won't stoop to your level. Granted, there are little points to what you said, but most of it is just B.S. only because you don't see R=U as a possibility. I see it as a possibility but not an absolute, and that's what I've always stated. It's not definite but a possibility. But yet, you still attack me and mine like we're spouting 'hersey'.
Kinda like Ramza Beovolve.
MOMMY PUT THE KIDS TO BED AND BREAK OUT THE LEATHER MASKS! DADDY'S HOME!!!! SECRET WORD IS: WHAT?! (Blame that one on Family Guy!)
P.S. "Honey" let's not fight in front of the kids, cuz that seems to be all you're doin'... Let's go somewhere private, k? (PM).
I still insist that Ultimecia is JENOVA.
And you have every right to believe that Christmas. And I'm not just saying that simply because I'm a hella fan of Christmas and the hate the comes along with it... Okay, maybe I am... I LOVE YOU Christmas!:love:
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 can´t be proved true or false sir bahamut. let´s 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 ther´s no prove , every character looks the same !.
I personally don´t 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 don´t pass the powers, they don´t die, in peace or not, they don´t 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 can´t be proved true or false sir bahamut. let´s 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 ther´s 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 don´t 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 don´t pass the powers, they don´t die, in peace or not, they don´t 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
I´m not trying to atack you Sir bahamut, I´m 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 squall´s 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 squall´s 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 I´m 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 I´ve 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.
Pharoh Amon Khan III is right. Not that I agree with the theory, but (I hope i don't look like Viator) the entire time cannot be compressed because time is infinite. Therefore, the compression started that the betatesters first played the game in late 1999 would still be happening, and those poor guys would still be fighting those weird sorceresses that show up.
There is no reason to believe that her death in the future would affect her ability to compress the future. Squall and co are still alive when they fight Ultimecia, despite the fact that their deaths would have been chronologically included in Time Compression as well. You're making a judgment on the limitations of Time Compression when it isn’t supported by anything within the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
There isn't any proof that time is infinate either.Quote:
Originally Posted by DfKimera
[QUOTE=Lilliputian Hitcher;1855436]There is no reason to believe that her death in the future would affect her ability to compress the future. Squall and co are still alive when they fight Ultimecia, despite the fact that their deaths would have been chronologically included in Time Compression as well. You're making a judgment on the limitations of Time Compression when it isn’t supported by anything within the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
What I'm saying is that... Uh... Sir Bahamut help with this one here. Let's look at like this Jackson... Stand up and stretch your arms out to the either side. One side is the past the other is future. YOU are currently in the 'present'.
Now one of these you're gonna have some matter to grab on to, (the past) and other you're just gonna be grasping at air (the future) because it hasn't happened yet. See the trick with the 'future-present' thing is that the future instantly becomes the present. See what I mean about not being able to compress 'all time' and the 'future'?
Ultimecia was attempting to achieve the "Everlasting Moment". I mean, think about it... If she have could have compressed the future that would mean that she would have compressed the actual moment of her achieveing the combined might of the succession without having to reach into the past. Technically like she was crossing the finishline before she even got inside the starter's box. And we would have to call her Sorceress Seabiscut.
It's really an ironic fated tale of madness and sadness because she's just trying to find that 'that moment' when hide away and give all SeeDs the finger from a safe distance and start blasting "Twisted Sister" songs like "We're Not Gonna Take IT (Anymore)" Incidentally that would make a rocking Magneto video on Youtube. :D
I always see time and time travel in this equation I came up with.
1= Past
2= Present
3= Future
1.5= Actual Present
Now there's lots of arguement about time being finite and infinite but those are just means of structuring time to something like a line, flowing energy (river), or a sphere... We could be all day on that; and I can't compress time. I hope I've explained myself clearly if not... To quote Ultimecia "Fufu".
You’re still making assertions that aren’t supported by the game. If the future hadn’t been written yet, then their wouldn’t be a sorceress from the future trying to compress time. I think that’s a pretty clear indication that there is something in the future to ‘grab onto’.
From her present she can't pull from the future. She's only able to draw from the past which is era of the Fated Children; From the Fated Children's perspective Ultimecia IS the 'future' but from Ultimecia's perspective she is in the present.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
She not only can't draw from future; but if she did she would effectively putting herself in the fate she's trying to avoid. So she really wouldn't want to compress that moment.
One thing to note whenever you're talking about time travel... Your perspective of time will almost constantly change.
Our present is the future to our past.
:D An there is people that say FFVIII plot is lame, there is no discussions like this on the FFVII thread
I'm one of those people that believe it. And it's not 'lame' persay... I think it was very poorly executed. Otherwise there really wouldn't be any threads like this. But hey... here we are... :love: There's potential for this roller coaster but it just doesn't catch my stomach and it tries to compensate with over the top visuals to cover up a story that has a great setting but unattachable hollow characters, save Squall. Don't hate me.
Now the R=U adds something like the story of Darth Vader to it. If Episode One was your first Star Wars, then one can see how it's hard to imagine how this innocent boy will become the scurge of the galaxy. Much like R=U there clues that hint to it, and it's not that there are 'facts' against it that hurts it so, it's that there support for it are pretty null and void.
It's almost like a questionable intentional/unintentional 'easter egg' after the story ends. Because whether Rinoa becomes Ultimecia or no, Ultimecia still exists in the future at the end and can possess her... Or can't she?
When I first played it I found very stupid to kill a witch from the future and then go back to the past, the witch is still in the future, is like a sick circle with infinite posibilities. This guys from square ruins easily the end of FFX by doing a pink sequel, I bet the death of tidus was something official right ?. but don´t open their mouths to speak about this, maybe they are sitting in a table asking " can somebody please tell me if rinoa is ultimecia? , who put that easter egg there ? " , I think a short animation about ultimecia origin would be a lot popular for all of us.
If she is located in the present when she compresses the future, it is still the future. And I still really don't see why compressing the future would bring about her destruction. Even if her death is located in the future, I don't see why compressing this event would cause her any harm any more than compressing any other event in which she isn't alive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan IIIFrom her present she can't pull from the future. She's only able to draw from the past which is era of the Fated Children; From the Fated Children's perspective Ultimecia IS the 'future' but from Ultimecia's perspective she is in the present.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
She not only can't draw from future; but if she did she would effectively putting herself in the fate she's trying to avoid. So she really wouldn't want to compress that moment.
One thing to note whenever you're talking about time travel... Your perspective of time will almost constantly change.
Our present is the future to our past.
I hear ya. And when I found out it was going to turn into a 'time story'... I dropped the controller... I suddenly became concerned that after getting past the 'Oh I guess we forgot'... A time travel story is hardly ever done correctly or is just used as an easy cop-out. And just to add insult to injury as I shakingly picked up the controller to 'see where this goes' they throw in "Time Compression"....:eep: :eep: :eep:Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilder
I dropped it and popped in FF Tactics. It made me happy!:love:
But here is where a lot of the confusion starts that the story does a complete 360 even though up till you didn't even know what direction you were going.
I see you point about Tidus. I was going around saying that Tidus was nothing but a dream and so he returned to what he was. Then Square decides to test the waters and FFX-2 sank like stone. I have yet to get through this game... I'm caught between the emotions of feeling perverted, gay, or dumbed down...
The only problem with FFVIII is that it's like most movies and comics today... Good idea, bad execution, and just drop the "The End" sign because it's done. Not concluded, but just done.
Now, it's funny you should mention Tidus from FFX. It makes me think of "Eyes On Me" Squall wasn't a 'dreamer' but Tidus was. LOL
Also to note. I believe that Squall actually died. This would explain another thing pissed me off... So much I started to call the shot before it came up. At end of the discs, Squall blacks out and there's this stretch of unexplained time between then and now and it's buggin' the helled-horrors outta me. It happened twice and twice with Rinoa Ultimecia and Edea and Seifer all in the same proximity. Waitaminute... Was Edea there the second time? I dunno.
Y'know what I think about that shattering helmet and 'faceless Squall'? I think Squall died when Edea killed him. That's why he cried at the end.
'Course that's just what I think.:rolleyes2
Because that's the event she's trying to avoid. She knows that her ultimate end is coming. She's trying to prevent it or just avoid it by escaping to another moment in time that will last forever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian HitcherIf she is located in the present when she compresses the future, it is still the future. And I still really don't see why compressing the future would bring about her destruction. Even if her death is located in the future, I don't see why compressing this event would cause her any harm any more than compressing any other event in which she isn't alive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan IIIFrom her present she can't pull from the future. She's only able to draw from the past which is era of the Fated Children; From the Fated Children's perspective Ultimecia IS the 'future' but from Ultimecia's perspective she is in the present.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
She not only can't draw from future; but if she did she would effectively putting herself in the fate she's trying to avoid. So she really wouldn't want to compress that moment.
One thing to note whenever you're talking about time travel... Your perspective of time will almost constantly change.
Our present is the future to our past.
Imagine snapping your fingers and freezing that moment... The sound of the snap would probably never go away. Now you're wondering how can Squall and company still be alive if they've travelled to a time assumed to be long after their natural life span.
Don't want to say anything this weak, but it's true: Fate. They ARE the Fated Children. Plus what I see a lot of people don't understand about time travel is that the only reason you were able to travel through time or do anything is because you were supposed to follow those series of events. The 'dominoes' will fall where they may and there's nothing you can do to change it once they've fallen.
It's like my quote: "I do what I can because I can." Otherwise how else could I have done it?
You still haven't explained why compressing a time that includes her death would cause her to die. If she compresses everything to the point where nothing exists except herself (which was said to be her goal within the game), then she won't die because there will be nothing to kill her.
Okay... let's say that Ultimecia is one in a line of dominoes representing events in time. Now all the dominoes before her's have fallen or are in the process falling, this representing flowing time and past (fallen) events.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
Now remember, Ultimecia already knows that the following dominoes behind her, maybe the very next one, contain the event that she dies and this is the domino she's trying to avoid. So she gathers up all the dominoes before her (ergo compressing) and basically stacks them all together and compresses them into this one all mighty domino? The the rest of the dominoes behind her will not fall; she's stopped the line. More than likely those 'fated' still standing dominoes will disappear.
But because she was unsuccessful we will never know what would happen to those dominoes. Their missing that kinetic event that would set them in motion or even be there...
Kinda reminds me of line from the MOTU movie when the Sorceress of Greyskull talks to Skeletor:
"Men of great power... look back over their past mistakes... pile them all together... and call it 'destiny'."
I hope this explains. :love:
The Fated Children are killing the entire succession of witches as they travel through Time Compression or whatever effectively killing each Sorceress and aiding Ultimecia to absorb their fraction of the Sorceress Power. This also explains why no one has seen a Sorceress since Adel... They may not have necessarily been 'in hiding'. And this is how they passed on their power, where as the only way Edea recieved her power was from Ultimecia herself and thus began the Fated Loop.
This also leads me to believe that Ultimecia was not truly insane the whole time but was rather still absorbing Sorceress Power(s) when the Fated Children arrived and it was driving her insane at that point or at least disoriented as displayed by both Rinoa and Edea.
In effect... "Fufu". :love:
If she only compresses what's behind her, then there is still a future in which she dies. Compression only the past would be pointless if her goal is indeed to avoid her ultimate fate.
That's what I'm sayin'. She technically stopped the domino that would lead up to that moment, the Everlasting Moment. The took away all the dominos that would set the others to fall... In essence, the line stopped there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
But also in effect, I see your point, she was only speading up process I guess, ergo, the Succession of Witches being slaughtered by the Fated Children as I mentioned earlier. But her intentions were go no further than before her defeat and escape to Time Compression.
I guess Time Compression was a bad idea both by Ultimecia and the writers lol.
PAK:
Firstly, in FF8 the future DOES exist. As Lilliputian Hitcher pointed out, Ultimecia lies in Squall and Co's future, yet they carry on as if they're in the present. This in itself implies that since the past and future coexist, the notion of a present becomes entirely relative. Although this does not prove that all of the future exists, something else does:
Ellone states that you cannot change the past. Logically speaking this is only possible if all future timetravelling events already exist and are set in stone, and hence we can conclude that ALL the future exists just as much as the past. Hence compression of all of time is possible. For a more detailed explanation of this argument, please refer to the FAQ.
Now secondly, as Lilliputian Hitcher also says, your assertion that compressing the future would cause Ultimecias death is entirely baseless, and can instantly be refuted by the observation that the event in which Ultimecia dies happens in the past you say Ultimecia compresses (remember Ultimecia dies in the orphanage when Squall is but a young boy). But besides that, there really isn't any reason as to why compression of the future should not be possible.
This doesn't make much sense either. The compressed events do not dissapear. Once TC is over they all go back to where they belong, so to speak.Quote:
More than likely those 'fated' still standing dominoes will disappear.
Who said zombies don't have feelings?!Quote:
Y'know what I think about that shattering helmet and 'faceless Squall'? I think Squall died when Edea killed him. That's why he cried at the end.
And? Threads like that DO exist today, and it can easily be demonstrated that Laguna is Squall's father beyond any shadow of a doubt, by merely listing all the unambigously strong hints and applying a bit of simple reasoning.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilder
R=U is different. It hasn't been confirmed, but it doesn't have lots of unambiguous, strong hints to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt, and simple reasoning suggests that it can't even be possible to begin with.
I don't see your point. Sure, if Square announced that R=U, then yes, all those "hints" would be valid. But Square has done no such thing, and never will, so what's your point?Quote:
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.
"Asbolute meanings" are entirely uninteresting to discuss. Technically speaking, anything could be true. Irvine could be Ultimecia. Selphie may be the first born of a Moomba and a Chocobo. We can only discuss in any meaningful manner reasonable and plausible truths; we can weigh up all points and arguments for a certain theory and conclude which is more plausible and reasonable.Quote:
Nobody can make a statement about the absolute meaning of the last FMV, and in some of those guides I´ve read something like that.
What happens in Ultimecia's universe is irrelevant, because in it, she would be immortal anyway. Any sorceress who dies in FF8 has to give up her powers stat. Simple as that.Quote:
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)
Sir Bahamut:Firstly, in FF8 the future DOES exist. As Lilliputian Hitcher pointed out, Ultimecia lies in Squall and Co's future, yet they carry on as if they're in the present. This in itself implies that since the past and future coexist, the notion of a present becomes entirely relative. Although this does not prove that all of the future exists, something else does:
Ellone states that you cannot change the past. Logically speaking this is only possible if all future timetravelling events already exist and are set in stone, and hence we can conclude that ALL the future exists just as much as the past. Hence compression of all of time is possible. For a more detailed explanation of this argument, please refer to the FAQ.
Now secondly, as Lilliputian Hitcher also says, your assertion that compressing the future would cause Ultimecias death is entirely baseless, and can instantly be refuted by the observation that the event in which Ultimecia dies happens in the past you say Ultimecia compresses (remember Ultimecia dies in the orphanage when Squall is but a young boy). But besides that, there really isn't any reason as to why compression of the future should not be possible.
I see what you're saying but I tried to explain that there is future, it's just that Ultimecia can reach it. My understanding of time is that the past exists and is foundation for the present; the present instantly and constantly becomes the past ever second thus giving us a path to travel... The future we can't jump ahead to because the path has been shown.
I know I'm getting confusing.
What I'm saying is that we can't skip over the sequence of falling dominios but we can go backwards. This why Ultimecia is only drawing from the past. Well, that and she is the last in line. There are no moments in the future she would want except the events that lead to her death. She's trying to take away the events of the past leading to the present just before the inevitable happens. If the dominoes that set those events are gone then the dominoes will not fall and the dreaded event will not happen. (Good greif, I'm getting lost in my own analogy. At least I didn't use "Tetris" as the analogy this time... ) LOL. Basically she can't or wouldn't pull from 'Her' future. There's no Sorceress Power or events she wants Time Compression.
The only reason the Fated Children were 'jumped' into the future was because they were pulled there. And it was a moment in the future/present of Ultimecia that was supposed to happen. Time travel's funny that way.
Kinda like those time travel episode on "Gargoyles: The Animated Series".
"I should leave you here, if were not for the havoc I fear you would wreak on the timestream".
"But you won't, because you didn't. Time travel's funny that way."
Goliath and Xanatos.
And I guess zombies can love, I never said they couldn't. LOL:p
And what exactly do you base this assumption on?Quote:
Originally Posted by PAK
True, but she's ALSO trying to become a God by compressing absorbing ALL of time and space. Ultimecia is clearly hungry for power as well as fearful of her own fate, and why would she settle with merely avoiding her fate if she could, by compressing the future too become the supreme ruler of all of time and space? Note also the scanning Ultimecia's final form states that she is "absorbing all of time and space", further backing this up.Quote:
There are no moments in the future she would want except the events that lead to her death. She's trying to take away the events of the past leading to the present just before the inevitable happens.
That's hardly a satisfactory explanation. They didn't get pulled anywhere, they used their willpower to travel to the future through time compression. Odine and Laguna makes this quite explicit.Quote:
The only reason the Fated Children were 'jumped' into the future was because they were pulled there.
You left this part out in your last post...
Most likely, these dominoes will disappear.
But because she was unsuccessful we will never know what would happen to those dominoes. Their missing that kinetic event that would set them in motion or even be there...
Add-on: That's a damn good example of pardoxes TC would have created... There's a line of events that are set to occur, but now that the sequence is broken, will they occur? But, of course TC was futile. Bad idea. Really no threat at all when you think about it.
You're right, it hardly is... All I can say is that Ultimecia pulled them through with Rinoa and that it was a 'Fated' set order of events. And again, I say, Odine is questionable in his boasts. And Laguna... Well.... He's like G.W. Bush. You just wonder how the helled-horrors did they elect you? And the "Love and Friendship"... I'm sorry, for that just really pushin' the envelope for the 'theme' of this game bringing back to the poor execution... ugh... :rolleyes2 LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bahamut
I ask yourself, would you take anything these guys say seriously? It's no wonder Squall got lost in TC... I wasn't buying... I know, I know 'it's the game' but... ugh...:rolleyes2 :love: LOL.
Uhh, you need to edit your post in terms of quotes and such =P Anyway:
TC does not permanently break any sequence of events. As soon as TC is broken everything resumes to normal, and so all sequences continue to carry out. Of course, since TC can be viewn as merely another fated event in FF8's line of time, this is even more apparent. Again, the FAQ explains this in more detail.Quote:
You left this part out in your last post...
Most likely, these dominoes will disappear.
But because she was unsuccessful we will never know what would happen to those dominoes. Their missing that kinetic event that would set them in motion or even be there...
Add-on: That's a damn good example of pardoxes TC would have created... There's a line of events that are set to occur, but now that the sequence is broken, will they occur? But, of course TC was futile. Bad idea. Really no threat at all when you think about it.
That was entirely impossible to understand I'm afraid. It may be how you view time, but unless you actually offer a more comprehensible explanation as to why you believe it, it can't really be considered relevant.Quote:
Space-Time. Travel any amount of space given time. Also the order of events will only happen as they are supposed to. It's difficult to explain, but this is how I see time works.
Um, she gets to become God, with absolute control of time and space so she can recreate the universe as she sees fit. How's that for "good it would do her"?Quote:
This one of the things that I just try to avoid taking too literally. I don't see what good it would do her to do so.
You're using circular logic. Your initial argument for why Odine is questionable is because Ultimecia cannot compress the future, so you can't use Odine's questionability to show that the future cannot be compressed!Quote:
You're right, it hardly is... All I can say is that Ultimecia pulled them through with Rinoa and that it was a 'Fated' set order of events. And again, I say, Odine is questionable in his boasts. And Laguna... Well.... He's like G.W. Bush. You just wonder how the helled-horrors did they elect you? And the "Love and Friendship"... I'm sorry, for that just really pushin' the envelope for the 'theme' of this game bringing back to the poor execution... ugh... LOL.
As for "Love and Friendship", I agree; it's incredibly corny. But it's there in the game none the less, and so it must be taken into account. But anyway, your take on the mechanics of timetravelling are clearly inferior at this point, since you readily admitted that you don't actually have a satisfactory explanation.
I just don't see it making sense. When I was speaking about the the events that wouldn't happen I was speaking as if TC did occur. Now that she's compressed away all the events leading up to it, would time go back to normal? How is that if the set events of the future of Ultimecia defeat is missing the key sequence of events that would lead up to that moment are gone? I guess we would have figured out what she said after 'and...' :p But that didn't happen and I'm not gonna loose sleep over it.
Now this is one of those moments that we'll go into a round about view because of the 'it's in the game/not in the game statements'.
We wouldn't even know of the term "Fated Children" if someone hadn't posted a translation of the opening theme song. The term 'Fated Children' was as 'in the game' as most would refer to it as.
Like Time Compression is something that's in the game but not explained clearly... I believe it is an "Everlasting Moment" to best describe a series of 'events' in 'time' 'compressed' into one. This is something that requires something other than 'in-game' to me. I believe this is one of the reseaons aside from the R=U, Time Compression threads get so heated as well... Anyway...
To describe my ideas of the mechanics of time would take forever and honestly it's like 4:15am here... In a nutshell, I believe it is possible to travel backwards in time, but normally not forward beyond actual present. And if possible to travel to the 'future' if it is 'allowed' or an event that is set to happen. Self-contradicting I know, but again, it'll take too long. I'm not coping out. It's the basis of the equation I wrote earlier.
G'night...:eep:
P.S. I can't seem to get the quote thingie right so I apologize for not responding in kind properly.
I'd like to contribute, but I've been avoiding reading most of the more recent posts. Can people PLEASE tag spoilers for other FFs (FFX and X-2 I saw in here) and make it clear that they're spoilers for other games.
No, since there is apparently a rule on this forum that states that you don't have to.
EDIT: Funnily enough, there also seems to be a rule against making R=U threads and talking about Pharoh Amon Khan. Whoops.
Hahaha, and yet this thread has been open for 100+ posts, eh, as well as several other R=U topics. Oh well.
Well i guess they haven´t checked this thread yet...let´s all just be proud for taking a part in the last R=U discussion thread on this forum!:)
Ahhh then again i´m sure some new guy will create another thread about this sooner or later:rolleyes2
Hi, I´m new, A friend of mine told me that Rinoa is ultimecia in the future, is that true ?, thanks ( this person never go back again to the forum and never bother to read the 10000 post he caused ).:love:
I wrote this spit a long time ago, a really long time ago! ROFL!!! I LOVE that song!!! Pretty much explains why I'm posting and what Lilliputian Hitcher said...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
I'm not a 'bad guy' I'm just a famous 'bad boy'... :love:
Also, I gotta note, that just as I laid my head down to rest...
I realized I can't really lay down my beliefs on the mechanics of time on this game based on fantasy. And this just makes me think... who else other than the writers? I mean, really... I see it as the writers just used time travel and Time Compression as a (I don't know how to spell it properly (yeah I know it's the internet, but I'm lazy! Shove IT! LOL) Megafuffin Device.
"Hey, we don't HAVE understand time travel, but just use it as something that everyone just goes along with. Let's get on with the story"
My point is that I apologize that my views or anyone's views or 'facts' of the mechanics of time more than likely don't apply simply by the fact of this is fantasy and this was a story with one intended ending mapped out possibly without any facts or scientific intensions included other to be to exact other than what was the end result of the stories ending by the writers/creatorsOr not (scientific intensions)... which is inconclusive...
Just like "Time Compression" I've realized, this is futile... A major effort for entertainment or bending the law without breaking it, but ultimately futile... (and fun).
R=U is the result of an inconclusive story and will continue to be so... Just like the 'bible' that 'claims' to counter-act it.
I had more to say, but I editied it out for personal reasons....
I really do not understand why the R=U has caused such debate seeing that this is just mere fantasy to the result of there is an FAQ about it for the simple fact to bring about 'facts' to refute it; (and with respect Sir Bahamut you do not refute totally but offer perspectives on both sides to the best of your ability but at the same time it does seem to be biased against the possibility.)
Personally, see the possibilty as plausiable despite and equally the 'facts' that others 'find' to 'refute' as those to 'support' and therefore the futility as 'Time Compression' and the 'Fated Loop'...
Surely there is means of ameleration....
Well, I certainly agree with you that it's impossible to make full sense of TC, because Square obviously only put it in as a plot-advancing device without any specific thoughts on its inner mechanisms. That isn't to say discussion on the matter is entirely fruitless; certain enlightening conclusions can be made on general aspects of it, it's just that if one attempts to create a full consistent theory, one invariably runs into problems regardlessly of what approach you take.
Time travelling, on the other hand, is a phenomenon I believe can be broken down and understood fairly well. The FAQ goes in detail into two differing, consistent theories on time in FF8 which can explain what we see in the game based on a minimum amount of assumptions. Now, although only the writers can specify exactly what notion of time they had in mind when making the game, one can still make plausible, logical and internally consistent theories on the matter. Of course, it isn't to be assumed that the game contains no contradictions in terms of issues on time (barring TC), but fortunately this IS the case with FF8.
As for R=U, although this is a fantasy game, many people wish to logically debate the matter in order to determine what theories work and not, and also to try and find out exactly what the authors intended. Such is the nature of the FAQ too; it approached R=U purely on the premise that the authors had a purpose with the game, and that this purpose can be determined through logical analysis of the game. Based on that premise, the theory does not hold up, yet many supporters consistently disagree with this because they think the theory is cool or whatever, thus spawning the endless discussions.
Amelioration is possible and present in many places. If R=U supporters agree that the theory was not intended by Square and is not supported strongly enough by ingame hints to make it nearly as conclusive as say Laguna being Squall's dad, then that's cool. But anything else would not be the truth as far as I'm concerned.
I guess the words paralell universes and karma solves this up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilliputian Hitcher
Or much simpler, you could merely assume that the future actually does exist on the same line as the past and present. Thus, all of time exist 'simultaneously' (ignoring the fact that the word has no meaning when relating to time itself) and the problem is solved.
dkkimera something do u understand the r=u thery yet cause ur question was what it was all about do u see what its about yet
I said that on Page 3 or something. But the discussion here is organized and clean, i think this should stay, as people like to talk about it. :choc2:
i said nothing about stoping the convo i just wanted to know if ur question was answered
Addressing his last post to me...
I'm the one actually addressing the argument, and not the man making it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharoh Amon Khan III
The snipped portions were deemed irrelevant. At least I mentioned they were snipped. If you feel like I didn't address something, tell me what it is, and I'll see about giving it a go.Quote:
All you're doin is slicing and dicing things that I say to make yourself look smart. You're not even including my full statements.
Never said it was. Why does this stop me from commenting on it?Quote:
I already said that I wasn't serious about this and that this was just thoughts that crossed my mind and it wasn't anything to be put as 'proof'.
Addressing the validity of your ramblings is acting holier than thou?Quote:
But you just took it that way and played the role of the 'holier than thou'.
Please stop touting this. One CAN rationally debate fantasy. People do it succesfully all the time. Now, if you continue, yes, we will reach nowhere, but I at the least, will not be banned.Quote:
Dude, it's just fantasy. There's no need to take it this far or any further because the only landmark we're gonna reach is nowhere and ultimately 'closed and banned'.
No. It's not. Belief without evidence is not acceptable, even if you somehow avoided a bias, which you actually haven't, since you refuse to allow your belief to be rationally analyzed.Quote:
I'm trying my best to state my beliefs without being 'biased' as most are but that's just not good enough for you, is it? (shakes head in sadness).
I don't think it's MY level- the rational analysis- that gets these threads closed.Quote:
For the love of Mike... You're really just gonna drag this down once again to this level to why these threads are closed aren't you?
So you say, but never do. PAK, I have encountered many like you before. Blustering will not cut it. Put your money where your mouth is, or shut it.Quote:
Well I won't be party to that. I'll just keep posting what I say and we'll see what happens, k? I could slice and dice your responses like you did mine but I don't see that worth my energy.
I see R=U as possible. I see I=U as almost equally as possible.Quote:
You're really just being petty and that's it. I won't stoop to your level. Granted, there are little points to what you said, but most of it is just B.S. only because you don't see R=U as a possibility.
Because you're trying to get special pleading for a postulate that you claim is 'only a possibility'. Would you do the same for Z=U, or Q=U? I doubt it.Quote:
I see it as a possibility but not an absolute, and that's what I've always stated. It's not definite but a possibility. But yet, you still attack me and mine like we're spouting 'hersey'.
Don't compare yourself to Ramza. His 'heresy' was based on accumulated evidence. You, on the other hand, are arguing against all the evidence.Quote:
Kinda like Ramza Beovolve.
No. If you cannot conduct a debate in a method verifiable to all, do not hold it. The only reason to hold a hidden debate is so you can spin it. This way, in a public and recorded forum, any spin can be checked against the debate itself.Quote:
MOMMY PUT THE KIDS TO BED AND BREAK OUT THE LEATHER MASKS! DADDY'S HOME!!!! SECRET WORD IS: WHAT?! (Blame that one on Family Guy!)
P.S. "Honey" let's not fight in front of the kids, cuz that seems to be all you're doin'... Let's go somewhere private, k? (PM).
Now, continue, and avoid the meaningly pop culture references. It makes taking you seriously very difficult.