Seifer and Squall are brothers

[Christmas]

Are we still talking about this interesting FF VIII theory here or something else?

EDIT:Actually I think Ultima Weapon is a victim of a rape by Laguna and that is why Ultima Weapon attacK Squall in DSRC.

[Future Esthar]

If you tried to discuss the theories instead of making jokes it would be more productive Christmas.

[Clo]

By looking at the characters interactions one realize the following:

Edea and Seifer are Rinoa´s parents.
Squall and Rinoa are Zell´s parents.
Zell and Quistis are Selphie´s parents.
Selphie probably stays with Irvine.

Are you SERIOUS?

If you are, what evidence IS there?! Zell and Quistis show NO ROMANTIC INTEREST, not even once. And that's the only one I'm going to address right now. I mean, come on!

[champagne supernova]

By looking at the characters interactions one realize the following:

Edea and Seifer are Rinoa´s parents.
Squall and Rinoa are Zell´s parents.
Zell and Quistis are Selphie´s parents.
Selphie probably stays with Irvine.

Are you SERIOUS?

If you are, what evidence IS there?! Zell and Quistis show NO ROMANTIC INTEREST, not even once. And that's the only one I'm going to address right now. I mean, come on!

No, it really makes perfect sense. Because Zell & Quistis were in a loveless marriage, they got a divorce shortly after Selphie's birth, leading to Quistis having a short affair with Squall. As a result of this, Ultimecia was conceived, but Squall cut them off, and that's why she dislikes him and his organisation (SeeD) so very much.

[Serapy]

By looking at the characters interactions one realize the following:

Edea and Seifer are Rinoa´s parents.
Squall and Rinoa are Zell´s parents.
Zell and Quistis are Selphie´s parents.
Selphie probably stays with Irvine.

Are you SERIOUS?

If you are, what evidence IS there?! Zell and Quistis show NO ROMANTIC INTEREST, not even once. And that's the only one I'm going to address right now. I mean, come on!

We may never know. I mean, they have never recognised each other until the mid-game. According to the game, the orphanage is the only event that's brought back to life. But what if there was something else, other than the orphanage? What if there was something else that the party has not yet recognised?

It doesn't seem quite logical that the Orphanage was the only memory to be given back to the party. There has to be something more, not just the orphanage.

SquareSoft didn't do that (adding more things to the game), I'd agrue that it's because of disk space... among other reasons, e.g. not enough time. So, even little hints within the game can be considered very very important.

This is like a dice game, either it's hit or miss; one little hint can be worthy or not, but that doesn't mean you should automatically demolish the possbilities of these little hints. Don't ever do that!

[Clo]

This is like a dice game, either it's hit or miss; one little hint can be worthy or not, but that doesn't mean you should automatically demolish the possbilities of these little hints. Don't ever do that!

What "little hints"? Zell and Quistis don't talk.

[Raistlin]

Serapy: A "theory" based on loads of assumptions is inherently less reliable than explanations based on actual known facts. Please see Occam's Razor. Just because something is possible on a theoretical level does not make it likely, or even plausible.

Your "theory" fails a basic common sense test. Why would Square invent this intricate story only very arguably even remotely hinted at, where only a couple of people even reach that conclusion, years after the game's release? Is there some conspiracy among game writers to hide the "true" plot?

[Serapy]

Serapy: A "theory" based on loads of assumptions is inherently less reliable than explanations based on actual known facts. Please see Occam's Razor. Just because something is possible on a theoretical level does not make it likely, or even plausible.

It's possible, actually. Considering the fact that VIII is ficition. Do you honestly think that the creators of VIII strictly followed the Occam Razor model when making the game? Just no. It's likely that they didn't follow the model, and if we follow the model... the results would be way inconsisent.

Your "theory" fails a basic common sense test.

You fail to realise the intention of this thread. And moreover, we cannot always apply our realistic common sense to VIII becaue our world and VIII's world are different. So, your claim "use common sense" is not logical.

Why would Square invent this intricate story only very arguably even remotely hinted at, where only a couple of people even reach that conclusion, years after the game's release?

Because the fan base was heavily biased. When FF8 came out, a lot of people hated it and supported FF7 more. So, when you hate something, you don't look forward into digging itself. Years later, people begin to forget about VIII. Sooo... and Square can invent whatever they want. It's fiction.

[MJN SEIFER]

I don't get why all the VII fans were so quick to hate VIII seing as the games are similar in many ways, but different in others.

I know a lot of members here hate both VII and VIII, but they are my favorite FFs.

[Raistlin]

It's possible, actually.

I never said it wasn't; I even stated it as a given. My argument is that "possible" does not equate to "plausible."

Do you honestly think that the creators of VIII strictly followed the Occam Razor model when making the game? Just no. It's likely that they didn't follow the model, and if we follow the model... the results would be way inconsisent.

I have no idea what this even means. Occam's Razor is not some model for writing something. It is a tool of logic, which favors theories based on evidence than on baseless assumptions. The more assumptions you have to make, the less reliable and plausible the conclusion.

And moreover, we cannot always apply our realistic common sense to VIII becaue our world and VIII's world are different. So, your claim "use common sense" is not logical.

"Common sense test" was an arbitrary label for the substantive argument afterward, but your response here makes no sense. Yes, VIII is in a fantasy world, but the writers and developers are in this one, which is what the substantive argument addressed.

Because the fan base was heavily biased. When FF8 came out, a lot of people hated it and supported FF7 more. So, when you hate something, you don't look forward into digging itself. Years later, people begin to forget about VIII. Sooo... and Square can invent whatever they want. It's fiction.

Everybody hated FFVIII? No one was examining the plot? Your reasoning is almost as implausible as your conclusion, as you are simply piling on more assumptions.

Yes, Square can do whatever they want. But you have provided no actual evidence to support the conclusion that Square did what you are asserting.

[Clo]

Okay, I understand the desire to try to make up theories regarding old games, but can you at least make them REALISTIC to a small degree? Because this is not fun. This is startling. This is a put-off.

[Christmas]

My theory was so much better!

But people see it as a joke, I was so all serious and filled with evidences to prove it!

[Serapy]

It's possible, actually.

I never said it wasn't; I even stated it as a given. My argument is that "possible" does not equate to "plausible."

Every human mind is different. So, why must "possibility" always equate to "plausibility"? What did you expect?

Do you honestly think that the creators of VIII strictly followed the Occam Razor model when making the game? Just no. It's likely that they didn't follow the model, and if we follow the model... the results would be way inconsisent.

I have no idea what this even means. Occam's Razor is not some model for writing something. It is a tool of logic, which favors theories based on evidence than on baseless assumptions. The more assumptions you have to make, the less reliable and plausible the conclusion.

You're missing the point. Why would the creators of VIII waste more time making sure that thier points are clear, clear enough to be 'evidence' ? VIII, as well as other FF games, are designed to be open interpretation for players.
So, if the creators of VIII followed Occam's Razor, the game would be a lot less ambiguous.

Why is it that people like you take things out of proportion nowadays? I didn't mention "theory" in my first post, did I?

And moreover, we cannot always apply our realistic common sense to VIII becaue our world and VIII's world are different. So, your claim "use common sense" is not logical.

"Common sense test" was an arbitrary label for the substantive argument afterward, but your response here makes no sense. Yes, VIII is in a fantasy world, but the writers and developers are in this one, which is what the substantive argument addressed.

Fantasy worlds lead to more possibilities than real worlds. So, we can't use our common sense to analyse the game. I'm talking about inside the game, not outside.

Because the fan base was heavily biased. When FF8 came out, a lot of people hated it and supported FF7 more. So, when you hate something, you don't look forward into digging itself. Years later, people begin to forget about VIII. Sooo... and Square can invent whatever they want. It's fiction.

Everybody hated FFVIII? No one was examining the plot?

Stop exaggerating. I never said everybody.

Your reasoning is almost as implausible as your conclusion, as you are simply piling on more assumptions.

Okayy... Why don't you disprove this "theory" to prove that you're right? I'd love to hear it!

Yes, Square can do whatever they want. But you have provided no actual evidence to support the conclusion that Square did what you are asserting.

Are we playing the game? How can you give evidence when the game has a lot of things that are ambiguous? When the game is open to interpretation?

Anyways, I already have provided my evidence. You're just saying that because you don't like the idea of Squall and Seifer being brothers.

[Raistlin]

Every human mind is different. So, why must "possibility" always equate to "plausibility"? What did you expect?

Do you... even think about the things you read? I never said that. I said merely that something is possible does NOT make it plausible. A 0.0000001% possibility based on only wild assumptions is still possible. For something to be actually worth considering, though (plausibility), it has to be a realistic possibility.

You're missing the point. Why would the creators of VIII waste more time making sure that thier points are clear, clear enough to be 'evidence' ? VIII, as well as other FF games, are designed to be open interpretation for players.

Waste time... writing a coherent story? I'm going to hazard a wild guess and say the creators of FFVIII had different priorities than you. And just in case you missed the sarcasm, that's not actually a wild guess.

So, if the creators of VIII followed Occam's Razor, the game would be a lot less ambiguous.

Again, Occam's Razor is not something followed to create something. It's a basic principle of logic.

There are valid debates in every game, so your "less ambiguous" argument is spurious. But valid debates focus on evidence rather than ignoring mountains of evidence and instead focusing on remotely possible assumptions. This current debate, in scientific terms, is akin to intelligent design vs. evolution (read: not much of one).

Stop exaggerating. I never said everybody.

So you don't address the actual argument that there were plenty of people who liked FFVIII, and plenty more who still played it. This is a red herring.

Why is it that people like you take things out of proportion nowadays? I didn't mention "theory" in my first post, did I?

You and your magic words. The lack of the word "theory" doesn't mean you weren't making an explanatory argument. This is a red herring.

Fantasy worlds lead to more possibilities than real worlds. So, we can't use our common sense to analyse the game. I'm talking about inside the game, not outside.

You realize these things had to be written outside the game, right? Which is what my argument addressed? This is a red herring.

Okayy... Why don't you disprove this "theory" to prove that you're right? I'd love to hear it!

Did you miss Iceglow's post? Your so-called evidence was demolished at the beginning of this thread. Actually, now that I look back, you never even bothered to respond to Iceglow's comprehensive rebuttal. Which can only lead me to believe you're either willfully ignorant or just a troll. Either way, a rational debate is impossible. As it appears others have already learned from "debates" with you.

[Serapy]

Every human mind is different. So, why must "possibility" always equate to "plausibility"? What did you expect?

Do you... even think about the things you read? I never said that. I said merely that something is possible does NOT make it plausible. A 0.0000001% possibility based on only wild assumptions is still possible. For something to be actually worth considering, though (plausibility), it has to be a realistic possibility.

Simply put, it doesn't seem "plausible" to you because the whole idea of Squall and Seifer being brothers is ridiculous.
Ridiculous things = not plausible, it seems.

You're missing the point. Why would the creators of VIII waste more time making sure that thier points are clear, clear enough to be 'evidence' ? VIII, as well as other FF games, are designed to be open interpretation for players.

Waste time... writing a coherent story? I'm going to hazard a wild guess and say the creators of FFVIII had different priorities than you. And just in case you missed the sarcasm, that's not actually a wild guess.

In other words, they are not going to waste time ensuring that everything in VIII is flawless. Flawless as in... no inconsistencies.

So, if the creators of VIII followed Occam's Razor, the game would be a lot less ambiguous.

Again, Occam's Razor is not something followed to create something. It's a basic principle of logic.

Uh-huh. Here's a comparison so you can understand what I mean:

A) I know Occam's Razor and I created this story.
B) I don't know Occam's Razor and I created this story.

Would the results of A) and B) be the same? Definitely not.

There are valid debates in every game, so your "less ambiguous" argument is spurious.

Not really. Answer this question yourself, if VIII wasn't ambiguous, then why are people still debating about it on various sites, such as here and gamefaqs? Also, if it wasn't ambiguous, then why are there so many explanations on the guides/FAQ page of gamefaqs (e.g. Time Plot) ?

And not really. Not every game has valid debates. Most of them are straightforward, unlike VIII. Are you sure you have played VIII before?

But valid debates focus on evidence rather than ignoring mountains of evidence and instead focusing on remotely possible assumptions. This current debate, in scientific terms, is akin to intelligent design vs. evolution (read: not much of one).

That's evil. And there's nothing wrong with making something out of a chain of subtle hints.

Stop exaggerating. I never said everybody.

So you don't address the actual argument that there were plenty of people who liked FFVIII, and plenty more who still played it.

Dunno why this is such a big deal to you. There's a number of reasons why certain people don't dig into games that much.

Why is it that people like you take things out of proportion nowadays? I didn't mention "theory" in my first post, did I?

You and your magic words. The lack of the word "theory" doesn't mean you weren't making an explanatory argument.

I have said this before. Every time when I talk to myself or on this forum, I get "LULZZ GIMME EVIDENCE DAT KK" in return!

Fantasy worlds lead to more possibilities than real worlds. So, we can't use our common sense to analyse the game. I'm talking about inside the game, not outside.

You realize these things had to be written outside the game, right? Which is what my argument addressed?

To apply internal logic, never use your common sense... The sense that's outside of VIII's world... aka our Earth... duh.

To think like a VIII person; to make sense out of what happened and how does it feel, etc etc. In order to do all that, your mind have to travel into the universe of Final Fantasy VIII and da-da.

If not, then your argument is irrelevant.

Did you miss Iceglow's post? Your so-called evidence was demolished at the beginning of this thread.

Uh-huh. Did the game explictly state "LULZ SEIFER AND SQUALL ARE NOT BROTHERS" ? Nope. And plus, his post was mostly assumptions as well. If his assumptions make more sense than mine, then it doesn't mean swat.

To disprove something fully, you have to use hardcore evidence.

Actually, now that I look back, you never even bothered to respond to Iceglow's comprehensive rebuttal. Which can only lead me to believe you're either willfully ignorant or just a troll.

Stop jumping on the bandwagon, stop exaggerating and, most importantly, stop discriminating.

Either way, a rational debate is impossible. As it appears others have already learned from "debates" with you.

Not my fault. You started it.