Confused about the ending.

[Video Gamer]

This is a ridiculous argument that is going in circles. I'm getting tired of repeating myself, as well as debating someone with an obstinate refusal to consider other points of view. I'm beginning to think you just have a personal vendetta against me, since you're always first to sit me down and tell me what's wrong with my views. Hell, you even argue with me when you agree with what I'm saying.

I believe what Harry says in SH3 is reliable. You don't. The end.

I woulda jumped in and said something, but Aura seemed to be handing it quite well. But since you think it's JUST him...
Characters, as a whole, are untrustworthy. Trusting Harry over the developers is like trusting the young man from "The Tell-Tale Heart" over Edgar Allan Poe.

[Master_Sun]

I never said Alessa was in control when handing the baby, but notice how the aura dissipates into the child and no longer exists when the infant does.

[DamienPales]

Harry is not untrustworthy. There's no reason to believe that Harry is saying anything off the top of his head, especially in the journal that's trying to explain the plot of SH1 for newcomers to the series who've never played the first game. For the developers to put inaccurate information in there would be not only stupid, but also further evidence that the developers have no clue what their own games are about.

I could derail every argument by questioning the validity of everything every character says in every game. Maybe Laura never met Mary in the hospital like she claims. Maybe Douglas didn't have a son who robbed a bank and got shot. Maybe Jasper really doesn't want chocolate milk.

The "unreliable narrator" card would only work on Harry if he was either insane or purposely trying to deceive. It's just a cop-out argument because some people don't like the things he says, so instead of trying to rethink their theories, they just decide Harry must be saying things that aren't true. And...rolleyes smilie.

[Video Gamer]

Harry is not untrustworthy. There's no reason to believe that Harry is saying anything off the top of his head, especially in the journal that's trying to explain the plot of SH1 for newcomers to the series who've never played the first game. For the developers to put inaccurate information in there would be not only stupid, but also further evidence that the developers have no clue what their own games are about.

I could derail every argument by questioning the validity of everything every character says in every game. Maybe Laura never met Mary in the hospital like she claims. Maybe Douglas didn't have a son who robbed a bank and got shot. Maybe Jasper really doesn't want chocolate milk.

The "unreliable narrator" card would only work on Harry if he was either insane or purposely trying to deceive. It's just a cop-out argument because some people don't like the things he says, so instead of trying to rethink their theories, they just decide Harry must be saying things that aren't true. And...rolleyes smilie.

Or maybe he's just good-old-fashioned....wrong?
Really, though, either could work. Either the developers are wrong, or Harry is.

[DamienPales]

Or maybe he's not...?

If you want to believe Harry isn't telling the truth, fine. I believe he's telling it as it is. Unless you're willing to disbelieve everything that perfectly sane characters are talking about, then I don't think you have much of a case.

I'm bored of this circular argument.

[AuraTwilight]

Sorry, but Harry isn't omniscient. Harry thinks the Woman in White is Alessa. Alessa says the Woman in White is God. I think Alessa would know if she is or is not someone else. Oh, and the Developers are pretty much the Word of God on the subject. If they say Harry is wrong, there's nothing you can do about it. I've already PROVEN that Harry is wrong six ways from Sunday, and you haven't even addressed half the points I've made. You just ignore then outright and say "Well I don't think Harry is insane and maybe he did research inbetween games.

You say it's stupid for the developers to give inaccurate information in a summary of the first game. This inaccurate information is later corrected by Alessa/Heather herself, and regardless, the point of the summary is to give us Harry's account on what happened, not the objective truth of what happened.

The "unreliable narrator" card would only work on Harry if he was either insane or purposely trying to deceive.

Nice fallacy, but Harry doesn't know everything, he's easily duped and prone to whimsy and inaccurate speculation, and he's not psychic and can't really gain information through ESP. He can't research information that doesn't exist in-universe to research. Unless there's some document that says, "oh, and by the way, that Woman in White Mister Harry Mason killed was totally Alessa."

It's only a circular argument because you would rather have your pet theory than an accurate theory. Quit being childish and ignoring the facts.

[DamienPales]

Please. You're the one being childish and ignoring the facts. Like I said, I'm through arguing. I'll let you have your little victory.

[AuraTwilight]

I'm the one ignoring the facts? I've given a pretty solid case for my side of the argument. If you had directly acknowledged my various points and accounted for them, instead of ignoring my arguments and just repeating the same one you had over and over, you'd be in a place to judge me. Otherwise, you've just been sticking your fingers in your ears going "la la la Harry is right la la la I can't hear you."

[DamienPales]

I did acknowledge your points and addressed why I thought your reasoning was iffy, but you chose to ignore my points and kept repeating "la la la Harry is wrong la la la." Noticing the circle yet?

After about the third time repeating myself, I gave up.

Can we please stop this bickering and agree to disagree already? This is unbecoming of both of us. I have no personal stake in this, so I really am not going to get worked up over this. There are kids dying in Africa and whatnot.

[alone in the town]

You're both pretty!

Harry would, in a sense, be somewhat unreliable as a narrator, not as a reflection of his mental state but because he tells his story as he understands it, and he is not privy to everything we, the player, are.

This is my precise reasoning for being so adamant about the + endings not being possible within the context of the story.

[phix95]

So if the Aglaophotis had not been thrown, the Woman in White/god would have destroyed everything?

[AuraTwilight]

I did acknowledge your points and addressed why I thought your reasoning was iffy, but you chose to ignore my points and kept repeating "la la la Harry is wrong la la la." Noticing the circle yet?

After about the third time repeating myself, I gave up.

I don't see you responding to half the points I made. In your own words, you gave up after repeating yourself, even when new arguments came your waaay~.

Harry would, in a sense, be somewhat unreliable as a narrator, not as a reflection of his mental state but because he tells his story as he understands it, and he is not privy to everything we, the player, are.

Exactly.

So if the Aglaophotis had not been thrown, the Woman in White/god would have destroyed everything?

Pretty much. That's God's job.

[phix95]

I pretty much agree w/Aura. But on another, related note, wouldn't players, esp. new ones, be confused as to what's actually happening if none of the characters or notes say it? That's some of what's being argued in the thread...that Harry isn't reliable and that it seems you'd have to have read an outside source (Trans. Mem) to know for sure. (or was I just missing things and the game actually DID give you enough info to figure things out?)

Assuming they haven't read Translated Memories or anything of that nature, could they discern, just from the game itself, what the actual plot is and who the god is? That's part of why people post here, b/c they're not sure what happened. I remember my first play through and I loooved it, but I was confused and had to read a plot FAQ. I'm NOT disputing who Alessa is or who the god is, btw.

I would think a game would give enough info in and of itself for any intelligent player to know what's going on. But perhaps the dev's meant players to really discuss it in order to get what's really going on; not sure.

[AuraTwilight]

I pretty much agree w/Aura. But on another, related note, wouldn't players, esp. new ones, be confused as to what's actually happening if none of the characters or notes say it? That's some of what's being argued in the thread...that Harry isn't reliable and that it seems you'd have to have read an outside source (Trans. Mem) to know for sure. (or was I just missing things and the game actually DID give you enough info to figure things out?)

In the church near the end of the game, Heather finds a painting of the woman in white and comments that as Alessa she used to pray here to God, implying that the Woman in White is how Alessa imagined God to look like.

[phix95]

Ok. Granted. But assuming the player hadn't played SH3 yet is what I meant.

[DamienPales]

Ok. Granted. But assuming the player hadn't played SH3 yet is what I meant.

We were confused about a lot more than just the Woman in White before SH3 came along.

[phix95]

^Lol! Yes me too. So that's why I was asking. If it was possible to discern what is really going on w/out using outside sources,...eg, just by playing the game (SH1).

[Reno]

What gets me about this argument of if Harry's wrong or not, is that one reason everyone loves SH is because the character's a (fairly) realistic 'anybodies'. In that regard, this discussion itself is a pretty adept example showing that even though Harry had gone and done his research(as it's apparently most of us have), his theories could still be wrong or skewed from personal interpretation of the events(much like how we interpret the end of the game ourselves).

So Harry may very well have done all the reasearch, and have all the 'facts', but that doesn't auto-immune him from being incorrect.

[AuraTwilight]

Reno got it exactly right.

[JadThomas]

Ok, wait. Is the woman in white, and the woman holding Cheryl 2.0 (Heather) in her arms in the canon ending the same person? If so then the woman in white is Alessa.