So which ending is canon?

[Tillerman]

I don't ignore it, don't get me wrong. I just don't take it into account when I consider what the game points to in terms of story.

But that's what I mean when I say "don't ignore it." I mean you have to take it into account. Because in this particular instance, the story has been influenced by a game design decision. You can't just not take that into account.

So it's both and neither?

No, it's both. How could it possibly be "neither?" Are you suggesting that it simulteneously exists for multiple reasons and for no reason?

I'm sorry, what is your ultimate point? Are you still disputing the proposition that Good is the only possible ending? I honestly can't work out what you are arguing right now.

Well, for the record I agree that the good ending is probably the best fit. But to say it's "the only possible" ending is going too far; this is a subjective question, so by definition it can't be "the only possible answer." Besides, the guidebook isn't 100% clear, so there is room for doubt, if you really need a 100% clear answer the only way you're gonna get it is by going straight to the original creators and asking them.

But that's beside the point. The point I've been trying to make for the last 5-6 pages is that the red liquid has nothing to do with what's canon, and I will continue to assert that. I still think it's the result of someone reading meaning in a place where there is none. To think that it's somehow a clue left by the creators as to what's canon is wishful thinking.

But, I'm not ignoring its application as a gameplay device.

In a story sense, Harry will never know he can save Cybil with the liquid. In a gameplay sense, a person playing blind, which is the intention, will be just as ignorant as Harry.

I think you want me to admit that it has more to do than with just the story. I've never argued otherwise, but I don't see why that's relevant and why we're still talking about it.

Well, it's relevant because you kept insisting that the puzzle/battle needs to be examined only as a piece of narrative, not a game mechanic, because it is "important to the narrative." So have you changed your mind about that?

We don't have to keep talking about it if you don't want to... that's up to you.

[Lemex]

But that's what I mean when I say "don't ignore it." I mean you have to take it into account. Because in this particular instance, the story has been influenced by a game design decision. You can't just not take that into account.

That's not ignoring, that's evaluating validity - they are two very different things.

No, it's both. How could it possibly be "neither?" Are you suggesting that it simulteneously exists for multiple reasons and for no reason?

I'm suggesting that it exists purely for a now non-canonical ending. It wouldn't be the first time such an item existed.

Well, for the record I agree that the good ending is probably the best fit. But to say it's "the only possible" ending is going too far; this is a subjective question, so by definition it can't be "the only possible answer." Besides, the guidebook isn't 100% clear, so there is room for doubt, if you really need a 100% clear answer the only way you're gonna get it is by going straight to the original creators and asking them.

We have already been through this. Good is the only real possible ending - because of all the things we discussed a few months ago. To repeat all that would just be going in circles, as indeed we are.

Good+ cannot be a viable alternative because of all the questions it raises.

But that's beside the point. The point I've been trying to make for the last 5-6 pages is that the red liquid has nothing to do with what's canon, and I will continue to assert that. I still think it's the result of someone reading meaning in a place where there is none. To think that it's somehow a clue left by the creators as to what's canon is wishful thinking.

If you honestly think this then you agree by default that Good is the only possible outcome and there was no point in the last few pages of conversation.

[Tillerman]

We have already been through this. Good is the only real possible ending - because of all the things we discussed a few months ago. To repeat all that would just be going in circles, as indeed we are.

It's wrong to use the word "possible" in that context. It's not a question of what's "possible," it's a question of author's intentions. If you are telling me that you are 100% sure you know the author's intentions at this point, then you must be a mind reader.

But that's beside the point. The point I've been trying to make for the last 5-6 pages is that the red liquid has nothing to do with what's canon, and I will continue to assert that. I still think it's the result of someone reading meaning in a place where there is none. To think that it's somehow a clue left by the creators as to what's canon is wishful thinking.

If you honestly think this then you agree by default that Good is the only possible outcome and there was no point in the last few pages of conversation.

Huh? I think you must have seriously misunderstood my post, because that response doesn't make any sense.

Let me try saying this another way. IMO, if you look at Silent Hill 1 in a vacuum, any of the endings are equally credible (the bad ending is probably the most credible.) If you also consider SH3 and the guidebook, then you can make a good case for the Good ending being the canon ending. The red liquid has nothing to do with anything, it does not in any way help illuminate which is the canon ending... to think that it reveals anything about the author's intentions is wishful thinking. The only truly helpful clues are what is written in the guidebook. That's why I'd say that the Good ending was likely considered the canon ending at the time of SH3, but there's still a little room for doubt. And unless someone wants to interview the original creators, it's gonna stay that way.

[Lemex]

It's wrong to use the word "possible" in that context. It's not a question of what's "possible," it's a question of author's intentions. If you are telling me that you are 100% sure you know the author's intentions at this point, then you must be a mind reader.

But you said it yourself. The original developers for SH didn't know SH3 would ever be in the works. With this it can't be about author's intentions, instead it's about which ending the canon was built on - I've said this before. We do know that Good is the only possible canonical ending, because Good+ is just too messy, and requires a massive leap in logic on both Harry's and the player's part that is quite frankly unrealistic.

We have already been through all of this already

Let me try saying this another way. IMO, if you look at Silent Hill 1 in a vacuum, any of the endings are equally credible (the bad ending is probably the most credible.) If you also consider SH3 and the guidebook, then you can make a good case for the Good ending being the canon ending. The red liquid has nothing to do with anything, it does not in any way help illuminate which is the canon ending... to think that it reveals anything about the author's intentions is wishful thinking. The only truly helpful clues are what is written in the guidebook. That's why I'd say that the Good ending was likely considered the canon ending at the time of SH3, but there's still a little room for doubt. And unless someone wants to interview the original creators, it's gonna stay that way.

If you yourself are saying that the Red Liquid has nothing to do with anything then there cannot be room for doubt about the canonical ending. Besides, we do know the canon, for all the reasons discussed a few months ago and this week. However, for sake of argument, the best sort of theory are those that could be easily confronted, but continues to hold up; since a theory demonstrably describes events we can see. Like Evolution and the famous Rabbits in the Cambrian age.

Are you aware of the term: 'Beyond reasonable doubt?'

Since this conversation is about canon, then this conversation is not about original intention, since not all of the original developers worked on SH3, but about the canon.

[Tillerman]

because Good+ is just too messy, and requires a massive leap in logic on both Harry's and the player's part that is quite frankly unrealistic.

Not really. A leap of logic is not required, Harry is doing something as a part of the game. That puzzle is there for the player to solve, not Harry. It requires no more leap of logic than Harry being somehow magically cured by "health drinks" and "first aid kits." You're reading too much into something that was never meant to be read into.

However, for sake of argument, the best sort of theory are those that could be easily confronted, but continues to hold up; since a theory demonstrably describes events we can see. Like Evolution and the famous Rabbits in the Cambrian age

Those are scientific theories. They are testing facts. That's completely different from what we are talking about. We are talking about subjective opinions, interpretation. Your theory about that can't be scientifically tested, unless the test is to ask the authors what they meant.

Since this conversation is about canon, then this conversation is not about original intention, since not all of the original developers worked on SH3, but about the canon.

Which is defined by who? IMO, the only meaningful way to define it is to go by what the developers say. Now, I believe the people who wrote the guidebook worked on both SH1 and SH3, but I could be wrong.

[Lemex]

Not really. A leap of logic is not required, Harry is doing something as a part of the game. That puzzle is there for the player to solve, not Harry. It requires no more leap of logic than Harry being somehow magically cured by "health drinks" and "first aid kits." You're reading too much into something that was never meant to be read into.

What!

You are aware than in games Health Drinks and First Aid Kits are used to replenish health? Right? This is not a puzzle, this is something we have come to accept in games as early as DOOM and maybe even before that.

And also, about Red Liquid: how is it a puzzle when you don't have any clues to it's solving, or that it's even there. That doesn't make any sense.

Those are scientific theories. They are testing facts. That's completely different from what we are talking about. We are talking about subjective opinions, interpretation. Your theory about that can't be scientifically tested, unless the test is to ask the authors what they meant.

I'm well aware of that. I was giving an example of a theory to show what I mean by 'reasonable doubt'.

Which is defined by who? IMO, the only meaningful way to define it is to go by what the developers say. Now, I believe the people who wrote the guidebook worked on both SH1 and SH3, but I could be wrong.

We have been through all of this before, months ago, and not just by me.

If you don't believe me just read the entire thread.

[Tillerman]

You are aware than in games Health Drinks and First Aid Kits are used to replenish health? Right? This is not a puzzle, this is something we have come to accept in games as early as DOOM and maybe even before that.

Sure, but does it make logical sense that they should magically heal you? No. The reason why it doesn't bother you is because it's a game element. That's exactly why the red liquid shouldn't bother you.

And also, about Red Liquid: how is it a puzzle when you don't have any clues to it's solving, or that it's even there. That doesn't make any sense.

You can label it whatever you want, doesn't matter.

We have been through all of this before, months ago, and not just by me.

If you don't believe me just read the entire thread.

In case you haven't noticed, I've been a part of this thread from the beginning.

[alone in the town]

I am amazed that you continue to insist that the red liquid is precisely similar to every example given of gameplay elements which have no impact of any kind on the stories of the games in which hey can be found.

The red liquid is not the same thing as ammo and health drinks and cannot be said to factor into the story in anything like the same way.

[Tillerman]

It doesn't matter if it factors into the story. What matters is why it's there. It's there as a gameplay device, exactly like the ammo and health drinks. It's there as a gateway to unlock two endings. That is it's purpose.

It's not there as a developer left clue as to which ending is canon. They weren't even thinking about that when they made SH1. You're reading something into that red liquid that was never intended.

[Lemex]

Sure, but does it make logical sense that they should magically heal you? No. The reason why it doesn't bother you is because it's a game element. That's exactly why the red liquid shouldn't bother you.

Erm ... ok. I guess. It never did to be honest.

You can label it whatever you want, doesn't matter.

What does this even mean? I honestly don't see what you are getting at here.

In case you haven't noticed, I've been a part of this thread from the beginning.

I don't see how this is relevant.

It's not there as a developer left clue as to which ending is canon. They weren't even thinking about that when they made SH1. You're reading something into that red liquid that was never intended.

So this entire conversation was wasted, as it wasn't about the canon. Which is what this thread is about.

Why am I getting the impression that your argument is over?

[Tillerman]

You can label it whatever you want, doesn't matter.

What does this even mean? I honestly don't see what you are getting at here.

Well, you complained that it shouldn't be labeled a "puzzle." I'm just saying that it really doesn't matter what you label it. Puzzle is good shorthand for any instance in a game where you can use an item from your inventory to progress. But you can call it whatever you want, it's not really important.

In case you haven't noticed, I've been a part of this thread from the beginning.

I don't see how this is relevant.

Um, because you said "we've been through this before, read the thread." I'm just pointing out that I've already read the entire thread, in fact I've contributed to it. So I have a pretty good grasp of what's in it.

Why am I getting the impression that your argument is over?

Well what more is there for either of us to say? I can't prove to you that the red liquid is obscure for gameplay reasons. You can't prove to me that it's obscure as a clue by the developers about canon. You interpret it one way and I interpret it another. There's nothing more we can find out without asking the developers directly.

[Lemex]

Well, you complained that it shouldn't be labeled a "puzzle." I'm just saying that it really doesn't matter what you label it. Puzzle is good shorthand for any instance in a game where you can use an item from your inventory to progress. But you can call it whatever you want, it's not really important.

It's not a good shorthand though, because it's not a puzzle. That's just using an incorrect word.

Um, because you said "we've been through this before, read the thread." I'm just pointing out that I've already read the entire thread, in fact I've contributed to it. So I have a pretty good grasp of what's in it.

I know that. I'm just pointed out that others have already explained by Good+ cannot be canonical, which is what this this thread is about. What you are now arguing is not helping the thread at all or even talking about it, so I don't understand what the last two pages are even about. You have gone really off topic.

Well what more is there for either of us to say? I can't prove to you that the red liquid is obscure for gameplay reasons. You can't prove to me that it's obscure as a clue by the developers about canon. You interpret it one way and I interpret it another. There's nothing more we can find out without asking the developers directly.

So this entire conversation has nothing to do with the topic of the thread?

[alone in the town]

It doesn't matter if it factors into the story. What matters is why it's there. It's there as a gameplay device, exactly like the ammo and health drinks. It's there as a gateway to unlock two endings. That is it's purpose.

It's not there as a developer left clue as to which ending is canon. They weren't even thinking about that when they made SH1. You're reading something into that red liquid that was never intended.

Whether or not an item is story-important is all that matters when we're talking about what effects its presence have on how the story turns out.

Whether or not canon was on anybody's mind when the first game was in development, it is clear that this matter was considered when the writers of the third game chose to make one of the first game's endings the point at which their story begins. That they did so is obvious, else they would never have offered a comment about any of the first game's endings to be canon. There is no reasonable cause for anybody to believe there's even a chance that the writers intended Good+ to possibly continue into Silent Hill 3. That is how it is the easiest thing in the world to determine that the writers of Silent Hill 3 clearly did not dismiss the red liquid as a gameplay object of no greater significance than its effect on a single boss fight.

[Tillerman]

What you are now arguing is not helping the thread at all or even talking about it, so I don't understand what the last two pages are even about.

This thread is not the "only offer opinions that back up my own personal theory about what's canon thread." It's a thread for discussing opinions about what is canon. So by discussing this, we are indeed helping the thread.

Whether or not an item is story-important is all that matters when we're talking about what effects its presence have on how the story turns out.

But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about why a puzzle solution is obscure. You're saying that the meaning behind it's obscurity is that it's supposed to relate to canon. I'm saying it's obscure for gameplay reasons.

There is no reasonable cause for anybody to believe there's even a chance that the writers intended Good+ to possibly continue into Silent Hill 3.

But there is reasonable cause to believe that the writers wanted it to stay ambiguous as to which ending leads into Silent Hill 3.

[alone in the town]

But there is reasonable cause to believe that the writers wanted it to stay ambiguous as to which ending leads into Silent Hill 3.

When they go on record and single one of the endings out by stating, in clear and unmistakable language, that this ending leads into the third game (and using a word synonymous with 'canon' in doing so), there is no reasonable cause for doubt. There are only people being ridiculously pedantic, entirely on the basis of a statement which does not actually comment on canon at all.

[Lemex]

This thread is not the "only offer opinions that back up my own personal theory about what's canon thread." It's a thread for discussing opinions about what is canon. So by discussing this, we are indeed helping the thread

I haven't offered opinions. I've offered the facts that are presented in the game. And since you agree that Good is the most logical and most likely ending. I don't see any reason why you think that just because the Red Liquid is in SH1 then it MUST be an alternative. I've tried to show how this is not the case. It's beyond reasonable doubt

[Tillerman]

When they go on record and single one of the endings out by stating, in clear and unmistakable language, that this ending leads into the third game (and using a word synonymous with 'canon' in doing so), there is no reasonable cause for doubt. There are only people being ridiculously pedantic, entirely on the basis of a statement which does not actually comment on canon at all.

That's one way to look at it. Let's agree to disagree.

I haven't offered opinions. I've offered the facts that are presented in the game.

What you've offered is your subjective interpretation of those facts.

[Lemex]

What you've offered is your subjective interpretation of those facts.

What subjective interpretation have I made? I feel I have been pretty objective; maybe you can enlighten me.

I can't see how the Red Liquid is something to consider when discussing canon, because it's too obscure and raises far too many questions - that's not being subjective, that's taking the Red Liquid into account and evaluating it's importance in the Silent Hill canon. I took it into consideration, but finally the idea of the Good+ ending being an alternative just can't hold up to scrutiny.

If that isn't a logical, non-biased process then maybe you can educate me.

[Tillerman]

What subjective interpretation have I made? I feel I have been pretty objective; maybe you can enlighten me.

I can't see how the Red Liquid is something to consider when discussing canon, because it's too obscure and raises far too many questions - that's not being subjective, that's taking the Red Liquid into account and evaluating it's importance in the Silent Hill canon. I took it into consideration, but finally the idea of the Good+ ending being an alternative just can't hold up to scrutiny.

If that isn't a logical process then maybe you can educate.

Okay, I'll try. Actually, that's a subjective thought process you're using. In order for it to be objective, you'd have to actually be physically measuring it somehow. If you could show me how you physically measured the importance of the red liquid, then this conversation would be a heck of a lot easier because you could just show me and then I'd be like "oh, okay. I guess you're right." But unfortunately you can't do that, because your judgment comes from your head, whether it's from feelings or gut instinct or whatever. But it's not something you can prove... it's an opinion.

But anyway, let's put that aside for now... have I been confused all this time, are you actually arguing that the red liquid has nothing to do with what's canon? Cause that's what I'm arguing. Do we actually agree with each other here? I'm starting to get confused about what we've even been arguing about for the past few pages. If we actually agree with each other I'd feel a little foolish.

[Lemex]

First of all I should maybe point out I never considered this a real argument. A debate, yes. As I said before, any fan of Lynch is OK with me. If you found me aggressive in anyway then I apologize - I didn't intend to be.

Okay, I'll try. Actually, that's a subjective thought process you're using. In order for it to be objective, you'd have to actually be physically measuring it somehow.

I hate to say this but Objective actually means in the context of evaluation: free from personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts and unbiased. Subjective in the context of evaluation means: prone to personal feelings and whimsical interpretation; based on emotion, and a lack of reason.

Taken from Dictoneryreference.com

5. not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.
6.
intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.
7.
being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject ( opposed to subjective).

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/objective

Otherwise: what are Objectivists measuring?

But unfortunately you can't do that, because your judgment comes from your head, whether it's from feelings or gut instinct or whatever. But it's not something you can prove... it's an opinion.

My position is not based from feelings or gut instinct. I critically evaluated and analysed both the Good and Good+ and decided that Good is beyond reasonable doubt the canonical ending.

are you actually arguing that the red liquid has nothing to do with what's canon? Cause that's what I'm arguing. Do we actually agree with each other here? I'm starting to get confused about what we've even been arguing about for the past few pages. If we actually agree with each other I'd feel a little foolish.

I've been saying the Red Liquid has nothing to do with canon, almost as default, because I've been arguing against the proposition of Good+ being an alternative.

If we agree on this point then I honestly don't know what the last few pages were about at all.