Search FAQ

Login | Register


All times are UTC [ DST ]


It is currently 18 Aug 2017




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
Its Gone Now wrote:
Good points Tillerman, I fully understand your viewpoint.

It's very feesable that Cybil could be alive (although she would most likely still be stuck in SH :( ).


Sure. It's fiction, after all... we're not doing a police investigation. It's not a matter of whether she's alive or not, but rather how you choose to see the story. I know you're the type of person who treats canon as the word of god from the author (and I am too, generally.) But even then, you've got wiggle room. Just going by everything the developers have said, it's pretty clear that they are the type of storytellers who like to leave things up to the audience.

For me, I don't really have an opinion about whether Cybil is "alive" or "dead." That's honestly unimportant to me. What is important is that they choose to leave it open ended in SH3, and I respect that decision. There's multiple valid ways to see the story. That's always a sign of good writing.

Its Gone Now wrote:
I know it's easy to get snippy and start arguing, we've all done it (myself included :oops: )


Yeah, it's only natural to get irritated with people from time to time. But just so long as you don't escalate it, you can always keep things in control.

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Moderator
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Apr 2004
Notes left: 11052
Last seen at: In the anals of forum history
I remain completely flummoxed that this has been a debate at all, much less the heated one that it actually is.

I've spent many words stating my opinions over the years, but I can basically sum it up thus:

Position A: "Cybil is dead. There are many pieces of evidence proving this, from official recognition of this fact in Team Silent literature, to the circumstantial fact of her never being mentioned or referenced as being alive in later games, to the fact that it is the only way to maintain internal logical consistency, in a game series that has (even at its sloppiest) taken great pains to maintain internal logical consistency."

Position B: "Cybil might be alive because a scant handful of vague statements that only even sort of hint at ambiguity are more important than all of the hard evidence."

It's honestly a lot like arguing religion. We have two sides in this debate, but one side abhors the idea of taking refuge in solipsism and insists on adhering to rules of consistency and logic, and the other basically argues from the heart and only cares about the evidence to the extent that it agrees with what they already want to believe.

If it was really the intention of the writers that Harry was supposed to have a realistic shot at saving Cybil, it would have been as simple as a line of dialogue or a file, hinting at the purpose of the liquid. Just that would have made Good+ equally plausible. Without it, it's lottery jackpot odds at best, and comes across as completely contrived. It wrecks the suspension of disbelief and fails as the serious work of fiction it clearly tries to be. They might as well have had talking chihuahuas doing a musical dance number that fills Cybil with the power of warrior love and makes her parasite transform into frosted flakes, because that scenario is only ever so slightly less plausible and logical than what Good+ requires us to accept.

I mean, if your argument is "it's fiction, so who cares about the rules", then it makes no sense that you'd care enough to argue about it.

And, it's not that I think fiction, in general, can be interpreted in only one way. I absolutely respect the fact that the opposite is generally true. But, we're basically arguing whether or not Darth Vader died at the end of Return of the Jedi because Anakin Skywalker's ghost actor in the original cut wasn't Hayden Christensen.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 09 Jun 2010
Notes left: 494
But Ryan! You keep bringing up the red liquid! Game mechanic! Go sit in your corner with your guidebooks and irrefutable evidence! We don't have to believe it if we don't want to! Logic is for sillynannies!


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
Ryantology wrote:
Position A: "Cybil is dead. There are many pieces of evidence proving this, from official recognition of this fact in Team Silent literature, to the circumstantial fact of her never being mentioned or referenced as being alive in later games, to the fact that it is the only way to maintain internal logical consistency, in a game series that has (even at its sloppiest) taken great pains to maintain internal logical consistency."


That's overstating your case, though. You're using a shotgun approach to evidence which doesn't really make sense. What is canonically true can only decided by the creators of the game. You agree with that, right?

Then "internal logical consistency" is irrelevant. For one thing, it's questionable whether the developers would see it as internally inconsistent. There's no evidence that they do. For another, there are many games where a true ending is the most obscure path, and yet is considered canon for the story. So there's a lot of precedent to say that such "internal consistency" is unimportant. Now you might say "the writers of Silent Hill are different, they care about consistency!" But there's not really any evidence of that, is there? And in fact we know that it's apparently unimportant to Toyama, as he prefers to see the Good+ ending as true. So that's one of them who clearly doesn't care about it, at the very least.

As for the circumstantial evidence of her not being around... well you said it yourself, it's circumstantial. It only really matters in one game, SH3, and it only shows that they chose to leave it open ended for that game. We have to actually go to interviews and the guidebook for more information than that.

Ryantology wrote:
Position B: "Cybil might be alive because a scant handful of vague statements that only even sort of hint at ambiguity are more important than all of the hard evidence."


In regards to fiction, the only thing that works as "hard evidence" is the words that come from the creators' own mouths. One of them prefers to see the Good+ ending as canon, that's enough to throw a fly into the ointment.

And of course, it's fiction... so people are allowed to see it however they want, regardless of what the creators say. I think Toyama's statement is an important reminder of that.

Ryantology wrote:
It's honestly a lot like arguing religion.


No it's not. That's a horrible analogy. Arguing religion is arguing about facts that can be measured. We are arguing about fiction, and how a person chooses to interpret it is much more subjective. There is no "wrong" interpretation, although some may be more convincing than others.

Ryantology wrote:
And, it's not that I think fiction, in general, can be interpreted in only one way. I absolutely respect the fact that the opposite is generally true. But, we're basically arguing whether or not Darth Vader died at the end of Return of the Jedi because Anakin Skywalker's ghost actor in the original cut wasn't Hayden Christensen.


It's not really like that at all, because SH3 doesn't actually show any evidence of Cybil's death. All the evidence comes from interviews with the games' creators, and even those conflict. What actually is shown happening is a fact. We can't argue what literally happened. But if any interpretation is required, then you have to be a little more open minded. It's just like you said: it's not that fiction can be interpreted in only one way. On that, you are completely right, and that definitely applies here.

Trauma_ wrote:
But Ryan! You keep bringing up the red liquid! Game mechanic! Go sit in your corner with your guidebooks and irrefutable evidence! We don't have to believe it if we don't want to! Logic is for sillynannies!


If all you have to add is snark, then may I kindly suggest that you keep it to yourself. If you have a point to make, please just make it directly. Antagonizing people is only going to lead to pointless bickering.

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

My Bestsellers Clerk
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 22 Sep 2014
Notes left: 348
Last seen at: Kent (England)
The "SCHRODINGER'S CYBIL" argument has gone on for over a decade, nearly 2 now.

What about the possibility that she is both? :D

But seriously if you ignore what wheeler says in Homecoming then it's a possibility that she was never even real to begin with. We know SH can do this.

So shes either Dead, or alive and probably stuck in SH, or she never really existed.

But whatever you opinion on the subject, rest assured that we will still be having this debate in another 20 years. At least I hope so :D


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
Its Gone Now wrote:
The "SCHRODINGER'S CYBIL" argument has gone on for over a decade, nearly 2 now.

What about the possibility that she is both? :D

But seriously if you ignore what wheeler says in Homecoming then it's a possibility that she was never even real to begin with. We know SH can do this.

So shes either Dead, or alive and probably stuck in SH, or she never really existed.

But whatever you opinion on the subject, rest assured that we will still be having this debate in another 20 years. At least I hope so :D


Haha. I like Schrodinger's Cybil.

But you know, we all know which one of those options is true. The correct answer is obvious: Cybil never existed. That's just a plain statement of reality, as is true of any fictional character. It's the clearest fact about her in this thread.

So what's this debate really about? It's not about whether Cybil is alive or dead. It has nothing to do with that. Ryan was right about a lot of the things he said, but on that point he was totally off the mark. In reality, the two sides are more like this:

Position A: We believe strongly that OUR view of this work of fiction is absolutely true! There is no room for dissent!

Position B: There is always room for dissent, and certainly there is in this particular case.

I really dislike position A. To me, it seems like a tyranny of ideas. Even if Cybil's fate within this fiction was more clear cut than it is, I still wouldn't like it. And moreover, I don't think it fits with the spirit in which these particular games were written. One of the coolest things about the Silent Hill games is the mysteries, the vagueness, the things left unsaid. It's fun to try to form theories, and it's exciting when they seem to fit.. but we have to be careful not to become so fixated on those theories that we get tyrannical about them. That's going too far. We can't forget that this is all just fiction, and that there's always room for opposing viewpoints.

If there is any bit of doubt at all about a detail like a characters fate, it shouldn't be swept under the rug... rather, it should be embraced. I think it's a good thing that there's a little room for doubt on Cybil's fate... it makes the games that much more interesting.

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 09 Jun 2010
Notes left: 494
Quote:
Position A: We believe strongly that OUR view of this work of fiction is absolutely true! There is no room for dissent!

Yeah, about that. No one's really falling for it.


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
Trauma_ wrote:
Quote:
Position A: We believe strongly that OUR view of this work of fiction is absolutely true! There is no room for dissent!

Yeah, about that. No one's really falling for it.


"Falling for it"? Are you saying that's not true?

Then, are you saying you don't mind if people want to see Cybil's character as alive? There is room for dissent on that opinion? Is that what you're saying, Trauma?

Because if so, that would be great.

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Moderator
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Apr 2004
Notes left: 11052
Last seen at: In the anals of forum history
Tillerman wrote:
That's overstating your case, though. You're using a shotgun approach to evidence which doesn't really make sense. What is canonically true can only decided by the creators of the game. You agree with that, right?


I do, but whenever someone points to the Book of Lost Memories stating in plain language that Good is the ending which leads into Silent Hill 3 (indeed, this is basically the seed which gave birth to the very idea of Silent Hill canon), this simply isn't good enough for some people.

Quote:
Then "internal logical consistency" is irrelevant. For one thing, it's questionable whether the developers would see it as internally inconsistent. There's no evidence that they do. For another, there are many games where a true ending is the most obscure path, and yet is considered canon for the story. So there's a lot of precedent to say that such "internal consistency" is unimportant. Now you might say "the writers of Silent Hill are different, they care about consistency!" But there's not really any evidence of that, is there? And in fact we know that it's apparently unimportant to Toyama, as he prefers to see the Good+ ending as true. So that's one of them who clearly doesn't care about it, at the very least.


Internal consistency is always relevant. It is one of the most important factors that decides the quality of a work of fiction. Without consistency, it's just worthless nonsense.

As for Toyama, he was involved only in the first game, if memory serves? It ceased to be his matter to decide once the series went on without him.

Quote:
As for the circumstantial evidence of her not being around... well you said it yourself, it's circumstantial. It only really matters in one game, SH3, and it only shows that they chose to leave it open ended for that game. We have to actually go to interviews and the guidebook for more information than that.


The circumstantial evidence aids what is established as fact by the hard evidence. If all you have is circumstantial, that's not enough to say one way or another. I've got the hard evidence, though.

Quote:
In regards to fiction, the only thing that works as "hard evidence" is the words that come from the creators' own mouths. One of them prefers to see the Good+ ending as canon, that's enough to throw a fly into the ointment.


The rest of the evidence overwhelms this, rather emphatically.

Quote:
And of course, it's fiction... so people are allowed to see it however they want, regardless of what the creators say. I think Toyama's statement is an important reminder of that.


Sure. But, if you're going to believe in something that is 99% contradictory to the evidence, why bother arguing about it?

Quote:
No it's not. That's a horrible analogy. Arguing religion is arguing about facts that can be measured. We are arguing about fiction, and how a person chooses to interpret it is much more subjective. There is no "wrong" interpretation, although some may be more convincing than others.


Your interpretation is ignoring a slew of facts. Of course, you have the right to do that, if you want. But, to complain that others find it objectionable (and justifiably so) is absurd.

Quote:
It's not really like that at all, because SH3 doesn't actually show any evidence of Cybil's death. All the evidence comes from interviews with the games' creators, and even those conflict. What actually is shown happening is a fact. We can't argue what literally happened. But if any interpretation is required, then you have to be a little more open minded. It's just like you said: it's not that fiction can be interpreted in only one way. On that, you are completely right, and that definitely applies here.


Silent Hill 1 shows evidence of her death. Official literature confirms it. If this isn't enough for you, it's because you don't want it to be. Again, that's fine, but it won't be the source of any compelling counterargument.

I mean, if the creators intended Good+ to be canon, there would be some kind of positive indication in future games that she lived. There isn't anything, in any game, that qualifies as a hint that she made it out alive. There isn't anything that even stokes the fires of ambiguity. So, if that was their intention, why doesn't the series reflect any of that intention?

Since you didn't care for my first analogy, here's another: Let's say that Cybil worked on the 97th floor of World Trade Center II on 9/11. It is confirmed that she was in the building that day, but they never find her body in the wreckage, and nobody ever sees or hears from her ever again. That presents technical ambiguity, and you can come up with as many reasons why she might still be alive as your imagination can concoct, but how many of them would sound even remotely plausible?

This is a fictional scenario I invented, and since I did, I can say "She decided to run away and change her name and live in a commune for the rest of her life." In the context of this being my work of short fiction, I have the right to do that, but if I did, nobody in their right mind should take me seriously as a fiction author, because by doing that, I have ruined the piece with bad, contrived plotmaking. On TVTropes, they call this "asspulling". There is no way to resolve Good+ to the remainder of Silent Hill canon without so much asspulling that it would permanently stain the reputations of the writers who produced it.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 09 Jun 2010
Notes left: 494
Tillerman wrote:
Trauma_ wrote:
Quote:
Position A: We believe strongly that OUR view of this work of fiction is absolutely true! There is no room for dissent!

Yeah, about that. No one's really falling for it.


"Falling for it"? Are you saying that's not true?

Then, are you saying you don't mind if people want to see Cybil's character as alive? There is room for dissent on that opinion? Is that what you're saying, Trauma?

Because if so, that would be great.

Too bad she's not, no matter how hard you wish for her to be.


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
Ryantology wrote:
I do, but whenever someone points to the Book of Lost Memories stating in plain language that Good is the ending which leads into Silent Hill 3 (indeed, this is basically the seed which gave birth to the very idea of Silent Hill canon), this simply isn't good enough for some people.


That's okay, though. People don't have to go along with what the guidebook says. But personally, I tend to. One thing that can't really be questioned is that at the time Owaku wrote Silent Hill 3, he did it using the Good ending in mind.

Ryantology wrote:
Internal consistency is always relevant. It is one of the most important factors that decides the quality of a work of fiction.


No one's arguing against that. It's just that quality and canon are two separate issues. And also I think that when it's done for the purposes of a game mechanic, consistency in that particular case becomes a lot less important. After all, we have to allow games a little leeway in order for them to be good games.

Ryantology wrote:
As for Toyama, he was involved only in the first game, if memory serves? It ceased to be his matter to decide once the series went on without him.


He's the creator of Silent Hill 1, I'd say his opinion is pretty valuable. At least it is to me. And not just that, but I think everyone has the right to their own viewpoint on this work of fiction. Believing in "the word of god" makes sense, and I myself tend to do it, but it's hardly mandatory.

Ryantology wrote:
I mean, if the creators intended Good+ to be canon, there would be some kind of positive indication in future games that she lived.


That's exactly right. But you can also turn that point on it's head: if Good was intended to be canon, they could have easily included an indication of her death in SH3. Yet they specifically don't do that. The truth seems to be a little more nuanced than that: it was written as if she was dead, yet they also wanted to leave it open ended at the same time.

Ryantology wrote:
Your interpretation is ignoring a slew of facts.


No, that's not true at all. If anything, I think you might be the one ignoring facts, rather than me. And I think you have a false idea about what my "interpretation" is.

All I'm doing is laying out all the facts... that includes what the guidebook says, statements from the creators, including Toyama's statement that Good+ is the true ending. Toyama is the lone dissenter, so those statements mostly back up the Good ending, and in fact we know it was written with that ending in mind. But it's also true that the game itself leaves it open ended, the guidebook says it should be left to the player's imaginations, and that of the original creators Toyama thinks that the truth is flexible.

Those are all facts. I don't have a particularly strong opinion in how I view the story... it works just find with Cybil alive or dead. EIther way doesn't matter strongly to me. Since the game seems to have been written with then Good ending in mind, it makes total sense to view the storyline that way. Let me just reiterate that, since I'm a little tired of you and Trauma misunderstanding my position: it makes total sense to view the storyline as though Cybil is dead. It's completely logical.

Still, I think the door is open for alternative opinions. She's never actually killed off in the games... people don't have to accept what is written in the guidebook. If even Toyama himself feels that way, I think that gives us all license to feel the same way. You yourself have said that fiction is subjective... surely you can understand this point of view.

Trauma_ wrote:
Too bad she's not, no matter how hard you wish for her to be.


What you just said is a perfect illustration of position A: You believe strongly that YOUR view of this work of fiction is absolutely true. You've left no room for dissent on the matter of Cybil's death. You're stating your opinion about fiction emphatically, as if it was a fact.

So then, why'd you act as if I was wrong when I laid out position A? Why'd you act as if that doesn't apply to you, when it actually seems to be a perfect fit?

Help me make some sense of what you're trying to say.

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 09 Jun 2010
Notes left: 494
Quote:
You believe strongly that YOUR view of this work of fiction is absolutely true.

And we have the evidence to prove it. Which you keep handwaving away. You know full well what we're "trying to say", don't act all coy about it.

Besides, isn't this precisely what you're doing too, albeit more insidiously? Kind of like people that say "we're all entitled to our opinions", while feverishly trying to advance their own?

Sure, you're entitled to your opinion, but you're also entitled to get called on how stupid it might be.

Quote:
>And I think you have a false idea about what my "interpretation" is.
>I don't have a particularly strong opinion in how I view the story
>EIther way doesn't matter strongly to me.

Common sense and the content of your posts say otherwise.

Quote:
[. . .]including Toyama's statement that Good+ is a* true ending

*Fixed


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
Trauma_ wrote:
And we have the evidence to prove it. Which you keep handwaving away.


That's completely wrong. I'm not handwaving any evidence away... I'm endorsing it. The major points of evidence that the creators saw the Good ending as canon, I've repeated them over and over. Why do you keep ignoring that?

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

My Bestsellers Clerk
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 22 Sep 2014
Notes left: 348
Last seen at: Kent (England)
Tillerman wrote:
If there is any bit of doubt at all about a detail like a characters fate, it shouldn't be swept under the rug... rather, it should be embraced. I think it's a good thing that there's a little room for doubt on Cybil's fate... it makes the games that much more interesting.


So true.

Not having everything explained is one of my favorite things about the series, if the original devs had come out and explained exactly 100% why the town is the way it is I would probably be disappointed whatever the answer was.

We don't want SH to become RESI and explain evertyhing away (oh this year its going to be an ever so slightly different virus, lets find out who's behind it all).

I just reeeeeally hope Kojima realizes that ambiguity is essential in creating that feeling that only Silent Hill can give you. I personally think he'll nail it with Del Toro on board.


Top
   
 

Moderator
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Apr 2004
Notes left: 11052
Last seen at: In the anals of forum history
Tillerman wrote:
No one's arguing against that. It's just that quality and canon are two separate issues. And also I think that when it's done for the purposes of a game mechanic, consistency in that particular case becomes a lot less important. After all, we have to allow games a little leeway in order for them to be good games.


They are separate issues, until you put forth an interpretation of the story that can only work if that internal consistency is ignored or contradicted. To each their own, but when it comes to things like this, I do not accept interpretations that require me to devalue the work.

Quote:
He's the creator of Silent Hill 1, I'd say his opinion is pretty valuable. At least it is to me. And not just that, but I think everyone has the right to their own viewpoint on this work of fiction. Believing in "the word of god" makes sense, and I myself tend to do it, but it's hardly mandatory.


As the creator of Silent Hill 1, and only Silent Hill 1, his opinion works in a vacuum. Before the third game came along and created the series canon as we know it, it was plausible to interpret Good+ as a possible ending. There was nothing external to contradict the idea that Harry was trapped in a ceaseless temporal loop, repeating events over and over again until both he and Cybil made it out alive together. That was definitely not without its own flaws, but it was not stretching things to the point of absurdity. 15 years of Silent Hill games later, this concept has never been given life outside of a few ancient, creative fan theories, and at the very best, it would be a pointless anomaly in the canon, a stretch of logic made specifically to justify an assertion that is, otherwise, completely unjustifiable, and which contributes nothing to the mythos.

Quote:
That's exactly right. But you can also turn that point on it's head: if Good was intended to be canon, they could have easily included an indication of her death in SH3. Yet they specifically don't do that. The truth seems to be a little more nuanced than that: it was written as if she was dead, yet they also wanted to leave it open ended at the same time.


There shouldn't be a need to expound on Cybil's death. It's the most obvious result of the events of the first game. Harry doesn't even hint at her existence in his notes, which is about what you would expect from a man who has shouldered years of guilt over having to kill her.

Though, to be perfectly frank, Cybil is virtually irrelevant to the story of the first game, so it's no surprise she doesn't rate even a mention later on. Her only real contribution to anything is being a terrible cop and handing over a firearm to some civilian she just met. She spends a whole five minutes, tops, in Harry's company. She doesn't relay any useful information of any kind. If there had been a gun on the cafe counter next to the knife and map, she could have been removed completely from the story with no significant effect. I say this because taking all that into account removes most of the impetus Harry might have otherwise felt to risk his life to save her from a condition he knows literally jack shit about, and can solve only with a completely random item that he believes is just some recreational narcotic anyway.

Ryantology wrote:
No, that's not true at all. If anything, I think you might be the one ignoring facts, rather than me. And I think you have a false idea about what my "interpretation" is.


Perhaps it is more accurate to say that you are over-valuing certain facts and (severely) under-valuing others.

Quote:
All I'm doing is laying out all the facts... that includes what the guidebook says, statements from the creators, including Toyama's statement that Good+ is the true ending. Toyama is the lone dissenter, so those statements mostly back up the Good ending, and in fact we know it was written with that ending in mind. But it's also true that the game itself leaves it open ended, the guidebook says it should be left to the player's imaginations, and that of the original creators Toyama thinks that the truth is flexible.


To wit:

1: Open-endedness doesn't mean 50/50 agnosticism is warranted. The best that you can say about the odds of Cybil being saved is that they aren't entirely zero. But, in any practical sense, they are so close as to make no difference.
2: The player can imagine whatever they like. Silent Hill players love to imagine some crazy shit. It can't all be true because it can't all exist without contradiction.

Quote:
Still, I think the door is open for alternative opinions. She's never actually killed off in the games... people don't have to accept what is written in the guidebook. If even Toyama himself feels that way, I think that gives us all license to feel the same way. You yourself have said that fiction is subjective... surely you can understand this point of view.


I would love to hear Toyama, et. al, explain how they can justify this opinion. It would actually be rather insightful. I simply do not think that this is a matter with much room for legitimate debate. I don't think this door is open. I think there's a crack underneath at best, but nobody's exiting the room through that.

And, while I definitely accept that fiction is subjective, there are reasonable limits to how valuable this subjectivity is. Again, I can't accept an interpretation that insists that I ignore the internal consistency of the rest of the works in the series, not when it's a series that has displayed rather spectacular internal consistency over 7 main-series entries. I can accept other interpretations, and indeed I welcome them.

My stubbornness regarding this interpretation has nothing to do with a devotion to the idea that Cybil is dead. I really don't care about the character one way or another. I'm stubborn about it because it is an interpretation that is internally insupportable.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
Ryantology wrote:
Perhaps it is more accurate to say that you are over-valuing certain facts and (severely) under-valuing others.


Right, but you're only saying that because you'd basically like to ignore Toyama's quote. I don't agree with that attitude, so that's where our disagreement lies. So let's talk about that.

Ryantology wrote:
As the creator of Silent Hill 1, and only Silent Hill 1, his opinion works in a vacuum. Before the third game came along and created the series canon as we know it, it was plausible to interpret Good+ as a possible ending.


You've made a mistake here. You're trying to minimize Toyama's role, but you've ignored something very important: Toyama is the one who decided that the Good ending should be canon in the first place, at the time he was making SH1. Granted, it sounds like they all discussed this, so they all probably had some input. But when Owaku was writing SH3, he chose to write with the Good ending as mind *because* he talked to Toyama about it, and Toyama told him to take that route. In fact, I would guess that this was not Owaku's first choice... Owaku seemed to want to leave it open ended, based on how he wrote SH3, and his quote in the guidebook about leaving it open ended for the player.

In other words, if there is one single person who's opinion should be valued most, it's probably Toyama's. Owaku would probably be a close second. To be fair though, this isn't exactly the kind of thing you can rank... it's enough to say that both of their opinions are important, and leave it at that.

Ryantology wrote:
1: Open-endedness doesn't mean 50/50 agnosticism is warranted. The best that you can say about the odds of Cybil being saved is that they aren't entirely zero. But, in any practical sense, they are so close as to make no difference.


No, they aren't close to zero. That's just an incorrect use of math. You can't assign "odds" of something happening in fiction. All fiction is contrived, by definition. The unlikely will always happen when it needs to, in service of making the story interesting.

Ryantology wrote:
I would love to hear Toyama, et. al, explain how they can justify this opinion. It would actually be rather insightful.


My guess is that the "inconsistency" you're talking about never even occured to him. He probably doesn't realize that there are certain people out there who demand that this opinion be justified. This should be pretty obvious... after all, if it wasn't the case, he'd never casually say that he views the Good+ ending as canon, right?

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 01 Aug 2006
Notes left: 11371
Last seen at: I'm here, and waiting for you
Doesn't the implication that he doesn't think he has to justify his opinion make it mean that much less, though? It implies he doesn't think he has to think about things before he runs his mouth.

_________________
BlackFire2 wrote:
I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
AuraTwilight wrote:
Doesn't the implication that he doesn't think he has to justify his opinion make it mean that much less, though? It implies he doesn't think he has to think about things before he runs his mouth.


He wasn't just "running his mouth," he was responding to persistent questions about Cybil on twitter. We don't know how much he thought about it, or what his justification is, because he didn't say. All he said was that he changed his mind, and that he now considers the Good+ ending to be the true ending.

I don't think he needs to justify his opinion, either. I think that's a valid point of view, even if it came from a fan. Much less from Toyama, the creator of SH1 himself.

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Moderator
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Apr 2004
Notes left: 11052
Last seen at: In the anals of forum history
Tillerman wrote:
Right, but you're only saying that because you'd basically like to ignore Toyama's quote. I don't agree with that attitude, so that's where our disagreement lies. So let's talk about that.


It's not that I wish to ignore it, it's just that, considering his relationship to the series, and all of the rest of the evidence, and the fact that his opinion was never explained or justified, it simply isn't very important.

Ryantology wrote:
You've made a mistake here. You're trying to minimize Toyama's role, but you've ignored something very important: Toyama is the one who decided that the Good ending should be canon in the first place, at the time he was making SH1.


Well, then?

Quote:
No, they aren't close to zero. That's just an incorrect use of math. You can't assign "odds" of something happening in fiction. All fiction is contrived, by definition. The unlikely will always happen when it needs to, in service of making the story interesting.


I can speculate on its likelihood based on what information we have and the rules that the fiction plays by. This sort of deus ex machina is simply not a factor anywhere else in this series. Therefore, yes, fiction is necessarily contrived, but within even the context of this work of fiction, this specific event is too contrived to be considered anything but not technically entirely impossible. Like some of us used to like to say in situaitons like this, nobody can prove Dahlia's not a robot alien. either.

Quote:
My guess is that the "inconsistency" you're talking about never even occured to him. He probably doesn't realize that there are certain people out there who demand that this opinion be justified. This should be pretty obvious... after all, if it wasn't the case, he'd never casually say that he views the Good+ ending as canon, right?


I don't know how he feels about it. I know how I feel about it, as a fiction writer. I would never concoct a scenario like Good+, and insist it happened, without going out of my way to explain why it makes sense in the context of the rest of the work. Perhaps Toyama, et. al., don't take their work as seriously as I take mine, but I simply cannot imagine that a series as solidly consistent as this has, at its center, a disaster of a plot hole like this. I can't imagine that writers of this skill would be any more tolerant of it than I am.

I mean, I would expect an explanation, because I would feel compelled to provide one, if it was me. You know?

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 09 Jun 2010
Notes left: 494
Quote:
No, they aren't close to zero.

Put your money where your mouth is and demonstrate how then.

Because the likelihood of a guy using a recreational narcotic (to his knowledge) on someone trying to kill him is very close to 0. And yes, unfortunately for you fiction does work that way. This isn't something you can explain away so simply.


Top
   
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: