Search FAQ

Login | Register


All times are UTC [ DST ]


It is currently 24 Jul 2017




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

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 27 Jan 2007
Notes left: 274
Last seen at: Ry'leh
This is just a post on why I think that the Good+ ending would be the canon one. I have read the other theories around, heard what Lost Memories has to say and gave it some thought. This is my conclusion for right or wrong.

My first reason is because after you get it the intro movie switches to Harry and Cybil finding Baby Heather (instead of Harry and his wife). I know this may mean nothing in and of itself but I wondered why bother if they intended it to be vague about her fate? None of the other endings affect the intro at all. That is probably my main reason but hearing the other arguments on why her death is the more logical outcome, they honestly don't make sense to me. I'll try to address them as I can but if I've missed something please feel free to tell me.

First is the aglophotis. It has been said that to use an unknown chemical on someone would not make sense and that Harry has no real reason to even take it with him because he has no idea what it does. Which is basically true. At this point in the game Harry has no idea what it is, does or is even called and logically he would not know until it was far too late to save Cybil. However, the game itself lines you up very easily to take it, even not knowing what it is. The bottle is directly in your path, as is the aglaophotis. Now, rationally, you wouldn't throw something unknown and possibly lethal on someone under normal circumstances but they aren't exactly normal are they? Cybil is possessed with a weird growth out of her back and your only other option is to kill her so I would think you would try an alternate method anyway, even if it was harmful because as I said, your only other option is to kill her. Kaufmann's rescue seems just as illogical to me but we know it must happen for the events of SH3 to take place. It makes no sense that Harry would go to Annie's Bar for no reason at all. It is not mentioned previously in the game so it makes absolutely no sense that he would detour out of his way to go somewhere on a whim. Especially when at that moment he's trying to catch up with Cheryl at the lake. But we know it happens or SH3 does not happen. Incidentally, it is also where he does see Kaufmann retrieve the vial of aglaophotis out of the motorcycle and by Kaufmann's reaction could at least impress it's importance on Harry.

The second argument usually made is Cybil's non-appearance in any other Silent Hill game, particularly SH3, where it would be most likely. My only real answer to that would be that, barring Harry and Heather (well sort of Harry anyway), there are no other characters that make a second physical appearance. It would make sense for her to be included in 3 so I don't know why she wouldn't be. I do have theories (don't we all :) ) but I'm trying as much as possible to stick to in-game evidence.

Well, I think that is about it so I would just like to say thanks in advance for sticking with this long post and if there is anything that I have overlooked then I will try to either address it or change my stance accordingly. I mean, this is just my opinion but it made the most sense to me.

_________________
Are you ready to begin your trip to the Otherside
Death is an old friend of mine


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
FatalFrame wrote:
My first reason is because after you get it the intro movie switches to Harry and Cybil finding Baby Heather (instead of Harry and his wife). I know this may mean nothing in and of itself but I wondered why bother if they intended it to be vague about her fate? None of the other endings affect the intro at all. That is probably my main reason but hearing the other arguments on why her death is the more logical outcome, they honestly don't make sense to me. I'll try to address them as I can but if I've missed something please feel free to tell me.


The fact that it affects the intro is a mark against it, not for it. It is disrupting the narrative rather than building upon it, the same way the Bad ending does.

Quote:
Now, rationally, you wouldn't throw something unknown and possibly lethal on someone under normal circumstances but they aren't exactly normal are they? Cybil is possessed with a weird growth out of her back and your only other option is to kill her so I would think you would try an alternate method anyway, even if it was harmful because as I said, your only other option is to kill her.


It's not as simple as that. Cybil is trying to kill Harry, and if Harry dies, Cheryl will certainly be doomed. For this reason alone, it is completely illogical that Harry would attempt to get cute and creative in this situation. His only rational method of dealing with Cybil is to fight back, to maybe incapacitate her, but kill her if he has to. The red liquid would never cross his mind as a useful item for either of these goals, because it's just as unlikely to be fatal as it is to be curative.

Quote:
Kaufmann's rescue seems just as illogical to me but we know it must happen for the events of SH3 to take place. It makes no sense that Harry would go to Annie's Bar for no reason at all. It is not mentioned previously in the game so it makes absolutely no sense that he would detour out of his way to go somewhere on a whim. Especially when at that moment he's trying to catch up with Cheryl at the lake. But we know it happens or SH3 does not happen.


You can hear the sounds of struggle when you are outside of Annie's Bar. It is the cue which tips you off to the fact that it's not just another decoration. Rescuing Kaufmann naturally follows from this. It involves Harry being at the right place at the right time, but it's not a logical stretch beyond that.

Quote:
Incidentally, it is also where he does see Kaufmann retrieve the vial of aglaophotis out of the motorcycle and by Kaufmann's reaction could at least impress it's importance on Harry.


And it does: it makes Harry believe that it's one of the drugs that's being peddled around town.

Quote:
The second argument usually made is Cybil's non-appearance in any other Silent Hill game, particularly SH3, where it would be most likely. My only real answer to that would be that, barring Harry and Heather (well sort of Harry anyway), there are no other characters that make a second physical appearance. It would make sense for her to be included in 3 so I don't know why she wouldn't be. I do have theories (don't we all :) ) but I'm trying as much as possible to stick to in-game evidence.


This is more of a corollary than an actual argument. There are only two arguments that favor the canon status of the Good ending:

1. The fact that it is the only ending which requires no astounding leaps of logic to justify, and
2. The rest of Silent Hill canon officially derives from this outcome.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoile
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 27 Jan 2007
Notes left: 274
Last seen at: Ry'leh
I really don't see the altered intro as disrupting the narrative, more like extending it.

As far as Harry's rationale for using the aglaophotis goes I think we could both argue that until we're both blue in the face with neither of us really changing our minds much. But Harry does see the drugs in the safe and they don't look anything like the aglaophotis. But, as you pointed out he could also just as easily assume it was either a different drug entirely or a different form of the same one he saw.

About Kaufmann I never heard any sounds from the bar at all. Do you have to he close to it? Because usually I run the opposite side to get to the lake quicker (unless I'm specifically going there) but really, even then I've never heard any but it could just be that I missed them because I usually play with the sound low. It still seems like going out of the way to me though.

Another reason for my thinking that the Good+ is the "correct" ending which I forgot to mention in my previous post (I'll have to do an edit) is that only by saving Cybil do you get the information about how Cheryl came to be his daughter and what her connection to the town is.
Yeah, my last 'argument' wasn't exactly an argument because I could not come up with an explanation but more like a last thought kind of thing. I hope you don't think I was trying to tear apart your argument in particular because I know a lot of what I brought up were your thoughts on the endings. This would be easier using quotes but apparently I'm an initial because I can never seem to use the quote thing without it messing up.

I'm probably just partial to the Good+ ending because I like Cybil, better than Lisa actually which I'm sure won't get me any love in here but there you have it :)

_________________
Are you ready to begin your trip to the Otherside
Death is an old friend of mine


Top
   
 

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

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
FatalFrame wrote:
I really don't see the altered intro as disrupting the narrative, more like extending it.


I agree with you there. Well, I think you could read into it either way, but ultimately I don't think it means much of anything.

FatalFrame wrote:
As far as Harry's rationale for using the aglaophotis goes I think we could both argue that until we're both blue in the face with neither of us really changing our minds much. But Harry does see the drugs in the safe and they don't look anything like the aglaophotis. But, as you pointed out he could also just as easily assume it was either a different drug entirely or a different form of the same one he saw.


I really don't think you should read too much into the use of the aglaophotis. That's a game mechanic, and there's no evidence that it's meant to be an insight into which story branch is legitimate.

FatalFrame wrote:
About Kaufmann I never heard any sounds from the bar at all. Do you have to he close to it?


Good question. I've never noticed any sounds coming from the bar, either. I'll have to pay attention for that, next time I play.

FatalFrame wrote:
I'm probably just partial to the Good+ ending because I like Cybil, better than Lisa actually which I'm sure won't get me any love in here but there you have it :)


There's nothing wrong with that at all. Although the guidebook basically says that the Good ending is meant to be canon, Masahiro Ito said that he himself considers the Good+ ending to be true. The games themselves leave it pretty open ended. You should feel no shame in believing what you want to believe... I think the game's creators would support you on that. Silent Hill games were very much about leaving things open ended and mysterious, and I think the correct answer is up to you.

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

SHH Cult Subscriber
SHH Cult Subscriber
 Post subject: Re: Why Good+ Ending is My Canon Ending (spoile
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 03 Jan 2005
Notes left: 4638
Last seen at: Colorado
FatalFrame wrote:
I'm probably just partial to the Good+ ending because I like Cybil, better than Lisa actually which I'm sure won't get me any love in here but there you have it :)

I'm partial to the good+ ending as well, largely because of my fondness for Cybil. I've had her as my avatar pic since I joined here and have cosplayed as possessed Cybil (with the red eyes & the parasite coming out).
Although I favor that ending and usually opt for it, I don't feel it's canon. For one thing, it is super unlikely (in my opinion) for every single thing to turn out in the happiest way after the events of SH.
Also, Wheeler mentioned Cybil went missing in SH. Sure, she could have intentionally disappeared, but I don't really see why she would. The cult wasn't after her- and I think it would be more in line with her character to want to do something about what happened (not that there's anything she could really do) or to at least continue doing her duty/her job rather than run and hide.
Also, I think the Cybil & Harry leaving together and the clip where Cybil is added in with Harry finding the baby kind of make it seem like Cybil and Harry would've stayed together after SH1. Like they found the new baby together and were escaping and were going to start anew. Granted, that's completely speculation and opinion, but so was most of your reasoning. :P Anyway, we don't see Cybil with the Masons in SH3 or have any mention by Harry of her leaving with him (I'd think he probably would've at least mentioned it in his writings for Heather, even if they'd parted ways).

As for Harry going into Annie's Bar- that's not such a stretch. It's not hugely out of his way, and he does lots of exploring in the game. True, it's usually places he has a reason to check out or that he has to pass through, but still, I don't think it's unreasonable for him to check out this little extra place on his way. Maybe he wanted to see if he'd find someone there (he just entered a new area of town and this was pretty much the first public building he passed- someone could've been hiding out in there) or find something useful. Or maybe he was just off to the side of the street looking for any useful items and heard the sounds of the monster attacking Kaufmann. Either way, I really don't think it's a stretch for him to go in there.
Certainly not as much of a stretch as it is for him to use the aglaophotis on Cybil. It's possible he would, sure. To try everything at his disposal that would help him perhaps not have to kill Cybil. And I tell myself that a bit for the sake of enjoying the good+ ending. But in reality, with a possessed cop shooting at him, I think he's more likely to shoot back than to spend precious seconds fiddling around with mystery liquid. He's come that far, he's getting closer to Cheryl, and he's not likely to risk it all like that. He's already seen a number of people who've been taken over and monster-ified- nurses and doctors- and did what he had to do to them. It would be harder to kill Cybil since he knew her, but I think he'd do it.

_________________
Hunting the abyss lord... only one will stay alive!
Image


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)
This is quite simple really. Some things are down to personal opinion but SH3 tells you what happened at the end of SH1.

That is what determines the true ending, and that is the only game in the series you can say that about as it is the only one that has a "sequel"


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:
This is quite simple really. Some things are down to personal opinion but SH3 tells you what happened at the end of SH1.


No it doesn't. It tries to leave Cybil's fate open-ended on purpose.

It's only the guidebook that calls the good ending canon. Of course, you don't have to listen to the guidebook... and even Masahiro Ito said that he himself considers the Good+ ending to be true.

_________________
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
Except for the fact that Silent Hill 3 was written to follow the Good ending. To follow the Good+ ending would be a naked Deus Ex Machina.


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)
Cybil didn't make it people.

SH5 lore is far from absolute, however Wheeler did say that she went missing and was never heard from again, so if she is not dead she is still stuck in SH (or she would have told everyone what happened don't you think?).

So whether she survived or not it's hard to imagine her getting out of SH.

And I kind of feel that if she was alive she would have been in SH3 or they would have at least hinted at her existence, but she is not mentioned, because shes history.

We want her to be alive because she is a good character, but people die, especially in our favorite town.


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:
Except for the fact that Silent Hill 3 was written to follow the Good ending. To follow the Good+ ending would be a naked Deus Ex Machina.


But it was also written to stay vague on that point. I think it's kind of silly to call it a "Deus Ex Machina" (Apparently Masahiro Ito does too.)

Its Gone Now wrote:
SH5 lore is far from absolute, however Wheeler did say that she went missing and was never heard from again, so if she is not dead she is still stuck in SH (or she would have told everyone what happened don't you think?)


That's IF you value Homecoming as canon. I think it's very reasonable to ignore Homecoming, and personally I consider it a completely separate work of fiction. But if you want to value it that's your choice.

Its Gone Now wrote:
And I kind of feel that if she was alive she would have been in SH3 or they would have at least hinted at her existence, but she is not mentioned, because shes history.


However, if they wanted her to be definitively dead, they could have established that easily. All it would have taken was a single journal entry. But notice that they didn't. It's left deliberately open.

Its Gone Now wrote:
We want her to be alive because she is a good character, but people die, especially in our favorite town.


You're perfectly entitled to your opinion. Again, I just want to point out that Masahiro Ito has a different opinion from you.

_________________
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
Tillerman wrote:
Trauma_ wrote:
Except for the fact that Silent Hill 3 was written to follow the Good ending. To follow the Good+ ending would be a naked Deus Ex Machina.


But it was also written to stay vague on that point. I think it's kind of silly to call it a "Deus Ex Machina" (Apparently Masahiro Ito does too.)


Quote:
de·us ex ma·chi·na
ˈdāəs eks ˈmäkənə,-ˈmak-/
noun- an unexpected power or event saving a seemingly hopeless situation, especially as a contrived plot device in a play or novel.


It's not silly just because (as usual) you decide to be Mr. Contrarian. A deus ex machina would be Harry suddenly knowing the true purpose of the liquid, even though he was lead to believe it was just dope the entire time. Making it so that the red in Cybil's eyes reminds him of the liquid makes even less sense. Besides, Hiroyuki Owaku (you know... the writer, not the artist) wrote the 3rd game in conjunction with the Good ending- so the only way you aren't shit out of luck is if you were to just plug your ears and go "LALALALALA". I seem to remember a duo of excruciatingly unfunny internet critics doing that back in 2010, and it not ending well for them.

I certainly wouldn't put it past you. . .

P.S.- Ito is also on record as saying Cybil is dead. So he better start making up that mind of his <3.


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:
It's not silly just because (as usual) you decide to be Mr. Contrarian. A deus ex machina would be Harry suddenly knowing the true purpose of the liquid, even though he was lead to believe it was just dope the entire time.


I'm not just deciding to be "mr. contrarion." I seriously believe that it's insanely silly to take what is at it's core a game mechanic and try to pretend like it's a deus ex machina. That event is the way it is because it is a game mechanic. Taking it too literally and reading so much meaning into it is just foolish. It's a meaningless distraction from the discussion about what is supposed to be canon.

And yes, it's far fetched that the red in Cybil's eyes reminded Harry of the red liquid, but it's also far from impossible. A lot of far fetched things happen in Silent Hill.

And the worst part about this, for you, is that you have no reason to hang on such a dumb argument. You already have the guidebooks. It literally says that the Good ending is the one they intended to be canon. Other interviews confirm it. That's all you really need in your corner. Trotting out the old red liquid argument only hurts your credibility and makes you look silly. Stick with your strong cards and put your weak ones away.

Trauma_ wrote:
Besides, Hiroyuki Owaku (you know... the writer, not the artist) wrote the 3rd game in conjunction with the Good ending-


That's true, but again it bears repeating that he choose to obscure that within the game itself. The game could easily make it known which ending was the "correct" ending, but they chose NOT to do that. Why? Probably because it makes things more interesting when you can leave things up to the player's imagination. That's the spirit in which the game was written, and it drives me crazy when people like you just can't get that.

If you want to think of her as dead, you have Hiroyuki Owaku and the guidebook on your side. That's perfectly fine. But Masahiro Ito's opinion is perfectly valid as well. You don't have to treat the guidebook as gospel. The real spirit of those games is about leaving things up to the player. It's too bad that you have to be so pedantic about it, and can't seem to grasp the beauty in leaving it open ended.

_________________
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:
I'm not just deciding to be "mr. contrarion." I seriously believe that it's insanely silly to take what is at it's core a game mechanic and try to pretend like it's a deus ex machina


It's [near] mathematically impossible for [the player] to have thought about using the red liquid the first time around. Harry has known Cybil all of 15 minutes- he has no stake in whether she lives or dies, she represents a dire threat. To go through his magical black hole pockets and risk dooming Cheryl just to [possibly] save someone—as previously stated— that he has no stake in is illogical. To argue that any human being would ever do this is—yes, being a contrarian.

Quote:
Taking it too literally and reading so much meaning into it is just foolish.

Anybody that knows me knows that I find consistency important. There is no consistency in arguing for the Good+ ending.

Quote:
But Masahiro Ito's opinion is perfectly valid as well

Indeed!
https://twitter.com/#!/adsk4/status/166074052367220736

Quote:
A lot of far fetched things happen in Silent Hill.

No one with working a set of eyes would find this argument acceptable. There's a term for that in fact. But anyways...

Image

You had this argument with Ryan years ago, and ignored every piece of evidence thrown at you. And clearly today will not be the day you'll acknowledge any of it. I'll save us both the headache.

I know, I'm a big dumb meanybutt for focusing on important details that poke holes in your position, taking away any illusion of profundity this might give you, thereby robbing your very humanity from you at gunpoint. :(


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:
It's [near] mathematically impossible for [the player] to have thought about using the red liquid the first time around.


Totally irrelevant. Math has nothing to do with it. In a story, the character will do what the plot needs them to do. If the plot needs them to notice something, they will notice something. Almost everything that happens in fiction is far fetched, the key is just to sell it to the audience.

Trauma_ wrote:
Harry has known Cybil all of 15 minutes- he has no stake in whether she lives or dies, she represents a dire threat. To go through his magical black hole pockets and risk dooming Cheryl just to [possibly] save someone—as previously stated— that he has no stake in is illogical. To argue that any human being would ever do this is—yes, being a contrarian.


Of course he has a stake in whether she lives or dies... Harry is good human being. Especially the way Harry is presented in the story, as someone who seems to care about Lisa's fate as well even though she's someone that he just met, I don't think it's too unreasonable to think he might have an impulse to try to save Cybil.

Also you have to be careful bringing in "logic" into this sort of discussion. People do illogical things all the time. Characters should be written so that their actions have motivations, but in reality motivations can be complex and murky. It's not really about whether it's "logical" so much as whether it's credible and makes sense in the context of the story. And that is up for debate, but even that's an entirely separate issue from this discussion. Are Harry's actions well written? Can you even talk about whether it's well written when it's primarily meant to be a player decision and a game mechanic? Regardless of how you answer those questions, it doesn't necessarily say anything about what is a canon ending.

Trauma_ wrote:


http://alchemillahospital.net/keichiro-toyama-on-the-true-ending-of-sh1/

Looking at this again, it seems Toyoma is the one who says this, not Ito. But still, just as valid:

"I remember that I said “Good” was the true ending, because Good+ is a game’s game. Probably, Owaku remembered that and he wrote SH3 story as a sequel to “Good”.But, now, I change my mind and consider the “Good+” is a true ending."

Trauma_ wrote:
No one with working a set of eyes would find this argument acceptable. There's a term for that in fact. But anyways...


Of course it's acceptable. Fiction will used far fetched motivations like this all the time, when it needs a character to do something. Generally it's the writer's job to make it seem natural, and not to rely on them too much. But in small doses they can be fine, and I think especially within the realm of Silent Hill this is not all that far fetched.

And please... please... do me a favor, and stop it with the condescending graphics. I do not appreciate that. You are not helping yourself win the argument by having a big insulting graphic. All you're doing is being immature. I'm going to ask you nicely... please don't do that again.

Trauma_ wrote:
You had this argument with Ryan years ago, and ignored every piece of evidence thrown at you.


I didn't ignore a thing. If anything I was too exhaustive about replying to every single point he raises, when I really need to. I'll probably make the same mistake with you.

Trauma_ wrote:
And clearly today will not be the day you'll acknowledge any of it. I'll save us both the headache.


You could've saved us both the headache by not being so aggressive earlier. But you've chosen to be aggressive. If you really believe what you're saying so strongly, then answer my arguments. Explain to me why it doesn't matter that the red liquid thing is the way it is for game mechanics reasons. Explain how it has anything to do with what's "canon," in other words are you saying it's meant to be portrayed as impossible as a clue that it's not canon? Also, explain why they left it so open ended in SH3? Why didn't they just include a memo that mentioned Cybil had died, which would have been extremely easy for them to do?

Explain all that, please.

Trauma_ wrote:
I know I'm a big dumb meanybutt for focusing on important details that poke holes in your position and taking away any illusion of profundity this might give you. :(


You haven't poked a hole in anything. What you've done is trotted out an old, obsolete theory which was never meaningful in the first place. It's still just as meaningless now as it was then, but it has the added stink of being redundant, and useless to this discussion. All I've done is pointed out the holes in that theory, how it never made sense and never amounted to anything. You've taken great insult to that, I understand that.

But you really shouldn't. You don't need that theory. The red liquid thing is obsolete, even more meaningless now than it used to be. If you really care so much about canon, you don't need to overanalyze a minor detail in a plot point that is the way it is because it's a game mechanic. There are interviews you can pull from. There's an official guidebook with information that is in your favor. That's what you should be using.

This isn't a question about whether Cybil is alive or dead. Cybil doesn't exist, there is no body, she's a fictional character. Rather, this is a question about what the creators intended to be canon, and how we the players choose to interpret it. The actual game SH3 is vague on the point, intentionally, and the creators themselves seem to be divided on what actually should be considered the true ending. I think it's arrogant to try to close off discussion and insist on one point of view. Rather I think we should embrace the divide, and let people believe what they want.

Personally I don't care much either way. The reality is that Cybil didn't appear in SH3, and is probably "dead" to the series in the same way that all of the old characters are retired now. Kojima will probably do something completely different with the new game, and that's great. However, I do think it's cool how they left it open in SH3. I think it's important to point that out because I think it was a great decision. I love when fiction leaves little mysteries open ended, up to the player's imagination. I think we should celebrate that, rather than deny it.

Sure, the guidebook kind of takes that mystery away... and if you want to go along with that, it makes total sense. But I also think we don't have to treat it as gospel; Although I reference the guidebook a lot, I also try to make it a point to say that it doesn't necessarily have to be accepted as fact. One of the cool things about Silent Hill are the mysteries. I also think it's interesting that Toyama chooses his own canon ending, and I think that sets a great example for us. With regards to fiction, as long as something is left open ended, we can choose to believe whatever we want. That's the beauty of stories.

_________________
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've taken great insult to that, I understand that.

I have cheap shots for people who are condescending. You may be surprised to find that most people do.

You haven't proven how the theory is "obsolete", you've only said that it's obsolete, shit all over the debate, attempted to smear it on my face and declared victory. Just like you always do.


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:
I have cheap shots for people who are condescending. You may be surprised to find that most people do.


Of course I'm not surprised. I found you quite condescending from the beginning, and was actively holding myself back from making cheap shots, because I don't want this to turn ugly. It's only natural for people to feel this way, and I understand where you're coming from as well. If I was condescending, I apologize. I try to be polite, but it's really difficult to control your tone and how it's perceived. The same goes for you as well, so that's why I try to stay as polite as I can. The huge insulting graphics were a bit over the line, though.

Trauma_ wrote:
You haven't proven how the theory is "obsolete", you've only said that it's obsolete, shit all over the debate, attempted to smear it on my face and declared victory. Just like you always do.


That's not fair. I've talked at length about WHY I think it's obsolete, why it never meant anything. The important part is in the why. Remember that we're having a discussion about what is canon. There's two possibilities: either 1. you accept the author as the word of god on what's canon, or 2. you feel it's up for audience to decide for themselves.

Which are you, by the way? Just curious.

Supposing you're number 1. Canon is what the author believes is true. In that case, the whole red liquid thing would be meaningful only so far as it gives us an insight into what the author is thinking. But the problem is, it doesn't. Neither Ryan nor yourself have ever given any evidence that it does so. Furthermore, it's totally irrelevant in the face of ACTUAL evidence in the form of interviews and writings from the developers talking about what is canon. So if you're 1, then you have to concede the red liquid thing is completely pointless.

Supposing you're number 2. If that's the case, then perhaps you could look at the red liquid thing and make that your pivotal reason for deciding what is canon. That's fair enough. But that also means you have to completely drop the guidebook and interviews as evidence, and also concede that there is no absolute canon, and that whether Cybil is alive or dead is up to each individual person. Are you willing to do that?

_________________
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:
I try to be polite, but it's really difficult to control your tone and how it's perceived.

Tough shit <3. I realize I can come off a bit harsh, and I apologize for that- but that's what happens when you provide such delightfully condescending non-tributions.

Your strongest argument is against the semantic phrasing of but one point of mine. That it's near mathematically impossible for a first time player to guess what the red liquid does. If we were to test this hypothesis in a controlled laboratory setting, the results would agree with this. But of course, mathematics has nothing to do with that- right? In spite of the fact that 2 members of TS are on record as saying "Cybil is dead".

Whether or not Harry uses the red liquid is subservient to whether or not the player knows its use. This is something you're just going to have to accept.

This isn't something you can just explain away. You have insufficiently dismantled this very crucial blockade to your conclusion, opting instead to write it off as a "game mechanic", and "irrelevant". No one is falling for that. If you want to argue your case, you need to not be so disingenuous as to disregard evidence that contradicts you in favor of evidence that might back you up if you frame it properly.

For someone who claims not to be an adherent to the idea that Good+ is canon- you seem pretty virulent in arguing that its a possibility.

Quote:
Furthermore, it's totally irrelevant in the face of ACTUAL evidence in the form of interviews and writings from the developers talking about what is canon.

Like Ito's tweet about Cybil being dead and the guidebook telling us that the Good ending is "connected to the third game".

Quote:
But the problem is, it doesn't.

It totally does. If it were useless- you wouldn't be so desperate to get us to shut up about it.

I consume art because I'm interested in the object itself, as well as the connections (and breaking of connections) to other objects- not my own meta narrative where I can just disregard whatever and pretend a musician is playing a C when they're actually playing a D#. I'm actually kind of surprised your head isn't spinning from all that nonsense.

I'll spell it out plain and simple, one last time.

Just because you're given the option to, doesn't mean you're meant to. This is a concept even my 8 year old nephew can understand.

Why do you want Cybil to be alive so desperately anyways? I mean, let's not kid ourselves- you wouldn't be arguing so virulently if this weren't thecase.


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)
I like to look at hard facts, the simple truth is that any ending of SH1 that would mean SH3 could not happen, cannot be Canon, can it? How could it?

As for what the Author says... it goes in my opinion, how can you go against what the creator has said? (without whom the game would never have existed).

They were intentionally ambiguous on a lot of subjects to allow you to make up your own mind, but where they have given you something clear as to how something is, you can't really go against what they have said, it is their story to tell not ours.

If you don't want to believe something the Author says then that is your prerogative but you can't tell people that what the Author says is wrong (especially the original creators) because that is just ludicrous.

Who is anyone to contradict the creators????

I don't know if the writers singled out 1 particular ending as Canon, but if they did then it is IMHO, especially with a sequel involved.


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:
Tough shit <3. I realize I can come off a bit harsh, and I apologize for that- but that's what happens when you provide such delightfully condescending non-tributions.


People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. You've been just as condescending to me this whole time, and you're still making jabs at me with stuff like that "non-tribution" remark. Whatever way you're accusing me of acting, it's doesn't give you license to be a jerk. We can have this discussion, but there's no good reason for us to argue in anger with each other. Why don't we both agree to try being reasonable, nice people from now on. Sound fair?

Trauma_ wrote:
Your strongest argument is against the semantic phrasing of but one point of mine. That it's near mathematically impossible for a first time player to guess what the red liquid does. If we were to test this hypothesis in a controlled laboratory setting, the results would agree with this.


It's impossible to test the probability of a person's actions in a laboratory setting, even if Harry was a real person. But since Harry is fictional, that idea doesn't even make any sense. Fictional characters act according to the author's whims, depending on the needs of the plot. Not necessarily according to logic.

If a character's actions stretch credibility too much, you could call that bad writing... but bad writing doesn't necessarily have anything to do with what's canon. A badly written storyline can be canonical. A well written storyline might not. One thing doesn't have to do with the other. You don't get to choose what is canon based on your own common sense ideas about how Harry should act... only the author gets to choose what is canon.

Trauma_ wrote:
But of course, mathematics has nothing to do with that- right? In spite of the fact that 2 members of TS are on record as saying "Cybil is dead".


Yes mathematics have nothing to do with it, because that idea makes no sense.
The fact that some members of TS are on record about it is a big point in your favor, as I've been saying from the beginning.

Trauma_ wrote:
Whether or not Harry uses the red liquid is subservient to whether or not the player knows its use. This is something you're just going to have to accept.


What do you mean? Are you just saying that Harry uses the liquid according to what the player chooses? Isn't that obvious? I haven't said anything to the contrary, I think that was actually part of my point.

Trauma_ wrote:
This isn't something you can just explain away.


What isn't something I can just explain away?

Trauma_ wrote:
You have insufficiently dismantled this very crucial blockade to your conclusion, opting instead to write it off as a "game mechanic", and "irrelevant". No one is falling for that.


I'm sorry, but I honestly don't understand what you're talking about. You haven't established how the red liquid event demonstrates what the developers intentions about canon were. Where is your evidence regarding this crucial point? How exactly does it give us insight into what the developers think is canon?

Trauma_ wrote:
If you want to argue your case, you need to not be so disingenuous as to disregard evidence that contradicts you in favor of evidence that might back you up if you frame it properly.


Sorry, I'm not trying to be disingenuous, but I honestly fail to see where in this post you provided evidence that the red liquid event provides insight into what the developers think is canon.

Trauma_ wrote:
For someone who claims not to be an adherent to the idea that Good+ is canon- you seem pretty virulent in arguing that its a possibility.


That's not the case at all. It's more like the opposite... at every single turn, I've been agreeing with you that the quotes in the guidebook and interviews with the developers is strong evidence that they thought that the Good ending should be considered canon. There is no doubt about that. I'm not even trying to argue against that. All I've been saying from the beginning is that the red liquid thing is meaningless in helping us discern what is canon, in light of the real evidence that is present in the interviews and the guidebook.

Trauma_ wrote:
It totally does. If it were useless- you wouldn't be so desperate to get us to shut up about it.


Honestly, I don't really want to argue this with you either. But you're the one being aggressive about it, and I'm just the type of person who doesn't like to back down, especially when I know I'm right. Well, I guess that's true of most people.

Also, despite how hostile you are being with me, I honestly think that if we keep talking about this, there's a good chance you'll change your mind.

Trauma_ wrote:
Just because you're given the option to, doesn't mean you're meant to. This is a concept even my 8 year old nephew can understand.


This is very, VERY condescending. Even at my most irritated with you, I don't think I was ever this bad. Please don't do this anymore. I'm actually trying to extend the olive branch with you, I promise I will treat you with as much courtesy as I can from now on while still trying to make the points I feel are correct. Please extend me the same courtesy.

Now to answer this point... are you implying that the player is meant to choose the good ending? Obviously the good+ ending is meant to be hard to find, but what does that have to do with it being canon? Often in video games, there is a "true ending," and often that ends up being the canonical ending. Just off the top of my head, I recently played Steins;Gate (a fantastic game btw) and that is the case with that game. The true ending is the hardest to achieve, requiring a lot of obscure knowledge that the main character is not likely to know if we take it literally. Yet, this is considered the canon ending, as shown by the anime.

There are plenty of other examples like this in Japanese games. Usually the hardest to find, most obscure ending is the canon one. The obscurity of the ending is meant to be a game mechanic, so the fact that the main character wouldn't reasonably be able to find it shouldn't be considered evidence of what is canon.

So again... what evidence do you have that the red liquid decision was meant by the creators to convey that the Good+ ending is not canon? What's your basis for that reasoning, how does the red liquid ending convey this point? We know that Good ending is considered to be canon by some of the team members, we know that from interviews, but why is the red liquid decision as useful as those interviews? You haven't talked about that point at all, if you don't mind I would really like an explanation.

Trauma_ wrote:
[Why do you want Cybil to be alive so desperately anyways? I mean, let's not kid ourselves- you wouldn't be arguing so virulently if this weren't thecase.


I don't care if she's alive, and I don't care that much about what is considered canon. What I care about is people like the opening poster not being fed misinformation. That's all. There are good reasons to see the Good ending as the canon ending. Quotes from the guidebook and from interviews are those major reasons. But it's also important to point out that the game deliberately leaves it open ended, and that not all of the creators agree on what the canon ending should be.

Based on that, I really think that there's some room for alternative points of view, and I think we should all be open minded about it and not shut someone down for having their own point of view about the ending. I also think that's in the spirit of what the creators wanted for Silent Hill. That's important to say, and that's where I'm coming from.

Its Gone Now wrote:
I don't know if the writers singled out 1 particular ending as Canon, but if they did then it is IMHO, especially with a sequel involved.


You're right, but it's not quite that simple. We know from interviews that Owaku was basically told to write SH3 as if Cybil was dead, and as much is said in the guidebook. But Owaku also chose to leave this open ended in the game itself, and in the guidebook he says that it is meant to be left to the player's imaginations. Toyama said in an interview that he considers the Good+ ending to be canon. So what we have here is a bit of mixed message from the creators of the game.

I think the best way to makes sense of it is this: the game was written as though Cybil was dead, but this wasn't explicitly told to the player in the game because they wanted it to be open ended. The creators themselves consider it open ended enough that they can have a difference of opinion about it. So I think it's fair for us to make up our own minds.

_________________
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)
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 :( ).

All we really know for sure is that she hasn't turned up since SH1. She really COULD still be alive, I haven't tried to say that she definitely died or not, just that it seems more likely to me that she didn't make it. But either way is possible. Anyway there is a whole thread on this so I won't go into it now.

Every persons perception of SH is slightly different I think, even if it's just 1% of a difference it can seem like a big deal.

Yourself and Trauma_ both raise some excellent points.

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

It can get a bit heated when opinions are flying around, but I like that, you are clearly both very passionate about SH which is what this forum wants.

Ambiguity is one of SH's defining qualities for me. Something they have not done as much in the last few years, not explaining everything was what they used to do best.

When I look at the OG's post title, he says it is "his" Canon ending and not "the" Canon ending.


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

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


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: