Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-27524978-20160210030742/@comment-27701762-20160401205030

Realta8 wrote: Not exactly. Even when you're playing for the first time, reading his and Flowey's dialogue seem to imply they do have an inkling that this has happened before. I would assume it's due to the game limitations - it's impossible for a programmer to account for everything. Saying that Toby could not have accounted for everything doesn't actually further anything. In order for it to matter, we would need to demonstrate what Toby's intent is, so that we can show what he forgot to do. But given that Toby has been pretty damn careful in many places, it would be a huge oversight to forget something as important as this, especially as a way to show a key aspect of a character.

Yes, I agree with the sprite thing, but he actually points out Frisk's stoic at that point in time, several times, and that he finds that freaky. Your point was that Sans is potentially getting violent with Frisk when at the moment all he knows is that Frisk hasn't reacted to his joke, which means that Sans is potentially getting violent with a child that might just be stoic. This demonstrated that Sans has a baseline to compare Frisk to, so that he knows Frisk is "evil" this time around.

But Sans doesn't attack Frisk now. He attacks them after Frisk has demonstrated a, well, genocidal tendency, and appears incapable of being "saved" except by getting them to give up. There's no need for some sort of baseline to compare Frisk to.

And as I said, the only way this explanation works is if you encounter Sans and then reset the game before doing a Genocide run (whether this is by completing a Neutral run or otherwise). No character retains knowledge following a True Reset (except perhaps Chara), so Sans would not be able to remember after a Pacifist ending. So the only way this works is in a very specific circumstance.

He's too precise in what he tells you for him to merely have impressions. Toriel, Papyrus, Undyne, none of them are ever that precise, they talk about 'feelings'. Given your examples, I don't see what's so "precise," aside from the death count.

When you're fighting Sans, he's pretty stressed out. Considering how there are bones all over the place when he attacks you, he probably wouldn't have noticed if you died or just left. Flowey wants to outright screw with your mind, so he nitpicks. Sans only wants you to quit. In Flowey's battle there are a lot of bullets. In fact, a lot more than in Sans's fight. Yet Flowey is able to differentiate between quitting and killing. And Sans is messing with Frisk/the player just as much as Flowey. You even note later that Sans is trolling Frisk. So there is just as much reason for Sans to keep track of this stuff and make fun of Frisk for leaving as he does to keep track of deaths and make fun of Frisk for dying.

You can't quantify how many times a person has died by looking at their face. The first time, it would be plausible - you would see shock. The second time, frustration, maybe still some surprise. From the third onwards, you would only ever see the same expression, until it escalated towards rage. You can't simply say "Ah, you're just frustrated enough for this to be your fifth time". It doesn't actually make any sense. What makes more sense is that Sans is trolling you. It would fit his personality.

By that exact same logic we would need to say that the monster's magic attacks can't hurt Frisk's soul, since a soul isn't an actual heart nor can it be harmed through magic, and thus Frisk is never actually hurt. The rules of the game's universe are not determined by what you as viewer find possible. These rules are determined by the author. These rules are put in place sometimes for the sake of a broader agenda, and sometimes for the sake of narrative efficiency. In the case of Sans, if he does not have actual memory of these events, then he needs some way to count Frisk's death. Using facial expressions is not only suitable, but fits with Sans's previous dialogue. If you think Toby's use of facial expressions for this purpose is stupid, then I have no grounds for arguing against it. But saying that because you find the concept stupid means that there must be another explanation for events is insufficient as an argument.

I'll return to one of my earlier points with two fronts of attack. If Sans is trolling Frisk, and I agree with the premise, the trolling comes from killing Frisk and frustrating them. If Sans keeps saying that he is counting Frisk's deaths by using their facial expressions, then not only does he know it is false, but he knows that Frisk knows it's false. So it's adding nothing to the trolling. Likewise, if he actually remembers these events, then there is absolutely no need to refer to Frisk's expression if he is killed, and so the ruse should be dropped. But it isn't.

Have you ever noticed that almost always when he aludes to resets, he talks about Frisk's expression? He never gets "feelings" like the others. That's strangely convenient. In the beginning, when Papyrus feels like he knows you, Sans trolls him instead of being contemplative/agreeing, as if he didn't actually even have to consider the idea. (https://youtu.be/3Jn77RQg75c?t=13m26s) Indeed. And this idea fits perfectly well with the thesis that he doesn't have an actual memory, akin to the way Flowey has actual memory of the events. If Sans gets these same feelings that the other characters get, his awareness would give him a reason to look for indications of the timelines changing. That he looks for specific reactions fits with what the null hypothesis that he is just like the other monsters except that he has a special knowledge about the nature of those strange feelings of deja vu.

In your example of Papyrus, Sans does the same thing without having previously gone through the scene. The difference is that Papyrus says the rock looks familiar. Sans has to direct Papyrus toward Frisk as opposed to the rock in either case.

Meanwhile, when you re-encounter Sans when first entering Snowdin, he expresses surprise at Frisk's reaction (literally, he calls it weird that Frisk immediately turns around without waiting for Sans to tell them to turn around). If he had actually experienced this event before, he would know that he had encountered Frisk before, and thus would know why Frisk doesn't wait.

The two times I notice he doesn't alude to expressions are the screenshots I sent earlier (after Papyrus death), and when you spare him in genocide and return (mid battle). Those times he acts like he's absolutely certain of what you did anyways. There are probably others I haven't seen/don't remember. He doesn't refer to Frisk's expression in the earlier line you posted, but that line also doesn't indicate that he has an actual memory from another timeline. It is perfectly consistent with the idea that Sans has some vague feeling that Papyrus died in another timeline.

And Sans does comment on your expression if you attack him during the sparing sequence after being dunked on. His line is "woah, you look REALLY pissed off.../heheheh.../did i getcha?"

In fact, this sequence serves as better evidence for my position than yours. If he had an actual memory of the event, then he wouldn't need to ask if he "got" Frisk. By the same token, there would be no need to not "tell that to the other sans-es," since there are no other sans-es, properly speaking. Flowey essentially retains his identity across the timelines, and if Sans has the same actual memory that Flowey has, then he would essentially be the same Sans as well.

He also is clearly warning you about Flowey on your "first date". I doubt he would find it relevant to warn you about someone playing a prank on Papyrus. But he does so in a roundabout way, like he always does with the resets. (If you keep returning to Flowey in the end, you find out that Sans knew Flowey because he kept messing with Papyrus) I somewhat agree with this, or can agree with it. Flowey says that Sans was the cause of a lot of his resets, which means that Sans could very well have some vague impression that there is an evil "talking flower." But he would not need to exactly remember Flowey. In fact, by attributing it to a vague impression rather than actual memory, we have a better explanation for his decision to blame an Echo Flower, since that would be the clearest example of a "talking flower" in his normal life.

Also, you can reset just after killing Sans, before talking to Chara, without doing a true reset. He won't "read your expression". He does. I double-checked by doing it myself. The line is "that expression that you're wearing.../well, i won't grace it with a description."

Either way... I feel kind of embarassed for derailing this thread so much. So, we should probably keep it to the original subject.

I'm justifying this digression on the grounds that the Game Theory video relied in some part on Sans having the very knowledge that we're discussing.

I'm hoping that this is correct. Otherwise I have to come up with a different justification.