Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-31371445-20170222233857/@comment-27136653-20180708132935

"Where does the cyan flag say this? It just said you waited still, then dethroned Ball with a sharp attack."

It's a natural extension of patience.

"Wait, so you DON'T believe the six traits are all separate?"

But... I do believe that.

"You just did, though."

What? What part of this is a "conspiracy" to you?

"It'd be easier to just go there than to fake it."

It would most certainly be easier, the conspirators can tell you all about that.

"Now, if we have a contradiction, like I had pointed out about the plaques, then a conspiracy is the only possibility."

Or Toby didn't think it through and we're allowed to bend this material, finish his work for him. Improve upon it even.

"When it comes to Frisk."

It is self-enclosed because of the fact that it is practically aware of its own existence, you could say. There is no world beyond the underground, just the credits. There is no past, just the intro.

"How? If we don't contradict what has been established so far, we break nothing."

How can you do so and NOT break the rule, when the rule is, that the game is self-enclosed? What would be the point of "the world beyond?" It can't be a game, just an idea in your head that you may turn into a fan fiction, or a comic, or an animation, or a free to play game... but never an original Toby Fox-licensed game. Which is the whole point. Undertale is only a Toby Fox game. It can't be anything else. And theories... the lore, that was never the focus. You may do it for fun, but it's pointless. For the point is in the game as a whole, in how it makes you feel. Not in its lore.

"It does this because there IS a hidden story!"

The backstory can always be expanded upon by the fans. But there is nothing else hidden in there. We've probed the game throughout, we gave it a complete MRI scan. There's nothing. The game hides no backbone, it just sits in the form it does in for the sake of the player experience. So that it wouldn't be too complicated, but not too broken at the same time either.

"Why Frisk fell IS a reflection of us. Only we know. We're meant to roleplay Frisk."

Which is one of the paradoxes. Frisk has their own name. Can disobey our commands. Feels different about fighting than they do about any other action. Proof: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/373594290817073152/461269357713031189/Bez_nazvu.png

Tell me this. Why did Toby Fox do it so that we would actually question this? If we're them, then explain all of this. To me, it feels like Chara is the "player." Always striving for LV, for the "end", and moving on after the job is done. Sure, there's an in-game explanation to their psychosis, but that's not important. What they are right now carries its own message too. A message that is the polar opposite of Frisk.

"Exactly. Hence why I keep this in my theories."

Hence why your theories are a horrible amalgamate. Torn between fake and real. Shackled by the meta, jailbreaking the rules by disobeying the meta. Either go full in, or full out. You can't do both, it's pointless. Doing both at 50% is getting an F from both, at least by the EU school test standards. But it's not just that. You're not only fulfilling each approach at merely 50%, you're also breaking the rules of the inner one from 50%. The outer one doesn't care, the less you develop that one, the less creativity you have. But the inner one asks you to obey the rules, and you're breaking them by thinking of this GAME as a whole UNIVERSE or something.

You are trying to give a backstory to Rich Uncle Pennybags's parents over here, in essence. You are quite literally wasting your own time. I am at least putting my theories into use.

"Correction:Things don't have to work like our world-We are meant to use the game's rules, not our own."

Good luck when the game's rules start contradicting themselves. And I wouldn't be this doubtful if they didn't. It's full of loops requiring the employment of tremendous plot gymnastics in order to get untangled. And after you've got your dodgy backstory, dodged all the paradox pegs with it, you'll see that it's pointless. Too much information for such a simple game, for such a simple man. If this was Toby's focus, then why the game? Why A game? And if a game, this specific kind of a game, then why such a complicated backstory? (surely you won't find an easy solution to all the pegs; if there was one, we would have stumbled upon it years ago already)

You may use the game's rules, but you are forgetting one: a game is nothing more than its program. If you are using the game's rules, you are employing the biggest shackle of them all, the fact that it's merely just a game. The only way you can go past this, is to explain everything in this game without going meta. YES, even if that includes changing the meaning of lines of the characters. Surely they must have meant something else, of course they didn't mean the world is gridlocked and that there's some player in control of their entire world?

"That we are to accept by faith that what the story says happen DID in fact happen in that universe?"

That's like saying that 1 = 1.

"We really don't know that."

Well a judge can call a sentence even with assumptive evidence. Toby is no Scott Hawton. I am willing to bet real money on that.

"That would imply that it's sentient. And a game can't be sentient."

If you believe that a crash implies a character trying to lock you out of the game, then anything is possible.

"Yeah, all the evidence was already laid out. We just need to find them."

I have honestly no idea where else would you like to look.

"But I do believe the existence of the HUD, as with everything else "meta", has an explanation in the game's world."

I do too. I just like to scratch the part that looks like a game. If it's not a game, then there are no turns, no invisible slashes, no smashing of buttons / no buttons at all in fact. Although, I do believe the possibility of the buttons being laid out in one way or another. But not as actual physical rectangles. Hallucinations of rectangles? Maybe.

Idc that Toby said that all these things are canon. So they are. So what. It's not like I'm actually breaking this presumption, I'm just putting a different spin on it all so that it would make more sense according to the rules of the real universe, instead of the rules of a computer screen. If I wanted to make this according to the rules of a computer screen, I would say something like this:

Okay, so something somewhere is projecting the entire reality. Some ultimate supercomputer, a reality machine. That's how no one can be real, and how buttons can seemingly pop up around, people be locked into turns, while at the same time being as complex as us in the real life (if it ever comes to questioning their body composition).

But I don't believe that. I don't believe their universe is like from the movie Matrix, I believe that their reality is genuine. And I don't know of a genuine universe that would be able to cast and sustain perfect rectangles with text out of nothing, that just sounds like yet another computer thing to me, not as a universe with different physical laws or whatever you're calling it.

"Why I take Alphys' separation of DT and SOUL power for granted."

Even though other parts of the game suggest she may have been wrong on this one? I mean sure, don't contradict the game, and don't question it if the info is established seemingly for no reason (e.g. the intro). But if a character appears to be contradicted by an in-game rule? Or if a new piece of info comes to contradict the intro later on? Could it be, could it just be, that the character was wrong, and that the intro fed us false info for the sake of a plot twist or something? Such wouldn't be uncommon, mind you. If the intro were to be explained as a folklore or something (and that appears to be the case), then what if?

"If it's self-enclosed, the red trait MUST be shown somewhere within the game."

Uh... no? Gaster? The surnames of the monsters? The pre-war era? The missing monster history volumes? Shit's missing all over the place, and you keep telling me we haven't looked deep enough. Ask on /r/underminers, would you? There is no confirmation about the true nature of the color red anywhere in the game.

And if you're this quick to start making conclusions, then lemme make a few ones as well. We have ONE (1) correlation between DT and soul power, and we have ZERO (0) counterpoints. Nothing can strike away the fact that the more DT a being has, the more powerful its soul is. So let me just state that this is a confirmation.

Furthermore, Toriel reacting to us resetting the same way the other characters do, as well as implying she had already experienced a reload deja vu before is ALSO a confirmation that the other kids had the same powers as Frisk, proving it wasn't the HUD that struck Asgore down in our battle, as much as he himself.

But even outside this thing we're currently doing here, your belief that Toriel was merely having a Chara flashback, which JUST so happened to be identical to the deja vus the other characters were getting, is still incredibly foolish and petty. What exactly is preventing you from accepting this theory, in light of all this evidence, as a fact? I would understand the DT = soul power one being a bit sloppy, but this just makes no sense to me.

"There ARE things left"

There is nothing left. This game is dead. No one is playing it anymore. The only thing living on now, no, surviving, is the fandom.

"That's why not everyone believes it. But look at the evidence, and you will see that ONLY Chara can be the narrator"

Would you look at the evidence then too? Toriel did have a proper reload deja vu.

"So it IS possible to theorize based solely on canon!"

I never said you can't. But such theories cannot have a concrete answer. They just present the facts and let YOU make a conclusion out of it for yourself.

"excluding it will ruin the canon"

Then I change it. I won't just white it out, obviously. But we could get arbitrarily close while not giving in to the meta. The HUD may as well be canon, but the characters themselves won't notice anything, because I've modified it so much. I mean, personally, the most I will allow myself is the existence of the buttons in some form.

"The Barrier is, and always was, PAST the purple door."

Was it though? Sure, the wall blocking us from returning may have been a plot mechanic, but the purple door certainly wasn't. It looks the same whether the barrier is there or not. So I'd like to know an answer to this. Does the barrier like, disappear or something when you approach it too closely, while it looks white and hypnotizing from afar?

"You yourself said the lore and the meta aspects make one big soup."

So you will transform a soup into a soup. Good riddance there. The game is based on conditions. You make up universal rules and patch them with conditions. How is that any different again? We must allow ourselves fluidity. Everything in the real world, minus the quantum world, is based on fluidity, nothing is quantized. In Undertale, even the macro cosmos is quantized, apparently. And that's a sign it is a game. That's what we have to get rid of.

"Though my rational rule for what is just meta and what is actually canon is rather simple-What is and isn't addressed directly by the game?"

Technically, everything in the game is canon. So why are we still refusing to accept certain things as canon? Could it be due to our subjectiveness after all?

"I said fix the holes in YOUR theory."

There are no holes if you just look at it from a different angle. And who's to say what's right and what isn't here, where is the lore police?

"If the game addresses it, it's canon, otherwise, it's not. How simple is that?"

Too simple to bare any meaning. Besides, you've left out the category when something seemingly canon might not be canon, due to contradictions.

"It need not be the opposite of chaos-Merely something that puts an end to it, through accuracy."

And you said the word mayhem has a specific meaning. I guess it doesn't then. I guess it's just a synonym for a play, a game.

"Why would the game in general be considered as mayhem here, if it not be a part of the reflection of the trait?"

And why isn't it? And why wouldn't the game be considered as mayhem, if we consider mayhem as a synonym for a game, play, or a run?

"It's order because it "puts an end to the mayhem"."

Aaaaand now it is order again. Choose already.

"Why don't you let the evidence answer that one for you?"

Nah. I don't think Sans is retarded. He likes to crack funny bones here and there, that's all.

"Not attacking.. at all?"

Well you gotta attack eventually. So postpone it.

"I meant NATURALLY."

There is no natural way of doing that.

"Hence why I would consider the time stone as a better indicator of justice than the mind stone. You could look directly at the crime, as it happened."

Except, it doesn't move you through time, it moves things through time to you. But again, we get to the border issue. What's the difference between cyan and orange? They could be summarized as just inverses of each other and yet, they have different colors. Similarly with red and purple, if you believe that red is DT that is. And the same for green and yellow. Green is nothing but time. Yellow can be time, or mind. So naturally, it must be mind.

"It IS real. It's invisible."

Then why has he not stated so? We could have figured out that Asgore was a coward WITHOUT Toriel explaining it to us. I mean, take a look at the conspiracies we are threading over here. So if that happened, why did the invisibility explanation not happen? And even IF it was invisible, how come no one ever questioned it. Yeah, it's still a plot hole.

"His research with Gaster helped him discover these laws."

And how did Gaster discover it?

"But for the flower, who also has six SOULs?"

No exceptions. Sans said that 20 is the maximum. He obviously knows everything. Isn't that right? Besides, why would such a system transform the number 20 to the number 9999 upon absorbing 6 souls. Like, what kind of pseudo math is behind that?

"Besides, it matches our HUD exactly, in terms of layout."

He got great copying skills.

"At that point, there wasn't real psychology."

The middle ages would have been too late. I was thinking the late iron age or so. You know, 2000 minus 2000. The vedas already existed back then, so why not?

"Yes, Omega Flowey never tried to RESET.."

There, case closed.