Thread:ChildOfTheMoon3/@comment-5956954-20170516091426/@comment-26185073-20170516221021

Cheeseskates wrote: I recommend taking heed to my advice regardless. I can't fix the page myself since I am too busy with school, so it will either stay or conform. You otherwise have your own freedom. It must be filled with facts, not disputable speculation.

Anyways, my responses:
 * 1) Mettaton was a ghost. They became one with the machinery Alphys made. How to prove? Cousin of Napstablook and their diary entries, a ghost possessing a dummy and even becoming one with it, and Papyrus dubbing the ghost who Mettaton once was "HAPPSTABLOOK, THE HAPPY GHOST." Even if it is not confirmed, the conclusion has indisputable evidence in the game. (Never directly stated, and just there is just enough evidence if not more about Narrator Chara. Same goes for this)
 * 2) Alphys created Flowey. Asriel's dust sprinkled in the middle of the garden as stated during the walk through New Home, and Alphys was nervous to hear a tiny flower convinced Papyrus to meet everyone in the barrier room. From this, it can be concluded the game intended the player to see it was Alphys who created Flowey (as in Mettaton's quiz, Alphys also gets nervous from the protagonist choosing Asgore) as a gift. Gaster has the same amount of evidence, though more speculative (for example, the neater sentence structures can mean anything and the red faces in the last wall panels could also mean anything).
 * 3) Chara was not evil but misanthropic or possibly sadistic. That is in the past. They came back as some demon that gained power through feeding on someone's genocide and then destroyed the game world, killing everything. They are smart enough to know what "sentimentality" means, so they are smart enough to know killing is wrong, but they do it anyway. That is evil (About as evil as Asgore. Observing the possibility of Narrator Chara, as they literally narrate that run, they don't immediately go with it. It does take a certain amount of LV for them to find Doggo's death funny, so putting that in perspective makes it seem as though there is some corruption going on.)
 * 4) The narrator Chara theory can also be twisted to be seen as the protagonist thinking, reflecting or talking to and on themselves, being mostly extroverted. Sans is the only character in the game to see and mention the protagonist's facial expressions and body gestures and make responses without their oral input, so this acts as proof. (But the protagonist has no reason to monologue about the bed on the left, or call Alphys' opinion on an anime they haven't seen 'bad'. (note, Chara's name is on the save points. Even after you learn Frisk's name), so it can't really be twisted at all in that degree. Oh yeah, and the foreshadowing Woshua jokes. (which are included in the concept art of the memory montage in Asriel's fight.)
 * Everything else you can fix. I don't agree with what is said in the 6th paragraph's first sentence either.

I personally don't care because Undertale itself is simply too speculative as people look into these details too much. Undertale should be dead for having its endless speculatory nature backfire against itself. Overall, I would prefer no speculation unless there is indisputable evidence supporting the process of elimination, the abductive reasoning, or the general sight.