Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-27997069-20160317174518/@comment-28064260-20160409065433

Isthereaplace wrote: I don't clearly understand where we are going, but I try to progress, and assume that Chara is meta. To make it clear, I don't yet believe they are, and right now, I don't care either.

The first thing to examine is whether meta-Chara influences the theory, and the answer is probably. A meta-Chara who identifies as a separate self, would obviously disprove that they are the player. On the other hand, a Chara who identifies as the player's in-game representation, would only raise further questions. Is there anything else in going meta, besides that it is a pretty straightforward way of trying to disprove the theory, without being too risky?

Now, I have already mentioned that I acknowledge two forms of validation, which is probably more than most people do (and definitely more than most people mention). Please try and collect evidence that is not influenced by what player believes, or choose a path that I find appealing. That is, if you actually want to validate your ideas to me. I don't see anything risky, assuming you're not trivializing this word.

So you don't like how Chara is intended to reflect the player. Well, not my problem. Still open to questions and arguments though, as long as I don't have to repeat myself.