Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-32182236-20190716003715/@comment-27136653-20190805145552

Sans not utilizing his hacking skills is not a contradiction, since there are no two contradicting statements. Just because he knows those skills doesn't mean he uses them all the time. It could even be that he couldn't use them in that specific situation.

The reason we tend to reject the hard mode conspiracy theory is because it's just too ridiculous. I always tend to sprinkle some of my personal judgement into my theories, because I know which theories are likely to pass and which are not. I mean, it's alright if you're just creating your own interpretation of the story. But if we wanna deciper Toby's ideas, we must factor in both him, his past, and also our common sense, and mix it all together.

I also disagree about Flowey. Different things can happen across different timelines for seemingly no reason. If we assume that this is not necessarily unique to the changing FUN value, we could also argue that Flowey's change in behavior in hard mode is due to the effects of this specific timeline.

Speaking of our own senses, Undertale is a videogame, so we can only use our eyes and ears. But that's what we've been doing up to this point, so mentioning it is pointless.

If a given character mentions a given thing, then yes, it is safe to assume that from that character's point of view, the thing in question is real. The actual question is, is the character itself real in this specific circumstance, is this specific part of the game, this scenario, real, or is it a mere mask? I am mentioning masks which conceal the true nature of a given scenario, because it's the only way to explain how can something be different from the way we see it, which is a common argument regarding stuff that doesn't exactly make sense in UT.

My own opinion on all of this is, we cannot use the full exent of the scientific method for Undertale. Rather, we can only make observations about the game and then assess the absolute truth about them based on evidence from a different part of the game. And if such assessment is impossible, then the problem is left to our own individual interpretation.