Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-31371445-20170222233857/@comment-27136653-20181116180416

"Where did Sans mess up?"

He's got all these amazing techniques... maybe he's just too lazy to use them as efficiently as possible.

"That's simple-If they did, the monsters couldn't cross either."

I meant something more obvious. Use your imagination: lure them into an inescapable trap and then take their soul. Maybe, I dunno, employ Alphys to be the gatekeeper, and entrap the venturer if they're a human... and let them pass if they're a monster. Simple.

"Undertale ISN'T our own reality."

Obviously. But there's a limit to the things you can tweak. Give in to nonsense and there won't be an arguement I could use against your reasoning. (I'm finding an analogy with a concept in neural networks called "overfitting" - you can achieve 100% accuracy, but your network's predictive ability will be crap. Similarly, you can think of an ad hoc solution that would explain how the UT world functions exactly how we see it, but in result, it won't be more than a simplified description of the game's code, with 0 predictive abilities concerning alternative scenarios... quite a crappy theory of everything.)

As a story writer myself, ad hoc explanations drive me crazy. So logically, so does the HUD. It cannot possibly exist exactly how we see it, because it's too abstract. If however the level of abstraction isn't important, then think about how it came to be. Evolution, augmentation, or ad hoc procreation? Evolution doesn't seem to be the plausible solution, and the "this is how the world simply works, deal with it" argument is laughable when compared to the augmentation hypothesis, which at least gives AN explanation, as opposed to NO explanation.

That's my point. That the "simulation" hypothesis > "this is how it is" hypothesis. Because it's simpler. Instead of assuming a plethora of grand univesal laws, it assumes a computer program, located within a universe of pre-assumed laws, i.e., the laws of our own universe, which need not be assumed.

So... if you do favor the idea that Gerson's cave is the reason Frisk can't touch him, as opposed to an arbitrary cosmological law, kudos to you. And if we do so for everything that might resemble the simulation hypothesis, we will in effect completely dunk the simulation hypothesis.

"In my take, the SOULs are in fact the main cause of the system."

Instead of the soul literally dancing about on the interface, we could A it. E.g. when you're selecting in item, that heart isn't your actual soul. Because we don't need to assume that it is.

Also, I think the items CAN be physically held. Have anything to say about that guy holding the spider donut next to Muffet's shop in Hotland?

"The rule about mentions is mentions within the story PERIOD."

Huh? What do you mean? He doesn't mention it. He doesn't mention you resetting during the final fight if you do so. Of course you need to fight again. But you have escaped the fight nonetheless. He should have commented on that. Or even better yet, should have left a comment if you were to decide to reset instead of reload.

"When was the message sent to Toby? Also, Toby has done exactly what you just laughed at the idea of him doing... With Omega Flowey."

Somewhere in 2016 if I recall the date of the post that image came from. And if YOU recall, Toby programmed everyone's movements. Yet he chose not to fix them after wards. He also programmed an autosave for Omega Flowey. Yet he chose not to fix Asriel. You get my point? He no longer wants to touch the game, even if the fix is easy and obvious.