Is Ashley Riot Keyser Soze? - June 15, 2000 - Chris Jones
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of
the participants and the moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the GIA. There
is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. And just like that - poof!
He's gone. Don't say we didn't warn you.
100.
100,000.
100,000,000.
That's a lot of freakin' zeros. As a console playing kid, I always knew Nintendo was
good, but this makes me a little afraid of them. Of course, if they were really clever
they'd have programmed all those Game Boys to rise up and take over the planet upon
receiving some sort of special signal, but I guess they'll have to make do with the sales
profits. Poor guys...
Onward.
He's a virgin, but knowledgeable. (He coded
his own HTML!) *VS spoilers* |
Hi there, this is my first time writing in. I'm a letters column virgin.
Be gentle with me. You know, I thought I fully understood VS, but given that everyone
who plays it has a different take on exactly what the hell happened, and given how good
the translation was, I think the game producers maybe kind of blew it. It's a tremendous
game, but the garbledness of the story should probably take away points from a 10/10
review.
Here is my take on what happened:
Sydney and Joshua: These are not the same person.
Evidence: 1. First of all, there is a short flashback that Sydney has, in which a
little boy sees a younger Duke and rushes to his arms. Since the Duke is much younger in
this scene, we can only assume that the boy was Sydney as a child, and not Joshua. If
Joshua and Sydney were brothers, it's not too much to assume Joshua would look a lot like
Sydney when he was a kid.
2. They're listed separately in the credits.
3. I think that the reason that Sydney's soul shows up as a little kid is that the Duke
saved him from sickness or death as a child by giving him the Blood-Sin and the power to
stay immortal. So, one might say his body lived on, but his soul never got any older. That
would be completely idle speculation, except you will remember that Sydney says, "I
wanted to help Father, just as he helped me when I was born." If you're observant,
you will notice that the Blood-Sin on Sydney's back is a bit skinny and distorted
lengthwise, almost as if it stretched with the skin as he got older. By contrast, Ashley's
Blood-Sin had the normal shape.
The Duke's motives: He was immortal too, and he wanted out. He also wanted
Rosencrantz to succeed to the city. However, Sydney was against Rosencrantz from the
start, which is why as soon as he found Ashley, he decided to test the new guy instead.
That also explains why Rosencrantz is immune to the Dark: he's been preparing for this for
years, only to have Ashley take it all out of his hands.
Evidence:1. In the intro, when the Duke speaks with Rosencrantz he says something
like, "Lea Monde is yours. Let no one out of the city."
2. When Rosencrantz confronts Sydney he says something remotely like, "You would let
the Cardinal have the city? Not after all I have suffered these many years!"
3. Later, before Kali kills Rosencrantz, he says, "You have deceived me,
Sydney?" to which Sydney replies, "I've done nothing so base. You deceived
yourself with a child's daydreams."
Ashley's family: He never had a family.
Evidence: How could Sydney and Rosencrantz both come up with the same story, if it
weren't true? Also, how to explain all those Break Arts and such, that are "retrieved
from Ashley's suppressed memory"?
Anyway, I realize this is long, but I haven't seen people pick up on a lot of this
stuff.
Cheers,
Albert Onyx. |
I'd actually argue the exact opposite about the strength of VS's plot. While total
incoherence doesn't have much appeal, many of the best films, books and games are those
you have to go to over and over again to get what really happened.
The point about the young Sydney being shown with a younger duke is strong evidence
that Sydney and Joshua are not the same person, but it's not conclusive. Still, if you
take into account that if Sydney were Joshua's brother, the young Sydney would look nearly
identical to the current Joshua, the elder brother theory works quite well.
As for the rest of your ideas, I'm skeptical. The Duke telling Rosencrantz to go into
the city could have been a ploy on the Duke's part to get rid of him - he knew Rosencrantz
would never survive. And Sydney could have pulled Rosencrantz's lie out of Ashley's head
to taunt him with, it doesn't mean Ashley didn't have a family. Still, good thinking,
former letters virgin. Was it good for you?
One less X-Box customer *VS spoilers* |
Ugh. This is now my third time attempting to write this letter. I hate
Microsoft. I'm not going to even bother with the Hardin/Sydney/Joshua thread. Instead,
I'm going to focus on the Rood.
*chides Chris for not paying attention during the ending*
Yeah, Guildenstern did get his Rood from Sydney; he skinned Sydney's back for it.
Pretty painful, I'd imagine. Guild (as I'll call him from now on; it's shorter than
calling him Guildenstern) then proceeded to put the skin on his back, claiming the Rood.
Does it remind anyone else of The Silence of the Lambs? I can imagine Guild using a
bayonet a la Buffallo Bill to skin Sydney.
During the entire game, Ashley had his shirt on. But, during the ending, when his shirt
was removed, he had a blood sin on his back. Ashley, though, did not claim the Rood from
Guild when he defeated him. Instead, Ashley already had a blood sin, a Rood Inverse. The
Rood Inverse is what Mullenkamp has on her back during the intro, and the blood sin emblem
on the cover of the Vagrant Story disc. Indeed, the Rood Inverse has a more Arabic,
flowing design, along with the fact that it is red in color. Sydney/Guild's Rood was
black, and the sword in the middle of the design pointed down.
Of course, the real question lies in how Sydney and Ashley recieved their blood sins.
During the game (I can't remember the exact point), it was said that the Inquisition
branded the blood sins onto the backs of heretics (and possibly felons? I don't quite
remember if felons were included). Of course, that practice has since fallen into disuse;
it would seem that Ashley and Sydney would be one of the very few people alive to have a
blood sin. One piece of evidence supporting the use of blood sins on heretics is
Mullenkamp; she has the Rood Inverse tattooed on her back. As the priestess of Mullenkamp,
and also a dancer, she surely would have been branded as a heretic.
Of course, that still doesn't explain why Ashley would have a Rood Inverse on his back.
During the flashbacks, the Ashley there wore shirts with open backs; his skin was clean.
Sometime between the death of his family and the current time, he had acquired a blood
sin.
Either this will be a loose tie that will be fought over in VS debates around the
country, or it'll be resolved in a sequel. There's still much about Ashley's past that
hasn't been explained.
Ugh. I think this letter was much better written the first time I wrote it. But there's
no helping that. IE screwed me over.
Noah Bayens.
Oh, and Tia is much hotter than Callo. Callo had two ratty looking dreadlocks on the
side of her face that gave her the feared 80s look. |
Your logic is good, except for one thing - while Ashley did wear a covering on his back
it didn't cover everything. I'm fairly certain Ashley did not have a Rood Inverse on his
back prior to beating Guildenstern, because it didn't show up in the early close ups. At
the very least, it's unlikely because there are many doors requiring the Rood Inverse that
Ashley can't open until the game is beaten through.
Mullenkamp is something of an enigma in the whole game - she's mentioned at a few key
points in the game, and it's highly likely the dancer in the opening is her. But who she
really was, what she did, and how she ties into the cult and Lea Monde is completely
unknown. A prequel centering around Mullenkamp herself would fit the pattern established
so far of being in the same universe as FFT and Vagrant Story, but not featuring the same
characters.
I don't think those were dreads, but curled ringlets. Either way, I don't care. I grew
up in the 80's, I think she's hot.
But aren't we all kinda transitory? |
Me, again...the almost middle-aged casual gamer. I read the remarks on
paganism in FF games; how Eurocentric!
Japan's underlying religious/philosophical tradition is Shinto. Certainly, most RPG's
coming from Japan have a European look and feel to them; some even incorporate pagan
symbols (such as the Pentacle in Chocobo Dungeon 2), but it's unlikely there are
undercover pagans running amok at Square. It appears that neo-paganism is one of the few
religions that has not gained much attention in Japan, which makes sense; with Shinto at
its core, Japanese society probably hasn't removed itself from nature as far as American
society has, so it has little need for outside influences to tell them how to honor and
respect the earth.
Anyway, many of the same themes we think are "neo-pagan exclusive" can also
be found in Shinto philosophy, except Shinto doesn't require it's adherents to dress like
extras off the set of Xena: Warrior Princess. What we're seeing as "pagan" is
probably seen as "Shinto" in Japan.
ImpermanentOne |
I don't know how summoning relates to Shinto, but from what I've read it is much more
of a naturalistic religion than Christianity. The RPG emphasis on the use of elements and
magic as a quantifiable but personal internal energy is also vaguely like the Shinto
concept of "kami" or spirit, if I remember right.
On the other hand, it's probably worth noting that many RPG conventions are derived
from Western games like Dungeons and Dragons or Ultima, including using various
mythological beings as enemies and allies. If anyone's ticked off about paganistic themes
in RPGs, perhaps it's the US rather than Japan they should be ticked at.
East is east, West is west |
A note on the growing amount of Judeo-Christian themes (angel
wings--everywhere). One has to imagine what non-Christians far away from North America see
in Christianity. Eastern religious thought is much different than the West. Over here we
asume religion equals God, but over there, religion is almost "atheistic".
Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism, have no supreme being, an physical afterlife, or even
a concept of a soul (divergent sects like "Shin" Buddhism don't count), and are
generally very different than religions like Christianity and Islam. The ugly parts of
Christianity jump out at a lot of non-Christians: the Crusades, lots of strict rules,
powerful and corrupt heirarchy (medieval Roman Catholic Church), etc. Eastern religion
is less conerned with rituals, prayer, and ceremonies, but with contemplation, meditation,
harmony, etc.
Take Christianity, if you change the names, and bring it back in time a few centuries,
and you'll have the perfect oppressive cult-like evil organisation.
Its all about perspective. Personally I think more religion in RPGs makes for cooler
plots.
As for Japan "making sport" of North American cultural icons, think for a
moment about what North America does with other cultures' icons. Baseball teams called the
"Redskins", comes to mind. We also treat tribal religion and polytheism like its
some kind of joke in our media, when there are still many people on this planet who are
Shamanists and Tribal Religionists. (Its not like there are no tribal religions left.
Here's some statistics, there are more Tribal Religionists then there are Jews, but who in
America would ever make a video game or movie with a fantasy culture ruled by Rabbis? If
the Tribal Religionists had access to the American media, I'm sure they'd get annoyed.)
Trevor *looks surprised at huge letter* |
For sure Eastern religions are based on different fundamental assumptions than Western
ones, but I'm not sure that excuses taking extreme creative liberties with other people's
shibboleths. Not that I think that line has been crossed yet, but as you say, angel wings
everywhere.
Nor am I trying to excuse any dumbass things the US has done as far as cultural
improprieties go (and damn if there haven't been a lot of those.) But that's exactly the
point - we wouldn't make a game with evil rabbis intent on taking over the world, and with
the exception of some ignorant rednecks I know, few people would make fun of "tribal
religionists". There's nothing wrong with putting a spin on a few sacred beliefs, but
after a while it's hard to not to take it as some sort of editorial.
He tasks me, but I shall better him |
Chris: I have been contracted by somebody claiming to work for your
archnemesis, to give you a question so difficult you cannot possibly answer it, thus
making you appear foolish in front of your millions of adoring fans. Bastard that I am, I
have taken up the challenge.
Here is the question:
I live in Japan and want a PS2. However, eventually, I will be going back to the
states, and I don't want to have to buy a second one when I get back, just to play
American games. I read on the GIA news that the first gen PS2's over here will play
American games, but that later versions were changed. I've also heard that the reason for
this is because of cracked DVD drivers stored on the memory card.
So my question is this, if I buy a PS2 now, but swap memory cards with someone who got
a first-gen machine, will my machine be able to play American games, or will I need to
swap the entire machine?
Lord Pendragon |
Hmm, Mr. Freeman has started to enlist others in his clever revenge plots. I salute
your branching out, sir.
As it is, the question is indeed unanswerable, since there are no American PS2 games
yet. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Sony was currently researching ways to make sure
the US encoding would work against the cracked drivers. Internal GIA opinion is that the
DVD and game lockout sections of the code are separate, and a mistake in one wouldn't
effect the other. If you speak Japanese fairly well, I'd get the Japanese PS2, otherwise
wait for the US version.
Independently moral *VS spoilers* |
I'd take you up on discussing the significance of the ending of VS,
except I already had my say, and having seen it to finally beat the final boss on Sunday
(heh) (...sigh), and the ending pretty much entrenched my opinion on the game, which still
stands: not a game about religion, but one about the importance of moral independence. =) <begin
spoilers> I seem to gather from the ending that somehow Sydney's soul found passage in
Ashley's body, and thus was probably able to transfer his powers to him. Sydney's soul was
finally released by using Duke Bardoba's dagger, which I would guess was the same dagger
Sydney attempted to steal back at the manor, and must have been part of the ritual binding
him to Mullenkamp when he was (must have been) a child. It also explains what the Duke's
younger son meant when he was thinking of Sydney: "He means to die". Sydney knew
that his father was about to die, and that there would probably be nothing to protect him
once his connection to the powers of the dark were discovered, and so he decided to die
and pass on his knowledge to someone who would be harder to track down (plus immortality
means there's never an end in sight when you're having a bad day). A worthy successor
indeed. Or am I totally off on this one?
It's actually pretty satisfying as an ending, as it seem to leave very little loose
ends. Still, I wonder, what happened to Merlose after her last scene? Did she go back and
report on what she saw? Did Duke Bardoba convince her to remain missing, or worse, had her
killed??? Or did she figure out Ashley didn't die, and make it her mission to try and find
him so that she could complete her investigation (fodder for a sequel, perhaps???)
On the more mundane side of things: anyone else wish that Ashley would have worn the
black trenchcoat/cape we see him in at the end throughout the game??? I guess something of
Sydney (taste in attire) did linger on... <end spoilers>
As for the chances of a sequel for it (or of FFT), it looks grim, folks (see Square's
firing of Masuno), which pisses me off. They own all the copyrights, and they may make one
someday, but I fear that without the same guinding hand... gulp. Ah, hell, there's always
Hoshigami to look forward to (if it ever makes the jump to these shores...)
This may be the one to get me off my butt, and go so far as to retrieve my master plan
for world domination, were it not for the thick layer of dust now collecting on my
binders... Wait... No one was supposed to know about that... ;)
Princess Jemmy, will plead the fifth from now on... |
Interestingly enough, some GIA staffers seem to agree with you about moral independence
being the main theme of the story. I don't get it myself, but it takes me a while for the
whole of a work to percolate up through my head.
I suspect Merlose just went back to her regular life after the game - she saw much of
the events in Lea Monde, but she was never more than tangentially involved. Her role
as an observer is rather fitting for an intelligence analyst. Her presence in a sequel
would be welcome, but as you say it's unlikely. On the other hand, I never expected to see
a sequel to FFT, but various subtle clues in the game (Agrias's Balm, etc.) make it clear
that Vagrant was a follow-up in all but name.
Final fight method #1 *VS spoilers* |
Earth ..pump up the earth .. and use your Break arts i kill him in under
20 mins easy .. i figured out how to inflick up to 100 damage a hit on him plus i know his
timing on his blood sin so i let him hurt me ..... its right when the screen zooms in on
you plus you can heal before he attcks you with it ... sweet you should try that if you
ever go back through the games new game plus (its worth the play) |
Unfortunately I only had the one save of VS, so I can't test this out, but those of you
still working through may find this useful.
I've got it, but didn't know I had it. |
Humor? Yeah, you've got it. You just have a slightly different style than
Drew's, and that one dude decided to be all up in arms about that. Now comes the real
concern: Why haven't you gotten any letters about Space Channel Five?
-Cedric "Lobst" Henry |
Indeed I haven't gotten any Space Channel 5 letters, and I'd say it's because of the
same reason I haven't played it myself - no time, too many other games. It's a shame too.
The presence of Michael Jackson aside, SC5 looks fun and well designed. I even like the
commercial, although the fluttering eyelashes is a bit much.
Final fight method #2 *VS spoilers* |
I agree he's pretty hard to damage, but there's one thing that his
defenses can't protect him from. Phantom Pain. Once you've learned all the Chain
Abilities, a new one becomes available. Phantom Pain does an amount of damage to its
target that equals the number of current phantom points in the weapon you struck with. So
say you've got a sword with 116/116 PP in it. If you hit Guildenstern with a Phantom Pain
from it, he takes 116 damage. I just killed Crimson Blades for Cranequins (for the range)
and used Instill to max out their PP. Take the best staff (yes, staff) and shield that you
have, boost out the intelligence on them both as well as you can, a manabreaker helps on
the shield too. Then wear those, wait to get hit, switch to a crossbow, hit him with
Phantom Pain, switch back to the shield and staff, and repeat. He'll go down in no time.
Figuring somewhere around 80 PP per crossbow, times 7 crossbows, that's 560 HP. He's only
got about 700 HP, so if your staff has 100 or so PP in it, there's very little left to
worry about after you're out of PP. A little reflected damage will finish him off quick.
Or, if you think you can get in range fast enough, you can bring other weapons with more
PP capacity. Zhakrin |
This sounds a little more feasible as a method for dispatching Guildenstern, but again,
I can't test it.
It's the Man keeping us down! (No, not
Gilgamesh) |
"Something is happening and you don't know what it is, do
you..." Mr. Jones, Even today, it amazes me how ignorant even well educated people
are about religion. One wonders why Christianity is so mocked? Because, for centuries it's
been the main religion of almost all the imperialist oppressors, from Charlemagne to Queen
Victoria. So now, in this era, it's chic to belittle it. What people don't realize is that
much of the time, those in power ignored the basic tenets of Christianity, and instead
twisted it to their own purposes in order to keep their subjects in line. It's the same in
the Middle East with Islam, in Southeast Asia with Buddhism, in India with Hinduism.
Instead of following the main teachings set forth in these religions (i.e. compassion,
respect, charity, humility.) the rulers, priests, etc. use the more violent parts to
subjugate their people and have their way. So, games like Xenogears actually validate the
main teachings of Christianity, and all other religions, while invalidating the various
perversions brought about by humanity's desire for power.
~Krelian (hoping this clears things up) |
There's a good bit of truth in the above statement. Despite the forms final enemies
take in various RPGs, the core virtues they embrace - bravery, loyalty, compassion, honor,
sacrifice - are fairly universal throughout most human cultures. I generally don't think
most religions boil down to the same fundamental assumptions, but within the context of
the relatively simple plots encountered in most RPGs, it works ok.
Fair trade |
I would sell my body parts for an Ashley Riot action figure. Who needs 2
legs? I've never been too partial too my kidneys either. Gilbert |
Heck, sacrifice your limbs to the gods. Apparently you get nifty clawed metal ones
after it's over. I might even do it regardless of the action figure.
Closing Comments:
Started playing LoM last night - looks great, but I didn't get very far since I forgot
to enter a name. I know a lot of people are nuts about renaming, but I'd just as soon the
game assign me one.
Got a huge amount of letters today, and still kinda shafted the 2D people even with all
I posted. Sorry 'bout that. But after all that debate, I'm looking forward to something
more lightweight tomorrow, so send me whatever you got. Space Channel 5, Paper Mario, LoD
rants, whatever. Later.
-Chris Jones, ranks as a Berserker |
|
|
|