Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
10+. By default (especially in game theories), theories take information from the game and interpret it and then make assumptions.
11. I can't help it if you remember. If you click on the coffin and Chara (the name for the child you choose) is said something like: "On the lid there is a name. "Chara" It's empty. . . "
15. I'm not saying anything else! I'm even using that argument from you!
This is the main problem of your theory: You interpret the picture as if faces crossed out inevitably mean that they were killed by Chara. It may seem reasonable to you, but it remains a speculation. And since this argument continues to be used, I see black for your "I-use-only-canon-therese-why-is-everything-correct-and-verifiable! Theory.
3. the game world is now completely empty. Everything that lived there is dead. And I don't think a dead world matters that much anymore. Chara may have done the last murders, but if you killed the player all through the game, you would have done it anyway. And Chara would have absolutely no use killing you or killing any monsters at all if she intended to destroy humanity afterwards. And that's just because of the barrier. A human can only cross the barrier with a monster soul. And Chara didn't absorb a soul. She couldn't do that either. Only monsters can absorb human souls not vice versa.
That would also mean that Chara can't even use human souls because humans can't absorb human souls.
Sure, I can tell you another family murderer:
Flowey aka Asriel. In Pacifist he kills not only his father and mother by absorbing their souls but every single monster in the underground. In the end Asriel resets the time and only he and Frist know about it. Toriel herself says she only remembers how this little flower appeared.
Asriel (Gottform) wants to erase the timelines once and for all. Pretty close to destroying the world, isn't it?
So you consider it noble when monsters want to kill a little kid to get to the surface. Although this child has nothing to do with all this and (seen from the pacifist's point of view) no fly does what to suffer. You said yourself that the number of murders is irrelevant. Killing is always wrong. And it's wrong to kill with that, no matter why you do it.
Papyrus not really. I just wanted to point out that papyrus never wonders what could happen to man if he brought him to the castle. Worst-case scenario, he's an accessory to murder. And according to the law of my country, there is no ignorance to protect him.
Muffet calls you stingy and much more and makes assertions about the child although nothing is confirmed. Just because she doesn't know the allegations are false doesn't excuse the attempted killing. And she won't leave you alone until you buy her cookies or eat some from the spider bazaar. That doesn't make the reason for the murder any better morally justifiable.
If I stick to it Chara accompanies you with comments (no matter which route):
If you pay attention, there are sarcastic, amusing comments and generally TIPPS on how to talk to the monsters.
Nothing lived in the world before, you are responsible for most of it. And Chara doesn't "test" you by herself. She more or less tells you what you've done. That YOU destroyed everything (comes when you want to restart the game). In this case, she's acting like Sans. First she tells the player what you have done and then the consequence follows, which is that she reminds you again and again of your actions with the help of the picture.
And now there is a sentence that is as famous with Chara as her Jumpscare: When you restart the game after the genocide she asks you if you think you're above the consequences. And if you answer this with no she asks you what you still want here and there is silence again. For someone who kills to his heart's content everything that gets in front of his nose, this is such an inappropriate sentence that my neck hair is resisting me.
As I myself already indicated, your theory is 50% based on an interpretation of an image. The post-genocide picture can be interpreted just as well: "Hey, you did make the pacifist. But look, you killed them all before. Do you remember?" None of these interpretations are worth more or less. And an interpretation is never Canon. And above all in this comment you have clung to the picture!
My final result of my theory is this:
Every character in Undertale is responsible for morally reprehensible acts. This does not exclude Chara in any case! However, there is no antagonist in Undertale. The question of this role is left to the player. This freedom of roles is Canon, as it is explicitly made clear above all in the trailer.
Also no, unless very specific circunstances are met, sans is extremely weaker than toriel or asgore, with no kr at all, he would deal 3-5 damage per turn and thats it (only one if we use game mechanics and not logic, as monsters only suffer 1 tick of damage even if hitted several times in a single turn, and that dam,age is calculated with atk-def), and, with kr at full power, affecting the monster exactly as much as it affect chara, it would deal 120 damage in the first turn, and about half that much the next 2, and 120 again the enxt one, giving that he can dodge 14 attacks before falling he could deal between 240 (the monster he is facing shoot more than 24 projectiles in 3 turns) and 360 (the monster he is facing needs actually over 4 turns to shoot 24 projectiles)
Sure, thats a lot for a 92 HP human.
For a 680 HP papyrus, or 1500 HP undyne, thats not enough, by far.
Even if we assume the monster they are facing killed over 100 monsters with absolutely 0 increase in their stats (which is an extremely unrealistic scenario, but absolutely needed if we want sans to defeat froggit, for example) sans still get crushed by every single boss fight in the game
Canon wise, using 100% monster game mechanics, sans will deal 1 damage per round, and that would be all.
Remember, monsters and humans dont attack in the same way or defend themselves in the same way.
+
Still, to avoid entering a loooooong debate about sans power or weakness, i will simply quote toby fox and their "boss monsters are the strognest breed of monsters"
Its canon, its not up to debate.
10 indeed, thats why by default they have no weight at all, they take something from the canon, and manipulate it in non canon ways.
11 Ok, ill believe you, really.
It makes no difference, chara isnt going to be a better or worse person just because they have a customized coffin.
I concede to this.
15 its not speculation at all, stay with toriel and watch charas laugh and red glint in their eyes, the game directly shows you chara takes control of your body and let an evil laugh before the picture with the crossed faces appears on screen, quite explicitly i must add. And that scene is invariably AFTER you see with your ownh eyes what kind of stuff chara does when laughing like that and "putting that creepy smile" as flowey says.
The only thing it doesnt directly show is the killing strike.
Still, even if you dont want to adress this despite being 100% canon, asgore murder, flowey murder, your murder and the entire world full of innocents murder is still on-screen and verifiable directly.
3 No, the world isnt empty, alphys is alive and safely evacuated, pretty much every civilian ever from snowdin+waterfall+hotlands+ the core+the capital city are completely safe, secured and evacuated, thats over 30 monsters we directly saw on screen (roughly 1/5 of the observable population) and, on top of that, al npcs you dotn even get to see, like those sleeping at the inn, those on the hotel behind closed doors, everyone on the houses next to the rock family, etc.
over a 20% of noticeable npcs are still alive, not to mention those you cant actually see.
Yet she still destroys the world, and then.
Flowey ONLY absorbds their parents souls in true pacifist, in neutral, both toriel and asgore souls are broken, not absorbed.
Asriel wants to force you to repeat the game so you dont leave, a plan with absolutely 0 killing involved.
How is that comparable to destroying the world?
Indeed, killing is bad, thats why asriel god of the hyperdeath, who dont want to kill anyone and dont kill anyone (he just want to force you to play the game from scratch) isnt.
I dont know why are you so insistent on that, asriel never kills anyone, if he lose, he return all souls, if he wins, he reset and return all souls.
Papyrus is too innocent, yes, he would be an unknowing accomplice, still cant see how papyrus actions, regardless of him saving or killing humans, are relevant to chara.
Muffet tried to protect her family from being tortured and murdered, and thats noble and heroic.
Killing someone to protect your family isnt bad, its heroic, she truly si a spider hero
And she won't leave you alone until you buy her cookies or eat some from the spider bazaar.
Thats totally false, even if you never ever bought anything, she lets you go in the end if you dont kill her.
I already told you, she was protecting her family, as soon as she realizes you arent a threat, she lets you go.
The comments arent necessarily chara, it isnt canon unlike the genocide and post-genocide murders. But as i said, even if the comments are really chara, it changes absolutely nothing, their actions overcomes their words.
Then, again, if thats the case, justify the 2 possible post-pacifist endings.
Remember that this:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWidPoYUAAAtRbz.jpg
Is a 100% official piece of undertale merchandise.
Watch asgore face, or toriel face, or undyne face.
And now tell me they are happy.
That drawing is official, from the official store.
It is totally and absolutely canon chara murders everyone in every ending they can act.
And you still have to justify that, im still waiting.
My final result of my theory is this:
Every character in Undertale is responsible for morally reprehensible acts. This does not exclude Chara in any case! However, there is no antagonist in Undertale.
Im not saying that chara is the antagonist, i never said that.
I said chara is evil, nothing more, nothing less.
That was totally unrelated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llMVqHDemUs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYHXpdNqdGs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uY1Eyk8frk
The last links belong together!
The store is fangamer, and the merchandise sold there is personally approved by toby fox, and also featured in his twitter, you can actually see fangamer undertale merchandising announced in Toby foxs twitter, and he gets a very nice cut out of every sale.
It is part of the official merchandise from the official shop.
https://twitter.com/tobyfox?lang=es
So tou can check for yourself that the merchandise is 100% official and have his approval
Okay, the merch is and approved by Toby Fox. No matter if he has confirmed this article as part of the Lore or not, I will include this picture. I had to think long, very long. I almost thought you destroyed my theory (which is hard since it's a THEORY). But now I've found a solution:
After this long debate, we were able to crystallize two main arguments against Chara:
1. Chara probably kills the surviving monsters by destroying the world.
2. that ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ photo you're clutching tighter to than the monster kid on the cliff.
And here I have a solution that is 100% based on the game itself and can solve these two problems (at least as far as point 1 is concerned. Point 2 has about 80%).
This was the hardest problem and made me shake a lot. But for the solution I only needed one question:
What kind of world is Chara destroying? To establish this, I need a basic hypothesis that can be fully confirmed as Canon:
Some characters in Undertale are aware that they are in a game and have the ability to influence that game.
And there are only three characters who can obviously do that: Sans, Flowey (and Chara). Chara's in brackets because we'll need her later.
But which mechanics of the game influence Sans and Flowey exactly?
The answer for Flowey is relatively simple: Time. The manipulation of time is ironically also the ability of the player. He and Flowey are capable of talking the game and putting everything on track. The normal "reset" only works 95% completely. This is shown by the fact that many characters experience a Deja vu experience. The perfection of this ability is the True Reset. He's completely resetting everything. According to Flowey, it has resetet hundreds of times and in its Omega form can even jump between specially created save files.
But what influence does Sans have? In any case, it should be noted that Sans cannot possibly influence time. Although he knows the concept behind it, he does not share Flowey's ability to remember the events of the previous run. In this respect, he behaves like other monsters.
But Sans has another ability that he uses to manipulate the game: Sans can influence the space.
And this is what the bone bag shows us when it uses a shortcut. It's not magic, which is the same for Flowey. It's more about the physics of Undertale and actually any physics of video games, which you can observe especially well in other games from a bird's eye view.
To better understand Sans ability we take a look at the first Zelda. What is important here is not the game itself, but what happens when Link changes rooms. Here's a simpler explanation:
Due to technical limitations at that time it is impossible to build up the whole upper world at one blow. The solution to this problem is map splitting. The map is divided into small individual pieces for this purpose. Here is an example:
Link is located in a specific room. The other areas you can reach by entering the exits at north, west, south, east. But the other areas don't exist yet. These are stored disordered as program and graphic parts in the memory. If Link leaves the room, the one he left behind will be "deleted" and the next room will be generated only then.
Now it comes to the interesting part. The rooms are of course not geographically ordered due to their storage form. The game basically does the following: Link is located in the room with the address A1. It goes to the left output, where the "charging zone" is located, which only leads to the room with the address A2. A1 is "deleted" A2 is loaded.
And that's the principle on which Sans ability is based. This "mechanics" is still used today (especially in 2D games). You should notice something. As soon as you leave the room with Frisk, the picture turns black for a short moment. At that moment exactly the same thing happens as in the Zelda example (only faster and larger rooms are possible).
If you watch Sans closely, you'll notice this:
He "teleports" only at the following events: If it leaves the area through one of the "outputs", generates a loading sequence (black screen) itself or disappears from the visible image. To teleport himself, he simply exchanges the addresses of the respective areas.
We would have an example if you went to Grillby´s with Sans. He's going right with you. Actually, the game should think: Okay, delete "Station Room" and load "Waterfall Room". But instead you land on the map part that we just call "Grillbys Inside". Another indication is the fact that it looks like you just came out of the loading zone of the door.
Now you're probably wondering: What's this exact description of Sans ability for? What does this have to do with the destruction of Chara's world?
A lot! By manipulating game mechanics from characters of the game and generally breaking through the fourth wall, Undertale shows that it is nothing more than a video game in both mechanics and story itself!
This is inevitably Canon, since the mechanics of the game itself have a decisive effect on the story (see Omega Flowey). This means that Undertale has always worked according to the "physical" rules of a game.
The question of what kind of world Chara destroyed is clear: The game world. But not everything you might believe at first.
In the Zelda example I have already discussed the existence and deletion of spaces in a 2D game (3D is much more complicated). And the question of what destroys Chara von Undertale is a question of the existence of areas or spaces in the genocide run. Because there's a room you can never enter in the genocide run: The room in front of the barrier.
And now it's getting very interesting. Mettaton says in the genocide run to Frisk that Alphys and the remaining monsters flee to the barrier. So the question arises: why there of all places? It's not like they can all escape through the barrier (with one of the human souls at Asgore, a maximum of 6 could escape). That quote even brought me to this.
Now a question arises in game physics: Do alphys and these monsters physically exist in the genocide run? The answer is no! You can search the whole underground for them you will never find! The only place they could be, from the story point of view, would be the room in front of the barrier. But it exists in the genocide run. To exist, this room must have been entered at least once in this run. But this is not even planned in the genocide run! Sans itself is the proof that Undertale works according to these spatial laws. What does that mean for Alphys and Co. ? You have left the game world that can be captured by the player.
And now to Chara: She clearly meets the criterion that she is aware of being a part of a game: she talks directly to the player and knows about values (like sans) that wouldn't make sense in our world.
So what did Chara destroy?
Problem two:
You're still interpreting an image. The only difference to the original are the desperate faces of the monsters. It's just a detail supplement.
Let's get back to my interpretation:
The image is intended to show the player what he has done before. Chara takes control of the game, because after the genocide she thinks you don't deserve the happy ending and "rewards" you with this picture.
And if the monsters in the picture now still look desperately, this actually only strengthens the impression which this picture is supposed to give. And if Chara now has control over the game, the "distortion" of a photo is not a high art.
Asgore/Flowey assassination special problem solving:
This point is absolutely debatable, but possible:
In this solution I would now like to try to acquit Chara of all her alleged murders. Although my solution is very appreciative in nature:
At this point, the point that killed Chara Flowey and Asgore must in fact be completely revoked.
I have in fact based this assertion on the following basic thesis: Frisk is a "doll" through which the player interacts with the world. I looked at several LPs and came to the conclusion that this thesis is so wrong. The following evidence is important for this:
Normally, an exclamation mark appears when Frisk encounters a monster. In the genocide run, however, it changes to a smiley.
And so I come to the following thesis: Frisk develops a personality in both runs.
To capture this more precisely, I compare Frisk with Chara. Frisk doesn't show any character traits of her own. This manifests itself in his indifferent gaze. Up to this point the old thesis is actually supported.
But I'm using Judgement Boy to help me with this. A thesis of them assumes that the player more or less "educates" Chara by showing her what he thinks is right and what not. However, I reject this education which is so practiced on Chara. Chara has too much character of her own for her moral understanding to be reversed so quickly. But what about Frisk?
He hasn't got much character. It would be a lot easier to influence him that way. So I come to the following statement: Not Chara, but Frisk committed the murders of Flowey and Asgore himself. There are two things that would speak for it:
1. the smiley instead of the exclamation mark: it Might mean that Frisk likes it little by little to kill monsters
2 Unlike Chara, Frisk has a physical form. Chara can obviously only do this after Asriel dies. That means she couldn't have hurt anyone before.
The information whether Frisk develops a benign personality is rather poor: Frisk lives happily together with the monsters. And Frisk pats his back in the embrace without the order of the player Asriel. This hardly says anything concrete. But it doesn't weaken the genocide side.