This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

worst story of final fantasy

#61NocturneDreamPosted 3/16/2012 4:01:01 PM
ChaosArbiter posted...
NocturneDream posted...
Irvine, Cid, and Edea don't know Laguna personally and wouldn't be able to verify if Squall was his son.

Learn some reading comprehension, would you? He's countering your argument that they wouldn't remember a second individual named Squall.

Ellone only mentions 'a child'. If it was Squall then why didn't she just tell him upfront instead of being so ambiguous about it and saying 'a child'?

Possibly because she didn't feel it was important for Squall to know (or even just at that point in time), possibly because she wanted Laguna to tell Squall himself.

The point is, there are pretty much no named individuals who are not important in some way. If they have a name, they have some importance. The Ultimania names a character - the child of Raine and Laguna - as Squall, and there is only one character named Squall in the game. Therefore, that character is the child of Raine and Laguna.


If the facts don't explicitly state it then unfortunately it doesn't matter. All these assertions really amount to is fanfiction unless said explicitly otherwise by Square Enix.
#62Zadios765(Topic Creator)Posted 3/16/2012 4:25:40 PM
If only it was possible to kick people out of topics because NoctureDream is an idiot
#63RaiuPosted 3/16/2012 4:33:47 PM
So you refuse to believe that the only person named Squall in the entire game is the same Squall who Square explicitly said is Laguna and Raine's son, but you will believe in a bizarre theory you came up with about there being multiple Squalls at the orphanage (with nobody who was at the orphanage or within Square-Enix who will talk about or even hint at this mysterious "second Squall")?

... is this Joshua? This is exactly the sort of reasoning he used in his "theory" topic.
---
-Raiutaryuu-
#64manmousePosted 3/16/2012 4:58:27 PM
oh my god
#65fireinthewrongholePosted 3/16/2012 5:06:25 PM
If the facts don't explicitly state it then unfortunately it doesn't matter. All these assertions really amount to is fanfiction unless said explicitly otherwise by Square Enix.

Zell might not be human unless Square Enix says otherwise. He could be a moomba for all we know.
---
"Im not stupid. GAMEFAQ's PLEASE CLOSE THIS TOPIC SINCE MY QUESTION WAS ANSWERED!"
- bes4360
#66ChaosArbiterPosted 3/16/2012 5:09:34 PM
NocturneDream posted...
If the facts don't explicitly state it then unfortunately it doesn't matter. All these assertions really amount to is fanfiction unless said explicitly otherwise by Square Enix.

In other words, you're arguing for the sake of arguing. In shorthand: trolling.
---
Inside Burt Gummer is an Ork. The Ork is not trying to get out. It's damned happy to be there.
Hinamizawa: Where killing your friends is always the answer.
#67FeralGrieverPosted 3/16/2012 5:12:43 PM(edited)
Raiu posted...
... is this Joshua? This is exactly the sort of reasoning he used in his "theory" topic.

I remember reading his “theory” in the archived topics :)

At least NocturneDream hasn`t claimed that we all believe in him/her and are just not capable of admitting it
---
Love your enemies... It makes them so damned mad
#68NocturneDreamPosted 3/16/2012 7:28:22 PM
Raiu posted...
So you refuse to believe that the only person named Squall in the entire game is the same Squall who Square explicitly said is Laguna and Raine's son, but you will believe in a bizarre theory you came up with about there being multiple Squalls at the orphanage (with nobody who was at the orphanage or within Square-Enix who will talk about or even hint at this mysterious "second Squall")?

... is this Joshua? This is exactly the sort of reasoning he used in his "theory" topic.


I'm not refusing to believe anything.

I would like for Squall to be Laguna's son but unfortunately we must go with facts and not random assertions even if there is strong evidence for it. There is no proof that Squall is Laguna's son, unfortunately, because the game never explicitly states as such. So we can't just presume to know because there are no concrete facts to support it. Just a strong likelihood.
#69ChaosArbiterPosted 3/16/2012 9:07:11 PM
NocturneDream posted...
There is no proof that Squall is Laguna's son, unfortunately, because the game never explicitly states as such.

There is one character named Squall. A character named Squall is explicitly stated to be Laguna and Raine's son. Since there is only one character named Squall, that character must be Laguna and Raine's son. This is not "strong likelihood" or "strong evidence" of something - this is literally the only possible result of the explicit statements given.
---
Inside Burt Gummer is an Ork. The Ork is not trying to get out. It's damned happy to be there.
Hinamizawa: Where killing your friends is always the answer.
#70NocturneDreamPosted 3/16/2012 11:06:12 PM
ChaosArbiter posted...
NocturneDream posted...
There is no proof that Squall is Laguna's son, unfortunately, because the game never explicitly states as such.

There is one character named Squall. A character named Squall is explicitly stated to be Laguna and Raine's son. Since there is only one character named Squall, that character must be Laguna and Raine's son. This is not "strong likelihood" or "strong evidence" of something - this is literally the only possible result of the explicit statements given.


Oh, very well. It's still non-demonstrable though.