• Hello everybody! We have tons of new awards for the new year that can be requested through our Awards System thanks to Antifa Lockhart! Some are limited-time awards so go claim them before they are gone forever...

    CLICK HERE FOR AWARDS

Why is Aqua so popular?



REGISTER TO REMOVE ADS
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ikkin

Bronze Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
1,517
Not exactly, the last thing we see before Vanitas fuses with Ven is that he knocked out Aqua, and that Mickey was getting closer to them.

If anything, the more obvious assumption is that Mickey intervened somehow. Saying "our union was interrupted" wouldn't automatically spoil Aqua's story at all.

... What purpose does this serve at all? "Oh well, Kingdom Hearts is confusing anyway" doesn't mean you use convoluted and counter-intuitive arguments when discussing it.

Okay, that's a fair enough point about Mickey.

I'm not sure what you're asking in the second paragraph there.


"was never completed to begin with" was already said in other words. He said "Our union is not finished", not "interrupted".

But that contradicts with "broken," hence being ambiguous.


Also, what did Vanitas do right before fusing with Ven? He just blew out their entire plan, he told Ven what the Unversed were, what their purpose was. His character wasn't deceptive at all at that point, he was proud of accomplishing his purpose. Arrogance is definitely more a part of his character than deception. In fact there are hardly any scenes where he tries to deceive Ven with out-right lies.

Most of the time he is telling him the outright truth, that Terra is no longer going to be himself. Followed by testing his strength, telling Aqua that she's "a backup" in her scenario, revealing Ventus's past to him along with MX.

If anything, the only real lie he told was "I'll choke the life out of Terra and Aqua", as he didn't intend to kill Terra.

But if he's that arrogant, why would he admit to, essentially, failing? Bragging about his successes is a very thing than giving details about his failures. =P


The dialogue in the dive scene served to clarify what was going on there, you actually deviate from his character to assume it is a lie.

Not exactly. He's pretty petty about failure -- remember how whenever he loses to Ven or Aqua before the end, he basically acts like he was just testing them all along ("I'll keep you around." "You're on probation.") despite being pretty clear up front about wanting to kill them? I don't think it would be in character for him to admit failure in detail.


For the term "broken". His overall context is an indication of their union being unfinished, and the keyblade being incomplete.

He says "Our union is not finished". Words that clearly indicate that whatever process they used to form the X-Blade wasn't finished.

He looks at the X-Blade, the camera pans to it, it looks broken, so that's the word he uses there "The X-Blade cannot stay broken like this".

Then after looking back at Ven "join me now, and we can complete the X-Blade!"

His usage of "broken" was easily based off of his observation, he returns to using "complete" when he's talking about what they have to do(as opposed to "fix").

One word in the entire dialogue points to "broken", which is how the X-Blade appears. The entire dialogue, however, indicates(explicity states, actually) that the X-Blade is incomplete and that they need to complete it.

But why should the X-blade look broken if it's not supposed to be broken? It would have taken approximately one minute to make a second model for the X-blade with transparent or fluctuating blade/filigree, which would better communicate the "incomplete" implication without leaving the very strong "caused by Aqua" implication.

That's not the only time that the "broken" implication is used, either -- the Trinity Report uses the word "damaged" in reference to it. It's used alongside "their union had not been finished," but "damaged" is not a word that one would ever use to refer to something that had not been completed. Saying that something is "damaged" has a very particular implication of having had damage be done to it; merely putting something together wrong isn't enough to call it "damaged."

Though I just thought of another possibility that would account for both of those things -- what if Vanitas attributed Aqua's ability to break the X-blade to their union not being correctly done in the first place (whether because that's what happened, or because that's the only explanation he could come up with)? It'd at least account for all of the obvious visual ties between Aqua's actions on the outside and Vanitas' actions on the inside, as well as the "broken" and "damaged" references.


This whole argument is too complicated for me, but I think it's important to keep in mind what the X-blade actually IS. It's Vanitas and Ventus' hearts. Destroying it destroys them. That's the main reason I don't think Aqua broke it first, because in that case, she just shattered Ven's heart and I seriously doubt either he or Vanitas would be functional to have their battle. They wouldn't even need to have a battle because they'd be dead.

That said, it would be cool if Aqua calling out for Ven to give her strength woke him up, and then the squiggly lights shooting everywhere was a symbol of their battle, with the dark suit disappearing when Vanitas faded. Cool, but just wouldn't make any sense to me and I certainly didn't interpret it that way when I played.

Remember, though, Aqua didn't destroy the X-blade, she just cracked it. It stuck around for a while after that in its broken form before finally disintegrating, and appears in Ven's scenario in the same form. So that would explain why they were still functional after she did what she did.

And that would be kind of bad, because it would make her no better than any sidelined love interest. =/ If Aqua's biggest contribution was calling for Ven, I would never forgive them. Seriously.
 

rac7d

The prince of Tides
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
6,126
Awards
4
Location
USA
" she's the only one of the main characters with a formal rank. She tends to react the least to any threats (in part a product of Dull Surprise) and in contrast to Ven and Terra, is least affected by the villains. She also threatens the villains plans the most out of the three, by dint of them not having any reason to take her into account, and lasts longer than Terra or Ven. At the end of the game, she's the only one with any semblance of activity, while the other two are incapacitated. She also takes on what are clearly the most dangerous regular enemies in the game, the Heartless. On top of all this, she tends to be more of a Game Breaker than Terra and Ven due to her high magic stat.
Even if you don't consider her a Badass from any of that, you should also take into account that she defeated Vanitas every time they fought except when Vanitas ambushed her, and eventually took down Vanitas equipped with the X-Blade and Terranort (possibly the two most powerful characters in the franchise) thanks to her strength helping her friends Fighting From The Inside. As an encore, she proceeded to survive without any protection besides Master Eraqus's Keyblade in the realm of Darkness for eleven years."

that why she is liked so much
 
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
5,612
Awards
4
Location
∵Иೆ!?तっФ」
But you can't do that, because of the order of events. >_< As I've explained repeatedly.

Then I feel like we have some sort of misunderstanding on what happens when, and what means what, because I still see no problem.

Look, it's an issue of causation here: either the destruction of the X-blade kills Vanitas, or Vanitas' death destroys the X-blade.

Vanitas literally can't have been killed by the destruction of the X-blade, because he's already dying -- he's unconscious and falling, even if he hasn't started glowing yet -- before it disintegrates. In fact, no physical damage is done to the X-blade at all in that scene before Vanitas closes his eyes and it doesn't show any reaction to Vanitas letting go of it, so Vanitas' demise is the only possible reason for its destruction.

I agree that he's dying, before the X-Blade is even destroyed. But not dead, and that's the key.

Destroying the X-Blade would destroy Ven's heart, right? And yet, the X-Blade is destroyed, and for some seconds, Ven is still around. There's simply a delay in reaction, as is customary in KH (with all the antics that go on for characters as they die)
Vanitas was dying because Ven laid the smackdown on him, this causes the destruction of the X-Blade and then, albeit shorter than Ven (and for obvious reasons) Vanitas dies.

So it seems obvious to me that the X-Blade is destroyed in the process of death/separation. There reaches a point when the fusion is no longer stable, but that doesn't have to be at the very instant of death.

And I can't believe how we are debating over something so stupid.

In any case, let's say Vanitas is unconscious instead of dead. What, exactly, does that change in this argument? Vanitas can no more be awake and in control of the Ventus-Vanitas body while his heart is unconscious than he can if it's dead. =P

Never said he was unconscious. I said he closed his eyes, which he did. You can't say that he was unconscious, just as how you can't say he was dead at that instant.

Let me try to explain my position on timing better -- the amount of time something takes is, of course, impossible to compare. But what timing can be used for is to show whether things are intended to be simultaneous or distinct.

I admit that using the number of seconds is probably not the best way to go about this, which I used to avoid subjectivity. In fact, it disguises some things that could have been fairly useful to me (like the fact that, despite real time elapsing between Vanitas falling back with his eyes closed and him being shown again falling, glowing and disappearing, that's still really one uninterrupted action). But bringing the argument back to that is completely pointless, because my arguments don't rely on that degree of timing -- all I need to say is that X is clearly intended to be earlier and distinct from Y, and Y is clearly intended to be earlier and distinct from Z, hence Z cannot possibly happen before X.

Apply this to something, because your talking in generality doesn't really do anything.

You're making a bigger deal out of the question of when Vanitas dies than what it deserves. On the inside, he's at the very least dying when the X-blade disintegrates, and on the outside he's clearly conscious for at least a few seconds after Aqua cracks the X-blade -- he could die at several points after that, but it doesn't particularly matter when he dies if the earliest point is too late. =P

I'm not. Vanitas dying at the moment he disintegrates is clear cut and makes sense given what we know about death in KH (no corpses, as I said), whereas your idea of his death is more ambiguous and problematic.

I don't see the problem with him maintaining control of the body as he is dying internally. Do other characters lose control of their bodies and become lifeless dolls as they are dying? No (wouldn't make sense because then we wouldn't even be able to tell when they are dying and when they are dead). Eg Nobodies are still talking/moving even as they fade back into darkness.

if you're paying attention

HOHO! Get it folks?

You don't read half of what I write, do you?

And once more: HOHO!

So, no. I don't think that they took the time to coordinate duration.

But order? Of the biggest, most climactic scene in two of the game's three scenarios? Yeah, I think they coordinated order, and I think they'd have been massively irresponsible as writers if they didn't. =P We're not talking about an entire game's worth of cutscenes here -- we're talking about two of the most important cutscenes in the entire game, with a total length under ten minutes.

Then this is where we simply disagree. I don't think while making one cutscene here, they were keeping in mind the other, especially since there's no tangible link between them (ie the same scene from two different perspectives). And as I said, even in such scenes, we know they weren't always up to par. As a couple examples, the timing of Terra going back inside Land of Departure's castle is noticeably longer in Terra's scenario than Aqua's based on the start of the bells, and the order of the first three worlds for TAV doesn't make sense based on when they interact with each other. And I don't think the fan-ascribed importance matters in that regard, especially since no one is ever going to notice something like this, and even if they did, it shouldn't matter.

So I don't find it "massively irresponsible" of the writers, nor do I consider it disrespectful to point it out.

Did you forget what my theory was?

As an aside, hard to have much of your theory to forget over the course of this debate considering it's only been revealed in bits and pieces. Eg that it was based on another plane of time was only established when I was the one who brought it up.

Vanitas loses control of the X-blade almost instantaneously on the outside because Aqua broke it, rather than because of anything Ven did.

Right, well then, you should have no problem saying that all of that energy shooting out of the X-Blade was also a direct result of Aqua cracking it and not due to Vanitas and Ven fighting. After all, the character report does say:

She summoned the last of
her strength and brought the Keyblade crashing down on Vanitas, cracking the
x-blade and releasing a torrent of energy that spilled out into the Keyblade
Graveyard

The wording is necessarily connotative of Aqua's breaking the X-Blade releasing that energy, not an internal battle, which holds with my theory. Ven and Vanitas would have already fought at that point, the internal key would have just been destroyed and Aqua destroying the shell of the external key would have released that pent up energy.

I already explained why Vanitas said that in my last post -- because there is every reason in the universe for the external events to be ignored in this scene! The writers don't want to put it there because it would spoil Aqua's story, and Vanitas doesn't want to say it because it would mean admitting to Ven that Aqua's still alive and resisting him.

Riddle me this: what would be gained by Vanitas saying "our union was interrupted?" It'd have players thinking, "oh, hey, Aqua's okay!" instead of wondering what happened to her. It'd make Vanitas sound weak, since he'd be admitting failure. It'd be a complete and utter derail of how that conversation was supposed to go, because Ven would demand details, and that would have little purpose besides spoiling Aqua's story. It'd be absolutely and utterly out of character for Vanitas, basically turning him into Mr. Exposition no matter how unlikely he is to actually explain things properly in that context.

I think Zulkir adequately responds to this, and I think you're failing to understand the difference between exposition and characterized dialogue.
There's literally no reason for Vanitas to lie at that point because if he did, the player would never even know, thus the effect is lost. Furthermore, we would be left with misleading information since it is also not covered in Aqua's story. On that note it is, unsurprisingly, not even covered in the character reports, the one place it should have been. Gee, wonder why.

(you keep ignoring the fact that Vanitas calls the X-blade broken rather than incomplete or unfinished)

The fact that he uses "not finished" interchangeably with "broken" as you yourself pointed out shows that these are being used as synonyms. Which, you know, they are.
There is only one X-Blade, and it clearly still exists even before their union (on whatever plane of existence), so to say their union forged it in a broken state is totally acceptable.

And, yes, I think Vanitas was wielding a complete X-blade when he fought Aqua? You know why? Because they made a Complete X-blade design and used it in that fight. Because the X-blade that Vanitas used against Aqua had an absurd level of cutscene power that Ven simply didn't face in his own scenario (if Aqua was thrown back into a wall by a simple swing of an Incomplete X-blade, Ven certainly should have too given that he's canonically weaker than her). Why should the weapon Ventus-Vanitas wields in that fight even exist in that form if Ven was never subdued?

Because there's a difference between the internal and external key.
Internally from the start the X-Blade was broken because of their incomplete union. Thus it only looked complete externally. And then Aqua physically broke it.

Honestly, if a complete X-Blade can be stopped that easily, it isn't worth the endeavor and MX should give up on it. It can be destroyed that easily by bonds when that has happened to no other weapon in the series. Sora is bond-central, so pretty sure a completed X-Blade would be cake to destroy.
Ven's destruction of the internal key prior to Aqua makes much more sense because it actually provides a legitimate, logical explanation for why she could do so- because the X-Blade had already been severed internally by one of its "ingredients."

Also, LOOK AT DA POWER OF DA X-BLADE IT MUST BE COMPLETE DESPITE THE FACT THAT I HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO MEASURE POWER IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE POWER OF A COMPLETED X-BLADE IS SUPPOSED TO BE.

If you're right, then Aqua couldn't have done anything without Ven enabling it, which is really annoying given that she's the only female character in KH doing any of the real work to begin with. =/

Yeah, preserving Ven in the CoW and then beating Terranort and sacrificing herself- she totally doesn't have enough of a role, let's steal Ven's glory despite the fact that he was passive and subdued most of the time and finally managed to do something.

Works both ways.
Why I’m saying this has absolutely nothing to do with character preference. I actually like Aqua more (think I explained why in the Xion Hate club).

See what I did there?

The same thing you did when I quoted you, and the same thing I was doing sarcastically in response.


And did you forget what game we're talking about here? Convoluted and counter-intuitive is just how Kingdom Hearts rolls. If it wasn't, there wouldn't need to be two characters involved in the X-blade's destruction in the first place. =P

lol

It's certainly not unprecedented for characters to lie outright in important scenes -- remember Xion pretending that she'd gone mad and wanted to absorb Roxas when she really just wanted Roxas to kill her?

Remember that time when it was made clear after the fact that Xion was lying and thus it made sense to have the lie in the first place, since the player could actually know it WAS a lie?

You choose that line as evidence? Seriously? First off, MX and Terra are both inside Apprentice Xehanort at that point, and both of them are locked out. And, more importantly, it's far too general to prove that he knows exactly what's been happening outside -- all it proves is that he knows that he's in control of the body, which is blatantly obvious even from the inside.

Yup.
Locked out? Huh? MX flat out says there that he’s in control.

I don’t understand how you can be IN CONTROL but not know what you’re doing. If you control the body how the fuck do you not know what’s going on outside? If that’s the case, hilarity ensues, because Apprentice Xehanort (and Vanitas) would be walking into walls and shit.


I just have serious trouble imagining that fight working out with Vanitas being fully conscious both on the outside fighting Aqua and on the inside fighting Ven at the same time. How can he see both sets of events at the same time? How can he react with both real and mental muscles in different ways at the same time? There are no other scenes in which we see characters in their Dive to the Heart while doing anything with their bodies -- Sora's sleeping, Roxas is transported away bodily, young Ven's in a coma, and Terra and Master Xehanort are both locked out of Apprentice Xehanort's body.

Because that’s Vanitas’ heart fighting against Ven’s heart, so what we’re seeing is a sort of metaphysical battle. I don’t understand how it’s so hard to think that Vanitas could be fighting Ven internally and Aqua externally. I think you’re thinking of it way too literally.

The one where he says the X-blade is broken? I think that proves evidence against your idea too. You're trying to use an ambiguous line to prove more than it's capable of proving.

“You're trying to use an ambiguous line to prove more than it's capable of proving.”
-uses the word broken to try to prove Aqua broke it-

I am assuming nothing more than what was presented to us. The X-Blade was broken and their union was not finished.
As the character reports put it:

“but it was damaged; their union had not been finished”

Let’s have a grammar lesson. What is the purpose of a semicolon? To provide a close connection between two sentences/clauses, eg through causation. That is, the wording here means that the X-Blade was damaged BECAUSE the union had not finished. And I am assuming nothing more than that, while you are suggesting that the union was not finished because of Aqua, which is never even remotely hinted at despite plenty of chances to do so.




Here, let's try it this way: Ventus-Vanitas and the X-blade are the same thing -- the fusion between Ven and Vanitas' hearts. If something happens to weaken the X-blade, the Ventus-Vanitas fusion should be weakened as well. However, there's no indication of that at any point before a few seconds after Aqua cracks the X-blade. The weakening of the Ventus/Vanitas fusion doesn't have to take the form of Ven gaining control of their combined body, but it ought to have some visual representation, and that simply doesn't exist in the game.

I agree that Ventus/Vanitas are representative of the X-Blade, but what muddies the whole thing up is the fact that they don’t die at the same time. The X-Blade is destroyed, Vanitas disintegrates, Ven disintegrates. If we’re taking a strict approach, then this should have all happened simultaneously. But as I’ve discussed, there’s that sort of death delay.

Who said it needs a visual representation, and more importantly, who made you the decider of that? I mean, shit, you said that the dark suit on the outside disappears when Vanitas on the inside loses control meaning we have no visual representation in Aqua’s story of when Vanitas DIES.

As I said, there is a difference between the internal and external key, and the external doesn’t have to reflect the internal. As an example, the Keyblade Graveyard. Those “lifeless keys” which “used to be full of power”? What do you think happened to them. Obviously, the “internal keys” are gone, the heart/souls of the keyblades. So they become useless scrap metal. But they’re not destroyed.

Similar for the X-Blade. It was incomplete from the beginning despite the fact that it looked complete. Then Ven destroys the internal key, it becomes scrap, and Aqua manages to physically break it and release that energy.

Sora woke up naturally in his Destati as part of a dream. If you want to admit Vanitas' body was asleep, go right ahead, but then I've already won.

Ven's condition is completely unlike any other Dive to the Heart that we see, because it's caused by Vanitas trying to force a union between both of them and completely dominate Ven's heart. This means that Sora's Dive to the Heart is not necessarily the best example to use -- especially since Vanitas is already fully awake when Ven wakes up.

Sooo it must just be a COMPLETE coincidence that Ven enters this Dive to the Heart in the exact same manner as Sora... and Roxas... and himself at the beginning of the game.

I agree that these are different circumstances but the fact that they all enter using the same animation should be telling you something.

Listen, because you’re so stuck on some kind of explanation for the incomplete union, maybe putting this in DBZ terms will make you understand.

In DBZ (can’t believe I’m using this but it’s the closest thing I could think of), you need to have equal power levels to fuse, correct? A similar case in KH, but I don’t imagine they need to be the exact same, just within a range. Otherwise, if one power is significantly stronger than the other, the weaker will be destroyed, as MX suggests in his report. That was the whole point of making Ven stronger, to have him on level with Vanitas. However, the light in his heart proved to be stronger than anticipated. It was able to resist a complete union.

Can this occur unconsciously? YES. The power in his heart is inherent, it’s not going to go away if he’s passed out.


...and you're forgetting the fact that they're trying to avoid spoiling Aqua's scenario, aren't you? -_- Because that would be a great way to ruin her entire ending, and add little else. (Besides, why would Aqua cracking the X-blade take the form of her calling out to Ven in his mind? She's trying to subdue Ventus-Vanitas, not plead for Ven to wake up -_- )

Complete load of bullshit. If they have to spoil, they will, though even in this case they can keep it vague. As an example, we find out what Vanitas is in Terra’s scenario, spoiling for Ventus, but we don’t see Vanitas’ face. Similarly, we could hear Aqua’s voice or that the union had been interrupted, and then find out exactly what happened in Aqua’s scenario.

Otherwise, as I said a million times, by upholding some spoiler integrity then they lose an actual explanation and no one ever knows what actually happens. Of course, they could at least explain it in the Character Reports but OH WAIT... they don’t. Funny.


I don't need kicking and screaming, but I do need some indication that Ven's subconscious knew that it had fought Vanitas off.

I don’t.
 

Gray Aria

The Misshapen Spark
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
3,860
Awards
6
Age
32
Location
In the gray area
No, they move. It isn't like "jiggle jiggle oppai~" moving but they move like breasts move in real life. :/ I don't see how it is entertaining, though. It isn't even something noticeable.

You're not a guy. Trust me. We notice the slightest movement in breasts and when we do, we tend to focus all our attention to it. It's something a woman could never hope to understand, even if she is gay.
 

kupo1121

We are Moogle! Hear us...kupo?
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
8,349
Awards
17
Location
Wherever I am right now
You're not a guy. Trust me. We notice the slightest movement in breasts and when we do, we tend to focus all our attention to it. It's something a woman could never hope to understand, even if she is gay.

Honestly...I never really noticed it lol...IDK why...I guess I'm just de-sensitized after all the Dead or Alive and Soul Calibur I've seen. After those games, nothing can compete...
 

Ronove

New member
Joined
Jan 18, 2011
Messages
300
Age
31
Really, the boobs thing is nice but not essential.

It's like if you find a case of fine champagne in the trunk of your Lamborghini, you'll take it and enjoy it but it ain't why you like the car.
 

LS22

New member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
199
Location
Dressrosa
Really, the boobs thing is nice but not essential.

It's like if you find a case of fine champagne in the trunk of your Lamborghini, you'll take it and enjoy it but it ain't why you like the car.

Exactly, I think Aqua is an okay character I like her but not she's not like my fav. character I find her okay
 

Ronove

New member
Joined
Jan 18, 2011
Messages
300
Age
31
Oh don't misunderstand me, Aqua is fantastic and my favorite. But it ain't cause of the boobs.
 

Grey

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
606
I love Aqua. It's weird. I loved Ven prior to the game, loved Terra during, and love Aqua post-game. Her story is interesting, she's more unique than the other two (though Terra is actually fairly unique anyway, being someone who is dark and yet isn't a "dark" character... if that makes any sense), she's badass, and best of all, she's female.

Now normally, her being a woman wouldn't be a good reason, but in the KH universe, it is. Being a female and capable of fending off enemies at the same time is a very difficult thing for KH females to do. Kairi only really gains the will to "fight" (sort of) by the end of KH2 and Namine is just a little bitch. Xion can fight, but her character isn't the "competent" type. She maintains the air of a novice girl for a while, and even though she eventually becomes a great fighter, she has other flaws in her character (like being uninteresting) that Aqua doesn't possess.

That's why Aqua rules. Her character is terrific, she's a great fighter, she's unique, she's interesting, and all the while, she's a woman.
 

kupo1121

We are Moogle! Hear us...kupo?
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
8,349
Awards
17
Location
Wherever I am right now
Yes, but far too often do her detractors claim it's the main motivation. A pity, really.

The male mind sometimes confuses me o_O

Now normally, her being a woman wouldn't be a good reason, but in the KH universe, it is. Being a female and capable of fending off enemies at the same time is a very difficult thing for KH females to do.

Ummm...Larxene anyone???
 

*TwilightNight*

Bronze Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
2,213
Awards
6
Age
34
Yes, but far too often do her detractors claim it's the main motivation. A pity, really.

I can't blame them when that was the only thing blown out of proportion in practically every facet since her appearance. Just because her outfit accentuated her chest - in the front. From what I've gotten in the game world for males: boobs + fighter = boner. And it's not even that well deserved. You would think we would be talking about volleyballs for a chest the way the conversations sometimes went, but she's normal, every American woman sized. At least in-game. CGI-wise, it's worst and saggy, and I don't get the hype. And I still don't understand the big deal. Gorgeous-looking female character, I'll give that much. I love her design.

Point is, the reactions for Aqua lasted. And of course, it's going to be used against her.


Ummm...Larxene anyone???

She doesn't have Kairi's face or looks like her. Therefore, her point in the KH universe is moot :I. Originality does not last.
 

Ikkin

Bronze Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
1,517
I agree that he's dying, before the X-Blade is even destroyed. But not dead, and that's the key.

Destroying the X-Blade would destroy Ven's heart, right? And yet, the X-Blade is destroyed, and for some seconds, Ven is still around. There's simply a delay in reaction, as is customary in KH (with all the antics that go on for characters as they die)
Vanitas was dying because Ven laid the smackdown on him, this causes the destruction of the X-Blade and then, albeit shorter than Ven (and for obvious reasons) Vanitas dies.

So it seems obvious to me that the X-Blade is destroyed in the process of death/separation. There reaches a point when the fusion is no longer stable, but that doesn't have to be at the very instant of death.

And I can't believe how we are debating over something so stupid.

That's... essentially what I was saying. You don't seem to be contradicting me in any way that would affect my argument.

Though I will add that the fusion obviously can't remain stable after Vanitas dies, and that the destruction of the X-blade implies that the destabilization happens when Vanitas closes his eyes, rather than when he disappears completely.


Never said he was unconscious. I said he closed his eyes, which he did. You can't say that he was unconscious, just as how you can't say he was dead at that instant.

...oh come on, this is absurd.

Are you really trying to argue that a guy who's just spent ten seconds getting gradually weaker, closes his eyes, then dies seconds later isn't unconscious for those few split-seconds between closing his eyes and disintegrating? Why would you possibly think he might still be conscious and capable of reacting on the outside?

Even assuming that's the case, it'd still require you to believe that the outer union was able to survive the inner destruction of the X-blade, which is highly, highly unlikely because the X-blade is the union.


I'm not. Vanitas dying at the moment he disintegrates is clear cut and makes sense given what we know about death in KH (no corpses, as I said), whereas your idea of his death is more ambiguous and problematic.

I don't see the problem with him maintaining control of the body as he is dying internally. Do other characters lose control of their bodies and become lifeless dolls as they are dying? No (wouldn't make sense because then we wouldn't even be able to tell when they are dying and when they are dead). Eg Nobodies are still talking/moving even as they fade back into darkness.

But the Everything Fades thing tends to show up in a very specific way in Squenix games -- namely, that the character's eyes close, and then they start to fade. There's a pretty obvious implication that the fading starts because they're dead, rather than that they're not dead until they fade completely.

And that's not a good comparison at all, because we haven't seen anyone else die in an internal struggle while they're still conscious on the outside. Nobodies aren't full beings, so they're not the best comparison; Eraqus is a better comparison, and he takes some time to disappear too despite being completely incapacitated.


HOHO! Get it folks?

And once more: HOHO!

What's the point of this? -_-


Then this is where we simply disagree. I don't think while making one cutscene here, they were keeping in mind the other, especially since there's no tangible link between them (ie the same scene from two different perspectives). And as I said, even in such scenes, we know they weren't always up to par. As a couple examples, the timing of Terra going back inside Land of Departure's castle is noticeably longer in Terra's scenario than Aqua's based on the start of the bells, and the order of the first three worlds for TAV doesn't make sense based on when they interact with each other. And I don't think the fan-ascribed importance matters in that regard, especially since no one is ever going to notice something like this, and even if they did, it shouldn't matter.

So I don't find it "massively irresponsible" of the writers, nor do I consider it disrespectful to point it out.

...there's no tangible link between them? There obviously is, if we're arguing about them! There would be no tangible link if and only if Aqua and Ven's scenarios didn't affect each other -- but your entire argument hinges on the proposal that Ven's scenario make's Aqua's possible. =P

There's a pretty big difference between slight differences in timing in the Land of Departure (which can easily be resolved because we know that there's missing time given the extra conversation between Aqua and Eraqus that we find out about at the end of the game) and odd ordering of the worlds (which can be explained away by either travel time or sleeping time) and contradictions in two scenes that are interconnected in ways that are very canonically relevant.

And I still say that arguing from the "well, the writers messed up" perspective is inherently weaker than arguing from a perspective that's capable of taking far more into account.


As an aside, hard to have much of your theory to forget over the course of this debate considering it's only been revealed in bits and pieces. Eg that it was based on another plane of time was only established when I was the one who brought it up.

I thought that would be assumed, sorry.


Right, well then, you should have no problem saying that all of that energy shooting out of the X-Blade was also a direct result of Aqua cracking it and not due to Vanitas and Ven fighting. After all, the character report does say:

[...]

The wording is necessarily connotative of Aqua's breaking the X-Blade releasing that energy, not an internal battle, which holds with my theory. Ven and Vanitas would have already fought at that point, the internal key would have just been destroyed and Aqua destroying the shell of the external key would have released that pent up energy.

Those things aren't mutually contradictory; that the torrent is released by Aqua cracking the X-blade doesn't imply that the torrent isn't caused by a conflict within the X-blade. I can say that confetti is released from a balloon by poking it without implying that the confetti was created by the pinprick. =P

(I don't think you want to try beating me with pedantry... it's not like I haven't considered whether grammatical nuance could be used against me)


I think Zulkir adequately responds to this, and I think you're failing to understand the difference between exposition and characterized dialogue.
There's literally no reason for Vanitas to lie at that point because if he did, the player would never even know, thus the effect is lost. Furthermore, we would be left with misleading information since it is also not covered in Aqua's story. On that note it is, unsurprisingly, not even covered in the character reports, the one place it should have been. Gee, wonder why.

But all dialogue should be characterized, including expository dialogue. If it isn't, you're sacrificing characterization, which is generally a bad thing -- and Kingdom Hearts values characterization above everything, especially perfectly explaining everything that happens plotwise.

There are a lot of things that we never find out because it wouldn't be in-character for anyone to tell us. Whether Axel really wanted to turn Sora into a Heartless. Why Axel was injured when he showed up in Betwixt and Between to sacrifice himself. What exactly happened with Xion and Riku. What Axel and Saix's plan was. Xemnas' real goal for Kingdom Hearts. Whether Ansem the Wise was really as innocent as he made himself out to be. (I could go on) This is, if anything, a big part of the reason people find KH's story so frustrating -- it's certainly not anything new and unusual for the series.

As for the Reports... they didn't really give all that much information that wasn't already in the game, apart from the bit about Xehanort stabbing the Terranort body as opposed to Terra. And, even when they do, they're still rather ambiguous.


The fact that he uses "not finished" interchangeably with "broken" as you yourself pointed out shows that these are being used as synonyms. Which, you know, they are.

But using them as synonyms is linguistically unacceptable. The words "broken" and "damaged" should never have been used at all if they wanted something synonymous with "unfinished," because they have at the very least very heavy connotations of having-damage-done-to-them that become a rather large counter-indication when paired with an Incomplete X-blade model that looks identical to the way the X-blade looked when Aqua broke it on the outside.

There is only one X-Blade, and it clearly still exists even before their union (on whatever plane of existence), so to say their union forged it in a broken state is totally acceptable.

And you called me out for speculation? Wow.

The X-blade is the combined hearts of Ven and Vanitas; I see no indication in the game that their creation of the X-blade involved calling an existing one from another realm rather than creating it with their hearts.


Because there's a difference between the internal and external key.
Internally from the start the X-Blade was broken because of their incomplete union. Thus it only looked complete externally. And then Aqua physically broke it.

Honestly, if a complete X-Blade can be stopped that easily, it isn't worth the endeavor and MX should give up on it. It can be destroyed that easily by bonds when that has happened to no other weapon in the series. Sora is bond-central, so pretty sure a completed X-Blade would be cake to destroy.
Ven's destruction of the internal key prior to Aqua makes much more sense because it actually provides a legitimate, logical explanation for why she could do so- because the X-Blade had already been severed internally by one of its "ingredients."

Also, LOOK AT DA POWER OF DA X-BLADE IT MUST BE COMPLETE DESPITE THE FACT THAT I HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO MEASURE POWER IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE POWER OF A COMPLETED X-BLADE IS SUPPOSED TO BE.

The idea that the X-blade is just that powerful that it can't possibly have been destroyed that easily is complete and utter speculation on your part. Xehanort was never really interested in using it as a weapon -- everything he said about his goals was related to its non-battle uses, so he'd have been just as interested in it if it was made of glass.

The only real indication we have of how powerful the X-blade is... seeing the presumedly-complete X-blade used against Aqua and Mickey, which isn't a great place to start from when you're trying to argue that the X-blade should have been more powerful than that.


Yeah, preserving Ven in the CoW and then beating Terranort and sacrificing herself- she totally doesn't have enough of a role, let's steal Ven's glory despite the fact that he was passive and subdued most of the time and finally managed to do something.

Works both ways.
Why I’m saying this has absolutely nothing to do with character preference. I actually like Aqua more (think I explained why in the Xion Hate club).

This is entirely disingenuous.

It's readily apparent that Ven stands to lose far less than Aqua does by not getting full responsibility for the X-blade's destruction, because his climax is completely different thematically than hers is.

Ven's cutscenes don't put much emphasis on the act of overthrowing Vanitas -- the only part of the fight that's shown at all is Ven finishing Vanitas off, and nothing is shown of Ven resisting the union in the first place. Ven fights Vanitas as an equal, and therefore the game isn't particularly interested in the question of whether he's capable of beating him; the real emphasis is on the sacrifice that Ven is making by choosing to fight Vanitas in the first place. Thematically, Ven's scenario ends on a note of giving up everything for one's friends -- this wouldn't be affected by Ven needing help to wake up.

Aqua's cutscenes, on the other hand, place a much higher degree of emphasis on the power struggle between the X-blade-wielding Ventus-Vanitas and Aqua. The climax of her story is the Heroic Second Wind that allows her to overcome Vanitas and break the X-blade, resulting in an overall theme that the light of friendship can overcome any darkness. Without giving Aqua credit for doing the impossible, this theme simply doesn't work, and there's nothing else there to replace it.


If Aqua cracks a completed X-blade and wakes up Ven, her theme keeps its power, his theme keeps its power, and all he loses is the passive ability to keep Vanitas from subduing him on the inside (while retaining the passive ability not to be consumed entirely, without which Aqua wouldn't have been able to wake him up).

If Aqua cracks a X-blade that's already been rendered lifeless and inert by Ven, her theme dies a horrible death, and Ven's gains nothing (since it was never particularly interested in power to begin with). It's not a good trade-off at all.


Remember that time when it was made clear after the fact that Xion was lying and thus it made sense to have the lie in the first place, since the player could actually know it WAS a lie?

Do you know how many fans simply do not understand this due to how easily it's glossed over?

And I have other examples too; look up the page for more.


Yup.
Locked out? Huh? MX flat out says there that he’s in control.

I don’t understand how you can be IN CONTROL but not know what you’re doing. If you control the body how the bonk do you not know what’s going on outside? If that’s the case, hilarity ensues, because Apprentice Xehanort (and Vanitas) would be walking into walls and .

We're talking about Apprentice Xehanort, not Terranort. Apprentice Xehanort is controlled by a merged heart, not Master Xehanort. That's why he's amnesiac, remember? *sigh*

And you're assuming that the ones who show up on the inside are the same as the conscious self, which... is not necessarily the case.


Because that’s Vanitas’ heart fighting against Ven’s heart, so what we’re seeing is a sort of metaphysical battle. I don’t understand how it’s so hard to think that Vanitas could be fighting Ven internally and Aqua externally. I think you’re thinking of it way too literally.

But then you run into the other problem, in that if Vanitas' heart isn't the same thing as Vanitas consciousness, how would it know for sure what Aqua did? (I really am leaning towards the idea that the consciousnesses are one and the same, though, because that's the way it works in every other provable case)


“You're trying to use an ambiguous line to prove more than it's capable of proving.”
-uses the word broken to try to prove Aqua broke it-

Except that I, unlike you, have offered a variety of other circumstantial evidence with which to make my argument. All I need to do with that "broken" is show that your direct statement isn't particularly solid as evidence so then my other evidence can finish the argument. =P


I am assuming nothing more than what was presented to us. The X-Blade was broken and their union was not finished.
As the character reports put it:

“but it was damaged; their union had not been finished”

Let’s have a grammar lesson. What is the purpose of a semicolon? To provide a close connection between two sentences/clauses, eg through causation. That is, the wording here means that the X-Blade was damaged BECAUSE the union had not finished. And I am assuming nothing more than that, while you are suggesting that the union was not finished because of Aqua, which is never even remotely hinted at despite plenty of chances to do so.

You're assuming that Ven's actions affected Aqua's scenario, which is never remotely hinted at in Aqua's scenario, and is never directly addressed in Ven's. You're also dismissing outright some pretty strong hints towards Aqua's agency in Ven's story, like the fact that the Incomplete X-blade's design includes the battle damage from Aqua's story despite the fact that the details (like, say, burn marks and chips) would be a particularly poor fit for an unfinished weapon.

And there's a pretty big difference between something being damaged because it was incomplete and between saying that incompleteness is damage. In the former case, the damage would still need to come from an external source (like, say, Aqua cracking it), which would still rule out Ven's destruction of the X-blade on the inside having any effect on Aqua's fight.


I agree that Ventus/Vanitas are representative of the X-Blade, but what muddies the whole thing up is the fact that they don’t die at the same time. The X-Blade is destroyed, Vanitas disintegrates, Ven disintegrates. If we’re taking a strict approach, then this should have all happened simultaneously. But as I’ve discussed, there’s that sort of death delay.

Well, there seems to be a bit of a domino effect there, which isn't all that strange, but there's also the issue that showing one thing at a time doesn't mean they're not simultaneous -- Vanitas' falling and then disintegrating is pretty continuous despite Ven's Keyblade disappearing in between.


Who said it needs a visual representation, and more importantly, who made you the decider of that? I mean, you said that the dark suit on the outside disappears when Vanitas on the inside loses control meaning we have no visual representation in Aqua’s story of when Vanitas DIES.

Why should there be any representation of Vanitas on the outside at all after he loses control of the body? If nothing of him is left on the outside, no further representation of his loss can be given.

If we're talking about representation, though, how about a more serious issue: if you're arguing that the X-blade was broken on the inside simultaneous with Aqua cracking it on the outside, and the disappearance of the dark suit represents Vanitas' death... what does the external destruction of the X-blade represent? The cutscene director made a pretty big deal of its destruction not happening immediately after Aqua cracked the X-blade -- it had to have been waiting for something, but your theory leaves it as an orphan with no internal element at all.


As I said, there is a difference between the internal and external key, and the external doesn’t have to reflect the internal. As an example, the Keyblade Graveyard. Those “lifeless keys” which “used to be full of power”? What do you think happened to them. Obviously, the “internal keys” are gone, the heart/souls of the keyblades. So they become useless scrap metal. But they’re not destroyed.

Similar for the X-Blade. It was incomplete from the beginning despite the fact that it looked complete. Then Ven destroys the internal key, it becomes scrap, and Aqua manages to physically break it and release that energy.

Except that the X-blade is self-evidently not lifeless when Aqua cracks it. If the X-blade had been turned into scrap, that scene would have played out very differently -- its destruction would have been far more dramatic and much less emphasis would have been given to its extreme emission of power.

If they wanted to show Aqua destroying a scrap key, she wouldn't have only cracked it a little -- she'd snap the thing in half as the color saturation dove down near zero.


Sooo it must just be a COMPLETE coincidence that Ven enters this Dive to the Heart in the exact same manner as Sora... and Roxas... and himself at the beginning of the game.

I agree that these are different circumstances but the fact that they all enter using the same animation should be telling you something.

No, I don't think that's a coincidence at all.

But, I also think that they would have portrayed the scene a bit differently if they wanted Ven to display a sense of agency in his awakening -- Vanitas would be subject to those same animations rather than portrayed in a position of dominance, and he wouldn't already know what was going on before Ven woke up.


Listen, because you’re so stuck on some kind of explanation for the incomplete union, maybe putting this in DBZ terms will make you understand.

In DBZ (can’t believe I’m using this but it’s the closest thing I could think of), you need to have equal power levels to fuse, correct? A similar case in KH, but I don’t imagine they need to be the exact same, just within a range. Otherwise, if one power is significantly stronger than the other, the weaker will be destroyed, as MX suggests in his report. That was the whole point of making Ven stronger, to have him on level with Vanitas. However, the light in his heart proved to be stronger than anticipated. It was able to resist a complete union.

Can this occur unconsciously? YES. The power in his heart is inherent, it’s not going to go away if he’s passed out.

I don't really have a problem with Ven resisting a complete union, depending on what that means -- if a complete union would have meant Ven's heart would have been completely consumed, then that obviously wasn't the case.

But, that doesn't necessarily mean that Ven would have reawakened on his own, because, as you said, resisting full absorption could easily be done unconsciously. An internally-unconscious Ven goes much further in explaining the existence of Ventus-Vanitas and the X-blade on the outside then Ven constantly struggling throughout the whole ordeal, in any case.


Complete load of . If they have to spoil, they will, though even in this case they can keep it vague. As an example, we find out what Vanitas is in Terra’s scenario, spoiling for Ventus, but we don’t see Vanitas’ face. Similarly, we could hear Aqua’s voice or that the union had been interrupted, and then find out exactly what happened in Aqua’s scenario.

Otherwise, as I said a million times, by upholding some spoiler integrity then they lose an actual explanation and no one ever knows what actually happens. Of course, they could at least explain it in the Character Reports but OH WAIT... they don’t. Funny.

It depends on what their goal was. They seemed to have been generally trying to avoid directly addressing elements from one climax in another except when it was being used to make things look worse for the other two. Saying the union had been interrupted would have been a much bigger connection than anything else that they added in the Keyblade Graveyard scenes (and adding Aqua's voice simply wouldn't have made sense, since that would make the wrong kind of connection and make it seem like she'd woken him up with The Chick powers rather than X-blade damage).


You're not a guy. Trust me. We notice the slightest movement in breasts and when we do, we tend to focus all our attention to it. It's something a woman could never hope to understand, even if she is gay.

Which is obviously why no one said anything about it until the ESRB brought it up, despite the game being out in Japan for months. Right.


She doesn't have Kairi's face or looks like her. Therefore, her point in the KH universe is moot :I. Originality does not last.

Well, they could always add Arlene/Relena in a game somewhere down the line... and then she wouldn't even have the originality problem. ;) She'd probably have to be nicer, though, and that might ruin it. =/
 

*TwilightNight*

Bronze Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
2,213
Awards
6
Age
34
Well, they could always add Arlene/Relena in a game somewhere down the line... and then she wouldn't even have the originality problem. ;) She'd probably have to be nicer, though, and that might ruin it. =/

You know what I mean, lol. To be a main female character, or to get any screen time at all as a female, you have to either look like Kairi, have some appearance of Kairi, or/and be connected to Kairi...in some way. If you're not, then you're automatically disposable and won't get much development, plot purpose, and/or time in the game. Usually, "the Kairis" (or one Sora, but who's Kairi, but who's really not, but who is) are the women worth focusing on. And unless something breaks the cycle, it'll remain.

Basically, all the girl cast, minus two, are expies of one another.

Larxene might appear in a future game, but it's more or less a cameo role. I doubt she'd be nice, though. If she ever could have been important and got some development (hopefully, not to the extent of whipped, wussified Axel status), I would think she would end up in the anti-villainess/anti-heroine role ala Catwoman. Switch sides when it suits her for whatever reason, but in the end, be on her own side. Erm, except that she won't be as morally conscious, if at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top