Forum for all other Silent Hill-related discussion.
 
 

Xuchilbara

Moderator

User avatar

The Red God

Posts: 8734

Joined: Feb 21, 2006

Location: United States

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by Xuchilbara on Mon Sep 02, 2013 12:23 am

This is a thread for those things.... I'll start.

In the play novel, there is a memo reference St. Alessa, SH4's revelation of the sects and their disagreements about birthing god, and something that merges these two ideas. It states that an evil entity must come in contact with a saint in order to birth god.

In the original script of the Japanese version of SH1, Alessa was supposed to birth the 'son of God' not God. (Which explains the missing factor from the cult's mythos in 3.) This was changed in the English supposedly because it's too sacrilegious. (God is just as sacrilegious imo tho.)

There's two things.. That official image depicting Cheryl and the burning house, which appears in the evening. And Origins which also depicts the ritual done in evening or night. This is signifigant because SH3 memos talk about sacrifices to the sun. I've never heard of a sacrifice to the sun done at night and in an enclosed space (Not an open space where you can see the sky.) such as the ritual that happened at the Gillespie house.

This is probably an oversight but shows the changes in the script because Owaku seems to follow the English script by 3, with emphasis on the false god and demon tones. However this may have also been intended, and may not be a retcon. I can't tell for sure.

But what I can tell is the theory that me and Floodclaw came up with a few years ago explaining this. Originally, as the documents state, Dahlia intended to summon the Son of God. The incubus is a night demon (Eye of Night actually represents it.) it's also a demon said to impregnate women. This cannot be an oversight, but something intentional. The incubus was this son of God so conveniently absent later on. Dahlia must have mistook it for God, when it was really a demon. Then this developed the story. It likewise explains how the ritual was done in an enclosed space and at night/sundown.
WHY NOT ZOIDBERG? (V)(;,,,;)(V)
 
 
 
 
 

Alex Townshend

Member

User avatar

Posts: 158

Joined: Oct 16, 2010

Location: Canada

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by Alex Townshend on Fri Sep 06, 2013 5:53 am

Anigav wrote:SH3 memos talk about sacrifices to the sun.


I thought it mentioned sacrificing to a "Sun God" or "sun deity", not to the actual sun itself.
Besides, I suppose the Halo of the "SUN" could act as a "sun" of sorts.

The best part of waking up... is James SUNderland in your cup.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Xuchilbara

Moderator

User avatar

The Red God

Posts: 8734

Joined: Feb 21, 2006

Location: United States

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by Xuchilbara on Fri Sep 06, 2013 5:57 am

Alex Townshend wrote:
Anigav wrote:SH3 memos talk about sacrifices to the sun.


I thought it mentioned sacrificing to a "Sun God" or "sun deity", not to the actual sun itself.
Besides, I suppose the Halo of the "SUN" could act as a "sun" of sorts.

The best part of waking up... is James SUNderland in your cup.



A sun deity is also a personification of the sun and the ritual of the memos is following the pattern of Aztec sacrifices to Tonatiuh. It makes sense when you remove the layers of religion and see that most gods had to do with nature and it's forces.
WHY NOT ZOIDBERG? (V)(;,,,;)(V)
 
 
 
 
 

Naroon

Member

User avatar

Pillman's got a gun!

Posts: 5326

Joined: Mar 29, 2011

Location: United States

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by Naroon on Fri Sep 06, 2013 6:54 am

Well since this thread is about retcons, there's something I've been wondering about for a long time. Let me post this disclaimer first:

This is a legit question, and to any possible lurkers just waiting for some generic TS vs. non-TS debate to spring up, fuck off please, kthxbai.


With that out of the way, I've seen people over the years make the claim that SH4, and sometimes only everything post-SH4, somehow retconned "lots of things" from the TS games. Yet anytime I've asked these folks what they were talking about (i.e. asking for evidence) they'd only respond "it happened, the retcons happened, fuck you, you dirty traitor", etc. This has been going on roughly since about the time Homecoming came out, but it may have happened with Origins' release.

If anyone has this information, I'd greatly enjoy it and give you free donuts.
Image
 
 
 
 
 

ERROR

Member

User avatar

Posts: 1237

Joined: Nov 21, 2007

Location: #lfk

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by ERROR on Fri Sep 06, 2013 3:08 pm

The only thing is the way in which Walter Sullivan dies, though that is explained, and that Walter saw "the red devil" in SILENT HILL 2, which is also explained. But, you know, people are idiots.
This post is the property of its author and is not to be used elsewhere without explicit permission from the author.

. . . AND THAT'S THAT.
 
 
 
 
 

Naroon

Member

User avatar

Pillman's got a gun!

Posts: 5326

Joined: Mar 29, 2011

Location: United States

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by Naroon on Fri Sep 06, 2013 6:20 pm

Thank you, take these:

Image

HEALTH UP
Image
 
 
 
 
 

Xuchilbara

Moderator

User avatar

The Red God

Posts: 8734

Joined: Feb 21, 2006

Location: United States

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by Xuchilbara on Fri Sep 06, 2013 7:03 pm

I thought there is conflicting reports of Walter's death. I wouldn't call it explained. The red devil thing is though.
WHY NOT ZOIDBERG? (V)(;,,,;)(V)
 
 
 
 
 

SotH

Posts: 40

Joined: Nov 19, 2012

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by SotH on Mon Sep 09, 2013 12:14 am

Anigav wrote:I thought there is conflicting reports of Walter's death. I wouldn't call it explained. The red devil thing is though.



Actually, his death itself is the same and the first grave in SH2 is only a manifestation which was brought up only due to James reading the article.

I never felt 4 really contradicted it at all, it's just the nature we read from it ourselves is now different.

The first time around, we were to interpret the red devil and his statements as one of guilt. However, because the details themselves are loose, much unlike the series integral origins details found in SH1, they could craft all that as to being a front, where the guilt as an act and the red devil is only a red herring formed from his knowledge of the cult, without retconning anything or making a giant plot hole.

People didn't stop to realize what the new details meant for the event correctly, so they never really tied it all together. So no, it's not a retcon, it's just that the original sounded better and more fit the original intentions of the writers at the time of crafting it. You risk a lot in altering things that meant one thing from the start and were only executed in a vague manner. Fortunately, SH4 at least expanded the story without retcon, even if we do disagree with it.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Naroon

Member

User avatar

Pillman's got a gun!

Posts: 5326

Joined: Mar 29, 2011

Location: United States

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by Naroon on Mon Sep 09, 2013 12:33 am

Why would James manifest Walter's grave? This is a little odd, especially considering that it's not required to read that article to progress through the game.
Image
 
 
 
 
 

Xuchilbara

Moderator

User avatar

The Red God

Posts: 8734

Joined: Feb 21, 2006

Location: United States

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by Xuchilbara on Mon Sep 09, 2013 4:46 am

Then you have to ask yourself why Walter's grave in the orphange was dug up to revel a missing body that made sense in the context of the ritual of assumption. You also have to ask yourself why the red diary gives two explanations, 1. they got the wrong guy. 2. Walter never killed himself.

So, the guy in the prison of SH2 is a red herring? I mean really, James could have manifested it as an omen or the town. Since to James and the player until 4, "red devil" was a pun to PH.
WHY NOT ZOIDBERG? (V)(;,,,;)(V)
 
 
 
 
 

SotH

Posts: 40

Joined: Nov 19, 2012

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by SotH on Wed Sep 11, 2013 1:58 pm

NarooN wrote:Why would James manifest Walter's grave? This is a little odd, especially considering that it's not required to read that article to progress through the game.


True, you don't have to read it to progress, but the point I was trying to make was that the graveyard isn't his actual resting place. And anyhow, you can skip many memos when you know everything. They don't exactly force you to read them for the most part and you can skip just about all of Stanley's dairy memos. And yet, which two still calls you up about him!?

I was thinking about the other tombstone names and, yeah, maybe it's not perfectly James manifesting it himself, but the graveyard is part of the other manifestations underneath the Historical Society. It might as well be half James and half the town's history (hence PH), depending on whether or not you actually read the paper on Sullivan.

Then you have to ask yourself why Walter's grave in the orphange was dug up to revel a missing body that made sense in the context of the ritual of assumption. You also have to ask yourself why the red diary gives two explanations, 1. they got the wrong guy. 2. Walter never killed himself.


Yes, Walter, released from the bounds of flesh, got his own body and hung it up in the apartment. It was only moved. There wasn't any "wrong guy" or anything as that was only the author's comprehension of the situation, before he started finding out what was really going on.

So, the guy in the prison of SH2 is a red herring? I mean really, James could have manifested it as an omen or the town. Since to James and the player until 4, "red devil" was a pun to PH.


Uh, no...

I said that what was printed in the newspaper now has to be taken as a red herring. Meaning, Walter was sprouting it as apart of a show for the police etc. now and nothing more, not like in SH2 where it was to be taken as legitimate insanity or guilt (even though Walter is quite crazy anywho).
 
 
 
 
 
 

Xuchilbara

Moderator

User avatar

The Red God

Posts: 8734

Joined: Feb 21, 2006

Location: United States

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by Xuchilbara on Wed Sep 11, 2013 3:18 pm

The memo isn't skippable, you have to read it in order to obtain the coin in the trash. Only the tombstone is skippable.
WHY NOT ZOIDBERG? (V)(;,,,;)(V)
 
 
 
 
 

SotH

Posts: 40

Joined: Nov 19, 2012

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by SotH on Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:01 am

Anigav wrote:The memo isn't skippable, you have to read it in order to obtain the coin in the trash. Only the tombstone is skippable.


Thanks for clearing that up. When I was writing the first comment, I was under the impression that was the case. Somehow I felt I was being corrected and wasn't going to bother opening a game just to find out (none of mine are right up to that point).
 
 
 
 
 
 

Naroon

Member

User avatar

Pillman's got a gun!

Posts: 5326

Joined: Mar 29, 2011

Location: United States

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by Naroon on Thu Sep 12, 2013 10:50 am

Been a while since I played SH2 myself, so I forgot it makes you auto-read that paper to pick up the coin. My bad!
Image
 
 
 
 
 

Xuchilbara

Moderator

User avatar

The Red God

Posts: 8734

Joined: Feb 21, 2006

Location: United States

retcons! retcons! retcons! *open spoilers*

Post by Xuchilbara on Thu Sep 12, 2013 10:54 am

The only reason I know this is because I practically memorized the games playing it several times a year since 2002.
WHY NOT ZOIDBERG? (V)(;,,,;)(V)
 
 
 


Return to Silent Hill General Discussion



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests