timesklion.blogg.se

It was essential then, from a narrative standpoint at least, that the player be there at the end and to glimpse into the future one that in a fun small way is just slightly altered by their actions. I’d agree the player character didn’t need to consciously observe the end of the universe to have it reborn, but in addition to the inevitability and acceptance themes, there’s also one of making the most of your time while you have it because the future is built upon the past. Hmm, I guess I had a slightly different interpretation than what you’re saying and what you put as the common one. I think that the orb that appears when the travellers play is all the possibilities for the next universe and you need to collapse those possibilies by entering them. On the other hand, you can see shadows in the ball that you jump into and the alien creatures only appear if you meet Solanum, pretty good evidence that you at least help in the creation of the next universe. I don’t se what you were trying to say with the “See you on the other side” part but the fact that it doesn’t explicitly tell you what just happened at the end of a mystery game doesn’t really prove anything either way.

You could not save anybody.Īlso, your argument about the dialogue doesn’t have much substance. Everyone you know has died a fiery death. You put a lot of emphasis on the new universe part but ignored the fact that you didn’t stop the old universe from dying. First of all, your entire argument seems to hinge on the fact that it doesn’t fit into the theme of the game. I think your interpretation has a few reasons why it’s weaker than the generally accepted one. It offers the notion that without observation, there is no fact. My interpretation is therefore closer to the classic "if a tree falls in a forest" koan. A conscious observer pulls the arms and locks the slots into place. Think of it like a slot machine that never stops spinning.

Otherwise, it is nothing more than undefined possibility but nothing concrete. In other words: the universe exists in its consistent state only as long as there is life in it to observe it. I think our presence did affect the Eye, in the sense that it collapsed the Eye from limitless possibility and randomness into a concrete, non-quantum-mutating universe. As long as a quantum object is observed, it halts its quantumness.Īdditionally, proximity to the Eye exacerbates the quantumness of quantum objects, which suggests to me that the Eye is the "quantum daddy", the most quantumest quantum there is. The quantum moon proves that those multiple positions are not exactly identical to one another. They exist in all positions, but a conscious observer pins them down in one position. ) but not quite how you reject the more common interpretation. I agree with the theme of your interpretation (acceptance, inevitability, the unfairness of random events such as the interloper.