In how far is an in game answer better than a outside answer, in game sources can still contradict each other?
Dude, all of this is fiction, there is no prove for anything, it’s all made up by the devs. It very vague to speak of “proof” in this context.
And in how do they go back and forth on new-U?
It’s very simple: they have an NPC tell the player “use that things that actually doesn’t exist” so he says “use the new-U-station” and for the rest of the game, they never mention it.
They mention taking people’s DNA out of the New-U systems as to justify Rolands death being permanent and being unrevivable, Jack tells you to kill yourself and proceeds to pay you for doing so, but then they say it’s not canon. That’s going back and forth. There’s a fk ton of plot holes and contradictory ■■■■ that they retcon a billion times over. New U isn’t Cannon, then character customization isn’t cannon, yet they use it as a fairly major plot device in tales. Saying your theory is right and other people are wrong because of what burch or some other guy says on twitter is equally insane.
I trust what’s actually tangible then things tossed around on twitter.
character customization ISN’T canon. all 4 characters are always there, with all threee skill trees filled. thats the canon version of…every rpg ever.
Yes.
That is, until you find out why Tina is torturing Fleshstick: he sold Tina’s parents out to Hyperion, and she had to watch them get tortured to death in front of her (which subsequently shattered her mind and turned her into the person she is now).
Krieg being Tina’s father is still speculation.
It’s canon as of tales they use it as a plot device And there’s no gameplay jargon explanation for that they use an in game player tool to advance the plot.
not talking about clothes, but about skill trees.
If Krieg were Tina’s Dad there were tons of possibilities how all doubt could be removed. But nothing of that happens.
Pandora is not a nice place were family reunions happen. They are just two lunatics on a planet full of lunatics, that were also two of many many victims of Jacks cruelty.
What the devs say is the here-say. Think of this 20,years ago nintendo and miyamoto said there is no over aching storyline to zelda then fans made up one so nintendo made it the main story enough people agree the devs will follow.
Yeah, but the Krieg is Tina’s dad theory is stupid. It’s too convenient, it like a bad soap opera:“I was your father all along but I lost my memory”. Look all these scenarios that could have been a dead giveaway, they all did happen.
its stupid, for being too convenient? Sounds like its perfect just by your logic. Sometimes, somewhere, things ARE convenient.
It’s is too convenient AND it is stupid for a couple of other reason.
With convenient I mean that just because both *lost someone they must the person the other one is looking for. That’s like a bad soap opera.
*there is no evidence that “she” is dead.
her, as in krieg’s grace, or tina’s mom? because there’s no evidence either are dead.
But if they were still alive there would be tons of evidence. And the lack of this evidence proofs that they are not alive.
The guy with the eye patch is papa burch from “hey ash watcha playing -Sleep is death”
still not in game canon.
Do you still think the image of the guy with the eye patch on the bus is still evidence that he is her father?
It’s easy to be the Contrarian and to say Theory A is wrong cuz there’s no real evidence of a b c. We can easily say your Samuels being tested on and being “Psycho Friends” with Krieg theory is equally stupid and convenient for the same reason.
It’s probably the case that Krieg was in the same test group as Tiny Tina and her Mother, but he coulda been one of the gay couple (Most likely the Shivers Guy because of his normal voice not sounding like the first guy), Erik Franks, Tina’s Father, or some random Third Party that was there but not mentioned.
I personally lean more towards him being a rando third party or the shivers guy, but to completely dismiss equally plausible theories is kinda lame too.
What about the letter in son of cramerax? That’s a pretty strong evidence. It’s also explains why “she” pushes a knife into his sternum.
And still most important: the lack of evidence. It’s not simply that there is not evidence, but if this theory were true there were lost of evidence. What of evidence could my theory create?
maybe tina’s mom stabbed him with a scalpel to try to save him from the torture, but samuels brought him back, but insane. hence why she’s so sorry.
That evidence could also be thrown away as easily just like you threw away other evidence for other plausible theories. For example Samuels could have written a perfectly normal letter and since krieg is, well krieg, he psycho’s it up, or she Coulda written it in psycho terms so he could read it, or krieg could just be crazy and saying what he wants to hear or its a completely different person named Sammy or blah blah blah. Nothing concrete saying that Samuels became a test subject just like no concrete evidence as to exactly which test subject Krieg is. It’s all circumstantial opening up a bunch of plausible theories.
What evidence did I throw away? I carefully dissected everything.
It isn’t even necessary that Samuels is also insane, but she could have written it this way so Krieg can understand it better.
It’s possible that became a test subject right before both escaped.