• AlessaGillespie
    AlessaGillespie closed this thread because:
    Closing this thread because it's become just a source for personal attacks from the same old people.
    01:56, December 11, 2014

    Hi there everyone!

    I was wondering, in SH if you save Cybil and get the Good+ ending, she will survive and replace Harry's wife in the intro sequence. But, that's the only ending in which she survives, and she's never seen nor mentioned in SH3. This made me curious which ending of the original SH is canon? I've read that:

    "Cybil is neither seen nor mentioned in Silent Hill 3. The official Japanese novelization uses the Good+ ending. In a section regarding relationships in the Book of Lost Memories, writer Hiroyuki Owaku stated that what happened to Cybil was "left to players' imaginations". However, the Book of Lost Memories also stated that the Good ending (in which Cybil dies) is the "orthodox ending, which is connected to the third game". In Silent Hill: Homecoming, Deputy Wheeler tells Alex Shepherd and Elle Holloway that a female police officer disappeared when she went to Silent Hill. The only evidence left of her was her motorcycle, which was found crashed on the road to Silent Hill. It is heavily implied this was Cybil. When asked if Cybil was dead on Twitter, developer Masahiro Ito responded "Yes, I remember Cybil is dead." He was then asked the meaning of Owaku's statement, to which he replied "if you choose 'good+' ending among them, she is not dead, maybe." Director Keiichiro Toyama stated that he intended for the Good ending to be the true ending because "Good+ is a game's game", and he believes Owaku developed Silent Hill 3 around the first game's Good ending based on his own previous statements. However, Toyama has changed his mind and now considers the Good+ ending to be the true ending."

    So... with Toyama changing his mind, Owaku saying that it's up to the players' imaginations, the Book of Lost Memories stating that the Good ending was the canon one, Ito saying she died "maybe", and Homecoming referencing her dissapearance it's really A MESS. What do you think guys? Which ending of SH is canon? Was Cybil ever with Harry? And if so, what happened to her?

      Loading editor
    • Well, i think that if we follow the good+ ending params, she could do the same as Harry and Heather, masked her appearance and decided to live a new life without The Order disturbing, but as a cop i'm sure that she was protecting herself someway (probably the same way as Harry, moving from town to town and changing name, but in her case, finding some informants and weapons too) and telling Hary how to protect itself too.

      Anyway, what Cybil is doing or if she's alive or not is a completely mystery, same as you could think for some other characters, they could be alive or not, because in the end you don't know what happens to them, like Laura in Silent Hill 2 (in one of the endings she get out the town with James, but any correct ending of Silent Hill 2 is any ending where James be in Silent Hill, because in Silent Hill 4, Henry talks about "The superintendent son that never came back from silent hill") or even  Henry and Eileen itslef, I have never seen any explanation for what happens next to them...

        Loading editor
    • The canon ending of Silent Hill is ironically not "good+," but just "good."  She was real in the game, yes, but was meant to be killed by Harry on the carousel. Personally, I believe "good+" should've been canon (otherwise, you never even see the parasite), but that's just how things went.

        Loading editor
    • This is an interesting topic; while I agree that it has been all but confirmed that the good ending rather than the good+ is "canon", i think that it was always meant to be interpreted by players, as is nearly the entire series.  Little things like this are left for us to imagine, and fill in the gaps with our own minds.  I think this is what has caused the SH community to be categorized as being very argumentative and somewhat hostile. :P  For me, the good+ is the best ending, and I think that Cybil left Silent Hill with Harry, but did not return to active duty.  I would think they did form a relationship, and ran from the vengeful forces of Claudia and her Order.  Perhaps she was killed or seperated from Harry, before Heather was old enough to remember her?  That is my interpretation at least. :)  Something of an old romantic, I am. Hahaha

        Loading editor
    • Hazardsfury
      Hazardsfury removed this reply because:
      Accident ^_^
      12:13, April 9, 2014
      This reply has been removed
    • Well since Harry is DEAD its pointless to discuss a relationship between Cybil and Harry. It was a terrible move that they killed Harry, he was like Chris Redfield from the Resident Evil series.

        Loading editor
    • "any correct ending of Silent Hill 2 is any ending where James be in Silent Hill, because in Silent Hill 4, Henry talks about "The superintendent son that never came back from silent hill"

      Just because nobody saw James come back from Silent Hill doesn't mean that he got trapped there (as in the Maria ending) or kill himself (as in the In Water ending). Just because you disappear doesn't mean that you turn your car into a submarine. With the Leave ending, it's fair to assume that James cuts ties with everybody and starts a new life somewhere else with Laura. He did just have one hell of an experience that he'd rather move on from after all. Why didn't James ever contact his dad? Well, his dad is the type who keeps umbilical cords locked in a box, so I don't blame James for avoiding his dad.

      As developers have stated for over a decade now, any of the SH2 endings (aside from joke endings of course) could be the canon ending as the 4 endings are all just different endings to the same story. It's up to the player. Now onto the question at hand:

      It's really hard to make sense of what Toyama said in that Twitter because of the Engrish, but he said that he now thinks the Good+ ending is canon, and personally I go by what the director says rather than a game guide.

        Loading editor
    • I don't think James would be able to live with the guilt of letting Eddie and Angela die. That's how I see it.

        Loading editor
    • Why does James need to feel guilty about Eddie and Angela dying? Eddie went insane and had to be killed, his rage got to the point where he threatened to kill James. And James was in no real condition at the time to help Angela, he was just as confused and unsure as she was hence why he doesn't feel he can "save her and take care of her, and heal all of her pain". Angela made her choice to die as she couldn't move on with her life. It has nothing to do with James.

      The Leave ending is all about James being able to overcome his inner demons, and move on from the past, not about saving the other two main characters.

        Loading editor
    • Because any person with a conscience will feel bad about letting someone else die. Toyama previously stated Good was the canon ending, so going by what he now says is just picking and choosing what you want to hear.

        Loading editor
    • I'm not denying that In Water is a likely ending, it's just as likely as any other of the endings. What I'm saying is that it is wrong to say that the correct ending is where James stays in the town, when it's been explicitly stated that it's up to our own interpretation. If you think James' guilt makes the IW ending canon, that's fine, cos I feel differently about it like I've just said. But it's incorrect to assume that SH4 has made it clear that James stayed in the town from an ambiguous comment made by Henry when disappearence can mean so much more than dying.

        Loading editor
    • I never argued that IW is a "true" ending. AFAIK, the only official confirmation is the novelization, which follows IW. I was just pointing out the flaw in your logic regarding James not caring about Angela or Eddie.

        Loading editor
    • Eddie and Angela are like facets of James' personality (one weak, self-loathing and suicidal, the other bitter and angry). I disagree with saying their fates are irrelevant to James.

      I don't see why James would cut off ties to the rest of his society, or go into hiding. There's really no reason to.

      Henry also comments Mary disappeared in Silent Hill, implying her corpse was never found. It just makes sense to me that her corpse is in James's car at the bottom of Toluca Lake. There's also the Rosewater Memorial, which is about people dying of illness and sleeping beneath the lake.

        Loading editor
    • I know Alessa, I was further responding to Grisson's original post in regards to IW being canon. I got side-tracked with the guilt thing.

      And Alex, that's your own interpretation, it's just as likely that Eddie and Angela were real people. Their fates do serve some purpose you could argue, I just see them irrevelvent to James as I feel they have their own journey or struggle which juxtaposes to James. If in Leave, their fates contrast to James as James would be the only one who conquered his inner demons and "moved on" with his life. That in my view, is why I feel Leave is my own canon. Why would James go into hiding? He's been through one hell of an experience.

      He might have conquered his inner demons, but even I would feel like I need to start a new life somewhere else, even Harry chose to move away and start anew, same as Heather after their experiences end. Where's Mary's body? Well, James did pass through a cemetary in the Leave ending, I feel he buried her body in there. It's not like he has to hide anything from Laura anymore, he did just tell her he killed Mary after all. Leave is just as likely as IW, Alex. If you don't see James as the type to move on and start a new life somewhere, fine, but that's what I feel and that's enough.

      And Alessa, I've always felt that Good+ was the ending, I just use the director as a means of backing up what I feel. I'm not saying the entire ending hinges on his words, just like how the entire ending of SH2 doesn't end on Guy Cihi's words. I just personally don't like using a game guide to say if and ending was right or not, I like seeing actual game evidence cos otherwise it's like (nah, you were wrong with your ending, just go with it and accept it). For example, I accept that the Normal ending of SH3 is canon as Douglas is mentioned to have survived and exposed the Cult in Homecoming. That's the kind of stuff I use.

        Loading editor
    • Of course Angela and Eddie are real people, I never said they weren't. I meant they were facets of James's personality from a symbolic, story-perspective.

      I don't see how going through a hellish journey is a reason to cut off your connections with all your family and friends. Starting a new life somewhere else in another city isn't the same as erasing your identity from existence.

      Definitely read the last part of the novel:

        Loading editor
    • Alright, I wasn't bothered even if you thought they weren't real. It's a reason because it's a traumatic and life changing experience. If you found out you blocked out killing your loved one and you travelled to a town full of monsters it created modelled after your psyche and you survive all these horrors and challenges and manage to move on with your life, do you think you could just go back to your regular job and act like nothing happened? I wouldn't, and I'm sure others would feel the same way. SH4 stated that James and Mary went missing, do you think people might be wondering what happened to Mary if James is still at work fine and dandy (well, assuming James has co-workers or whatever). It's not just a hellish journey, it was a journey of manic proportions in which James had to come to terms with his own past and blocked memories and sanity. It would make sense for him to move away and start over, and try and move on from his experience in the town. But that's besides the point, Leave is 25% likely as an ending just like the endings where James stays in the town and Konami have deliberately kept the ending ambiguous so that we can choose the ending for ourselves. I'm jus stating what I feel is likely for the story if Leave is achieved. The reason I think James cuts ties with people after Leave is because since the 4 endings are all possible since we decide for ourselves, each ending needs an explanation for why James isn't seen again. In Water, he's in the lake. Maria, he's possibly trapped in the town as he embraced a delusion, Rebirth maybe he's trapped in the town as well since he tried to channel its dark power (heck, maybe the ritual worked and Mary came back and murdered him Pet Semetary style :D) but the point is with Leave I feel like the reason people don't see James again is because he starts a new life somewhere else.

      Novel adaption ending=/=Video game ending

      From Konami: "In Silent Hill 2, we prepared a couple of different types of endings, but they're all "real" endings -- each ending will give you a complete story. Your actions affect what type of story you see, though, and what some events mean -- at some points, you'll make a decision, and that will send you down one way, where you could have gone another. These decisions tweak your perception of the story, though, more than actual events. Depending on which way you go, your emotions could differ greatly, and your point of view on the story could be different"

      The author of the novel was just writing what he personally felt happen in the game. It does not in any way reflect what happened in the game as we make our own choice.

        Loading editor
    • You're making this more convoluted than it needs to be. It doesn't make sense for James not to tell anyone about what he saw in Silent Hill if he did survive.

      Saying they're all "real" endings isn't the same thing as "there is no canon ending".

      It's always possible Sadamu Yamashita collaborated with Owaku and decided to use "In Water" because it is canon.

        Loading editor
    • All the endings are possible as they're all different endings to the same story. Umm, yes it does mean they're the same thing, the fact that they're all real endings and that Konami have delibertatly kept it ambiguous means that wanted players for themselves to decide what ending they liked more, why can't yo understand this? If that one made you feel more, then that's your one.

      What doesn't make sense to you doesn't mean it doesn't make sense to other people. Heck, with me it doesn't make much sense as to why if James went to the town to kill himself he didn't just go through with it anyway and why we have a whole game but that's just me. It doesn't make sense to me, but it might make sense to others.

        Loading editor
    • I'm not going to bother responding if you keep refusing to see that there is no canon ending for this game as the developers have expressed time and time again that there is none and it's up to our own personal interpretation.

        Loading editor
    • I'm on the BrandonFox's side here. Why? Simply because it's possible to have several separate canons in a story. Drakengard has done it recently: the first game has five endings and there are two "canon canon" endings: second ending, which is the one that's used in Drakengard 2 and upcoming Drakengard 3, and fifth ending (ending E), which is used in NieR, another game in the universe. There's literally nothing that prevents Konami from going down the same route and making one game that uses In Water, another one that uses Leave and another for Promise and the "deal with gods one" (can't remember it's canon name.

      Also, I find it quite ironic that Alex finds it implausible for James to dissapear while still being alive, yet has no issue with four young children getting killed in predictable 50-year intervals at least four times and with nobody noticing, as per Homecoming's canon.

        Loading editor
    • I have no idea why you're saying "Konami said this" rather "Team Silent" which is more accurate. Yes, they may be legit endings for the *player*, but from a developer's canon perspective (canons are a concept becoming increasing popular), it doesn't mean they didn't have a canon ending in mind when they developed the story. Just because we don't *know* which ending is canon, it doesn't mean there isn't one, or that one wasn't kept in mind when developing SH3/SH4.

      Am I saying it's In Water? No, but it's what I believe. Due to Eddie and Angela's deaths, Guy Cihi's and Masahiro Ito's canon, the novelization, the tragic love story from the getgo, Douglas's missing man story, Frank not being in contact with James and Mary, I have my reasons. I also think it's peculiar that In Water is the first ending listed in Translated Memories.

      Other than Translated Memories and one IGN interview, I don't see anything similar being mentioned by the team about there being no canon ending, i.e. ("time and time again").

      James came to the town to commit suicide with Mary, and he didn't go through with it because he mentally repressed her murder.

      We're having a polite civil discussion. Whatever your stance is, just please don't be a raging asshole about it.

        Loading editor
    • So you realize that there are legit endings for each player, but you still think that the developers have a canon ending in mind when they develop a story which must mean that there is a canon ending? There either is a canon ending or there isn't one. Since the developers have not stated that any of the endings are the correct ones, it means that there isn't. I'm not saying that because we don't know what the canon is that there is no canon, I'm saying that because the developers have really said that all of the endings give a complete story, that none of them are completly right.  You keep refuting the fact that it's up to the individual and saying that deep down the devs thought In Water is canon just because that's the way the novel ended.

      Furthermore, while I'm not disputing IW as a candidate it is peculiar how even after James learns he was the one who killed Mary from watching the tape just a short while ago, Angela asks him on the burning stairway if he's saving the knife for himself and James responds that he'd "never kill himself". He seems to be against suicide, even though now would be the right time for him to start thinking about it.

      And I have my reasons for not thinking that a disappearence means death for reasons I've just said, from starting a new life somewhere else. There are over a thousand people who go missing in my country every year, just because you're missing it does not automatically mean you are dead. I don't care if you think In Water is the right ending because that's your view and I respect it, all I'm trying to prove is that there is no canon ending, only an ending which feels right for the player, which I feel I have proved as the devs themselves have said there is no canon ending and it's up to us to choose. I also don't see how the listing of endings in the translated memories book exactly points to IW being the canon ending. Leave is listed first in the Silent Hill 2 endings on this site but that doesn't exactly make it the right ending and neither should a placement in a book given as to what strange reasoning that it. Calling me a raging asshole doesn't exactly help either.

      There is no canon ending. What you get is what you get depending on what your actions were.

        Loading editor
    • Again, find more interviews, other than Translated Memories and IGN, or you're putting words in Team Silent's mouths. And keep in mind, Translated Memories is a fan translation.

      You're claiming with authority and audacity that there IS NO canon ending, or even the possibility of there being one at all, whereas I'm arguing that stance that it's kept in ambiguity and the possibility of there being a canon ending is still there.

      For SH1's endings, Good (the canon ending) is listed in the top left corner. I'm just saying it's peculiar that In Water is listed first instead of Leave.

      And no, I'm not saying you are a raging asshole, I'm just saying to avoid that attitude.

        Loading editor
    • The point of the gameis to leave the endings ambiguous. The developers have said, "whatever ending you get is the real one." You're speculating yourself when you say that there's a canon ending when the devs have never said there was one.

        Loading editor
    • Why would anyone still believe Good+ is canon? Ito disproved it, BOLM disproves it, and even Toyama said the third game was written off the Good ending. There is simply no possible way Good+ is official canon.

        Loading editor
    • Ito (Art) said Cybil died yet on the other hand Owaku (Writing) said that her fate was left to the player's imaginations.

        Loading editor
    • "whatever ending you get is the real one."

      They never necessarily said that word-for-word, though. Personal canon and official in-game canon are two different things.

      "they're all "real" endings -- each ending will give you a complete story." could simply mean that each ending is a possible legitimate conclusion to the story.

        Loading editor
    • could simply mean that each ending is a possible legitimate conclusion to the story

      That only serves to further illustrate my point that each of the endings is jsut as possible as the other. Furthermore, Ito isn't the writer but is the art guy. Ito is only saying his personal canon, like he said "it was In Water for me". His opinions aren't authoritative on the plot.

        Loading editor
    • From a narrative perspective, I mean, but it's not set-in-stone proof that removes the possibility of one ending being canon for the rest of the series.

      Let me put it this way: just because something is like a "Choose your own adventure" novel, and every outcome is a legitimate possible conclusion to the narrative of the story, it doesn't necessarily mean that the author didn't choose particular ending in mind which they decided is the true/canon one. It's unrevealed, sure, doesn't mean it's not there.

      Virtue's Last Reward has 24 endings, for example, and there's only one true path which is canon:

      Anyway, whatever. This discussion is getting tedious, and we're just going around in circles.

        Loading editor
    • I've never played Virtue so I don't know what you're on about. But if you're saying that since Virtue is a game where you choose the adventure and every outcome is a legitimate conclusion to the story but there is only one path which is canon, then there is a canon ending then isn't there which completely refutes the comparison you're trying to make to SH2? You can't compare it to SH2 as each of the 4 endings is a legitimate conclusion, but you're missing the detail where one of the writers ever said that one of the endings was the true ending. Ito who again, is only the art/design guy, only ever gave us what he felt was his true ending, but it doesn't dictate on there being a canon ending or not. It's ambiguous, because it's up to the player. None of the further games in the series ever flat out say James was found dead in a lake, only that he disappeared which doesn't instantly mean dead. If any of the writers ever said one of the endings was canon then I'd agree with you but since none of them ever have, then I never will. Novelizations have no effect on the continuity of a series.

        Loading editor
    • Just because Ito did the art does not automatically mean they kept him out of the room any time they discussed the ending. Owaku was clearly talking about what players want to believe, not the official canon (unless you're trying to argue that the Bad and Bad+ endings are possibly canon). Officially, BOLM says Good is the true ending, Ito says it's the true ending, and even Toyama said SH1 and SH3 were written with the Good ending as canon. There's no getting around it: Good is the official ending.

        Loading editor
    • Virtue's Last Reward is like a "choose your own adventure" novel about 9 people being trapped in a warehouse facility, forced to play a deadly death game. Your actions determine the character's fates. There's one particular ending where everyone commits mass suicide:


      It's not canon, but it's also a legitimate possible real conclusion to the story from a narrative perspective. That's what I mean.

      Ito and Owaku are like BFFs. Ito isn't just some random guy who makes art, he is a legit member of Team Silent and is heavily involved with the entire planning of the story.

      Also, who are you to say novelizations have no effect on a series' canon? There are plenty of novels that are canon and provide additional backstory. Anne's Story will be canon to Downpour.

        Loading editor
    • I'm referring to when someone makes a novel adaptation of a videogame, not when they make a novel which explores other stuff in universe, hence the term novelization of a game. Mass Effect has novels which explore other characters in the series by one of the writers like Captain Anderson and Saren which I appreciate as providing additional story. I'm not referring to someone literally doing an almost word for word novel transition of the game itself.

      Ito isn't the writer. He's artist and designer. He's a valuble member yes, but his opinions don't dictate on the games plot, otherwise he'd be listed as the writer along with Owaku, but he isn't.

        Loading editor
    • I don't think anyone has the right to claim SH2: The Novel isn't canon. For the most part, it's 90% retelling of the game, with 10% devoted to additional backstory, such as Angela's past.

      The way you said "Novelizations have no effect on the continuity of a series." rubbed me the wrong way.

        Loading editor
    • That's a very narrow viewpoint, and a great way to write off anyone who doesn't say what you want them to. No matter how you try to twist it, he was privy to the series' canon story, and would know better than any fan. When he answered the question about Cybil, he did not state his personal opinion, but very clearly said she is dead. Nowhere does he say "in my opinion", or anything like that. Trying to argue that he doesn't know what he's talking about is quite disrespectful towards him, and there is no evidence to back it up.

        Loading editor
    • Ito is still the artist and is not the writer unlike Owaku no matter how much you try and twist how important he was to the game's story.

      When you state a personal opinion, you don't automatically have to say that it's your opinion when you say it. Ice cream tastes good. I remember that it was good. Is that not an opinion? I'm juxatposing Ito saying that she's dead to Owaku who is important to the game's story that her fate was left to player imagination. Even though Toyama said the third game was written with her dead as canon, Owaku still makes this debatable as he said it's left to player imagination and while it doesn't mean that she deffo lived, it still means that her dead isn't concrete.

      I don't understand why you are so absolute against cybil living and adamant to wonder why on earth anyone would believe she lives. You can't even use Toyama as a backing up for her deffo being dead as he's changed his mind since.

      "But, now, I change my mind and consider the "Good+" is a true ending."

      It's just one complete debate as the creators can't even seem to agree. And while I don't really like myself for saying so, the official Jap novelizatio follows the good+ ending which could at least show Alex how a novelization of the game itself doesn't affect continuity. I'm not even saying she's definitely alive, just that Good and Good+ are both worthy considerations.

        Loading editor

      That blurb is right next to paragraph that begins with "In the Good+ ending". Yes, in the GOOD+ ENDING, what Harry and Cybil do after escaping the town is unknown. That doesn't necessarily apply to the other endings.

      "The orthodox ending which is connected to the third game."

      Nuff said.

      And no, we aren't Cybil haters or anything. I fucking love Cybil, she's one of my favorite characters in the series, but I can't deny that she is canonically dead.

        Loading editor
    • Creator's commentary: "what happens to cybil afterwards is left to player's imaginations" on that very page. THe book just seems to contradict itself really. Good or + are possible.

        Loading editor
    • Edit: I understand now that he was only saying that what happened to cybil after the good+ ending is up to player imagination, my bad.

      I still stand by my belief on SH2 not having a canon ending however due to none of the writers ascertaining that any one ending is canon.

        Loading editor
    • Ito was a high-ranking member of the team who created the games, and needed to know the story in full to create meaningful contributions. It is completely ridiculous to act as though the writers kept important aspects of the story to themselves, presumably while rubbing their hands together and giggling maniacally. There is no reason whatsoever to assume he doesn't know what he's talking about, and again, it's highly disrespectful to him to insist he may be ignorant of the story in a game series he helped create.

      "Ice cream is good" is so not even kind of the same thing as "I remember Cybil is dead". Tastes in food are subjective - everyone in the history of ever understands that, which is why it's common to not add "in my opinion" or something similar to the end of such statements. On the other hand, whether or not a game character is dead is not personal opinion, especially when someone is clearly asking what her factual status is. There is not one drop of evidence that Ito was stating an opinion, and I'm seriously amazed that anyone could even read that tweet and reach such a conclusion.

        Loading editor
    • ^ I actually agreed that Cybil died with my last comment. I still disagree with the whole thing about Ito providing proof on the matter as he is till just artist and is not story writer, and if he was important to the story he'd be listed as such. Jeez, I'm not disrespecting the guy, I think he's awesome. The series I felt was dealt a punch when Ito and indeed when the Team was lost at least from what I can see from playing 1/3 of Origins, as the Butcher's appearence to me seems shallow and uninspired compared to SH2's pyramid head by Ito. And please don't make the presumption that I think all the writers are just a bunch of dr.evils who sit in a room and rub their hands together maniacally, all I'm saying is that if Ito is never listed as writer and his role was monster design I don't think he ever was writer. Moreover, the whole "I remember" comment could have been him just hearing so many times from fans or whatnot that she died and therefore that's what he thinks is the canon. But I do agree now that she died from the book saying that's the orthodox ending.

      I still think the whole matter being decided from the basis of the book saying what ending was right though. Good or Good+ could have been possible as SH3 and newer games make no distinct indication of her having died but it was only when the book says she her living was not right which did not make it right with me. When I accept a character dying I like to see game proof of their demise to make the canon make sense. I know that while it's possible for Shepard to die at the end of Mass Effect 2 that it isn't canon as otherwise Mass Effect 3 couldn't take place. Furthermore, if one of the actual writers had stated that she indeed died and Good was canon, I'd be happy with that. Or even if when you find Harry's entries in SH3 which made an indication of her dying, like maybe Harry is reflecting in his guilt of having to kill her I would have accepted as it's game evidence which provides emotional meaning and clarity as opposed to a game guide just simply stating what ending was canon. Do I know she died as canon? Yes, I do now (as I misinterpreted Owaku's comment in the book). Do I accept her death as having a good enough explanation? No.

        Loading editor
    • Reading this reminds me why I left this page. AlessaGillespie and AlexShepherd working together constantly to undermine anyone who disagrees with their personal point of view. Ironic that you say you can't "pick and choose" what you want to hear and yet here's you doing exactly that.

      Right here in this conversation are quotes from Owaku AND Toyama changing their minds about the solid ending, and adding Ito into it makes it even less clear. Especially with Japanese developers, they don't have the same "auteur" quality that makes them perfect experts on their own worlds, and it's perfectly possible (and indeed likely) that while they may have their own favourite endings they don't expect everyone to be beholden to them. This is just two fans arguing with another fan but expecting their opinion to be better somehow. I wish I could inject some humility into every Silent Hill fan who thinks their opinion is best and "more supported" by the developers.

        Loading editor
    • PrototypeC wrote: Reading this reminds me why I left this page. AlessaGillespie and AlexShepherd working together constantly to undermine anyone who disagrees with their personal point of view. Ironic that you say you can't "pick and choose" what you want to hear and yet here's you doing exactly that.

      Right here in this conversation are quotes from Owaku AND Toyama changing their minds about the solid ending, and adding Ito into it makes it even less clear. Especially with Japanese developers, they don't have the same "auteur" quality that makes them perfect experts on their own worlds, and it's perfectly possible (and indeed likely) that while they may have their own favourite endings they don't expect everyone to be beholden to them. This is just two fans arguing with another fan but expecting their opinion to be better somehow. I wish I could inject some humility into every Silent Hill fan who thinks their opinion is best and "more supported" by the developers.

      Left what? This "page"? This is your first reply in this page to begin with.

      And please don't be so judgmental, I'm (or anyone else) aren't "expecting our opinion to be better".

      Good is the canon ending. Toyama wasn't involved with SH2/SH3, or anything after SH1. Also, Owaku is NOT changing his mind about anything.

        Loading editor
    • If you've been around this site before, then you should know that personal attacks are not allowed. If you want to discuss the subject, then feel free to do so, but your entire post was just bashing Alex and I. The Good ending is canon, as stated by official materials. You can like whatever ending you want (as can the devs), but it's been officially stated that SH3 was based on the Good ending.

        Loading editor
    • Whoa there people. I just wanted to know your opinions, didn't want to start a war of some sorts. I haven't checked this thread for months and when I come back you argue. Easy, peace & love. Thanks for all the contribution, it's either the Good or Good+ because Harry needs to live, so I guess we may say that all three devs were saying simply which of the endings they liked.

        Loading editor
    • I know my reply to this post comes way too late... but looking at this whole discussion reminds me that SH probabily has one of the most divided fan base in the gaming series scene. Folks it's an ending that really doesn't change anything about what we know about the series, it doesn't matter if Cibyl dies or lives... the story carries on with Harry and Heather.

      In my view I never felt the need to chose one of the endings, very much like in SH2, it's not the ending that matters it's the journey to it.

      Another thing, and it's one thing that I have said to Alessa and AlexShepperd before and that I think it's really wrong in this wikia, is the way you two act. In this particular subject I have exactly the same opinnion as you guys, but you two are admin, you guys shouldn't intervene the way you do, often gang up against someone.

      Like I said, in this particular subject you guys are right, there are possible endings but the devs while making the story may have done so with a particular ending in mind but that doesn't make it right for you guys to jump on top of someone, let the other members of the wikia do the against-arguments and take a more "moderator like" role in it. You guys are obviously free to state your opinions, but not the way you often do...

      If you keep that up you guys will discourage people from discussing more interesting (often polemic, or less clear aspects) subjects of the game and the result will be more goofy discussion subjects like: "what´s your favorite monster?!" or "If your were a turist in slent hill where would you go?!" It's either that or you'll have less and less activity in this wikia to a point where it becomes stale. Please don't get offended by this, see it as a suggestion. 

        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.