Talk:Riku Replica

Tragic Villain Question
Honestly, he seems more like an anti-hero. Veroso 16:55 29 May, 2009


 * The thing is, no matter what, he's not on Sora's side. I think we should use the term "antagonist" since it's technically morally neutral while at the same time opposing the protagonist (Sora).—Urutapu 20:01, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I just want to thank KrytenKoro for (kinda) agreeing with me. And I have to say that if the Riku Replica had found out Namine wasn't really his friend, and of he had somehow gotten angry at Sora for this and had tried to kill him, and then Sora had killed him, that would make him a tragic villan. But that didn't happen. Veroso 21:23 30 May, 2009

om this note I suggest a comparison to Xion.

Besides, he wasn't the only tragic villain, couldn't the Experiment be considered a tragic villain?(Bananaphone1996 02:34, August 8, 2010 (UTC))

It's an opinion, pure and simple. You could consider all of the nobodies tragic in some way, since their main goal is just to be whole again. Xehanort, a main corrupted by darkness, by his own choice and foolishness, is tragic in a way. The actual articles aren't the place for opinions, but they're great to have, and we have forums so people can voice them.02:39, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

The Emblem's Appearances
"The only time when the Replica did not have a Heartless emblem on its chest was when he first bumped into Sora."

Correction. The emblem was also absent when the Replica first met Riku. The scenes in Re:Chain of Memories for Riku's story support this statement. JudgmentDay95 15:23 10 July, 2009

The image
I meant to just rescale it so there wasent as much pixelation seen, But i broke it instead. Does anyone know how to fix it?

I got it. -- James  Havoc  03:16, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Trivia
It was unimportant..hence deletion. One less article without trivia! ^^-- Xion 4  ever  04:07, February 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm wondering why I didn't do that myself... Trust your instincts Random! I almost feel bad for the poor trivia...-- Random! to a point!  04:09, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

The Image
Umm...

I was just wondering why the pic of data Riku is being used for the Replica?

Is it that Data Riku is in fact the Replica

If not, then I believe that the image should be reverted, as the pic is one of Data Riku and not one of the Riku Replica.--Raph the Great 19:06, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Good point. Why is Data-Riku's image is at Riku Replica's page?-- 18:38, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Because the Riku Replica wears the black coat in KH3D. maggosh 18:39, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but this is like having an image of Data-Sora as the main pic on Sora's page. Same look, but different characters, I just don't think it should be the main image on this page. maybe have somewhere on the page, but even then, we could just have a picture of him in the cutscene in KH3D. maybe if we can get the model of him as he appears in KH3D then we could make a render.

But if the Dark mode picture of him is a picture of Riku's Dark Mode, then I guess we can leave the Data Riku pic.--Raph the Great 19:06, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

"maybe if we can get the model of him as he appears in KH3D then we could make a render." Oh, so you know a way of decompiling a 3DS game now? Anyways, Riku Replica has so far appeared in 3 outfits, the cloak, the Dark suit and Riku's normal clothes. 19:10, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Riku, Riku-Replica, and Data-Riku each appear in Riku's normal clothes, in the Dark Mode, and in the Black Coat. By intent, these forms are exactly identical in appearance, and so the only reason not to use the images interchangeably is that they were released with a game that depicted a different copy of the character. However, in-universe these images all depict the same "shape".
 * On a related note, we use the Re:coded images for various Disney characters throughout the wiki, despite them accurately representing the "Data" versions. If absolutely necessary for consensus, we can rename all of these images as if they were Riku in whichever game he first wore the respective outfit, but as for using screenshots: there is no benefit in using lower-quality images to illustrate the same thing when we have higher-quality versions.
 * On a side note, I heavily dislike lead images ever being the Black Coat version of a character, and would like to suggest (as a faint desire, not as a position I'm committed to) the option that we use the alternate outfit for a Black Coat character when available. (This could affect Mickey, Roxas, Ansem the Wise, Master Xehanort (do we have an image of him in his Black Coat?), Young Xehanort, Ansem SoD, Xemnas, Riku Replica, Riku, and Data-Riku.) 19:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Heavily against your idea, KrytenKoro. I personally believe the Dark Mode image should be left up, because it's never actually stated if that even is the Riku Replica. - 24.63.239.203 21:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It's implied, considering the fact Riku says "That's the darkness from my past" or something along the lines of that and then inquires the player to read the "Chain of Memories" chronicle. All these point to Riku Replica who was created in Chain of Memories and also is within Riku's past as well as using Darkness. 21:56, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Which idea? Showing the unique costumes, as we already do for most of these, or that it's the Riku Replica, which is all-but-explicitly-stated by the game? 16:56, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Riku, Riku Replica and Data-Riku look exactly the same, there is no reason not to interchange their images if needed. Also there is no new render for Riku Replica available, I think the Ultimania doesn't even mention him once. If I remember correctly I named the file "Riku Replica KH.png" more than a years ago because even if it was used for the fight against Riku with his Soul Eater in all guides, the name would become to convoluted (like "Riku (Dark Mode with Soul Eater) KH.png" or something like that) so naming it after Riku Replica (which is also the only image apart from his cards that is directly associated with him until know) was more convinient and we hadn't used a KHCOM prefix then yet, so it was KH. --ShardofTruth 17:55, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I think we can either name that image "Riku (Dark Mode) KH.png", or fudge and call it "Riku Replica KHCOM.png".192.249.47.177 19:45, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The first option is the way we normally take so I'm okay with that, but what about "Riku (Dark) KH.png", shouldn't we rename that one too? --ShardofTruth 20:07, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Dream Drop Distance
We don't know if the Riku who appeared in Monstro in KH3D was the Riku Replica or if it was a version of Riku possessed by Ansem. Riku seemed to think it was the latter, since he essentially said "I've faced a dark imitation of myself before and now I'm fighting my actual dark side," like this Dark Riku and the Riku Replica were two separate dark sides of himself. It's definitely possible that it's the Riku Replica, and I actually sort of think it is, but it's not a certainty. The way the article is written now makes it seem like it was implicitly implied that it was Repliku, but I can't think of how to rewrite it to not sound that way, since this is the Replica's article. Fabala011 (talk) 17:49, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Doesn't Xehanort specifically state that Riku, despite giving in to darkness at one point, was unusable because he had become immune? It seems pointless that they would bring back Dark Riku, then, especially since (1) It's basically just Ansem SoD, and (2) even if time travel was involved, you'd think Riku would resist fighting himself even while possessed. I dunno, I guess we need ultimania clarification on this. 18:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * "implicitly implied that it was Repliku", it was. After that cutscene a memoir menu comes up asking if you want to read up on Chain of Memories. 19:25, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * And even this alone is quite reliable, as almost all the other memoirs come up after a relevant scene. Additionally, bringing in a Dark Riku would be pointless because even though his surroundings might change, he would likely still try to fight off the darkness inside him, just like he already did. 21:47, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * "that's not enough proof. what's proof is that this is not the original riku, but looks just like riku at the end of com who riku replica looks just like only wearing a black coat. it only makes sense to leave it as is." - Erry
 * You just said yourself that we don't know for sure who this is. It could be Riku when he leaves Castle Oblivion, it could be Riku Replica, t could be just a dream version of Riku, or it could be something else. There's not enough proof for this character to be Riku Replica. - 15:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It's implied, and that's enough proof for me. 16:56, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Riku says, "That was my... my dark side. I gave in to the darkness once. And ever since, it's chased me around in one form or another. The Seeker of Darkness who stole my body... a puppet replica of the shadows in my heart... and now, I'm facing me."
 * Riku didn't say that this particular person was Riku Replica, he only referenced him. He references Ansem, he references Riku Replica and then he says that the guy he just met was himself. Implying that he was nothing more than a representation of his darkness. Probably a dream representation of Riku from when he kidnapped Pinocchio. Also notice how you don't unlock the Chain of Memories Chronicle when the unknown removes his hood, but when Riku references Riku Replica. - 17:12, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm still sticking with the Riku Replica, until later confirmation because you don't just pull a "oooh all connected" like that and it's not even connected. 17:58, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Based on the chronicle, and also the fact the scene mirroring Sora's with Vanitas, and finally that requiring it to be a dream self would require introducing another character...the most responsible thing right now is to cover this on the Riku Replica page until we get clarification from the next game or an ultimania. If we must, we can say that the character is not explicitly identified, but this is still the best place to cover the character. 19:25, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Since we're not sure if this Riku is Vexen's replica, we shouldn't have the Riku in the Black Coat as the infobox image. The one in Chain of Memories died after being defeated by the real Riku in Twilight Town. If someone were to time travel to retrieve him, wouldn't someone mention that in the game? Riku didn't say it was his Replica. He said it was his dark side. Since the game is about dreams like the movie Reception, that Riku is more likely a dream version of Riku and not Vexen's replica. SeanWheeler (talk) 21:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know about any movie called "Reception", but I agree. Riku doesn't even say that it's the Replica. He sees a personification of his dark side (remember how when he was "evil", he took Pinocchio captive in Monstro much like the mysterious boy did?), and it reminds him of how he once submitted to darkness and how that fact has followed him on his journey in various forms. He mentions the Seeker of Darkness who stole his body, and the replica of the shadows in his heart. It's more like seeing the "dark side" again makes him reflect on his past; he's not saying "That was the replica." - 22:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Exactly, which is why the infobox image needs to be changed back to Riku's Dark Mode. Just because he looks like Riku, doesn't mean it is the Replica made by Vexen. According to the scene, it was a personification of Riku's dark side. Riku referenced Vexen's Replica to give the player a memoir of Chain of Memories. Having Data Riku's image in the infobox was the effect of speculation. I tried to replace the image with the picture of Riku Replica from Re:Chain of Memories but Maggosh reverted my edit without a reason. Why, Maggosh? I was trying to remove speculation and you put it back in. I made the right edit, didn't I? SeanWheeler (talk) 23:07, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree. I see no point in having the infobox image be black coated Riku. It doesn't even make any sense. The doppleganger that appears in KH3D being the same as the Riku Replica in KHCoM is nothing but speculation. For all we know, that could've been nothing more than an illusion created by Young Xehanort and/or Ansem. It makes much more sense that infobox image be Dark Mode Riku.
 * (Oh and about that movie mentioned earlier, I think you were thinking about "Inception".) Blackchaos27 (talk) 19:04, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Darn you Erry! You undid my edit and protected the page even though the Dark Mode Riku is the correct image and it makes no sense to have the image to be Riku in the Black Coat. Erry and Maggosh are insisting that the Black Coated Riku was Vexen's Replica, even though we have pointed out evidence about it not being Vexen's Replica and that is an act speculation which is against the rules of the mainspace making you hypocrites. SeanWheeler (talk) 23:00, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Here's what we know:
 * 1) A copy of KH1/CoM-era Riku appears before Riku in Prankster's Paradise. After it disappears, the Chronicles for KHCoM shows up.
 * 2) All other Chronicles appear after scenes that depict characters from that game; Days is obtained after the Roxas-Axel scene is revisited, BbS is obtained after Vanitas is shown, KH1 is obtained after Ansem is shown, KH2 is obtained after Xemnas is shown (I believe), and coded is obtained after Maleficent and Pete try to retake the dataspace.
 * 3) No "generic personification of Riku's dark side" appears anywhere else in the series.
 * 4) In La Cite des Cloches, Vanitas appears to Sora in a similar scene; Vanitas is a creation of the darkness in the heart of Ventus, which sleeps within Sora.
 * 5) Riku: "That was my...my dark side. I gave in to the darkness once. And ever since, it's chased me around in one form or another. The Seeker of Darkness who stole my body...a puppet replica of the shadows in my heart...and now, I'm facing me."

Now, it's true that the character is not explicitly said to be Riku Replica, and we don't have any other scenes of the Riku Replica wearing a black coat. However, as regards possible Seekers of Darkness, Riku Replica is a better candidate than Ansem-Riku (who is basically the same being as Ansem), and Riku-Ansem is explicitly not a viable candidate. Riku's quote does not explicitly rule out the Replica, it just notes that he is one again facing his darkness. Finally, the only times Riku has worn a black coat himself, he has either been absolutely not a seeker of darkness (at the end of CoM, or as Data-Riku), or he has had a totally different appearance (Days Riku, or Riku-Ansem). Furthermore, Ansem-Riku from KH1 wore the Dark Mode suit at all times, and it is clear from the boots that this Riku is not wearing the Dark Mode suit, so it's not him. The apparition being Riku Replica is an obvious impression to take from the Chronicle showing up, and from mirroring the scene with Vanitas. Riku Replica is quite literally a personification of Riku's dark side, and he's the only form of Riku this character could be without assuming the existence of a totally new character which nothing in the series has yet suggested, nor does KH3D explicitly claim it.

This is absolutely more than "just speculation". What it is is assuming that the game isn't lying to us when depicts what appears to be a certain character, then tells us that this character appeared in a certain game. Assuming otherwise is both assuming that totally new characters were added in with no fanfare (extremely odd), and that we now need to distrust a character appearance whenever they aren't explicitly named. Now, it could absolutely have been just a dream of Riku Replica, rather than the actual Riku Replica from the real world. However, that's true for virtually all characters in this game, including robed Ansem.

Finally: the character absolutely exists (we see him, for crying out loud), and it will be covered on this wiki. If you truly believe that this article is not the most accurate place to cover it, then you need to suggest a better place, because throwing out coverage of published info is not an option.

Also:
 * "we have pointed out evidence about it not being Vexen's Replica"

No you haven't, you've argued that it can't be known for sure. Given all the other characters that reappeared in this game, there's no obstacle to Riku Replica showing up. 00:07, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I actually meant "we pointed out evidence about the possibility of it not being Vexen's replica." There is a chance that it's Vexen's Replica, but it is very slim. We can still keep the Dream Drop Distance section of the article because Riku mentions Vexen's Replica in that scene. However, we can't have the infobox image be Riku in a Black Coat, because we don't know if the Black Coated Riku is the replica. The infobox image needs to stick to Dark Mode Riku until we get confirmation that the Riku doppleganger is Vexen's Replica. SeanWheeler (talk) 13:18, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Evidence about the possibility of the off-chance pertaining to the once-in-a-blue-moon-er moment... maggosh 13:25, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No, you did not present any evidence for an alternative. You're not arguing it could be a definite other person, you're arguing evidence of existence from absence, which is pointless if not exactly false.
 * as for coverage: reread what I said. THIS character appeared, with a visual depiction and everything. If you believe he should not be treated as implicitly the replica, then give me a page title you think I should move his coverage to. 20:18, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Japanese video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y69PqcjPxmo

From me on the IRC: he says "that is my darkness who has appeared as EACH OF THESE THINGS he equates (1) Riku-Ansem (2) Repliku (3) HISSELF that is the OPPOSITE of saying that Riku-Ansem, Repliku, and the thing that just appeared are distinct the DREAM RIKU INTERPRETATION IS A MISINTERPRETATION FROM AN UNCAUTIOUS TRANSLATION "and now as me myself"/そして俺自身 it's just a reiteration of his neuroses from throughout the whole game and last few games, that he sees himself as a fallen creature of darkness there's no "I'm describing that dude specifically here, who is different from the other things I just described" 04:11, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

"a puppet replica of the shadows in my heart...and NOW, I'm facing ME." "This world seems to have gone back in time." Need I say more? 97.81.35.41 17:57, 13 February 2013 (UTC) Rex Ronald Rilander
 * Apparently, because it's not clear what you're trying to say. In any case, the original Japanese line does not have the implication that the apparition is obviously distinct from the Repliku. 06:03, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

But aren't we supposed to be the ENGLISH wiki? And how is that not clear?(a rhetorical question) 97.81.35.41 18:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC) Rex Ronlad Rilander

English wiki doesn't mean we ignore the authorial context when basing an interpretation on assumption.

And no, its not clear. Just say what you're trying to argue instead of trying to be snarky.184.244.185.5 20:23, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Snarky?! I'm not being snarky, I'm being reasonable. At the very least I'm not arguing to no end. How about we just agree to disagree, all of us, and stop this pointless arguing? Well, that's what I'm gonna do, you guys do what you want. 97.81.35.41 22:05, 17 February 2013 (UTC) Rex Ronald Rilander
 * ...You still haven't made it clear whether you're even disagreeing. Seriously, stop wasting time being snarky and just state whatever your point is. As it is, you're wasting our time. 01:28, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

There seems to be a lack of solid evidence that the Riku we saw in Monstro was Riku Replica. Sure, it would make good sense, but relying on any implications, regardless of how strong, would be simply speculating, and unless something's changed lately, we don't deal with speculation, only solid facts and evidence, and there seems to be none that say that this Riku is the Riku Replica. As far as Riku mentioning the Replica and the CoM chronicle appearing in that cutscene, I have this to say: A) Riku mentioned the Replica, he did not identify the cloaked Riku as such. B) Yes, the CoM chronicle did appear shortly after the cloaked Riku vanished, it was not cued by his presence, but by Riku's aforementioning of the Replica. Therefore, none of the events that mention the Replica have any direct attachment to the cloaked Riku, therefore there is no direct evidence that said Riku was the Replica, therefore the infobox should be changed back P.S. Sorry for resurrecting an old dispute, but I only just now discovered the change and I feel that if I think that the wiki made a mistake, it should be rectified, regardless of how long ago it was-- 08:14, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Riku Replica is the only logical choice AT THIS TIME. We know it's not Data-Riku because 3D isn't inside the datascape. So Riku Replica is the only logical choice that isn't Riku himself, and we know that it isn't Riku himself from what we have. The CoM stuff is just extra evidence that it MAY be Riku Replica, but all fingers point to Riku Replica AT THIS TIME. Hopefully more info is given out before KH3 or with KH3. 08:55, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * So the only thing we have is best guess? Last I checked we only posted stuff that we have evidence for. The only thing that even suggests that this is Riku Replica is that it looks like Riku, which isn't really evidence at all. I don't think we should get into the habit of posting blatant speculation just because it's the current best guess.-- 23:46, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I never said we were guessing, we were assuming based off evidence we were given and had. The only person who looks like Riku that way is the Replica, that we know of. With the evidence of the CoM Chronicle appearing in the same scene, we can LOGICALLY assume, based on evidence, that it is Riku Replica. Until we have other evidence that it isn't, it seems pretty solid so far. 08:48, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Assuming is making conclusions without evidence. We don not do that here. The CoM chronicle is not evidence to the fact because it appeared when Riku mentioned the Replica, so it has nothing to do with the doppelganger's presence, therefore it can not be seen as proof towards him being the Replica. Sure, of the three known Riku's, the Replica is the one that makes the most amount of sense, but that alone should not be seen as proof that this doppleganger is the Replica. -- 17:05, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Normally, I would say no to this but KH3D has so many plot holes and crap that the only thing we can do is assume. 18:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Then what are we supposed to put? The only logical one to put it as is the Riku Replica. AT THIS TIME, I really don't see the big deal because if we don't put it as the replica and put it as Riku, THAT is a bad assumption, because we literally have no proof regarding that. At least with the Replica, we know it still exists in the story. We can't just pull this thought that it's Riku because we don't know the meaning behind "And now I'm facing me." So for now, in my opinion, the logical explanation is that it's the Riku Replica, because we know he exists. If we got legitimate proof that Xehanort grabbed Ansem-possessed Riku and that was him, then that would be fine, but we literally have no proof. 18:40, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You literally have no proof that this is Riku Replica, and yet you are saying that assuming that it is him makes so much more sense. I'm not saying we should make a whole new to this page for the doppleganger or to make false assumptions as to his identity, simply not make any assumptions at all. Make a mention of his appearance on the necessary pages (as is already done), and change the infobox picture of Riku Replica back to Dark Riku. That is all. The idea of it being Riku Replica is a wonderful theory, but for now, that is all it is.-- 19:14, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The thing you're missing is that there isn't a "null" option in this case. There's claiming they're definitely different beings, and giving it a separate page, and there's implying that this character is best covered on the Riku Replica page (as a dark replica of Riku), and covering it as such on the page (notice how we word it). Splitting it off to a separate page not only hides the article so people won't find it, but is a direct claim that we are dealing with separate characters; the best and strongest evidence at this point (with the implication being a fair deal more clear than you're giving it credit) is that we are seeing a form of the Riku Replica. For that matter, Young Xehanort said he gathered the suitable incarnations of Xehanort, and the replica is a being that (1) copied a host of Xehanort's heart, and willingly chose the darkness that host rejected, and (2) was made by a host of Xehanort's heart. 05:50, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * At this point, the only thing I am asking to be changed is the infobox picture. I did see the way you worded it, and I commend you with that. However, the fact that the main infobox picture being what it is says that we are of the stance that the doppleganger is without a doubt Riku Replica, which I feel there is too little direct evidence to support. All I am asking is for the infobox image to be changed back to Dark Mode Riku until we can say for absolute sure, instead of relying on assumptions. Is that too unreasonable? -- 06:05, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. We're not asking you to take out the information pertaining to the doppelganger. We're just asking you to change the Infobox picture, because despite your reasoning to keep the info there, it still doesn't warrant to have the infobox image match that doppleganger without clear evidence that it was same person. I mean for all we know, that doppleganger could've been nothing more than an illusion, Riku was in the dream world after all. Keep the information there, but change the infobox image back to Dark Mode Riku until further notice. THAT is what makes MORE sense. Is that too much ask? Blackchaos27 (talk) 18:12, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, might as well throw in my two cents: -18:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * First, in my opinion, the hooded figure in KH3D is Riku himself, in the past. Remember, the Riku Replica did not kidnap Pinocchio, it was Riku in Kingdom Hearts. The quote, "That was my...my dark side. I gave in to the darkness once. And ever since, it's chased me around in one form or another. The Seeker of Darkness who stole my body...a puppet replica of the shadows in my heart...and now, I'm facing me." the "me" is Riku, himself. If you were Riku, and you were talking about the puppet, would you say "me"? No, because you're not the puppet, you're Riku. I think that, as the world is in the past, that the events in Prankster's Paradise are simply a replay of the events from before it's destruction by darkness all the way through the events of Monstro in the original Kingdom Hearts. The hooded figure has nothing to do with Xehanort or the True Organization. However, that's my assumption.
 * Second, the chronicle evidence. Yes, the Chain of Memories chronicle was triggered in that scene. However, who's to say it was not triggered simply when Riku mentioned the Riku Replica. If you notice, Kingdom Hearts 3D: Dream Drop Distance is, at least in part, a telling of how all the previous six games tie in with the overall plot and this game's plot. Simply mentioning the Replica could have sufficed to remind the player about the events of Kingdom Hearts Chain of Memories.
 * Thirdly, and more importantly, the assumption that the hooded figure is the Riku Replica is, by definition, speculation. Merriam-Webster lists speculation as a word related to assume, and Google defines assume as to "suppose to be the case, without proof." Both words have similar, almost exact meanings. (Here is speculate and assume. Note that under speculate, assume is listed as a synonym). And this wiki is strictly anti-speculation, and I quote "Speculation should not be added into any article whatsoever" -From the Manual of Style. Here's another one "Not allowed in artices -Rumors or speculation on the Kingdom Hearts series." -From Help:Editing. Plain and simply, you cannot speculate, or assume, based on the "evidence" you have. It must be explicitly stated. An example lived on this wiki is the recent crisis with the Game icon after the announcement of Kingdom Hearts HD 2.5 ReMIX. The claim why we could not put the icon, no matter how obvious it was, was that it was speculation, because the game wasn't out, even though KHHD2.5 is more a compilation of previous games than a whole new game. Yet, this wiki stood by the policy. And now I see that the policy is being chucked out willy-nilly. For a site that prides itself in being a fact-based encyclopedia, this is a huge blow. You CANNOT simply choose when to be speculative and when you can be "assumptious".
 * My suggestion, as far as covering this hooded Riku: put it in Riku's article, as part of the story. Something like "Riku finds that the kidnapper was an individual who looks similar to himself, reminding him of all the times the darkness has chased him." He doesn't need a new page, because he is not explicitly a different person. Neither can we assume that he is the Riku Replica simply because the chronicle was triggered in the same scene.
 * "the "me" is Riku" -- I've already addressed, several times, why that is an incorrect interpretation of the line.
 * "Thirdly, and more importantly, the assumption that the hooded figure is the Riku Replica is, by definition, speculation." -- No, what it is is not requiring the character to have a nametag on them every single time we see them It's not assuming that every time in CoM that the RR doesn't say it's the RR, it's really Riku teleporting up from the basement. It's a very basic interpretation of what's going on based on what is directly shown and what happens everywhere else in the game.
 * For KHII.5, we don't put the icon down because every time people put the icons down before the game comes out (even with 1.5!), they fuck something up and we've decided "hey, we know this is going to be a clusterfuck, please can we not do the same stupid thing this time, kay?" For RR, the game is out. It was called "Kingdom Hearts 3D". We're describing a scene that has already been published, not making guesses about something that is yet to be shown.
 * "However, who's to say it was not triggered simply when Riku mentioned the Riku Replica." -- "All other Chronicles appear after scenes that depict characters from that game; Days is obtained after the Roxas-Axel scene is revisited, BbS is obtained after Vanitas is shown, KH1 is obtained after Ansem is shown, KH2 is obtained after Xemnas is shown (I believe), and coded is obtained after Maleficent and Pete try to retake the dataspace."
 * Yeah, sure, we can change the image. I don't really think we should be using black coat images outside of the organization pages anyway, regardless of the "most recent depiction rule", because they are hella bland. 01:44, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, "the "me" is Riku" and all that was just my opinion, first of all. I would like to continue this discussion, but I also feel the article is written correctly at this point, or at least, it's agreeable. If you guys want, we can continue our lovely discussion, but I feel it'd be better on the forums at this point. 18:06, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Revisiting Dream Drop Distance Riku
Not to dredge up old debates, but I think we should address this going forward now that Kingdom Hearts III is out. What is the situation exactly? Riku's apparent dark side kidnaps Pinocchio just like he did in OG Kingdom Hearts, but in Kingdom Hearts III it is suggested that Riku Replica's Heart had been wandering the Realm of Darkness until Riku showed up there to save Aqua, and even if it was Riku Replica (which I further doubt because Riku Replica has never been seen in a Black Coat) how then could he interact with Pinocchio, when Kingdom Hearts III shows that Riku Replica can only be seen by Riku after he takes residence in Riku's Heart, and any time before that he'd have been just a Heart. So Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance Riku Doppelganger can't be Riku Replica. But at the same time, was Dark Riku present in the Organization at the time? Even was approached by Saix shortly after Lea left Radiant Garden to search for Braig and Isa, and we see Vexen complete his work on the Replicas during the events of Kingdom Hearts III, allowing himself and Demyx to be replaced by Xion and Dark Riku. So if this isn't Dark Riku or Riku Replica then who do we encounter in Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance? At the very least, I think that we should move the Dream Drop Distance information to the Dark Riku page. (Levi657 (talk) 12:47, 2 March 2019 (UTC))

Vexen wouldn't have needed to be a member for Dark Riku to join, Xemnas/Ansem/Young all had replica bodies from the old batch so Dark Riku could have initially just have had one of those. It can't be good Riku Replica since he didn't meet up with Riku until he went to the realm of darkness in KH3. So yeah, the info should be moved to Dark Riku. --Vanitas (talk) 16:55, 2 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't think is Dark Riku, because of a dialogue in KH3 where Demyx confirm he was substitute by a Replica. This mean he was a member during DDD, nad the others replicas in the Organization are: Ansem, Xemnas, Young Xehanort, Dark Riku and Xion.
 * Ansem, Xemnas and Young Xehanort already are present during DDD events, so Demyx are not refering about them, Xion was created later, even because the experiments made by YX in Toy Box and by Dark Riku in San Fransokyo seems to be for remake Xion.
 * Vanitas was not a Replica since he said he recreated his body using the screem and sadness energy from Monstropolis, so his body is natural, not a Replica, and probably when Sora saw him in Cité des Cloches was really him in a "incorporated" form, similar how we see Eraqus in the end of KH3, since when Sora say "you are the one of the cathedral" Vanitas don't seems surprised, like he was really there.
 * If Dark Riku was present during DDD the members numbers will not make sense:


 * 1-Master Xehanort
 * 2-Ansem
 * 3-Xemnas
 * 4-Demyx
 * 5-Luxord
 * 6-Xigbar
 * 7-Terra-Xehanort
 * 8-Vanitas
 * 9-Marluxia
 * 10-Larxene
 * 11-Saix
 * 12-Young Xehanort
 * 13-Dark Riku


 * During DDD the memebers was only 12, not 13, and Dark Riku is the only one that make sense to be the Demyx's substitute, so I don't think the Riku we saw in DDD was Dark Riku, but just Replica Riku, how this is possible I don't know, but considering what was said and what the Org. do in the end of DDD, just don't make sense to him to be Dark Riku, since all the others replica we know was there, and Xion was created after Demyx was substitute--93.150.192.173 17:23, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Demyx wasn't necessarily one of the chosen who appeared in DDD, Dark Riku could have already taken his spot in that game. Would make sense that he'd already been substituted since Larxene was surprised when he showed up in KH3. --Vanitas (talk) 17:35, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It is not clear that Terra-Xehanort showed up at the meeting, as according to the Ultimania he would have reformed due to the same stuff Xehanort did, so it's more likely that he was captured ("belongs to us") but not inducted. Also, Dark Riku is Replica Riku, just from when he was still a dick. 15:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * But Demyx confirm that he was substitute by a new replica, and Larxene could be surprised even because they didn't see the faces of each others, and since they was 12 during the end of DDD and MX confirmed that Terra-Xehanort was one of them, that mean he was there, or will not make sense capture Sora, because then they would have 14 members, and not make sense for MX remove one of the guardians if he already have 13, even because he already have 12 (13 with Sora) in the end of DDD.
 * I will try to be more clear.


 * During DDD the Org. was composed by 12 members, the confirmed in DDD 100% are: MX, Ansem, Xemnas, Xigbar, Saix, YG, Vanitas (he appeared in the Cité des Cloches and in KH3 seems was really him, since he wasn't surprised when Sora say "you are the one of the cathedral"), TX (he was mentioned as a member, and he is not one in the thrones room, then with Sora will make 14 members planned during DDD).
 * Demyx confirmed that a new replica take his place in KH3.
 * Ansem (with replica body), Xemnas (with replica body), YG (with replica body) was already members in the org. during KH3, Dark Riku is the only other replica we know.
 * Terra-Xehanort returned using he real Terra body with the past MX heart (apparently before lingering Will was created, since in KH3 he didn't know who is Lingering Will)
 * Vanitas recreated his body using sadness and screems from Monstropolis, since he say that in KH3, so, he don't using any replica body.
 * Xion was created after Demyx say that he was substitute by a replica, since both YX and Dark Riku in KH3 was making exeperiment for recreate Xion, was even said that Vexen was working for another replica.


 * With all this point, the only plausible member that could substitute Demyx can be only Dark Riku, since any other replica was already there, and Xion was created after.--93.150.192.173 16:26, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Demyx says a replica stole his spot, he never states it was a new one. ("The replicas are way more real than you remember. I mean one stole my spot!"). Marluxia then goes on to say that none of Vexen's new replicas are finished (these new unfinished replicas are likely the Replica Xehanorts). --Vanitas (talk) 17:42, 3 March 2019 (UTC)


 * But if you are right that mean during DDD the members was already 13 (14 with Sora) and that will make no sense. Btw, all the things about the experiemtns made by YX and Dark Riku, seems to be related to Xion, since they was talking about emotions too, and was said their members are not complete (so, Xion wasn't complete still), Dark Riku is the only one that make sense to be the one that stole Demyx's spot--93.150.192.173 18:37, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Dark Riku being a member in DDD would just mean Demyx was benched in DDD, which would still make it so that they only have 12. They only had 12 in KHIII and Demyx was on the bench rather than being their 13th, so seems they never planned on having him be one of the chosen anyway. --Vanitas (talk) 19:48, 3 March 2019 (UTC)