11
edits
Talk:End of the World: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
Luis Arturo (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
*It would be non-plural if it was something like "man's destructive nature", which would refer to man as one whole. However, that grammar pattern would require "Heartless" to be usable in the same manner, i.e. "Heartless's destructive nature", not "''the'' Heartless's destructive nature". | *It would be non-plural if it was something like "man's destructive nature", which would refer to man as one whole. However, that grammar pattern would require "Heartless" to be usable in the same manner, i.e. "Heartless's destructive nature", not "''the'' Heartless's destructive nature". | ||
*"The Heartless" plainly refers to the group as a whole, which jives well with all other uses of that phrase in the series, as well as what we've actually been told about End of the World. | *"The Heartless" plainly refers to the group as a whole, which jives well with all other uses of that phrase in the series, as well as what we've actually been told about End of the World. | ||
*It may just be possible to twist in a reading as singular or generic (I don't think it is, but maybe), but it is neither necessary nor the natural way to read the line.[[User:KrytenKoro|(ಠ_ೃ) | *It may just be possible to twist in a reading as singular or generic (I don't think it is, but maybe), but it is neither necessary nor the natural way to read the line.[[User:KrytenKoro|(ಠ_ೃ)]] [[User_talk:KrytenKoro|<small>Bully!</small>]] 14:39, December 8, 2010 (UTC) | ||
| Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
::Isn't that just figuratively speaking though? And I thought that was said in a game or something, but it's really just conjecture? You say that "The same idea can be applied to a world". You used the word "can" which means it's subjective and you don't have to think of the worlds that way. What's the point of having info on a wiki that's subjective like that? I've seen several people across the internet say that it's fact and use khwiki as a source, so wouldn't it be best to just remove it from the articles, so no one gets mislead? (I'm the same guy as before btw, I just keep on getting logged out for some reason. It logs me out and doesn't let me log back in sometimes. It says "There seems to be a problem with your login session; this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Go back to the previous page, reload that page and then try again." Anyone know how I can fix this? --[[Special:Contributions/76.102.24.151|76.102.24.151]] 03:43, 30 January 2017 (UTC) | ::Isn't that just figuratively speaking though? And I thought that was said in a game or something, but it's really just conjecture? You say that "The same idea can be applied to a world". You used the word "can" which means it's subjective and you don't have to think of the worlds that way. What's the point of having info on a wiki that's subjective like that? I've seen several people across the internet say that it's fact and use khwiki as a source, so wouldn't it be best to just remove it from the articles, so no one gets mislead? (I'm the same guy as before btw, I just keep on getting logged out for some reason. It logs me out and doesn't let me log back in sometimes. It says "There seems to be a problem with your login session; this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Go back to the previous page, reload that page and then try again." Anyone know how I can fix this? --[[Special:Contributions/76.102.24.151|76.102.24.151]] 03:43, 30 January 2017 (UTC) | ||
:::The fact that the words "seems" and "could" are in that line is so people DON'T take it as fact. It's just an observation. If people are going to misinterpret it as fact, then you should talk to the misguided people. [[User:Rex Ronald Rilander|Rex Ronald Rilander]] ([[User talk:Rex Ronald Rilander|talk]]) 03:53, 30 January 2017 (UTC) | :::The fact that the words "seems" and "could" are in that line is so people DON'T take it as fact. It's just an observation. If people are going to misinterpret it as fact, then you should talk to the misguided people. [[User:Rex Ronald Rilander|Rex Ronald Rilander]] ([[User talk:Rex Ronald Rilander|talk]]) 03:53, 30 January 2017 (UTC) | ||
::::I don't see the point of having the info in the first place. If you have to put "seems" and "could", then maybe that info shouldn't be there in the first place? If something isn't a fact, then it shouldn't be on a wiki. --[[Special:Contributions/76.102.24.151|76.102.24.151]] 05:53, 30 January 2017 (UTC) | |||
:::::"Goofy: This is a Heartless world, so maybe it’ll just disappear." | |||
:::::According to the web, Nomura once said something about it being the Heartless of Worlds, as well, but I can't find the interview yet.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 17:46, 30 January 2017 (UTC) | |||
== Crumbling Island == | |||
"Crumbling Island" reappears as the name of the mission in which you fight the first Ansem battle in FFRK.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 22:04, 26 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
== Emblem or Pureblood?== | |||
Since the End of the World is considered as a Heartless of all worlds, the question that remains is... Can it be considered as a Pureblood Heartless, or an Emblem Heartless? I'm saying this since, as a Pureblood, it does has an organic feeling, like it's trying to emulate the appearance of the Realm of Darkness's geography. But it can also be an Emblem heartless due to, despite not looking like one, the heartless sigil is located before The Final Rest, far bellow the Crater at the Evil Grounds. That and also that a lot of Strong Emblem heartless are also encountered in there, like the Behemoth. {{User:LuisArturo/Sig}} 12:30, 17 November 2023 (UTC) | |||