|
|
Post by prinnydood on Mar 26, 2007 16:03:16 GMT -5
Can you please provide these unused videos, dialog, and pictures you keep talking about? Not saying I don't believe you or anything, but I would like to be able to draw my own conclusions from all the material available.
About the only thing I can find in defense of Gregory's innocence is the journal entry where he says he comes up with a good idea for a story. It just so happens to be the day after the newspaper clipping talking about the kidnappings.
But like all the evidence against Gregory, this is not sure-fire proof he is innocent, as his mental state may mean he has no idea what he does some days, and reading about his "escapades" leads him to believe he is making up a story about what is really going on.
Anyway, back to my original point. Do you think you could provide me with those "deleted scenes?" I'm very curious about them.
|
|
|
|
Post by PrincessJennifer on Mar 26, 2007 16:16:02 GMT -5
The deleted scene should be easy to find via YouTube search, the dialogue I could try and send to you if you have msn.
|
|
|
|
Post by RoseDoll on Mar 29, 2007 18:05:53 GMT -5
I think he is innocent! There's no good evidence he's guilty!
|
|
|
|
Post by TheBaronessMeg on Mar 29, 2007 18:06:55 GMT -5
I must agree. PrincsesJennifer also provides quite a plethora of evidence that he is not guilty.
|
|
|
|
Post by laura on Mar 29, 2007 19:21:33 GMT -5
I think he is innocent! There's no good evidence he's guilty! There's no good evidence he is innocent either. It just makes more sense that he's guilty than not. |
|
|
|
Post by PrincessJennifer on Mar 29, 2007 20:17:40 GMT -5
Actually, there is a lot more evidence to support his innocence than his guilt. It is either in this topic or the Missing Kids one over in Theories, I believe.
|
|
|
|
Post by laura on Mar 30, 2007 4:03:59 GMT -5
I don't believe that, but I also don't believe we're ever going to agree on this anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by PrincessJennifer on Mar 30, 2007 4:09:24 GMT -5
You don't have to believe it, since the evidence can be seen in one of the two locations I existed. The whole point of this topic is to argue eachother's evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by laura on Mar 30, 2007 7:04:54 GMT -5
We did argue our evidence though, and it seems we don't come to the same conclusions from it. It happens.
|
|
|
|
Post by cellerikun on Mar 30, 2007 7:10:33 GMT -5
It keeps coming up that there is supposedly more evidence that Gregory didn't do it, but almost all the evidence you're citing for your argument is unreliable.
For one, they're deleted scenes and materials. Maybe this is just me, but since those things weren't in the game, those things aren't canon and inadmissible as evidence. They were cut for a reason, y'know?
Secondly, it may be just me again, but the idea that Jennifer can recall exact dates, times, entire newspaper articles, letters someone else wrote, and all this other stuff you're citing, after ten (give or take a few years, do we know how old she was when she was at the orphanage?) years, when she experienced it all as a kid? I don't buy it. No adult can recite from memory entire articles, word-for-word, from specific dates, even those relevant to them personally, from written materials. And in the 1930s, what six year old read the newspaper?
I fully maintain that Jennifer's view of those events are distorted-- and that's what the game is all about: Jennifer recovering her lost/blocked memories and having to sort through all the distortion to arrive at her memories the way she really remembers them. But there's nothing to prove that she remembers them the way they happened, she remembers them as they happened and the way she viewed them as a child.
Do you have anything to actually prove that Gregory is innocent, that actually happened in the game, and doesn't rely on Jennifer's distorted viewpoint (or at least stems from something that she would more likely have understood as a child?)?
|
|
|
|
Post by PrincessJennifer on Mar 30, 2007 16:20:51 GMT -5
They were cut for a reason was the point. The fact that they were cut support my theory that Gregory kidnapping and killings kids may have been a dropped story point, but never fully removed due to lack of time. This is very common in video games.
And we also have no idea how many times she read those articles. Most were also very small. And even if you read or see something once, it remains in your subconscious.
The biggest things to support his innocence is the complete lack of any credible evidence that he is guilty and his personality. We know Joshua died within the same time frame that she got Jennifer, so that dilutes the only motive people could come up with-him kidnapping kids as a replacement for Joshua.
|
|
|
|
Post by monanne on Mar 30, 2007 18:02:28 GMT -5
Can you please provide these unused videos, dialog, and pictures you keep talking about? Not saying I don't believe you or anything, but I would like to be able to draw my own conclusions from all the material available. I just went over to youtube and found it under "rule of rose Unused Cutscene", posted by someone named khodahafez. It doesn't have sound, but looks like it was originally intended for the Gingerbread House chapter. And it would definitely have supported the "Gregory is guilty" theory... |
|
|
|
Post by PrincessJennifer on Mar 30, 2007 18:14:43 GMT -5
But the fact is, it was obviously cut for some reason. Also, Gregory's nature is much more violent in the trailer released before the game's completion, in contrast to his more sad personality in the final version of the game. The same is true of his original artwork. His actions in the trailer make it appear that he is stalking Jennifer, while in the final version of the game, it is she who keeps bumping into him. All these changes support my theory.
|
|
|
|
Post by laura on Mar 30, 2007 19:40:17 GMT -5
But the changes shouldn't matter as it was never used. That's like me bringing up Clara's weeping in the unused dialogue to support Hoffman molesting her- but I can't use it because it was not used. Saying 'they were going to make him guilty but didn't and accidentally left some stuff over from time constraints' is not evidence, not to mention would make the creators incredibly lazy. It's basic game continuation, what are the chances that these newspaper clippings of kidnappings and shallow graves in the backyard and the peas rhyme are all coincidences? They'd have to be the most damning coincidences I've ever seen. They wouldn't be there unless they were conducive to the plot, that's just basic editing knowledge. If it doesn't have anything to do with the plot, it must be removed. Leaving all these things in 'by accident' would actually end up more time consuming than just deleting them.
|
|
|
|
Post by PrincessJennifer on Mar 30, 2007 19:57:22 GMT -5
No, it wouldn't. It would take time to remove the holes and change the look of the level-time they may not have had. The holes were used in the removed scene. Since that scene was removed, they should have been as well. The pea rhyme could have been thrown in just to make it okay to leave the article in, as inspiration. The fact is, we know for a fact they left a few things in that should have been removed but were not.
|
|
