Facebook Twitter YouTube Frictional Games | Forum | Privacy Policy | Dev Blog | Dev Wiki | Support | Gametee


Thread Rating:
  • 13 Vote(s) - 4.38 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Spoiler Plot Discussion Thread *Spoiler Alert*
rotten Offline
Junior Member

Posts: 41
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Plot Discussion Thread *Spoiler Alert*

Corbent
I'm pretty sure it's a mistake with the year of the first note. Here it is credited as being made on 4th August 1899, which makes more sense.


Now, for the second note you brought up, he doesn't say his children are dead, he says he will bring them back in case they die (as I see it).
09-13-2013, 10:52 PM
Find
Prettz Offline
Junior Member

Posts: 4
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Plot Discussion Thread *Spoiler Alert*

(09-13-2013, 10:40 PM)rotten Wrote: Prettz,
Interesting, but do you mean to say that Jack the Ripper was Oswald's alter ego and in reality there was no manpigs as it was Mandus all along who killed the whores (which he mentions btw)?

Something like that, I'm just trying to find why we have all the streets names where Jack the Ripper killed people. Oswald did say something that a part of him that hated was born when his wife died. maybe when he found the orb this part was given strength and not created because it was already a part of him.

just a starting idea to see what any of you think works or not.

edit:I'll bring up my theory on the manpigs in a bit, that ones a bit of a rabbit hole.
(This post was last modified: 09-13-2013, 10:57 PM by Prettz.)
09-13-2013, 10:54 PM
Find
jacksepticeye Offline
Junior Member

Posts: 19
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Plot Discussion Thread *Spoiler Alert*

Is there a story reason for the game being blue instead of actual black darkness?

Is it symbolising a dreamy state or his current state of sanity or Amnesia? TCR said there was a reason for doing it
09-13-2013, 10:54 PM
Find
Petch1984 Offline
Junior Member

Posts: 19
Threads: 2
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Plot Discussion Thread *Spoiler Alert*

It's just a game about some naughty pigs. You play a man who tried to change the world for the better and then the pigs starting running a muck. They're the ones pulling the strings, the filthy swines. Sure, they act dumb but ask yourself this: Can you pass through dimensions? Can you zap people with electricity?

They're the next step in evolution, half-man half-pig and real angry. They got the creator of the machine to kill himself so they could take the reins. A machine for pigs now owned and run by pigs. I've resorted to eating 4 bacon sandwiches a day to stop their real world counterparts getting any ideas.
(This post was last modified: 09-13-2013, 11:04 PM by Petch1984.)
09-13-2013, 11:02 PM
Find
Alardem Offline
Senior Member

Posts: 711
Threads: 17
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 24
RE: Plot Discussion Thread *Spoiler Alert*

(09-13-2013, 10:54 PM)Prettz Wrote:
(09-13-2013, 10:40 PM)rotten Wrote: Prettz,
Interesting, but do you mean to say that Jack the Ripper was Oswald's alter ego and in reality there was no manpigs as it was Mandus all along who killed the whores (which he mentions btw)?

Something like that, I'm just trying to find why we have all the streets names where Jack the Ripper killed people. Oswald did say something that a part of him that hated was born when his wife died. maybe when he found the orb this part was given strength and not created because it was already a part of him.

just a starting idea to see what any of you think works or not.

edit:I'll bring up my theory on the manpigs in a bit, that ones a bit of a rabbit hole.

"Maybe I should introduce him to Jack and his sons."
09-13-2013, 11:03 PM
Find
Corbent Offline
Junior Member

Posts: 24
Threads: 1
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 4
RE: Plot Discussion Thread *Spoiler Alert*

(09-13-2013, 10:52 PM)rotten Wrote: Corbent
I'm pretty sure it's a mistake with the year of the first note. Here it is credited as being made on 4th August 1899, which makes more sense.


Now, for the second note you brought up, he doesn't say his children are dead, he says he will bring them back in case they die (as I see it).

Thanks for the correction on the note, it does make sense now. The other thing about the kids, yeah. I was considering as a fact that Mandus finds orb in Mexico, he gets horrible visions, he sacrifices the kids in that same temple. That's why the note seemed weird to me. And that's why I feel I have my placement of their deaths wrong or the reason of their deaths wrong.

EDIT: A note states "Walking away from those temples, that small pile of stones under the rhododendrons. The skulls of innocence under the loose clod. Headless ribcages in the cool stone behind the altars, three thousand miles apart." This distance mentioned between the remains strongly suggests he sacrificed them in Mexico. That is why it gets so confusing. Also a note on August 22 states "I walk amongst them. My children, I whisper to their dreams, you are my children now. I have children once again, and your forms imperfect will be the engines to make my own blood flow again." Another clue that the kids died before this date.
(This post was last modified: 09-13-2013, 11:21 PM by Corbent.)
09-13-2013, 11:06 PM
Find
rotten Offline
Junior Member

Posts: 41
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Plot Discussion Thread *Spoiler Alert*

Quote: "Maybe I should introduce him to Jack and his sons."
Exact quote goes "I may even introduce him to Jack, or his sons at least. We have stronger locks on the windows now, and we bring their toys to them."
Doesn't ring my bell. Calling Mandus the Ripper would be apparently a stretch.
09-13-2013, 11:13 PM
Find
Alardem Offline
Senior Member

Posts: 711
Threads: 17
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 24
RE: Plot Discussion Thread *Spoiler Alert*

(09-13-2013, 11:13 PM)rotten Wrote:
Quote: "Maybe I should introduce him to Jack and his sons."
Exact quote goes "I may even introduce him to Jack, or his sons at least. We have stronger locks on the windows now, and we bring their toys to them."
Doesn't ring my bell. Calling Mandus the Ripper would be apparently a stretch.

So Jack and his 'sons' became piggies? Seems legit.
09-13-2013, 11:17 PM
Find
PathOS Offline
Member

Posts: 189
Threads: 11
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 6
RE: Plot Discussion Thread *Spoiler Alert*

One of the biggest issues with the timeline is the twins. Mandus and his alter ego keep talking of them at certain points as if they're still alive ("I can still save them!") and at other points as if they're already dead. The twins' journals would seem to indicate that they lived up until October 1899 at least. Yet during the summer Mandus would often opine about how his new "Children" made him feel like a father again.

I suppose it is possible that Mandus was just spending all his time in his Machine and never saw his twins for long periods and given his already disturbed mind could have believed they were already dead. Unless he did indeed try to resurrect them with Compound X.
09-13-2013, 11:18 PM
Find
rotten Offline
Junior Member

Posts: 41
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Plot Discussion Thread *Spoiler Alert*

Corbent
We cannot disregard the twins' diary which has an entry in October, when they have long come back from Mexico. The twins even live to see the pig in the garden.

I already said that in my opinion he killed them between 23 November and 1 December. I think it was in a temple which was found under the Machine. See these entries:
"Later you used your spoon to dig a hole in the garden to get all the way to Mexico"
"How could a child's spine be made like clockwork? I washed it carefully and placed it on the mantelpiece, by the egg I laid myself, under the garden where the childrens' skulls are buried. I call it my Mexico."


So I think this temple is exactly under the garden and he sees it as his own Mexico. It is there that he sacrifices his children and as for 3000 miles... maybe he's referring to the depth, because he wanted to reach the Earth's core.

ADD:
Alarden
Yeah, about this legit... I never heard that Jack the Ripper had any sons. But here they are mentioned and it must mean something. In my opinion it's either Jack & sons were Mandus & sons, either Jack and his sons were manpigs all along...
(This post was last modified: 09-13-2013, 11:35 PM by rotten.)
09-13-2013, 11:32 PM
Find




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)