Katawa Shoujo Forums

Guest Poster wrote:Since they're said to dislike each other, it'd be likely that THEY would be quick to point out they're merely in-laws and not brothers by blood.

Anyway, Word of God said they're really brothers-in-law and that comments contradicting this in the game were false and might be corrected, so in the end the discussion is a moot one.

Also, it's really unlikely Lilly's dad could have gotten the Satou name by marrying his wife, since said wife is Scottish and Satou isn't exactly a common Scottish family name.

But somehow Akira is a Scottish name for girls apparently

Steinherz wrote:But somehow Akira is a Scottish name for girls apparently

This fact feels to me like the whole reason Lilly's family was made Scottish. It's just too perfect.

Guest Poster wrote:Since they're said to dislike each other, it'd be likely that THEY would be quick to point out they're merely in-laws and not brothers by blood.

That would be relevant if Jigoro or Hiroyuki ever identified themselves as such. By the text, we have Hideaki (whose motivations on this subject are inscrutable) and Hisao (who's reasoning inside his head and, in the stated context, doesn't care to make the "-in-law" distinction).

Anyway, Word of God said they're really brothers-in-law and that comments contradicting this in the game were false and might be corrected, so in the end the discussion is a moot one.

I have a whole collection of dev quotes at hand to undermine the "Word of God" card, most obviously the one where Suriko states that canon is restricted to the actual game text/content. So I just file Dev statements away as "recommended headcanon." That being said, I'm still not sure why the Devs care so much about this one particular point that they've repeatedly made "this is canon" statements on it...

Also, it's really unlikely Lilly's dad could have gotten the Satou name by marrying his wife, since said wife is Scottish and Satou isn't exactly a common Scottish family name.

Come now, you seriously think the fandom isn't creative enough to come up with some sort of rationalisation for why a Scottish woman would have the last name of "Satou?" The easy answer would be that Mayoi is half-Scottish (I don't think there's any direct contradiction of this idea). And before you bring up the implausibility of a quarter-Scot having blonde hair, keep in mind that it's more or less equally implausible for a half-Scot.

ProfAllister wrote:

Anyway, Word of God said they're really brothers-in-law and that comments contradicting this in the game were false and might be corrected, so in the end the discussion is a moot one.

I have a whole collection of dev quotes at hand to undermine the "Word of God" card, most obviously the one where Suriko states that canon is restricted to the actual game text/content. So I just file Dev statements away as "recommended headcanon." That being said, I'm still not sure why the Devs care so much about this one particular point that they've repeatedly made "this is canon" statements on it...

But wasn't the whole "they're in-laws, not blood brothers" fixed in the updated patch for Katawa Shoujo or something?

From the Ask thread:

Silentcook wrote:

bhtooefr wrote:So, has the brothers thing been fixed for future releases as well?

Yes, it has been fixed. It OUGHT to have been fixed in time for the FR release, but... the less said about that, the better.

So, not what's been released, but for future releases.

ProfAllister wrote:I have a whole collection of dev quotes at hand to undermine the "Word of God" card, most obviously the one where Suriko states that canon is restricted to the actual game text/content. So I just file Dev statements away as "recommended headcanon."

Ah, but dear Prof, is not "canon is restricted to the game itself" also just a dev statement, and thus equally dismissible?

Oh dear, I've gone cross-eyed.

Atario wrote:

ProfAllister wrote:I have a whole collection of dev quotes at hand to undermine the "Word of God" card, most obviously the one where Suriko states that canon is restricted to the actual game text/content. So I just file Dev statements away as "recommended headcanon."

Ah, but dear Prof, is not "canon is restricted to the game itself" also just a dev statement, and thus equally dismissible?

Oh dear, I've gone cross-eyed.

There's a catch. "All dev statements are canon" is the proposed axiom. If I wish to disagree with this axiom, I need only prove a negation (i.e., "Not all dev statements are canon"), not the inversion (i.e., "All dev statements are not canon").

So, let's turn this into symbolic logic (for the people who are more math-oriented):

We will call the proposed Axiom "A" because we're lazy like that. Similarly, we will identify "D" as the set containing all dev statements. Finally, "C" is the set containing everything that is canon (or, for the sake of logic, all statements that are true).

"A" can be defined as "x ∈ D ⇒ x ∈ C" or "If 'x' is a dev statement, then 'x' is canon." or (for the ease of writing) "All dev statements are canon.'"
"C" can be defined as "x ⇔ x ∈ C" or "'x' is true if and only if 'x' is canon."
To hold "A" as axiomatic, "A ∈ C ⇔ A" or "'All dev statements are canon' is canon if and only if 'All dev statements are canon' is true."

And then we throw the wrench in the gears, because of the following:

S ∈ D - "'Canon is restricted to the game itself' is a dev statement."
and
S ⇒ ¬A - "If 'Canon is restricted to the game itself' then ''Not all dev statements are canon.'"

We run that through the other two propositions and we end up with this:

S ∈ D ⇒ ¬A ∈ C - "If 'Canon is restricted to the game itself' is a dev statement, then 'Not all dev statements are canon' is canon."

The definition of negation is that "x ⇔ ¬(¬x)" - "'x' is true if and only if 'not x' is false." This means that we have the following property for "C":

x ∈ C ⇔ ¬(¬x ∈ C) - "'x' is canon if and only if 'not x' is not canon."

So we then have:

¬A ∈ C ⇔ ¬[¬(¬A) ∈ C] - simplified to ¬A ∈ C ⇔ ¬(A ∈ C) - "'Not all dev statements are canon' is canon if and only if 'All dev statements are canon' is not canon."

And the contrapositive:

¬(¬A ∈ C) ⇔ ¬{¬[¬(¬A) ∈ C]} - simplified to A ∈ C ⇔ ¬(¬A ∈ C) - "'All dev statements are canon' is canon if and only if 'Not all dev statements are canon' is not canon."

But our logical extension has resulted in the following:

A ∈ C ⇔ ¬(¬A ∈ C) - "If 'All dev statements are canon' is canon, then 'Not all dev statements are canon' is canon."

From those three propositions (¬A ∈ C ⇔ ¬(A ∈ C), A ∈ C ⇔ ¬(¬A ∈ C), A ∈ C ⇔ ¬(¬A ∈ C)), there is one formulation that avoids contradiction:

¬A ∈ C - "'Not all dev statements are canon' is canon."

Which means, by extension:

¬(A ∈ C) - "'All dev statements are canon' is not canon."
and
¬(A ∈ C) ⇔ ¬A - "'All dev statements are canon' is not canon if and only if 'All dev statements are canon' is not true."

Therefore, "All dev statements are canon" is not true.

NOW you have permission to go cross-eyed.

ProfAllister wrote:From those three propositions (¬A ∈ C ⇔ ¬(A ∈ C), A ∈ C ⇔ ¬(¬A ∈ C), A ∈ C ⇔ ¬(¬A ∈ C)), there is one formulation that avoids contradiction:

¬A ∈ C - "'Not all dev statements are canon' is canon."

Which means, by extension:

¬(A ∈ C) - "'All dev statements are canon' is not canon."
and
¬(A ∈ C) ⇔ ¬A - "'All dev statements are canon' is not canon if and only if 'All dev statements are canon' is not true."

Therefore, "All dev statements are canon" is not true.

NOW you have permission to go cross-eyed.

Dude are you an actual professor? Because I'm pretty sure you just schooled everyone in this thread.

Dude are you an actual professor? Because I'm pretty sure you just schooled everyone in this thread.

In that, "Mutou is trying to teach everyone but nobody is really paying attention," kinda way.

Oddball wrote:

Dude are you an actual professor? Because I'm pretty sure you just schooled everyone in this thread.

In that, "Mutou is trying to teach everyone but nobody is really paying attention," kinda way.

Yeeaaah...Besides, all dev statements are totally canon anyway.

ProfAllister wrote:"All dev statements are canon" is the proposed axiom.
[Neato symbols, words words words, etc.]

I'mma stop you right there, mah man. I believe the proposed axiom is actually "Dev statements may be taken as canon at the reader's whim and are probably a fair indication of what they meant, no guarantees, all rights reserved, not valid in Indiana".

Oh, uh, whuzzat? Topic? Oh yeah. Uh. Turns out they really are blood brothers, but when the family sided against Jigoro after a particularly nasty argument, he disowned them all and changed his name in disgust at their weakling non-manly attitudes.

Whether additional dev statements are canon or not isn't really that important to the discussion, since the "in-laws-not-blood-brothers"-thing is stated to be an oversight that will be fixed in future releases. This isn't just a dev saying something like: "The official ending for all girls is that they live happily ever after.", but more like: "This little tidbit was meant to be part of the game from the start and will be part of the game in the future." Practically speaking, it makes sense to interpret said tidbit as canon, even if the planned updated version isn't on your hard drive yet.

...Excuse me while I go bitchslap some fellow devs for not shutting the fuck up for trolling the readers for being freaking liars on general principles.

Christ on a crutch.

Atario wrote:

Steinherz wrote:But somehow Akira is a Scottish name for girls apparently :lol:

This fact feels to me like the whole reason Lilly's family was made Scottish. It's just too perfect.

It's actually a total coincidence!

Silentcook wrote:

...Excuse me while I go bitchslap some fellow devs for not shutting the fuck up for trolling the readers for being freaking liars on general principles.

Christ on a crutch.

This is what happens when several of the Devs have said they're a bunch of trolls

Aura wrote:

Atario wrote:

Steinherz wrote:But somehow Akira is a Scottish name for girls apparently

This fact feels to me like the whole reason Lilly's family was made Scottish. It's just too perfect.

It's actually a total coincidence!

I actually believe you on this. Akira is kind of a rare name in Scotland.