Members see less ads - sign up now for free and join the community!
This is like saying when people say Kleenex they don't just mean tissue, it's the same thing, you don't need to be so pedantic about this.
But that doesn't contradict anything I said and in fact only further highlights my point, in that they wanted to use a term that is more layman than what is already used which is why they used Astral to referr to summons which is a more easier to remember term for the layman, those unfamiliar with FF to recognize since it's a word they'd already be famliar with than say a term like Eidolon is, which is a term that is known by people already into FF, which not only further confirms that it was never Eidolon in the game but also means that your own claim that the live translator had to be briefed to use Eidolon is based on nothing, meanwhile there is more than enough to show that he just said Eidolon because it's a term synonymous with it. This is not a big deal, I don't know why you are trying to turn this into a big deal and dragging this along over days.
The Archaean/ Astral thing was a part of omission of them not specifically stating the summons were called Astral's within the game demo, but this was caused by the game demo itself which is why he said that is a minor detail but a huge deal, the Eidolon thing is literally just a live translator at PAX saying Eidolon despite it never being a term in the game or mentioned through any official press material or game content.
But that doesn't contradict anything I said and in fact only further highlights my point, in that they wanted to use a term that is more layman than what is already used which is why they used Astral to referr to summons which is a more easier to remember term for the layman, those unfamiliar with FF to recognize since it's a word they'd already be famliar with than say a term like Eidolon is, which is a term that is known by people already into FF, which not only further confirms that it was never Eidolon in the game but also means that your own claim that the live translator had to be briefed to use Eidolon is based on nothing, meanwhile there is more than enough to show that he just said Eidolon because it's a term synonymous with it. This is not a big deal, I don't know why you are trying to turn this into a big deal and dragging this along over days.
The Archaean/ Astral thing was a part of omission of them not specifically stating the summons were called Astral's within the game demo, but this was caused by the game demo itself which is why he said that is a minor detail but a huge deal, the Eidolon thing is literally just a live translator at PAX saying Eidolon despite it never being a term in the game or mentioned through any official press material or game content.
Last edited:
And here's Episode Ardyn's Insomnia screenshot irl 
"Yodobashi Camera" .... *theories intensifies*
Likes:
Unoder and Storm
Well Mystery Disc was never released to the public to play, so at least we can get our hands on Episode Ardyn and play through daytime Insomnia for ourselves.
Likes:
Lord_Ham_Mork
Yes, that's another perfect example. Regular people call tissue paper "Kleenex" and adhesive bandages "Bandaids," but translators -- whether live or not -- aren't supposed to use brand names for generic products. Saying that isn't pedantic.
I'm not "turning it into a big deal;" I just want to refute an erroneous claim, which tends to take a while when one's conversation partner is intransigent.
The core my argument is this: whether or not fans use Eidolon as a practical synonym a la "Kleenex" (which is arguable in and of itself; in my experience, the common generic used is "summon"), it is certainly not an actual synonym. This is clearly demonstrated by the claim by localization staff that each FF has its own name for summoned monsters (with Eidolon obviously being the name chosen for IX and XIII).
I will admit the possibility that the live translator really did make a major error, and the localization staff simply didn't care very much because the error didn't actually stick. Even in that case, though, there's no reason for an obvious gaffe on the part of a translator to call into question specific details given in an article that merely repeated the error unknowingly.
I suspect that what made it a big deal was not so much where the misconception came from but how widespread it became. If "Eidolon" was mistakenly used a translator early enough that every media outlet started using that name, that would be a big deal, too.
I'm not "turning it into a big deal;" I just want to refute an erroneous claim, which tends to take a while when one's conversation partner is intransigent.
The core my argument is this: whether or not fans use Eidolon as a practical synonym a la "Kleenex" (which is arguable in and of itself; in my experience, the common generic used is "summon"), it is certainly not an actual synonym. This is clearly demonstrated by the claim by localization staff that each FF has its own name for summoned monsters (with Eidolon obviously being the name chosen for IX and XIII).
I will admit the possibility that the live translator really did make a major error, and the localization staff simply didn't care very much because the error didn't actually stick. Even in that case, though, there's no reason for an obvious gaffe on the part of a translator to call into question specific details given in an article that merely repeated the error unknowingly.
I suspect that what made it a big deal was not so much where the misconception came from but how widespread it became. If "Eidolon" was mistakenly used a translator early enough that every media outlet started using that name, that would be a big deal, too.
Likes:
Vallen
My problem with that rumor is that if it were the case, then there wouldn't be much of any reason for why the additional Ardyn form never came back in the Royal Edition instead of movesets from EP. Ignis Verse 2.
AFAIK Even during the Datamining days people didn't find much of anything significantly new with the Ardyn final boss pre-Royal Pack release, unlike the rest of the content.
AFAIK Even during the Datamining days people didn't find much of anything significantly new with the Ardyn final boss pre-Royal Pack release, unlike the rest of the content.
Likes:
IwakuraLain
I know, but that still doesn't really connecting everything beyond conjecture.
The RE DLC would have been the most logical and necessary step for the team to restore and repurpose the supposed monster form had it have been truly a phase that was cut....yet they didn't.
Unless someone has found a connection within the game outside of rumors that would explicitly link to the possibility of a monster Ardyn phase, it's hard for me to not remain skeptical about it being anything more than a simple hoax.
The RE DLC would have been the most logical and necessary step for the team to restore and repurpose the supposed monster form had it have been truly a phase that was cut....yet they didn't.
Unless someone has found a connection within the game outside of rumors that would explicitly link to the possibility of a monster Ardyn phase, it's hard for me to not remain skeptical about it being anything more than a simple hoax.
Last edited:
Likes:
CloudBuster
I remember the original leak, and it clearly wasn't talking about the daemon form. The guy said that it was a traditional FF monster boss based on the Lucis winged skull logo, which honestly makes no sense given what Ardyn actually is.
Likes:
IwakuraLain and Nova
A setting picture such as Arden 's old figure and Ayla (name when drawing was still the first generation / Kanagi) was released. I woke up as a draft character for animation. The setting is Mr. Kurita @ Obakason. Since it was finally tuned for games, it may be interesting to compare it when DLC is delivered.
.
Likes:
Lord_Ham_Mork
So, I went looking for the "leak" I was thinking about.
There were actually two "leaks" that mentioned monster Ardyn, but one claimed it was in the actual game.
The other one currently seems to exist only in an unsourced post referencing it (*sigh*), which goes as follows:
I don't remember the "Astral Chaos" name from the initial 4chan leak and think it might be the poster's misunderstanding, but the skeleton-in-armor description sounds right... and doesn't seem like it could have been confused with Deathgaze.
There were actually two "leaks" that mentioned monster Ardyn, but one claimed it was in the actual game.
The other one currently seems to exist only in an unsourced post referencing it (*sigh*), which goes as follows:
I don't remember the "Astral Chaos" name from the initial 4chan leak and think it might be the poster's misunderstanding, but the skeleton-in-armor description sounds right... and doesn't seem like it could have been confused with Deathgaze.
Good looks, maybe that would have been Ardyn's Lucii armor form. Could've been neat if the Lucis Caelum Coat of Arms was based on the first one.
Likes:
Unoder and Lord_Ham_Mork
I remember Roberto Ferrari mentioning he added Ardyns wing adornament because he assumed he would get a crazy transformation.
one idea that could have worked is having Ardyn becoming an spiritual entity just like a king of old but with daemonic traits, or maybe having him becoming Chaos himself.
either way i liked fighting him in human form.
one idea that could have worked is having Ardyn becoming an spiritual entity just like a king of old but with daemonic traits, or maybe having him becoming Chaos himself.
either way i liked fighting him in human form.
It's already been proven that XV never officially used Eidolon as its term as the head of localization himself confirmed the term for summons was made to be Astral with the explicit reasoning that they wanted to use terms that the layman would be familiar with, like Astral and Messenger and so on, not only that but not any mention of "Eidolon" is found in the game datamine while Astral is found for things that line up with things from circa 2014 version of XV. The live translator at PAX was just using a synonym for what summons are which FF fans know because it was an FF panel at PAX somewhere where everyone knows Eidolon is synonymous with summon itself, because it's the same thing, that's all there is to it, and it really doesn't matter if he said Eidolon or summon or whatever because a live translator saying something at PAX is so inconsequential to anything regarding what the actual game is actually presenting. A live translator at a panel is not a game localization head.
I don't know why you are dying on this hill just to try still defend the notion that the woman in the Genesis painting was a goddess despite the fact that she is the Oracle and always was, and that Gamespot article which has multiple inaccuracies is the only source for even saying that the logo person is a goddess, yet nowhere else is this ever mentioned let alone suggested. The woman in the genesis painting being the Oracle is clearly referencing the logo art figure herself and general visage and shape of her robes and even the wring and shut eyes, the genesis painting woman is the Oracle to the Chosen king, who just happens to be Luna, and by proxy the logo woman herself is the Oracle who just happens to be Luna. That painting by Yuki Matsuzawa was done specifically with the lore of the Oracles and the Chosen King and the Astrals being the gods and the whole prophecy+ plague etc in mind already, and even includes one of the 3 men with the Chosen having bandages over his eyes, which is also a clear nod to what happens to Ignis, and that art was first seen in 2015 Ep Duscae end when the lore with the Astrals being the gods and there being the Oracle and the Chosen king, the plague etc were already in place because the localization for XV started in 2014.
I don't know why you are dying on this hill just to try still defend the notion that the woman in the Genesis painting was a goddess despite the fact that she is the Oracle and always was, and that Gamespot article which has multiple inaccuracies is the only source for even saying that the logo person is a goddess, yet nowhere else is this ever mentioned let alone suggested. The woman in the genesis painting being the Oracle is clearly referencing the logo art figure herself and general visage and shape of her robes and even the wring and shut eyes, the genesis painting woman is the Oracle to the Chosen king, who just happens to be Luna, and by proxy the logo woman herself is the Oracle who just happens to be Luna. That painting by Yuki Matsuzawa was done specifically with the lore of the Oracles and the Chosen King and the Astrals being the gods and the whole prophecy+ plague etc in mind already, and even includes one of the 3 men with the Chosen having bandages over his eyes, which is also a clear nod to what happens to Ignis, and that art was first seen in 2015 Ep Duscae end when the lore with the Astrals being the gods and there being the Oracle and the Chosen king, the plague etc were already in place because the localization for XV started in 2014.
Last edited:
I wouldn't say it's been proven. The head of localization explained why the term Astral was chosen as the final name for FFXV's summons, but that doesn't necessarily mean that that was the only name ever considered.
I'll admit that, apart from the live translator's translation and the article's confidence (based on said translation?), there isn't any direct evidence that Eidolon was used within the game. However, there actually is reason to think that the term Astral was a late addition, which can be found in the very statements you quoted from the head of localization:
"They also helped covering up for the localization team, like for the demo when there was the term “Archaeon,” but no “Astral” yet, and people thought that “Archaeon” was the name of summons."
"When there was the term 'Archaeon,' but no 'Astral' yet" is a rather ambiguous phrase, but it's ambiguous in a way that's rather telling. See, if the term "Astral" had already been chosen, then the obvious way to cover up for the localization team would be to tell the gaming press that the summons are called Astrals. That this wasn't done immediately strongly suggests that the team hadn't yet made its final choice of name at the time of the confusion.
Well, at this point, I think it's critical to go back and review the course of this debate:
I referenced an article from Gamespot -- a legit gaming website that has (or at least had at the time) sufficient clout to be granted exclusive content from Squenix -- that stated that the woman in the logo was the supreme goddess of FFXV's world to demonstrate that it's not unreasonable for a fan to conclude that one of FFXV's many story revisions included a supreme goddess. In the process, I mentioned the fact that the article called summons "Eidolons" in passing to suggest that FFXV's content was still in flux at the time that the article was written.
Proposition 1: It is reasonable to conclude, based on the existence of the Gamespot article, that at least one of FFXV's drafts included a supreme goddess.
You proceeded to call the veracity of the Gamespot article in question because they called the summons "Eidolons," while stipulating that it wasn't their fault because the translator called them "Eidolons." In response, I set forth my confusion at your suggestion that the Gamespot article was inaccurate based on their use of a term that you yourself stipulated was given to them by Squenix's official translator. Furthermore, I argued that it seemed more likely that the translator was reporting the state of the localization at the time than that the information was incorrect.
Stipulation A: The translator at PAX called summons "Eidolons."
Proposition 2: Given that the translator at PAX called summons "Eidolons," the fact that the Gamespot article reported this name does not call into question the veracity of their information.
Proposition 3: While Gamespot's reliability does not depend on whether they were given bad information by a translator, it is actually more likely that the translator gave them correct information that changed in the revision process than that the information was legitimately bad.
When you continued to insist that the Gamespot article was unreliable because it reported that summons in FFXV had the name that the translator used for them, I argued that there was good reason to think that the translator's word usage reflected the actual localization at the time, because no competent translator would translate "Shoukan/召喚" to "Eidolon" without having some specific reason to believe that "Eidolon" would be used in the localization.
Proposition 4: A competent translator would not have used the proper noun "Eidolon" to translate "Shoukan" if they did not have reason to believe that the localization team had chosen to use that term.
You then proceeded to claim that the translator would have used the term "Eidolon" because it's synonymous with "Shoukan" in the context of Final Fantasy. I rejected this claim and stated that "Eidolon" is simply one of a number of possible localization choices that a FF localization team could choose to make, and therefore the translator still needed sufficient reason to choose that term.
Proposition 5: "Eidolon" is not synonymous with "Shoukan," since different localization teams have chosen to localize ""Shoukan" in different ways.
The rest of the argument has centered on whether Proposition 5 is true or false. As such, it's worth noting that, as no real defeater has been posed to Proposition 2, Proposition 5 has absolutely zero relevance on Proposition 1. Proposition 5 can't call anything before Proposition 3 into question and as such has zero relevance to whether there was a supreme goddess in a draft version of FFXV.
Given what I have said so far, it's obvious that the reason I'm defending Proposition 5 so strongly has nothing to do with my attachment to Proposition 1. Rather, I think that Proposition 5 is important in and of itself. "Eidolon" is a default choice for summons rather than a practical generic term for summons, which can be seen in the fact that most fans use the term "summon" to refer to summoned creatures in the generic (whereas most people refer to adhesive bandages as "bandaids"). It's certainly not a true generic term of the sort that would be used by a professional translator (like, say, "adhesive bandage").
This argument is severely flawed insofar as it bases itself entirely on the unsubstantiated assumption that the context of the Genesis painting was always exactly the same as what it ended up being in the game. Given how strange the visual placement of the one-winged figure is in terms of the game's final hierarchy, there's no reason to believe that the painting was always intended to be used the way it was eventually used. Having an actual goddess fill the Oracle's role wouldn't necessarily change anything else in the lore.
I'll admit that, apart from the live translator's translation and the article's confidence (based on said translation?), there isn't any direct evidence that Eidolon was used within the game. However, there actually is reason to think that the term Astral was a late addition, which can be found in the very statements you quoted from the head of localization:
"They also helped covering up for the localization team, like for the demo when there was the term “Archaeon,” but no “Astral” yet, and people thought that “Archaeon” was the name of summons."
"When there was the term 'Archaeon,' but no 'Astral' yet" is a rather ambiguous phrase, but it's ambiguous in a way that's rather telling. See, if the term "Astral" had already been chosen, then the obvious way to cover up for the localization team would be to tell the gaming press that the summons are called Astrals. That this wasn't done immediately strongly suggests that the team hadn't yet made its final choice of name at the time of the confusion.
Well, at this point, I think it's critical to go back and review the course of this debate:
I referenced an article from Gamespot -- a legit gaming website that has (or at least had at the time) sufficient clout to be granted exclusive content from Squenix -- that stated that the woman in the logo was the supreme goddess of FFXV's world to demonstrate that it's not unreasonable for a fan to conclude that one of FFXV's many story revisions included a supreme goddess. In the process, I mentioned the fact that the article called summons "Eidolons" in passing to suggest that FFXV's content was still in flux at the time that the article was written.
Proposition 1: It is reasonable to conclude, based on the existence of the Gamespot article, that at least one of FFXV's drafts included a supreme goddess.
You proceeded to call the veracity of the Gamespot article in question because they called the summons "Eidolons," while stipulating that it wasn't their fault because the translator called them "Eidolons." In response, I set forth my confusion at your suggestion that the Gamespot article was inaccurate based on their use of a term that you yourself stipulated was given to them by Squenix's official translator. Furthermore, I argued that it seemed more likely that the translator was reporting the state of the localization at the time than that the information was incorrect.
Stipulation A: The translator at PAX called summons "Eidolons."
Proposition 2: Given that the translator at PAX called summons "Eidolons," the fact that the Gamespot article reported this name does not call into question the veracity of their information.
Proposition 3: While Gamespot's reliability does not depend on whether they were given bad information by a translator, it is actually more likely that the translator gave them correct information that changed in the revision process than that the information was legitimately bad.
When you continued to insist that the Gamespot article was unreliable because it reported that summons in FFXV had the name that the translator used for them, I argued that there was good reason to think that the translator's word usage reflected the actual localization at the time, because no competent translator would translate "Shoukan/召喚" to "Eidolon" without having some specific reason to believe that "Eidolon" would be used in the localization.
Proposition 4: A competent translator would not have used the proper noun "Eidolon" to translate "Shoukan" if they did not have reason to believe that the localization team had chosen to use that term.
You then proceeded to claim that the translator would have used the term "Eidolon" because it's synonymous with "Shoukan" in the context of Final Fantasy. I rejected this claim and stated that "Eidolon" is simply one of a number of possible localization choices that a FF localization team could choose to make, and therefore the translator still needed sufficient reason to choose that term.
Proposition 5: "Eidolon" is not synonymous with "Shoukan," since different localization teams have chosen to localize ""Shoukan" in different ways.
The rest of the argument has centered on whether Proposition 5 is true or false. As such, it's worth noting that, as no real defeater has been posed to Proposition 2, Proposition 5 has absolutely zero relevance on Proposition 1. Proposition 5 can't call anything before Proposition 3 into question and as such has zero relevance to whether there was a supreme goddess in a draft version of FFXV.
Given what I have said so far, it's obvious that the reason I'm defending Proposition 5 so strongly has nothing to do with my attachment to Proposition 1. Rather, I think that Proposition 5 is important in and of itself. "Eidolon" is a default choice for summons rather than a practical generic term for summons, which can be seen in the fact that most fans use the term "summon" to refer to summoned creatures in the generic (whereas most people refer to adhesive bandages as "bandaids"). It's certainly not a true generic term of the sort that would be used by a professional translator (like, say, "adhesive bandage").
This argument is severely flawed insofar as it bases itself entirely on the unsubstantiated assumption that the context of the Genesis painting was always exactly the same as what it ended up being in the game. Given how strange the visual placement of the one-winged figure is in terms of the game's final hierarchy, there's no reason to believe that the painting was always intended to be used the way it was eventually used. Having an actual goddess fill the Oracle's role wouldn't necessarily change anything else in the lore.
Last edited:
Likes:
Vallen