This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
Because nearly universally other sources have described the game as survival horror, I have noted it was a survival horror game in the article body. That said, one of the developers was unsure if the game truly counts as horror.[1] However, only one third party source kind of shares this sentiment, as GameSpot described the game as "never actually scary" in their review.[2] This may be useful information for the reader, but I'm unsure how to articulate it without sounding contradictory. Mbrickn (talk) 05:35, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This game has many vague elements requiring interpretation, and I don't think the current synopsis accurately reflects anything but one editor's idea of events. It may be better to only present a brief description of the game's premise. 2601:240:E380:89E0:9DCA:5BD0:A3E6:59E4 (talk) 23:52, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A key point I want to call out is that, no matter how heavily a definition may be implied, neither the game nor rose-engine defines anywhere an explicit definition for Ariane and Elster's promise, and it remains open to interpretation.
For instance: there's not actually an extremely compelling reason to believe Elster successfully follows through on the promise in the "Promise" ending versus misunderstanding it, avoiding it, or recognizing that she has failed to satisfy it and needs to restart the time loop to try again. Neither the name of the ending nor the brief, vague dialogue between the characters are quite enough to prove anything in particular. There's no way to be totally sure that Ariane requested euthanasia, and implications are not enough to justify telling the reader that the euthanasia theory is definitely true.
Alternative interpretations exist that suggest the promise is not euthanasia, that the "Promise" ending serves only to restart the time loop, and that the "Artifact" ending is the one that satisifies the promise (which is something different from euthanasia). Those theories are equally as plausible as long as a canonical definition of the promise does not exist.
Until rose-engine or the game states something to the effect of "Our promise is [X]" or "Through [X], Elster fulfills the promise", then it's impossible to prove or refute any theory, and attempts to do so only run afoul of this article's own statement that the uncertain elements of the plot are open to interpretation. Ewhalen (talk) 23:42, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
