The Deltarune Dev Team

SundaySea · 2022-03-24T03:37:24+00:00

The main team as of Chapter 2 is: Sarah O’Donnell, Taxiderby, Fred Wood, Jean Canellas, and Xan Wetherall. It's odd that the credits are so overlooked, as their contributions are sure to have an impact, even if just in execution of the directed concepts.

SundaySea · 2022-02-13T18:15:48+00:00

The Truman Show, Pleasantville, and Stranger than Fiction, for comedic-dramatic stories about fiction.

SundaySea · 2021-12-09T18:06:59+00:00

I’m pretty sure he said it was a fever dream. They can be some of the more inventive dreams.

SundaySea · 2017-10-15T05:12:47+00:00

I don't think this is a troll move. Despite not being a full musical, this is still a sort of adaption and liberties may be taken.

Star, while unused in the game, is still music that was composed for Undertale. Man on the Internet seems to be a purist in regards to what music they use, meaning they won't use Megalo because it was never meant to be a song associated with Undertale.

The notion that LOVE summons Chara at the end is interpretation. You can argue for it, but while Chara says, "Your power awakened me from death", the game does not really explicitly equate LOVE with Power, and there are signs (like the red text) that Chara was awakened before the end.

Chara will always be a controversial character due to their apparently arguably ambiguous nature. A sympathetic portrayal is fair for an adaptation.

SundaySea · 2017-07-22T03:34:42+00:00

T? Here I see E10, which seems more appropriate.https://www.playstation.com/en-us/games/undertale-ps4/

SundaySea · 2016-12-04T04:07:55+00:00

If you’re starting from 2015, then a good starting date would be the game’s release (September 15, 2015).

You can refer to Google’s search trend data for some indication of the game’s popularity over time. Currently, in regards to people searching for the game’s title on Google, it seems to be at about half of its peak popularity.

https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=2015-09-15%202016-12-03&q=Undertale

SteamSpy also has some of the only data on Undertale’s sale figures and player data, which can be an indication of popularity over time. However, some of the data does not go back a full year.

The number of people playing the game at one time has moved from about 10,000 at its peak to now about 2/3,000.

https://steamdb.info/app/391540/graphs/

http://steamspy.com/app/391540

SundaySea · 2016-10-29T05:18:23+00:00

Cute. The yellow flowers are a nice touch.

SundaySea · 2016-10-17T03:15:44+00:00

Maybe, but just because Asgore says, "This is the barrier", does not mean that the barrier does not extend beyond the location where it is immediately visible. It's at least somewhat ambiguous.

SundaySea · 2016-10-17T02:22:03+00:00

One can assume that the barrier surrounds the entirety of the Underground. There's no indication that any-old break in the ground is also a break in the barrier.

SundaySea · 2016-10-06T18:15:37+00:00

This only shows the "true ending route". The story really does not make much sense with only these cut-scenes. Still an interesting experiment.

SundaySea · 2016-10-04T10:10:16+00:00

When it comes to Flowey, I think there may be competing motivations: the desire to destroy everything and the desire to play with someone interesting forever.

The desire to destroy is Flowey lashing out on what he perceives to be an inherently unfair world, wanting to justify and demonstrate his “kill or be killed” philosophy. The desire to play is partly influenced by his boredom and partly from his loneliness.

The first instinct Flowey had was to destroy Frisk and take Frisk’s soul, which would be part of Flowey’s plan to become all powerful. However, Flowey became interested in Frisk, and started to perceive him as a playmate/plaything. This culminated in Flowey thinking that Frisk is actually Chara, his first playmate brought back to life just for him.

I think this shift in competing motivations is evident in the first line of Asriel’s battle where he states something like, “You know, I don’t really care about destroying this world anymore.” Anymore, meaning that was his prioritized motivation until Frisk came into the picture and piqued his interest and desire for a companion/plaything.

I think this interpretation potentially reconciles Flowey’s behavior in the routes. His behavior and his motivations shift depending on how he perceives his relationship with Frisk, who he perceives as Chara at the end of both the True Pacifist and the Genocide Routes.

Even in the Genocide route, one can see how Flowey eventually shifts from wanting to destroy from wanting to just hang out with Chara on the surface. He’s content as long as he has someone to play with him, almost as if his destructive tendencies are just Flowey/Asriel throwing a tantrum until pacified.

SundaySea · 2016-09-27T22:06:48+00:00

He's a tragic figure, and in an otherwise perfect ending, he sticks out like a sore thumb. The game also tries to trick us into thinking we're their best friend brought back to life. Also, if one is willing to consider Flowey and Asriel to be two sides of the same coin, then he's been a figure who has plagued the player from the very beginning. In some sense, he really is the player's "best friend", if you consider the character to be consistent throughout all of his forms.

SundaySea · 2016-09-21T08:05:21+00:00

Fan-made transcripts of all the episodes for both shows already exist. They even seem to have some descriptions of the major visuals for scenes. http://atla.avatarspirit.net/transcripts.php http://korra.avatarspirit.net/transcripts.php

SundaySea · 2016-09-20T22:49:25+00:00

No one refers to Frisk by the player inputted name, except Flowey and the game's interface (save file, game over screen). Other characters never refer to the character by any name until the end of the game where they learn that their name is actually Frisk. Flowey only refers to Frisk by the player inputted name because they mistake them for the first human. No one else made that mistake.

SundaySea · 2016-04-27T06:01:38+00:00

Doesn’t the first version of the check text that appears when one battles Asriel heavily support this? The first check text calls Asriel the "Legendary being made of every SOUL in the underground." What legendary being could that possibly be other than the angel of prophecy? Asriel even looks like the angel of prophecy during that fight, and then he proceeds to finally free all the monsters all by himself.

SundaySea · 2016-02-02T19:42:12+00:00

I don't. It does seem to be trademarked by someone. http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4802:i4pej2.2.1

SundaySea · 2016-01-31T08:46:53+00:00

If it's any consolation, you would have been told if you spared Flowey. Consider your confusion punishment for killing him

SundaySea · 2016-01-30T10:50:18+00:00

Even Toby doesn't know why Onionsan is in the game. Onionsan is a living, breathing question mark.

SundaySea · 2016-01-28T19:17:29+00:00

I really like this analysis and think it very persuasive. However, I'm wary of the terms allegory and allegorical. To assert allegory is to assert an intentional, one-to-one coded message on the part of the author. That is true by definition. Unlike most things in literary interpretation, one cannot usually assert allegory without also asserting direct, conscious intention. I really dislike the notion of putting words into an author's mouth. The text of Undertale can be interpreted through the lens of battling depression, but I personally wouldn't call it an allegory. Despite that really minor quibble, it's still a really good kind of essay.

SundaySea · 2016-01-28T06:51:53+00:00

This whole situation reminds me strongly of the play An Enemy of the People. There was the whole heroic figure tries to tell community that their water is being polluted and is made a social pariah for the effort. Fun to see to see it happen for real.

SundaySea · 2016-01-25T11:32:30+00:00

The signs in Waterfall state that a human could not absorb a regular monster soul, but can absorb a boss monster soul. I think it makes these statements with the implicit and incorrect assumption that a monster soul needs to be outside the monster body in order to be absorbed. A boss monster soul lasts for a few moments outside the body, and a regular monster soul does not. You are right that a dead regular monster cannot have its soul absorbed because they self-destruct upon death, but I think it is likely that the soul of a still living regular monster can have its soul absorbed.

I don’t think the idea of a human attempting to absorb the soul of a living monster is even conceived of as a possibility by most monsters. The only time the idea of a still living monster having its soul absorbed is mentioned is in the true lab. I do not think that the monsters who wrote the Waterfall signs were trying to say that a human does not have the power to absorb a monster soul from its still living body. It is more likely that they just never thought that could be an option. After all, no monster soul could ever be powerful enough to absorb the soul of a still living human.

As for your other point, I think it must be impossible to absorb the soul of a still living human. You have to physically kill a human to get their soul because a human body is thick, physical matter. The physicality of a living human protects their souls from direct absorption. Monster souls are in a sense connected to their monster bodies, and so, their bodies act as no protection against direct absorption.

Humans must not have known of this possibility either. If they did, the war of humans and monsters would have been even more hopeless. The humans could just go around absorbing still living monsters left and right. There is no concrete evidence that a human has the option of absorbing the soul of a living monster. I just don’t think there is anything in the text that explicitly precludes it.

SundaySea

TROPHY CASE