The Cloud Theory (Thought exercise)

[TheBuzzSaw]

Cool. I'm just happy we met at some term. I know I'll probably forget by todays update

(*checks Dojo*)

Never mind.

The biggest thing working against you is the fact that this theory has been done before. Had it been new, we would be a bit more receptive... maybe...

 

[Homelessvagrant]

Who knows?

I'm just happy I'm not getting as much flaming as could have been. After I saw the first few post, I thought I might be in for a wild ride.

 

[Galvanic]

I don't know what half of you are complaining about. I see them perfectly fine. I'm not even familiar with the Metroid and Zelda villains but I still see the faces there without squinting.

And also, what about...? ->

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

Outline Ganondorf's face in detail... Someone else tried, but I still saw nothing.

 

[Gimpyfish62]

people who enjoy this thread may also enjoy the contents of the following thread

http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=105385

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

people who enjoy this thread may also enjoy the contents of the following thread

http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=105385

That's really where this stupid cloud theory belongs...

 

[Homelessvagrant]

I don't know what half of you are complaining about. I see them perfectly fine. I'm not even familiar with the Metroid and Zelda villains but I still see the faces there without squinting.

And also, what about...? ->

Hmm, well I never saw it before but it looks like either Charizard or Lucario (more likely charizard). Still I'm not claiming it because I couldn't see it myself. If some other people notice it (like a nice amount of people) then I might think otherwise. But hey either way it represents the final high priority franchise Pokemon.

 

[Papapaint]

But I never said that the clouds confirmed them. You reading to much into it. I'm saying simply put Sakurai put enemy faces in the clouds for symbolic purposes. That's it. It's happened in multiple games, movies, and other forms of media.... so why not Brawl? Like I said before I'm not doing any ZOMG Ridley confirmed posts, that's illogical and stupid (though I believe he will be a PC).

Actually, you're not a literary mastermind.

What's you're doing is called, in the literary world, "Looking Too Much Into Things." This happens quite frequently with analysis of contemporary poetry, for example.

For starters, symbolism has a very precise meaning--it's when an object both represents itself and represents something which is "not near itself in nature" (Addison, on Congreve). The clouds are not symbolic. They represent evil, and nothing more. If they both represented evil and, say, strawberry shortcake, and strawberry shortcake was entirely relevant to the story, then you'd have some sort of ground (although a weak ground, at that).

Secondly, RE: "While sadly the specific word alludes me, I know for sure that it is an important part of any story and is often the point of some kind of literary allusion."
You're possibly thinking of the "rising action," but it's hard to tell. You have a great deal of difficulty expressing yourself coherently for a literary buff. Also, rarely is the start of tension in any way an allusion--an allusion is a reference to a past literary work, most specifically the Bible.

Even if they are in the clouds, it's nothing more than a nice touch. It's not "symbolic," it's not deep, it's just clever design.

You, sir, are no literary buff.

 

[HyugaRicdeau]

Also this thread isn't about what the theory states but rather the validity of the said theory. Thus if this theory is to hold water it must be purposed by Sakurai himself (or someone in his staff) and what I resolve to explain is why logically he'd perpose such a thing.

Okay, so this thread is about "why Sakurai would do it," assuming that it is actually fact. But I don't see why that's so interesting. The symbolism that you would have us believe exists isn't even complex or poignant or profound at all. So what's the point? It just seems like you took this as some kind of writing exercise for yourself.

So yes, everyone who is debating the validity of the cloud theory is not discussing what your post is really about. But your "theory" is just the putting together of a bunch of disjointed circumstantial "evidence" together and calling it a theory. How do you EXPECT people to respond to that?

 

[Homelessvagrant]

That's really where this stupid cloud theory belongs...

The funny thing is, they didn't half the flames at the beginning as I have. Oh well, to each his own.

Okay, so this thread is about "why Sakurai would do it," assuming that it is actually fact. But I don't see why that's so interesting. The symbolism that you would have us believe exists isn't even complex or poignant or profound at all. So what's the point? It just seems like you took this as some kind of writing exercise for yourself.

So yes, everyone who is debating the validity of the cloud theory is not discussing what your post is really about. But your "theory" is just the putting together of a bunch of disjointed circumstantial "evidence" together and calling it a theory. How do you EXPECT people to respond to that?

Hmm, I don't know. I guess I found though right

thanks for the response.

Edit: I fixed the main post so that includes both the theory and validity

 

[Gimpyfish62]

KING DEDEDE TOO! i outlined his hammer in yellow!

CRAZY!


*rolls eyes*

 

[Eyedol]

I don't know what half of you are complaining about. I see them perfectly fine. I'm not even familiar with the Metroid and Zelda villains but I still see the faces there without squinting.

And also, what about...? ->

In between those four highlighted areas is a shape that looks(to me) quite a bit like Master Hand.

 

[Homelessvagrant]

KING DEDEDE TOO! i outlined his hammer in yellow!

I don't see King Dedede......

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

I see clouds.

 

[Homelessvagrant]

Actually, you're not a literary mastermind.


You, sir, are no literary buff.

You are right but I never said I was. I just like to read and am good at analyzing. You don't have to know what the mathematical (using symbols only) definition of intergration to do Calculus. But I'll change the sentence to make it seem more coherent to you. Thanks for the info though.

BTW I'm in no way a writer. I am an actual story teller. I verbally tell my stories to people. I also draw out my stories in picture form and occasionally write a story out (though I usually only write the skeleton or character ideas. I have many note books full of random writings, I'm too abstract to write any of my stuff out in full form). So I am no literry buff no but I am what I say I am.

 

[StellaNova]

Proof that people only see what they wanna see:

So, which way is she spinning?

This is not a perceptual trick. Stare at the dancer without blinking for like 30 seconds. You will see her animation change. I don't know how you guys missed that. I entertained the possibility of it being a perception deception (OMG) , as in if your right visual field catches it only or first, versus the left. But after testing it out for about 20 minutes, you can just simply SEE her change directions, for no apparent reason. Look closer.

 

[Homelessvagrant]

This is not a perceptual trick. Stare at the dancer without blinking for like 30 seconds. You will see her animation change. I don't know how you guys missed that. I entertained the possibility of it being a perception deception (OMG) , as in if your right visual field catches it only or first, versus the left. But after testing it out for about 20 minutes, you can just simply SEE her change directions, for no apparent reason. Look closer.

Well honestly she doesn't change at all because ahe isn't there. It's just a flash program that has various black images making a spinning girl. The answer to how she can seem to shift from turning left to turning right is in what leg overlaps the other at what point. Because in essence the don't overlap but collide.

 

[Gimpyfish62]

Well honestly she doesn't change at all because ahe isn't there.

wow did you just say that she actually isn't there after the entire point of this thread is magical villains in the clouds?

 

[brawlpro]

The G-Panion Cube will close this thread one day.

 

[.Yoshi]

This is all just pathetc fallacy........*

*if you know what it means, then it's a pun on this thread

 

[Hoboman725]

all I see is bowser, what is circled as Ridley looks like a hand of bowser's... and I see nothing where ganondorf is supposed to be

 

[susu_atari]

This is not a perceptual trick. Stare at the dancer without blinking for like 30 seconds. You will see her animation change. I don't know how you guys missed that. I entertained the possibility of it being a perception deception (OMG) , as in if your right visual field catches it only or first, versus the left. But after testing it out for about 20 minutes, you can just simply SEE her change directions, for no apparent reason. Look closer.

No, the animation repeats the same 1-second loop FOREVER. With a little practice, you can make her change directions at will. It's all about perception. There is NO debate about this. I AM right.

 

[VanillaMummy]

Watch the video of where this image is taken. It is almost impossble to see this image for over a second. If someone creates symbolism in a piece of art, it is supposed to be a tad bit more noticable then 3 frames of animation.

This thread is now about what kind of animals we've seen in clouds IRL. I like when I see crocodilles. =)

 

[Papapaint]

You are right but I never said I was. I just like to read and am good at analyzing. You don't have to know what the mathematical (using symbols only) definition of intergration to do Calculus. But I'll change the sentence to make it seem more coherent to you. Thanks for the info though.

BTW I'm in no way a writer. I am an actual story teller. I verbally tell my stories to people. I also draw out my stories in picture form and occasionally write a story out (though I usually only write the skeleton or character ideas. I have many note books full of random writings, I'm too abstract to write any of my stuff out in full form). So I am no literry buff no but I am what I say I am.

But... you're not good at analyzing. You'd be laughed out of any collegiate literature analysis course.

And that spinning girl is not a perception illusion.

 

[Papapaint]

Actually, that's wrong too. There's no standard rule for how long something needs to be visible in order to be a symbol. It can range from one word in a sentence to a major character in a film. Symbolism is not temporally limited. That's plain ignorant to think so.i

 

[Heavyarms2050]

i see a hand...

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

And that spinning girl is not a perception illusion.

Are you also implying that she actually changes direction in the animation?

For those who have not checked yet, the girl is a GIF animation, not flash. So, if you edit the image and view the frames (via GIMP or other program), you can clearly see that she rotates once. It is an illusion. With practice, you can get her to switch directions at will. I know because I've done it. Saying that the animation actually changes is short-sighted and stubborn.

 

[JPOBS]

you never actually stated whats the pooint though.
Even if those 3 clouds represent metroid, mario and zelda franchises, what are you getting at?

 

[jambre]

Dedede?

i think so.

(its 2d of him looking to the right, only one eye shown)

 

[Kadian]

So this is how I'd like to summarize things:

Homeless sees some figures in the clouds in the Halberd entrance scene. Other people may or may not also see them, and yet others poo-poo the idea and mock up pictures of bread and spinning girls, etc.

A number of points here:

1) When someone proposes an extraordinary idea/theory/phenomenon, it is not a case of the listeners being "closed-minded" or such, the fact is the BURDEN OF PROOF lies with the proponent of such arguments. It is not the responsibility of others to prove him/her wrong.

Examples:
a) When the United States launched astronauts with the purpose to put men on the moon, they brought a great deal of evidence back, such as photographs of space and Earth from the moon, scientifically analyzed moon dust and rocks, and left a plethora of equipment and markings on the moon which can be seen on its surface to this day.

b) When supposed "scientists" propose that a humanoid big foot species roams the American Northwestern forest, what do you suppose is their evidence? Eye witnesses and shaky video footage, both easily mistakable and hoaxable. What would it take to EASILY prove the existence of a Big Foot? A body. Bones. DNA evidence. Now, what would it take to disprove the Big Foot theory? For a great many thousands of people to simultaneously occupy every inch of wooded land to verify that, in fact, there exists no unknown creature living there.

The belated point is, extraordinary hypotheses require extraordinary evidence. The reader/listener/viewer has every RIGHT AND RESPONSIBILITY to be sceptical. It is not a matter of perspective. Just wanted to get that off my chest.

2) Fortunately, Homeless is not such a fool to start a thread without providing some evidence. The question now is, is it enough? He takes some screens and circles the cloud figures (or just posts them here after finding them elseswhere) and says, "Here are three villains from three of Nintendo's most storied franchises, formed in cloud, flanking the entrance of the Halberd, the supposed bad guys' HQ. There must be something to this." He then states that the use of literary techniques such as foreshadowing and symbolism apply to the validity of this claim, that Sakurai employs them to enhance his original story.

Indeed, that if it were true, and Sakurai's intent, the IDEA of these things coming together makes sense. Making out the Halberd as a center of all things evil in the Nintendo universe would be fitting of a storyline involving the ultimate culmination of numerous illustrious video game franchises.

But (they're always a 'but') there are a number of arguments to be made against this interpretation. Look at the video of the scene. The lauded cloud scene lasts perhaps 3 seconds, and the forms in the clouds are incredibly difficult to see, even when you look for them, and evidenced by the inablity of many on these boards to see them in still screens and circles indicating where to look. How will millions of fans see the figures in the video, the way it is currently presented? Also, the video continues with the Halberd swooping low and releasing hordes of baddies. In no way are the cloud figures seen in other various angles, or the rest of the video for that matter. So, one can make one of two findings from things:

1) Sakurai meant for the villains to be seen in the clouds, but did a poor job of presenting the forms. This mistake is on him, and the denizens of the Smash community will never see or know what Sakurai envisioned in his mind. I believe this is a poor line of reasoning, from the related bases that Sakurai has always made everything he wanted to be known obvious and he has not shown a lack of storytelling ability. In every post, every update, Sakurai tells us everything of importance. In every update within momory, he notes every flash of the sword, every turn of the head, every floating platform, he notes the details. And yet there are other times he is purposefully ambiguous, but still anticipates his audiences' thoughts by voicing questions of the type "How does this work?" "Where is this from?" "Isn't this great? jk". In this way he demonstrates key storyteller traits of knowing his audience and giving great detail. This is where this deduction must be false. Which brings us to the ONLY POSSIBLE LOGICAL CONCLUSION...

2) Sakurai never meant things to be seen in the clouds and people see stuff absolutely unintended. If he had purposefully done the villains-in-clouds image, would he have not made it easily known? Would he not perhaps zoom in on each cloud form and persist with the shapes in alternate angles? Would he not state that there is something to be seen in the clouds, instead of saying "When someone...or something...breaks those rules, the world will pay a terrible price..." in the post the image originally was shown?

Humans are imperfect beings, and sometimes people make mistakes. Individuals can see things, symbols, metaphors, what have you, in works that are unintended by the creator because they want to see them. It has happened works of the past, novels, paintings, films. And maybe it gives greating meaning to you because of it, good for you. An appeal of great creations is the ability of others to add some of themselves to it. Sakurai is a genius in my book, but at last, I'd like to put an end to this discussion. THERE ARE NO FIGURES IN THE CLOUDS.

 

[flyinfilipino]

Stuff.

Yes! ......

 

[Ban Heim]

And here's my proof. I may have shown a seemingly irrational post but at least I did it in a calm form with ration sense. This guy may be arguing for a more logical sense but he's making a fool out of himself doing so not showing any logical sense.

Do you now understand what I'm getting at?

This **** has been brought up time and again. It was made by some kid with way too much time on his hands. Why the **** would anyone believe this? It just seems so stupid to me that people would actually fall for it. How the hell am I making a fool out of myself when you believe that cloud shapes will reveal hidden characters?

Plus the fact that it's been brought up before several times elicits an angry/sarcastic response like the one I gave earlier. You can only be calm and rational so many times.

 

[Paingel]

WTF guys? You are all attacking and basically flaming this guy for NO REASON WHATSOEVER.

The OP hasn't flamed anyone, or called anyone names, or done ANY of the things that you guys are doing to him.

So.. what? Is it because he saw something you didn't? Because he's pointing something out that you didn't see? WTF is wrong with you guys? What are you doing, acting like this? Just because his theory isn't immediately proveable (How the heck do we know what the CG artist was thinking at the moment that they made those clouds move in that certain way?) you start jumping on him like he's a freaking troll.

And on top of it all there's a Mod doing this...

Yes, I can see the faces in the clouds too. They are distorted so that the "top" of the head is further out than the "bottom", so Ganondorf's otherwise strong chin would be receded in that picture which is probably why some people can't make him out.

As far as CG goes, clouds tend to be made with particle physics, which could EASILY be used to make clouds that look like ANY shape you want to. If you can make a 3-D model that looks like Bowser's head, then you can make a cloud that looks like Bowsers head. Just use all of the same vertex information, but instead of drawing polygons you draw particles.

It's easy to believe that the artist who did this would put faces in the clouds. It's artistic. It doesn't even require any new technology or any new way of thinking. It's the kind of detail that a professional would pay attention to. And if he DIDN'T do this? If this is just a mistake or someone "seeing what they want to see"? Then...

WHO CARES? WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? WHY ARE YOU ACTING ALL CRAZY OVER SOME IRRELEVANT POINT?

But then, the proving of the theory isn't the point. The point is to think about it and ponder it and be amused by the prospect. Whether or not it's "true" doesn't even matter. It's pattern recognition, and faces are some of the easiest patterns for us humans to recognize.

Consider your own actions before passing judgement on others.

 

[VanillaMummy]

Actually, that's wrong too. There's no standard rule for how long something needs to be visible in order to be a symbol. It can range from one word in a sentence to a major character in a film. Symbolism is not temporally limited. That's plain ignorant to think so.i

Let me correct myself, because I didn't word myself properly. A good use of symbolism would either be longer or more discernable. Yes, there can be symbolism that is just one word in a sentence, but it is done well and is usually picked up on upon inspection for symbolism.

The cloud theory, however doesn't fit this criteria. The clouds only form this shape for frames and is barely discernable, even when people pay close attention to still frames of the animation. I have a little more faith in Sakurai then to think he would be this poor at making something of symbolism.

Anyone that has laid under the summer sky with someone and pointed out what clouds look like could tell you that everyone has different ideas about what things look like, and its all what you mind wants to see there (whether it be conscious or subconscious).

The fact that I've seen the Ridley face and Hand outline in about 3 different ways further proves my point that anything could be "seen" in this picture if you tried to point it out.

 

[Gilgamesh]

The Burninator has come.

At first i thought this theory was crap, but after looking carefully at the clouds...

...I think i managed to see something.

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

At first i thought this theory was crap, but after looking carefully at the clouds...

...I think i managed to see something.

He was a man...

He was a dragon man...

Or maybe just a dragon..

BUT HE WAS STILL TROGDOR!!!

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

WTF guys? You are all attacking and basically flaming this guy for NO REASON WHATSOEVER.

The OP hasn't flamed anyone, or called anyone names, or done ANY of the things that you guys are doing to him.

So.. what? Is it because he saw something you didn't? Because he's pointing something out that you didn't see? WTF is wrong with you guys? What are you doing, acting like this? Just because his theory isn't immediately proveable (How the heck do we know what the CG artist was thinking at the moment that they made those clouds move in that certain way?) you start jumping on him like he's a freaking troll.

I asked him to outline the drawing of Ganondorf's face. He never replied to that. I personally believe that aspect is completely bogus. How come my opinion is looked down upon? It has just as much credibility as his does. He only mentioned Ganondorf's face because the original theory presented that. I saw someone attempt to draw in Ganondorf's face, but it still didn't work. I think that whole issue has to do with people being lemmings.

And on top of it all there's a Mod doing this...

That should be an indicator of how silly the whole theory is.

Yes, I can see the faces in the clouds too. They are distorted so that the "top" of the head is further out than the "bottom", so Ganondorf's otherwise strong chin would be receded in that picture which is probably why some people can't make him out.

If you can see him so clearly, draw him up for me.

As far as CG goes, clouds tend to be made with particle physics, which could EASILY be used to make clouds that look like ANY shape you want to. If you can make a 3-D model that looks like Bowser's head, then you can make a cloud that looks like Bowsers head. Just use all of the same vertex information, but instead of drawing polygons you draw particles.

Of course it is technologically possible. We just don't believe it was intentional.

It's easy to believe that the artist who did this would put faces in the clouds. It's artistic. It doesn't even require any new technology or any new way of thinking. It's the kind of detail that a professional would pay attention to. And if he DIDN'T do this? If this is just a mistake or someone "seeing what they want to see"? Then...

WHO CARES? WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? WHY ARE YOU ACTING ALL CRAZY OVER SOME IRRELEVANT POINT?

Just like you are now... The same could be said about you. If it is so irrelevant, why is anyone defending it? There obviously is some sentimental attachment here.

But then, the proving of the theory isn't the point. The point is to think about it and ponder it and be amused by the prospect. Whether or not it's "true" doesn't even matter. It's pattern recognition, and faces are some of the easiest patterns for us humans to recognize.

Consider your own actions before passing judgement on others.

But you forget that this is a whole new thread for this ridiculous theory. IT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED BEFORE! We are tired of the "wow neat look at this" effect. It wore off ages ago. Someone decided to come along and create a new thread as if it were recently discovered. That would be spam.

 

[Snakz]

Although i dont really believe most of this theory, i do actually i see Master Hand and Ganondorf, but i fail to see Ridley, he just looks more like Bowser's claw

 

[Dubyah8r]

Am I the only one who does see Mewtwo??? A full body profile below Ganondorf... It looks like him at the end of his celebration from Melee

 

[3D King]

I see Bowser and Ridley really well, but I can't really make out much of ganondorf (most likely because I'm not really used to his new look), I also kind of see Mewtwo in there.