Finalization
Note: Black Omen discussion covered in its own thread
~
What is meant by Gaspar's statement, "One of you is close to someone who needs help...Find this person...fast."? Is completing the Black Omen truly a sidequest, or merely a main chapter in the game? Who is this someone?
Note: Though it has been determined via translation that this line is significantly altered from the Japanese version, it nonetheless has no bearing on the English version. We can still attempt to infer what was meant by the statement.
Support for Queen Zeal/Sidequest
ZeaLitY: After completing the event, Gaspar remarks: OLD MAN: That poor woman can finally, rest, now that the Black Omen is, gone. She's reverted back to a human..." This heavily suggests that the someone referred to before completing the Black Omen is Queen Zeal. In addition, Zeal is Magus's mother; though they may not be close due to her dementia, they are nonetheless biologically related.
Lord J Esq: I happened to have played Chrono Trigger again over the past couple of days, in anticipation of playing Chrono Cross, which leaves me in an excellent position to put this issue to rest.
The riddle:
To whom is Gaspar referring when he say “One of you is close to someone who needs help. Find this person…fast.”
The facts:
1. Every side quest except for the Black Omen itself can be completed and Gaspar will still say that line. (This includes the side quests involving saving Crono, saving Lara, saving the forest, saving Atropos, recharging the Sun Stone, avenging Cyrus, chasing down Ozzie’s Fort, stopping Yakra, getting the Rainbow Shell, infiltrating the Giant’s Claw, and combining the Sun Stone and Rainbow Shell.)
2. The only non-monster character you meet in the Black Omen is Queen Zeal herself.
3. Upon completing the Black Omen, Gaspar will say “That poor woman can finally rest. She’s reverted back to a human.” This is a definite reference to the Queen.
The contentions:
1. The link between Gaspar’s earlier quote about someone needing help and his later quote about Zeal is tenuous.
2. The text may be blatantly mistranslated, and originally meant “Each of you” instead of “One of you.”
The resolution:
1. The first contention is not valid. Presuming Gaspar’s text is correct, there is simply nothing that occurs during the Black Omen expedition that can relate to any of the playable characters other than the confrontation with Zeal. There is no one else to meet, in any time period or location, and nothing else to do. The two comments are necessarily linked.
2. The second contention will either prove that Gaspar was referring only to Queen Zeal, or to every side quest including Zeal and her Black Omen—and the Black Omen is indeed a side quest, because it is not necessary to be beaten in order to confront Lavos in the final battle. Anyhow, if the text was correct, then we have no loose ends. He referred to Queen Zeal. If the text was incorrect in its translation, then we have one loose end: After completing the Black Omen, Gaspar says nothing about any of the other side quests, referring exclusively to his former liege. Why would he elevate her over the objects of other side quests?
The conclusion:
I think we can definitely say that he referred to the Queen. That’s how RPGs work. Even though Janus and the Queen were never close in the game, they are either related through blood or marriage, and in both Japan and America the theme of family tends to outrank most personal reservations such as abounded in Magus.
Riposte:go right corner: "Why would he elevate her over the objects of other side quests?" This loose end exists regardless of whether the translation is correct or not. It's the very fact that Gaspar seems to elevate Queen Zeal over the objects of other sidequests that cause a few people to argue that the Black Omen is not a sidequest, or at least not the same kind of sidequest as the rest. Lucca is close to Lucca's Mom in this way too for example. So we know that the "one of you..." quote couldn't, for example, relate Marle to Atropos, but it doesn't narrow it all the way down to just the Magus-Zeal relationship.
By your logic, you could link every sidequest to the Black Omen and Queen Zeal, since Gaspar stops talking about sidequests altogether after you beat Queen Zeal.
Counter-Riposte: Lord J Esq: Chrono Trigger does not have the luxury of indulging player choice actively. At some point it has to segue from the side quest phase of the game into the final confrontation with Lavos. The programmers decided that the Black Omen side quest—the most serious and important side quest of them all—would be that point at which the code switches are updated to reflected the game’s “best guess” that the player is ready to move on to Lavos. Of course it is possible for anyone so inclined to manipulate that, but this has no bearing on the fact that Gaspar referred to Queen Zeal in his two messages—there simply is no one else—and that the Omen is indeed a side quest. (And these are the only final points I made in my first post.)
Goodness, man! Gaspar refers to someone in the Black Omen, since that is the trigger that changes his earlier statement to the later one. Yet, in the Black Omen, there is no character, excepting the generic monsters encountered, except Queen Zeal. It is foregone.
go right corner: If we assume that Gaspar was talking about Queen Zeal in his "one of you..." quote, then since he was talking about other sidequests immediately before the quote, it's plausible to assume that Gaspar was still talking about yet another sidequest when he speaks that line. And Queen Zeal lives in the Black Omen.
Refutation against Queen Zeal/Sidequest
Heartfang: Defeating the Black Omen moves the game past the fated hour. Everytime you have a save message, he really only says one thing until you move the story past that message to the next. He won't talk about any sidequest whether you defeat them or not. Queen Zeal is the last storyline element of the game you complete, before you beat the game. Its the last thing you do before fighting lavos, and hence the last thing Gaspar tells you.
There was nothing of any relation to the characters when you went to the ocean palace the first time. You didn't even know schaala, or the janus magus connection.
Riposte: Lord J Esq: Incorrect; the Black Omen is just a side quest, just like saving Crono is “just” a side quest. Neither are necessary for the credits to roll. Obviously the game is designed for the player to play both of these scenarios—and all the others; that’s part of their replayability strategy. But side quests they remain.
It is a foregone RPG truth that every non-monster with a special sprite will have some important purpose, however brief or indirect, to the main plot. You the player are not expected to know all these characters at the Ocean Palace stage of the game, but by the time the Black Omen comes around and all the other side quests are played, the plot is revealed and the game is at its terminus. There simply was no one else between Gaspar’s first and second comments besides Queen Zeal herself. The jig is up. He had to be referring to her.
Axen: Axen: It's been said before that if you beat the Black Omen before completing the other side quests, Gaspar stops talking about all of them. Does that mean they've been resolved? Of course not. So it doesn't have to mean Queen Zeal.
go right corner: Magus already has a sidequest clearly connected to him, namely Ozzie's Fort. When you haven't complete the Ozzie Fort sidequest, speaking to Magus at the end of time will have him mentioning that fort, and the game will even show you a map screenshot of the location.
Gaspar clearly seems to have single out the Black Omen as different from the "normal" sidequests. Recall that his words goes like this:
"...You wish to fight Lavos, right?
[mentions about Bucket, then the Wing of Time]
[now, the following is an exact quote]:
Or there's the Black Omen, which
floats in the sky above your world.
Lavos is somehow connected with it.
[then says something like "up to you to decide when/where to fight Lavos, and then]
However, you will not be alone. [then said something about having glimpse of events, people and places that will empowered you]
[now he starts talking about sidequests]"
Finally, in connection with Gaspar saying the sidequests as "empowering" you, notice that each of the "normal" sidequests gives some sort of unique item you can't get in any other way:
1) Cyrus sidequest: Masamune II
2) Robo (Geno Dome) sidequest: Atropos's Ribbon
3) Fiona sidequest, if including saving of Lara as part of the quest: GreenDream
Also, you could consider the Hats you can buy in the Fiona's Shrine as unique items, although that's somewhat of a stretch.
4) Sun Stone sidequest: Sun shades, WonderShot
5) Rainbow Shell sidequest: Prism Helms or Prism Dress, although technically you could charm them off of Black Omen, but that's different from automatically getting the items.
Also the Rainbow if you have the Sun Stone.
6) Ozzie's Fort: Flea Vest, Slasher II, Ozzie Pants. Okay, so they're useless, but they're still unique items (although unlike the other sidequests, you have to charm these).
The Black Omen, however, is not empowering in quite the same way. Sure, you get tons of experiences and tech points, and you can charm some wonderful items off the enemies, but that's rather different from the way you gain the unique empowering items in the normal sidequests.
Some Other Guy: First of all, I'm just going to make a quick point: Gaspar will still say this, EVEN IF YOU CHOOSE TO DEFEAT MAGUS.
For all we know, and in support of the mistranslation theory, it could be implied that the statement made by Gaspar "One of you is close to someone who needs help... Find this person. Fast" (or however it goes) is merely implying that these ARE sidequests, and part of the story (eg; character backgrounds) is advanced upon completion.
IE, it's merely telling you that there are sidequests that can be completed.
This supports the translation theory, as in most, if not all, of the sidequests, you ARE helping someone who is in dire need (Lara, Marle's father, Atropos XR, Cyrus' ghost, the Mayor of Porre etc..).
If the aforementioned text does indeed refer strictly to Zeal, would it not be said in such a way that it refers solely to her, and not make implications that it refers to others?
And regarding Zeal's place in the story, as well as the Black Omen and Gaspars final comments...
When you first arrive in the Kingdom of Zeal, you learn that Lavos' presence has influenced her behaviour in such a way that she has changed from being a loving member of the Zeal royal family, into a tyrant, with nothing but immoraltality on her mind. She wants to achieve immortality at any cost, whether it be the people she once loved, or the people who look up to and have devoted themselves to her.
The Black Omen, which as Gaspar states, transcends time. As long as Zeal is inside the Black Omen, and is absorbing Lavos' power through the Mammon Machine, aeons could go by and she wouldn't age one bit. This her final step towards immortality, a goal in which she desires to achieve. She wants to be the all ruling, ever-powerful, immortal tyrant queen that she is to become under Lavos' influence.
Now for Gaspars comment about her being able to finally rest. It has absolutely no revelance to the aforementioned point of discussion at all. It is simply implying that you have rid her of Lavos control over her. Putting her to rest, meaning that her heart and soul is no longer under Lavos' influence and control, and it able to peacefully rest in her 'grave'.
Gaspar-Mistranslation Theory
go right corner: It has also been claimed that the line was a mistranslation, and that in the Japanese version it says "Each of you is close to...". (This is plausible since Japanese don't inflect words on pluralization, so if "each" got mistranslated to "one", "find those people" could've been indirectly and consequently mistranslated as "find that person" as well.)
Translation:
jibun no jidai no koto nara omae-san-tachi no naka ni mo sh*tte iru mono ga oru darou. kiite miru ga ii......
So far only one person on japanese.about.com responded to my question. The literal translation given to me is:
"If it's matter regarding your own generation, there's probably someone amongst you who know. It's good to ask."
And after considering the Japanese text myself independently of the above suggestion, I feel that the above is probably indeed an accurate translation.
Let me break things down into phrases and give my view of how I think they fit together:
1) jibun no jidai no koto: there's little ambiguity here. This means "things/matters/circumstances [koto] of one's own [jibun] time period [jidai]". Now because Gaspar is speaking to Crono & co as a group, the "one's own" here by context would be referring to each of the members in Crono & co. [Japanese as far as I know do not have specific "himself", "yourself", "yourselves" and the like, just a general "self". Not too surprising if you think about it; it's redundant to say "yourself" or "himself" anyway; the "you" or "he" has already been stated in the subject!]
2) nara: this word is described as the "provisional form" of the direct copula "da". An example usage:
Raishuu nara hima desu
"Provided that [it's] next week [you're talking about], (i) am free." (with things in [] deduced from context, since Japanese typically omits any parts of a sentence which is clear from context)
A somewhat smoother English translation would then be "if you're talking about next week, I'm free".
This should explain why together 1&2 could be translated as "if it's matters regarding your own generation". Of course, we know here that "jidai" doesn't really mean generation but the various time eras defined in CT.
3) omae-san-tachi no naka ni
a really literal translation would be like "within the group consisting of all of you", so equivalent "someone amongst you".
4) mo "also"
5) sh*tte iru: "to know". Unfortunately this is the most ambiguous part of the sentence, thanks to Japanese' freedom for dropping sentence parts. So it's not entirely clear to me what the subject and the object of this "to know" is, though I'm sure a native Japanese speaker would have no trouble giving you the most likely inferred subject and object, based on the structure of the sentence and other factors.
I'll get back to this later.
6) XXX sh*tte iru mono ga oru darou.
mono is "person". The way japanese works, if you want to modify a noun with a verb phrase, whereas in English you use words like "that" [eg. "the letter that I wrote"], in Japanese you tag the dependent verb phrase in front of the noun as if the whole phrase is an adjective, kinda like "the I-wrote letter". Now thanks to the ambiguity (at least to a non-native like me) of subject and object in the "sh*tte iru" part, the "XXX sh*tte iru mono" could either be "person(s) who know(s) blah" or "person(s) who blah knows".
But after that the rest is simple. "mono ga oru darou", ignoring the modifying phrase preceding the mono, simply means "probably [darou] there exists [oru] person [mono]".
We see now that how the translater in about.com read it as "person(s) who know(s) blah", and so the translation become
"there's probably someone amongst you who know", with the object of know being, from context of sentence, the "jibun...nara" stuff, namely "matters regarding your own time era".
Phew! So putting it all together, the first sentence could mean:
"For matters regarding each of your own time era, there's probably someone amongst you who knows about it."
The next sentence is much easier to translate. Literally:
to listen to and [kiite] to see [miru], is good [ga ii].
Again typical example of how Japanese sentences don't require subject and object if inferrable from context. But since the previous sentence is definitely talking about a person (even though I couldn't resolve whether the person knows something, or is being known by Crono & co), clearly the sentence would translate to
"it would be good to see and listen to that person [who knows about matters regarding your own time era]."
"to see and listen to" is pretty much equivalent to "to ask about something", hence it's acceptable to translate as "it's good to ask".
I should also note that "ga ii" is actually used in practice as a phrase that connotes an indirect command/suggestion of sort, so a translation that's more faithful to this nuance would probably be "you may want to see and listen to that person."
-------------------
So what's the conclusion? I now actually think that in the Japanese, Gaspar is simply telling you that you can talk to your own members (at End of Time) to find out about particular sidequests [with the sidequests being "matters of your own time eras"].
If that's the case, then Ted Woosley didn't really translate! He practically throw in a new line of dialog in the English version of CT!
However, since it's by all means possible for Square to intentionally modify the dialog (they have already done it to censor references to alcohol for example), maybe this is an intentional change, in which case we might not be able to draw much conclusions from the Japanese version regarding the English quote we see.
Neutral Commentary
go right corner: It just occurred to me that even if the "mistranslation" theory is in fact the true reason, Square would probably never admit it. After all, there are probably plenty of other ways for them to explain it, why pick an explanation that makes Square look bad? Especially since very very few people would have the means, interest, or skills to verify the alleged difference between the NA and Jap version of the dialog. Square could easily get away with brushing aside the mistranslation, and even if someone does point it out, they could say something like they deliberately change the dialog when translating to English to, I don't know, make the dialog more interesting/dramatic or something.
The important thing about the Japanese text is that it's markedly less precise than the English statement. There really isn't a "for each", "every", "one", or anything like that, and heck, it even has a "probably" in there. So it really doesn't matter that not all eras have sidequests; the Japanese text didn't really explicitly say every era or every person has to have a sidequest. As I've pointed out, a literal translation of the "jibun...nara" part is just "if it's matters concerning your own time eras" or "regarding matters of your own time eras". I interpret that to be a reference to the sidequests that Gaspar just talked about moments ago.
Support
go right corner: There have been many instances of (apparently) deliberate mistranslation of the CT dialog. So even if the "one of you..." quote is a mistranslation, there's no reason why it couldn't have been done on purpose. So the "officially correct" NA quote might still be "one of you..." not "each of you...".
Refutation
Lord J Esq: For instance, there really is no 65 million B.C. side quest, unless you want to count the fact that you have to put the Sun Stone into the Sun Keep at that time, or perhaps count the fact that the Giant’s Claw is a remnant of the Tyrano Lair—even though it occurs ridiculously long after the prehistoric era itself. But there really isn't anyone to whom you speak in that era, and the same holds true for 2300, excepting Belthasar's Nu, which I think is a valid exception considering that Belthesar himself is not actually there, and is not actually a resident of that era.
Nevertheless, all arguments aside, it had never occurred to me that there is also the possibility that it was not a scriptwriter, not a director, and not a designer, but good old Ted who was the sole driving force behind this instance of meaning. Perhaps other instances of meaning in the game as well are completely his innovation. Somehow that seems an unsatisfying thought.
And, as always, there is still the fact that if Gaspar’s disputed line does not refer to Zeal’s Queen, his definite line about her then has no preface, which seems odd in terms of RPG presentational logic.
go right corner: It's true that you don't need to bring Magus to complete the Ozzie sidequest; however, you never need to have Magus in your party either--he could've been killed off at North Cape. Thus there're good reasons for the game developers to avoid making a sidequest that is impossible to complete without Magus.
Lara-Sidequest Theory
Nintendo of America's Website
This is Lucca's mother. You must save Lucca's mom's legs in order to complete the objective given to you at The End of Time. To do this, you must destroy the Sunken Desert, help Fiona replant the forest, and go through the "camp fire scene" in order to go back to Lucca's House in the past. (Gameplay Sequence)
If You Didn't Get It Right The First Time...:
Then you have to go back to a previous save file and try it again. You only get one shot at trying to save Lucca's mom's legs.
Note:
Even if you have already saved Lucca's mom's legs, Gaspar at The End of Time will still say "someone close to you needs help fast". There is no way to get him to stop saying this.
Support
go right corner: The saving of Lara is the only timed sidequest. You have to save Lara by a certain, fairly short amount of time or you lose your chance. This fits with how the quote ends with "Find this person...fast".
SaboCactuar: If I might pose another theory...? I think that perhaps the answer DOES lie with Lucca's mother, Lara. In all the years that I've played Chrono Trigger, I've always thought that he was talking about Lara in the "Find this person, fast" quote. It just sounds too much like that side-quest to make sense as anything else. Anyway, my theory:
If you know much about how the typical RPG programming works, you know that all the scripted events in the game run off flags (or switches, variables, whatever you prefer). For a simple example, say you open a chest in 600 A.D. That action will trigger a flag to be marked as 'on', and whenever you return to the screen with the chest, or go to the same spot in 1000 A.D., the game will see that flag marked as 'on' and will know that you've already opened that chest. Bearing in mind that there are literally THOUSANDS of such flags in a game, it's entirely possible that the programmers let a little bug slip in.
So, for the sake of my argument, suppose that after you complete the Lara event the game is programmed to trigger flag #222220 (or whatever) but a programmer mistakenly typed #222221 in the event's script. Also suppose that the CORRECT flag, #222220, tells the game to have Gaspar shut up about the person needing help. Since the correct flag isn't triggered, that might explain why the Guru doesn't drop the topic even after you've saved Lara (or whatever sidequest is supposed to be attached to that statement, it wouldn't necessarily have to be the Lara one [though that one makes the most sense to me]). And since it's only a minor thing that has no real bearing on the gameplay, the playtesters might not have caught it.
Of course, none of that accounts for the "now she can rest" bit, but it might go a long way towards verifying the Lara theory, or at least disproving the "It's gotta be Zeal because he still says it even after you do everything else" bit. And to expand on my theory, it's possible that the programmers trigger a catch-all switch after you've beaten the Black Omen, which turns off ALL his side-quest prompts (because it would be assumed that after Black Omen you're ready for Lavos). Unfortunately, I have no way of proving or disproving this, but at least it's something to consider.
Riposte: Lord J Esq: That idea is good in spirit, but it loses integrity by its failure to account for a string of already-discussed independent occurrences that would have to have been programmed incorrectly in precisely the same fashion—all of which points to Queen Zeal. I still think people are not giving enough recognition to the values both in the United States and in Japan that our cultures place on family—even estranged family—and sometimes, even particularly so. At least if Janus were to have a hand in stopping her, she would receive some small dignity and her family would regain something of its honor.
Furthermore, Gaspar does mention the replanting of the forests, and Lucca’s subplot to save Lara is tied to that inextricably. It could be that Lara receives no mention because the designers knew that saving the forest will result in an that eerie scene with the strange red gate where Lucca confronts her past—an episode designed to surprise and enthrall players.
Counter-Riposte: SaboCactuar: Lucca's mother died, not as a result of Lavos' intervention, but simply as a normal event in the timeline. Everything else seems to in one way or another link back to Lavos' presence. So it's entirely possible that Lucca saving her mother isn't relevant to the correct timeline, which would explain why Gaspar WOULDN'T say anything about it. To him, that's just an event that was supposed to happen. But then again, with the evidence we have now, I don't think anyone can fairly say "THIS is what he meant" with any of the current theories. I still think it's either a mistranslation or a programming bug, and I definitely lean toward it referring to Lara.
Counter-Counter-Riposte: Lord J Esq: What conditions must be met to prove this theory? One would be to search the code and identify all the switches that are engaged after completing the Lara quest. These switches must be filtered to exclude any associated with the Fiona side quest, because even though the two are tied together, they are disparate. If, in this code, there is some switch engaged that returns either no value or a strange value, then we would have circumstantial evidence in support of the Programming Error Theory, because a no value return would indicate the activation of a switch that does not exist (i.e., the activation of one switch when another was intended), and a strange return value would indicate the activation of a switch that seemingly has nothing to do with the relevant game events (e.g., updating the speech of a townsperson somewhere to whom you have already spoken earlier in the game). However, this assumes that the Chrono Trigger code is very clean, which I doubt. If it is messy, this line of argument is almost futile. However, if we delve into the code and find this one glaring error amidst a field of cleanliness, then the argument becomes wide open. But until then, it remains an untenable position because the burden of proof rests with the claimant and not many of us are apt to go scouring through thousands upon thousands of lines of code for such a small return.
Due to the technical foundation of its argument, there remains no way to prove this theory besides going through the code or petitioning the original development team for answers. However, there is a great wealth of evidence to disprove it, most of which is already detailed in this thread. To those arguments I will add that this side quest is not actually about saving Lara. It is about inspiring Lucca to pursue scientific study. It is not necessary to save Lara’s legs—indeed, be it through aesthetic preference, cold schadenfreude, or even lethargic thumbs, a player is perfectly within his or her rights to let Lara be decapitated. The only thing that must come true at the end of this side quest, regardless of the choices the player makes, is that the younger Lucca goes from hating science to respecting it. The story was never about Lara; she is merely the object in a very powerful lesson in Lucca’s life.
Riposte: go right corner: I actually have had a little bit of experience in reverse engineering software, though none as large as CT. I can tell you that "messy code" is not a huge factor in determining whether some behavior is a bug or not. All "messy code" does is to make the program harder to figure out.
Code that leads to buggy behavior often falls along well-known patterns independent of "messiness". Messy code might increase the chance of creating more bugs, but it hardly prevents one from finding out where they are, other than forcing one to take longer to understand the code.
The n00b Avenger: "and considering it's Lucca's mother's life we're talking about"
But it's NOT her life. It's her legs. Which changes NOTHING about the present except for the fact that she can walk now. Ohhh!
In fact, the events before saving Lara imply that the Entity is responsible for letting Lucca save her mother. It's just a little detail about someone's past they regret, it's nothing important. And Gaspar certainly wouldn't be anticipating something like that unless he himself were the entity."
Refutation
the n00b avenger: Marle's dad and Lucca's mother are all ruled out, since they are all part of another sidequest.
ZeaLitY: The Lara event is involuntarily, and inseparable from the Fiona's Forest sidequest. However, this does not necessarily mean it cannot be delivered in this manner. Also, notice that in addition to Gaspar's speech, the savegame title changes as well. The savegame may be part of a larger code or not, but it does well to assert that the Black Omen/Queen Zeal is the final sidequest.
go right corner: Nintendo is not Square, and so its response is not necessarily "official".
