Atrus & Catherine, Dudas sobre el final de Myst Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

[Saavedro]

Para mi la explicacion es fácil. A´gaeris había escrito un libro nexo en otra era que lo llevaba justo al lugar donde estaba el libro prision y se mete en el antes q lo quemen ( por eso el guardia ve un resplandor un segundo )
luego dentro se va con Veovis gracias aotro libro que lleva con él.

[Leo'Ri]

Efectivamente, hay errores de traducción. No tanto en el sentido de una traducción mala, pero con discrepancias respecto de otros pasajes. Por ejemplo, "fire marbles" se traduce como "mármoles de fuego". El diccionario lo confirma, pero no el uso de la lengua. Deberían ser "CANICAS de fuego" (en inglés, a las canicas se les dice "marbles", porque antanyo eran de mármol...). En uno de los primeros "EXILE" vendidos en Espanya (el mío !;) )hay discrepancias de traducción entre el Diario de Atrus y los tapices en Narayan; simplemente, no coincidían las palabras, y no se podía descifrar; pero sí funcionó usando el idioma inglés. Obviamente, fueron traductores diferentes, ó quien lo hizo no tuvo en cuenta esa necesaria coincidencia.

[CoolWind]

Yo también tuve problemas con los tapices... que se solucionaron pasando al inglés. Dices que esto es sólo en las primeras versiones de Exile en castellano ? Lo arreglaron después ?

[Leo'Ri]

No sé si realmente han corregido los subtítulos de los tapices de NARAYAN, pero el protocolo completo de la exploración de NARAYAN (son 22 páginas A5), que fué llevado en castellano hasta el problema de los tapices, y seguido en inglés, fué mandado tanto a Presto en San Diego como a UbiSoft en Barcelona. Del protocolo se desprende que no cabe la sospecha de que Leo'Ri se haya perdido, sino que se prueba la discrepancia entre el Diario de Atrus referente a Releeshahn, y los subtítulos de los tapices. Con lo cual se hizo todo lo posible...
Lamentablemente este tipo de errores es frecuente en todo tipo de traducciones que se confían a traductores profesionales, pero que no tienen ni idea del tema. Repito: Las traducciones no son incorrectas en sí, pero SIEMPRE hay otras palabras que dicen algo parecido, y un traductor usual, que no es mystadicto, no tiene ni idea de los nexos entre el Diario y los tapices.
Es que las traducciones no suelen pasar por un "beta test".    

[CoolWind]

Oye...  :0 Me da la impresión que eres un GRAN fan de Myst y los D'ni. Cómo conoces lo del "Protocolo completo de la exploración de NARAYAN" ? Trabajas para UbiSoft o algo así (si no lo quieres decir no lo digas, eh ;) ).

De todas formas muchas gracias por estar por aquí y contar esas cositas.  

[Leo'Ri]

Coolwind, no, lamentablemente Leo'Ri no trabaja ni para ubiSOft, ni traduce para Cyan, porque en ese caso habría uno ó dos errores menos. Lo del protocolo es el resultado de anotar TODO lo visto, oído, tocado ó calculado. Y, para no perderse en el papelerío, pasado todo, con esquemas, mapas, etc., al ordenador, incluyendo palabra por palabra los discursos de Atrus, Gehn, etc., y también copias de los diversos libros. Así resultó no sólo un minucioso "walkthrough" sino un relato de las aventuras vividas, que incluso da ganas de leerlo a posteriori, con ó sin el juego en la pantalla. Claro está, no es posible publicarlo ...  
Reconozco que es un trabajo de locos, pero quién no lo está, aunque sea un poquitito?
  Saludos, Leo'Ri

[cosmodelia]

Y bien, reabrimos este viejo topic, ya que entonces no teníamos el placer de que estuviera en esD'ni,
¿cuales son la teorías de Leo'Ri sobre el encierro de Atrus en D'ni, el papel de Catherine, las hojas azules y rojas, ect. [la historia previa al comienzo de Myst] y sobre la enigmática fuga de Veovis?

[Sobre esta última la teoría de Saavedro nos parece la más convincente]

[Leo'Ri]

Dejarnos volver del frío ...

[CoolWind]

Atención!!

Algo que gustará (incluso diría que entusiasmará...) a más de uno es la discusión que se está llevando a cabo en el foro de Myst Community sobre los Libros Prisión y las famosas "Licencias Artísticas"

Discusión en MC

Además aparece de refilón, en uno de los posts, un lugar llamado... Tadjenar!!! A alguien le suena de algo ?

A ver si "entre todos" conseguimos una respuesta oficial rectificando lo que pretendieron rectificar.

[Leo'Ri]

Sí que sería bueno ... y la prueba de que la realidad (aunque sea ficticia) no puede negarse.

Por otra parte he visto en un atlas que esas formaciones de roca roja que publicó Cosmodelia, son los vestigios de antiguos volcanes: el último basalto, que había llenado los conductos al cráter, mientras que el volcán en sí desapareció por erosión. Vale decir, todo formación volcánica.

[cosmodelia]

Es una buena idea la de desafiar la autoridad de Rawa desde dentro del juego: podríamos decir que hemos tenido acceso a documentos D'ni en nuestras exploraciones por la caverna que demuestran que Rawa solo dice barbaridades: no solo niega los libros prisión sino que pretende variar la localización de la entrada a la caverna!!!!

Ahora que la habiamos situado en Argelia [no como erroneamente dicen en Arabia Saudita, habría que enviar una aclaración al respecto con todas las pruebas que hemos reunido] pretende llevarla a Nuevo México!!!

Hay que pararle los pies a Rawa antes de que sea demasiado tarde!!!

Si estais de acuerdo, y dado que Leo'Ri es quien mejor escribe en inglés, proponemos que haga el borrador y una vez de acuerdo sobre el texto, sea enviado oficilamente al DRC site y otros foros Myst en nombre del Consejo de Historiadores de esD'ni, fechado con el calendario D'ni y enviado desde Tadjenar

[CoolWind]

Es verdad eso de que quiere situar la Cueva en Nuevo México ? Eso ya es demasiado...

Campaña anti-Rawa ? XDD

Si hay consenso... XD

[cosmodelia]

Bueno, eso lo leimos en el mismo topic que das, habría que preguntar allí donde lo ha dicho Rawa, y pedir el texto original...

Sobre la otra cuestión sí hemos encontrado el post original y completo de Rawa, va abajo... ya direis que os parece cuando lo leais...

Si quereis documentaros sobre él, esta es la web tributo de una fan a Rawa

http://rawasplace.home.att.net/kbahn.html

No somos partidarios de hacer una campaña anti-nadie sino pro-reglas del juego.

En todo caso Rawa tendría que explicar mejor las razones de esos cambios, quizás si en la cimunidad MYST las conociéramos y fuera conveniente para el futuro desarrollo de juegos no habría tanta oposición.

Bueno, el post en cuestión de Rawa:

This is a copy of an email sent to the Riven Lyst by RAWA, Richard A. Watson, Cyan programmer and ultimate D'ni historian. The plain gray print indicates what is written by Richard Watson.

From: Richard A. Watson
To: Riven Spoiler Lyst
Subject: Assorted ramblings... Very Long...
Date: Wednesday, June 21, 2000

- - - WARNING - - -

This disgustingly long letter has taken me three days to write, as I've had time here and there to work on it, so it may be a little disjointed in places. Hopefully it'll still be coherent enough to be understood.
- - - - - - - - - -
There's been a lot of confusing/conflicting viewpoints on what happened to Sirrus and Achenar at the end of Myst.
I've been too busy to answer these as they come up individually, so I'm trying to address them all in one more general email. I still have over 200 unread lyst emails, so I may not address all the questions raised in these threads, but I'll probably hit many of them.
I want to start by pointing out that Myst/Riven are Cyan's attempt at recreating some of the events in the life of Atrus in a semi-non-linear medium (i.e. a game). Since it's a game where the player can do things that didn't happen in the account of Atrus' life, we've got to take some artistic license with his story - like the "losing" endings of Myst and Riven.
When making the games, we have to carefully pare everything down to the basic elements needed to play the game, leaving out almost anything that isn't required for gameplay. Myst Island, for example was made much smaller, and only the buildings/places relevant to playing Myst were included. Atrus definitely had other "places of protection" for his Books other than the ones shown in Myst. We throw in as many "extras" as we have time for, but for the most part, there isn't much time for things that aren't specifically needed for a playable game.
So the most accurate answer for many of these kinds of issues (e.g. "Why do the remaining Books coincidentally happen to be the Books with 'places of protection'?) is simply "artistic license". If we didn't have hardware limitations, storage capacity limitations, time limitations, money limitations, etc. and if we had a billion monkies working on a billion computers for a billion years, we could make the Ages more complete, which would be cool from an exploration point of view, but wouldn't make the games themselves any more playable. In fact with all the "non-game related" things thrown in, there would be a lot more "red herrings" and people would be even more confused when they write to me. (If I had a nickel for everyone who wrote to me asking what one of the few "extra" items in Myst did...)
The upshot of my ramblings so far is that there is a distinction between "The Complete Story of Atrus" (i.e. the D'ni historical accounts), and what we were able to portray in Myst/Riven. The problem is that you (the players) don't have direct access to "The Complete Story of Atrus". Unfortunately, this means that people often are forced to look to Myst itself to answer questions it wasn't intended to answer. Its purpose was not to be a course in D'ni history, it was designed to be game based on Atrus' life story.
"So what?!?!" I hear someone yelling in the back there. So... this means that there are different "correct" answers to many questions depending on if you're interested in the "real" answer (based on the background story not accessible to most people), or the "Myst" answer (based on the info available in the game). Sometimes the answers are the same. Sometimes they are different.
This wouldn't be a big problem if we stopped making D'ni related games. We'd just let you live with the "Myst" answer, in most cases you'd never know it wasn't right so you wouldn't even know to be unhappy with it, and the "real" answer wouldn't matter. Those who do think things through enough to be stumped with what they come up with may be bothered enough to try to get the "real" answer from me, which happened often enough for this Sirrus/Achenar question to be listed on the FAQ.
But as we make more of that background information available (hmmm, Mudpie, anyone?), the people out there who scrutinize these kinds of details are going to point to my "official" answers and say "Hey, that contradicts paragraph 3 of page 5 of blah, blah, blah" So, I've made a concious effort in the past to answer questions in a way that applies to both the "real" answer and the "game" answer as much as possible, and basically avoiding questions where the two answers blatantly contradict one another.
I've also avoided these topics because the answers just lead to a lot more questions...
If anyone's made it this far... Here are my answers, most of which have been on the FAQ for Myst for years (in case you just think I'm making them up off the top of my head right now .

Q. What happened to the red and blue books at the end of Myst?
A. Atrus tried to ensure that the boys would not be able to escape the Ages they were in. In Myst this is shown by the scorch marks where the Books used to be. The historical accounts are not specific as to how he ensured their captivity. Very little artistic license taken here - burning the Books seems a very reasonable, logical way of showing this.
Q. Does destroying the Book destroy the one occupying it (aka Did Atrus kill his sons?)?
A1. (game answer) - Clearly, from the evidence given in the game, the answer is no. Burning the Book, in essence, isn't much different than tearing pages out of it - either one "breaks" the Book. The boys were obviously alive when the Books were missing pages. The main difference is that a burned Book is more difficult to put back together.
A2. (historical answer) - The boys would be unaffected by the destruction of the Books, except that it would make it rather difficult for them ever to be rescued.
Q. Are they in some kind of void/suspended animation?
A1. (game answer) - From the evidence in the game, no. They are aware of the passage of time. And since they're still alive after all this time, they must have access to food/water/air/etc.
A2. (historical answer) - They were in complete Ages (and probably pretty nice ones, I would guess, if the panels were to show an Age that people like the boys would be so anxious to go to.) They just had no way out of them.
Q. So why do we only see black when we're in the Book?
A1. (game answer) - Because it's night with a moonless, overcast sky, and you don't have any firemarbles/flashlights/candles (you should have brought the matches from the safe in the cabin! ...
A2. (real answer) - We didn't like the idea of "rewarding" the player for setting one of the brothers free with another Age to see/explore.
Q. If the red and blue Books were ordinary Linking Books but leading to "Prison Ages", why do you switch places with the brothers when the Book is complete?
A. - A whole boatload of Artistic License. Completing the book is the player's way of saying "I want to free this brother." And we simplified that to its most basic elements - you're stuck in the Prison Age; he's out.
You want the complicated, more historically accurate way to free a brother?
1) complete the book so you can go to the Age he's trapped in 2) you'll have to find a spare Myst Linking Book somewhere or neither of you are coming back. This complicates the interface, and changes the game if you can carry a Myst Linking Book around with you the whole game that you can use at any time. 3a) go to the prison Age without a Linking Book - the brother and you are trapped together forever, or as long as the brother lets you live (how long do you think that will be?) 3b) Bring a Linking Book. The brother bops you on the head and links out, damaging the Book in the process so you can't follow him. 4) you're stuck in the Prison Age; he's out. we've had to do a lot more filming, modeling, rendering, changing the interface, etc. to essentially get the same ending as Myst already shows.
don't worry, we'll fix it in "ultimateMYST: the'see Sirrus and Achenar's Prison Ages' Edition". (Settle down, it's just a joke.
--------------------------------
Now that those of you who've thought they had things all figured out to the smallest detail have had the rug yanked out from under them... go think about the implications of this information for a while. The dominoes are going to start falling, and you may be in for a few "aha!" experiences.
Once you think you have a handle on this new info, and you've come up with all your questions, and thought about what the answers might be, come back and finish reading this email.
I'll try to answer a few of the biggest issues that this will probably raise.
(That means stop reading now - maybe even for a couple of days, if you're like me and like to come to these conclusions on your own and you'll be disappointed by my just blurting them out...)
If you're not interested in doing that, continue...
--------------------------------
Q. That means that the method used to trap Gehn wouldn't have worked as shown in Riven (using the Book to trick him to use the Book and set you free)?
A - You catch on quick! We were willing to sacrifice D'ni historical accuracy for a playable, immersive game with Riven, just as we did with Myst. In the D'ni historical accounts, the person helping Atrus had to use his/her wits in a different way to get Gehn to use the Prison Book. But simulating this was not an option with Myst/Riven's intentionally intuitive, minimal, immersive interface (i.e. no dialog boxes, no "pick which one of these three preset phrases" conversation trees, etc.). Your end of any conversations had to be implied or determined by where/when you clicked the mouse button. We took advantage of the one-in-one-out concept implied in Myst to keep the interface simple while being clear to all who played Myst (since 95% of them don't care enough about the nit picky details of the back story to see the problem anyway.)
Q. So if all this is true, then Sirrus and Achenar are only trapped in their Books because they didn't take a Linking Book to Myst (or another Age) with them?
A. Right again. They were not in the habit of carrying their own Linking Books. Every Age they had ever visited always already had a Linking Book back to Myst.
Q. But Gehn _was_ in the habit of of carrying a return Linking Book.
A. Yes, he was.
Q. So he never was really trapped?
A. According to the D'ni historical accounts, yes, he was trapped.
Q. How was he trapped, then?
A. I think you've got enough info to work this one out on your own...


Shorah,
RAWA

http://www.dnidesk.com/rawa4.html

[CoolWind]

Magnifica informacion la posteada por Cosmodelia.

Lo cierto es que lei ese mail (completo!) en la Riven Lyst cuando se publico, y la verdad es que me convencio bastante, ademas de plantear nuevas dudas (como la que menciona al final de todo, sobre Gehn).

Por lo que dicen la historia ha estado definida perfectamente desde el principio, pero que para realizar juegos han tenido que adaptarla. Simplemente eso. El problema esta en lo que comenta Leo'Ri en todo momento : el juego tambien es parte de la historia.

Y entonces ya solo depende de cada uno aceptar lo de la "licencia artistica" o basarse en la historia conocida e ignorar lo que se comente fuera de los juegos o los libros.

ummm... (aunque sigo sin entender lo de situar la caverna en Nuevo Mexico)

PD. Este post no tiene acentos intencionadamente (estoy en un terminal donde solo se pueden usar caracteres "normales").

[Leo'Ri]

No puede ser Nuevo México.
Una cosa es que se utilicen paisajes cualesquiera para rodajes, vistas, etc.; p. ej., muchos "westerns" (incluso "Los siete Magníficos") fueron rodados en el desierto de Tabernas, en Almería, Andalucía, España. Idem la magnífica película "Lawrence de Arabia".
Pero algo completamente distinto es querer negar que en el Libro de Ti'Ana hay miembros de una caravana dotada de camellos (bueno, los hay también en las Canarias, y en Australia, si bien importados), e invocando la gracia y protección de Alá. Y Alá nunca fué invocado en Nuevo México. A no ser que se explique previamente cómo una cierta minoría árabe prosperó allí, porque "Alá" no es ni más ni menos que el nombre de Dios en árabe. Ó el "hacedor" en D'ni.
Lo que no puede hacerse es negar a esos andrajosos, pero fictivamente existentes camelleros, y el hecho igualmente ficticio de que eran árabes.