Generally not a good idea to cite a source whose observations refute your claim when speaking for themselves, and to then ignore that source when they say you're wrong. =P
Let us not pretend you weren't trying to speak to a general notion of "how people actually work" when bringing up the three-weeks thing. I really am going to insist you practice good faith discussion.
Anyway, we all know that's what you were attempting to speak to: how people actually work. Yet here's a real person telling you that you got how I work wrong -- and I'm not nearly so vain as to think I'm unique in this way.
I'm not going to insist, though, that everyone works the same either. Perhaps we could all do that.
So, the word doesn't mean Aerith had romantic feelings for Cloud (i.e. it doesn't mean ... what it means) in this particular instance ... because it would make you wrong? =|
Is it not a lot more likely a possibility that you're just wrong?
I have no idea what this is in response to, but debating any of this is probably as worthwhile as slamming one's own cock in a car door.
That's not a point I was making either, so ...
Who knows? More importantly, who cares? You suggested the developers may not have even intended a notion of wavering in the first place.
Again, I'm going to have to insist you start debating in good faith and practicing intellectual honesty.
My list of "Points I Wasn't Making That You Insist On Responding To" is getting long.
Really, that was her only intended purpose in Cloud's story?
A subject that didn't come up until the sequel released eight years later? A sequel the developers had no idea they would be making?
1) Is it operating in good faith to ignore the majority of someone's argument? As a rule of thumb I tend to ignore anecdotes in debates because they tend to lead to expressions of righteous indignation and drama. Again, not about you. Just personal experience. Trying to attach ulterior motives to me is not operating in good faith either.
2) So when was Cloud ever her "boyfriend/lover"? Because that is what the word means. I never said she doesn't have any romantic feelings for Cloud. But it's not love, as evidenced by what was actually shown in-game.
3) Not even gonna comment on that, LOL.
4) Cloud never agreed to Jessie's pizza either, but he still mentioned it during her death scene as if he agreed to it. Same situation with Aerith and being her bodyguard. Aerith's assertiveness dominated in that situation. He went along with it, and allowed her to dictate the nature of their partnership. Call it "implied consent" if you want, but no deal was struck.
5) I am being intellectually honest. Sometimes I'm not responding to you specifically. You were quoting Kitase rhetorically, and so I am responding to Kitase's quote. Sorry to say, but Kitase is wrong.
To claim that Cloud is "wavering" between two women is to imply that Cloud is actively pursuing these women. He's not. Cloud is never shown making use of his agency to that degree in the original game. The player is given the illusion of choice based on who he's nicer to, and then the player is stripped of that illusion when Aerith dies. At no point does Cloud "waver" or behave as if he's torn between two women. That's not how the mechanics or story of the original ff7 are setup.
And no, I don't treat quotes from the developers as overriding to what was actually shown in the game. Dumbledore isn't gay until there's little ambiguity left within the pages of the book, to use an analogy. If developers put out statements that outright contradict their own creation, I'll point it out, SUCH AS the "koibito" line from Nojima.
6) After going back to some scenes in the original, I'll also mention Aerith's death is also meant to help Cloud reconnect with his emotions and realize he's not just a "puppet" as Seph calls him.
As for guilt:
, similar to another moment from earlier in the game where Cloud asks "You okay" and Aerith replies with "All good! … I think"
