Lol It's hilarious when the "don't make sense" parts are totally make sense but when Monokuma rushed to the voting he said "ok that makes sense ". I was like "what" 😂😂
TheKanonHara The sprinklers go off at 7:30 AM and therefore 10 PM is wrong. If the body was there before 7:30, the body would have been soaked. Therefore, the murder would have had to happen after 7:30 AM
Oh, man, this argument. One thing I can say is that it was horrible watching this argument unfold over a Twitch chat. First of all, the chat was completely ignoring the progression of the argument and kept repeating the same stuff over and over again, and Joe was missing all the posters who were actually answering his follow-up questions. Halfway through, he did understand why shooting at "10 p.m." was the correct answer, but then his argument changed that shooting at Hina's statement was also correct. Basically, now he was trying to argue that Makoto would be saying, "Well, actually, Hina, I don't need an alibi for that time at all." when shooting at her statement. This DOES make sense in a real-life discussion, but not within the game's rules, which require shooting at literal contradictions. Even after this was pointed out to him, he kept arguing that it doesn't have to be a contradiction, because there were other Debates where the yellow statements weren't contradictions (he was right; the game does make this error at certain points). Then he asked, "Where is the proof that it has to be a contradiction?" Sadly, nobody ever answered him this before chat started repeating the same stuff from the very start again, but the proof was in the tutorial during Chapter 1's trial, which explicitly mentions you have to shoot at lies or contradictions. Ultimately, there are faults in the Non-Stop Debates where the "contradiction" rule is violated, but this was not one of them, and those faults led him to believe it doesn't always have to be a contradiction he has to shoot at. (I have no excuse for his V3-1 argument, though. His argument on that one was entirely bullshit; this one I could understand due to unfortunate circumstances.)
Yeah, the narration in the games has always been presented as the main characters telling the player what they were *actually* thinking/doing at every moment, so to have them "omit" such important details as *plotting a murder* is absolutely a lie and does set a precedent of the game outright lying to you, making every subsequent trial worse because it'd only be natural to expect it to happen again.
I was following your statement and agreeing on some things, but that v3-1 statement. lol That entire case is bullshit, you need to be golden medalist in mental gymnastics to justify all that shit. And it's not really a good achievement.
The game signposts who the killer is clearly enough that lots of people, Joe included, figured out who it is long before they were supposed to. Plus everything that's said is -`~*'-technically-'*~`- true; she DID drop everything she was holding and go after him. I understand why that isn't satisfying for everyone and I'll admit I was kinda pissed when I saw who the culprit was, but the game's explanation worked for me since they foreshadowed everything in advance.
@@violet_broregarde Joe made a small piece of deduction just based off who can be in the room; that twist was poorly telegraphed, robbed us of a better protag, and sacrificed trial integrity for a half baked twist then HOLDS THAT LUKEWARM TONE ***THE ENTIRE GAME***
I dont get his issue here. Makoto didnt have an alibi during that time frame. The sprinklers dont suddenly give him one. What they do prove is that the time frame of the murder is different from when they first assumed. The answer is pretty damn obvious. And I'm not saying this to defend danganropa. It plays fast and loose with logic more than once. This just isnt one of those times.
I don't think he'd enjoy the first one that much. The need to start from the beginning for each of the endings is pretty terrible in retrospect even though I did enjoy it, but it would make for some pretty boring streaming. The second and the third game have a lot of quality of life improvements though and I adored them.
But you don't have to start from the beginning due to the flowchart system they have. If it was the ds version then yeah, but the newer ports let you skip all overlapping dialogue and such. Sure he'd have to start from the choices but that's for the most part it, the rest is skippable if it is the same
Man I love this video and I liked the guys streams, even though I like Danganronpa, there is no doubt it has some dumb moments in it. So it's great to see people riff on it!!
Yeah... _7 30_ made a whole lot better sense as a relevant time FAR MORE than _10 o'clock_ did. It is the time the time the sprinklers actually go on and the contradiction being that the murder had to happen after _7 30_ and not before, because the sprinklers turn on at that time. The fact that there was a _10 o'clock_ option *and* a _7 30_ option *BOTH* just seems like a purposeful troll on the games part for the purpose of confusing you and being backwards. If the _7 30_ option didn't exist, then the _10 o'clock_ would make *more* sense, but since they are both there, the _7 30_ option, logically, is more right. (Makoto doesn't have an alibi from 10 til 7 30, but not having one before 7 30 doesn't matter, because the scene already cleared---at that stage of the debate, before the tarp is brought up---that the blood would have been washed away at 7 30 if it was done before then.) I do not understand the level of shit posting spawned from pointing this out... Whatever.
No, you're wrong! You're not shooting the time, you're shooting the statements. Hina's statement is completely true, Makoto doesn't have an alibi from 10PM to 7:30AM. Byakuya's statement is false: He's saying the murder could have happened starting with 10PM, but we know that's not true because of the sprinklers. You're shooting the most contradicting, false, suspicious statement when playing Non-Stop Debate. In this case' Byakuya's statement is straight up false, while Hina's is 100% correct. How in the hell do you think it makes more sense to shoot at Hina? What does the sprinklers have to do with Makoto's alibi? He still doesn't have an alibi between 10PM and 7:30 regardless of what happens with the sprinklers. God, some people don't understand basic logic...
@@Gennosuke1983 you just talked in circles long enough to not only say nothing, but go backwards by saying "what do sprinklers have to do with sprinklers?"
Macaroni, I don't think you actually understood what gennosuke said... 5ilver42, the reason for this level of "shit posting" is because he RAGE QUITTED and took a FULL HOUR to point out a detail in the game before he returned to playing it (and in the end, he was still wrong).
@@QuikVidGuy What they said makes perfect sense. Joseph was being a dumbass here and anyone who takes his side on this is being one too. You shoot at statements you want to CONTRADICT. It makes no sense to shoot at Aoi’s statement since her statement is completely true. You shoot at the person who’s wrong, the person who needs to be contradicted. Byakuya’s statement is the one that’s wrong, the timeframe for the murder starting at 10pm doesn’t make sense when the sprinklers went off at 7:30. He is making an inaccurate statement, Aoi is making an accurate one. Based on this game’s mechanics you shoot at the person who’s incorrect, so shooting at Byakuya here is the ONLY thing that makes sense. Him insisting that shooting Aoi is also equally valid just because she mentioned 7:30 is stupid and blatantly wrong.
Dane David he does does he do this a lot? Get pissed at a game when he can’t understand something so obvious? He did this for his xc2 stream. I mean, I know he has to pay attention to the chat and all but this is basic knowledge.
I'm on Joe's side on this one. Byakuya's line about body appearing after 10 o'clock doesn't even make a contradiction because it's true. It's like saying that we live after Big Bang happened. Not right after but after nonetheless
I was going to watch the archives since "Oh boy, a new Dangan Blind, maybe it'll be one of the good ones", but extensive reading of the comments section and his immediate hatred of Taka thankfully turned me away early. Now I just wish Lucahjin would upload on Saturdays again, she's approaching this point, and I'm wondering if she'll notice certain 'corpse details' early.
Joseph tends to give off the impression he's condescending, but he's not that much in reality. He's trying to point out game's flaws as he plays. However, he doesn't praise things usually as much, giving the impression he's a contrarian, pessimistic, and etc. You hit it right on the head though. He might seem annoying at first, but you get to understand who he is and you start having a good time then. I'd recommend trying to watch another one of his streams.
TheBilateralGamer yeesh... talk about taking the piss to get to the pie. John has an interesting (yet not uncommon)personality type. The unintentional asshole trope.
These were a chore to get through sometimes. It's annoying when people are so salty all the time about the little things. Can you enjoy life for 2 seconds?
His opinion is kinda based in faulty logic. Like I can have the opinion that drowning puppies is great for the environment. That doesnt mean people shouldn't disagree with it.
It’s not an opinion, it’s just being objectively illogical. The game mechanic is to shoot at an incorrect statement with the evidence that proves it to be incorrect. Shooting Aoi here does not accomplish this because Aoi is not making an incorrect statement. Shooting at Byakuya does make sense because he IS making an incorrect statement and the evidence you use to prove it directly refuted his statement. This is as black and white as it gets.
This doesn't make any sense No it doesn't work that way How does it make sense? It makes NO sense! That's not how you do it What's the contradiction? What are you talking about? What the fuck are you guys talking about?
I love how Twitch chat was personified by Hifumi
"NO, THAT'S WRONG! You don't have to point out a contradiction."
im confused
HOOOOOOOLD OOOOOON
S P L I T O P I N I O N
morphenomenal trial grounds
Suzerain *Bass drop*
Gdttd Eggegdh
eternal scrum debate part 2
Lol It's hilarious when the "don't make sense" parts are totally make sense but when Monokuma rushed to the voting he said "ok that makes sense ". I was like "what" 😂😂
I'm pretty sure he was being ironic when he said that
I had a seizure trying 5o read that
'im not stubborn, im right' is the most Joseph anderson thing, Joseph Anderson has ever said
As somebody who recently just finished the game, I do not understand his confusion?? This was an easy contradiction that made complete sense lol
i do not understand it at all. can you explain it to me ?
TheKanonHara The sprinklers go off at 7:30 AM and therefore 10 PM is wrong. If the body was there before 7:30, the body would have been soaked. Therefore, the murder would have had to happen after 7:30 AM
Oh, man, this argument. One thing I can say is that it was horrible watching this argument unfold over a Twitch chat. First of all, the chat was completely ignoring the progression of the argument and kept repeating the same stuff over and over again, and Joe was missing all the posters who were actually answering his follow-up questions.
Halfway through, he did understand why shooting at "10 p.m." was the correct answer, but then his argument changed that shooting at Hina's statement was also correct. Basically, now he was trying to argue that Makoto would be saying, "Well, actually, Hina, I don't need an alibi for that time at all." when shooting at her statement. This DOES make sense in a real-life discussion, but not within the game's rules, which require shooting at literal contradictions.
Even after this was pointed out to him, he kept arguing that it doesn't have to be a contradiction, because there were other Debates where the yellow statements weren't contradictions (he was right; the game does make this error at certain points). Then he asked, "Where is the proof that it has to be a contradiction?" Sadly, nobody ever answered him this before chat started repeating the same stuff from the very start again, but the proof was in the tutorial during Chapter 1's trial, which explicitly mentions you have to shoot at lies or contradictions.
Ultimately, there are faults in the Non-Stop Debates where the "contradiction" rule is violated, but this was not one of them, and those faults led him to believe it doesn't always have to be a contradiction he has to shoot at.
(I have no excuse for his V3-1 argument, though. His argument on that one was entirely bullshit; this one I could understand due to unfortunate circumstances.)
@x5dgr it's not bullshit, the narration lied
Yeah, the narration in the games has always been presented as the main characters telling the player what they were *actually* thinking/doing at every moment, so to have them "omit" such important details as *plotting a murder* is absolutely a lie and does set a precedent of the game outright lying to you, making every subsequent trial worse because it'd only be natural to expect it to happen again.
I was following your statement and agreeing on some things, but that v3-1 statement. lol
That entire case is bullshit, you need to be golden medalist in mental gymnastics to justify all that shit. And it's not really a good achievement.
The game signposts who the killer is clearly enough that lots of people, Joe included, figured out who it is long before they were supposed to. Plus everything that's said is -`~*'-technically-'*~`- true; she DID drop everything she was holding and go after him. I understand why that isn't satisfying for everyone and I'll admit I was kinda pissed when I saw who the culprit was, but the game's explanation worked for me since they foreshadowed everything in advance.
@@violet_broregarde Joe made a small piece of deduction just based off who can be in the room; that twist was poorly telegraphed, robbed us of a better protag, and sacrificed trial integrity for a half baked twist then HOLDS THAT LUKEWARM TONE ***THE ENTIRE GAME***
I dont get his issue here. Makoto didnt have an alibi during that time frame. The sprinklers dont suddenly give him one. What they do prove is that the time frame of the murder is different from when they first assumed. The answer is pretty damn obvious. And I'm not saying this to defend danganropa. It plays fast and loose with logic more than once. This just isnt one of those times.
Exactly
Let's remember he retracted from that last statement pretty fast. Btw, imo he would really enjoy Zero Escape more.
Zero Escape does seem much more up his alley
I don't think he'd enjoy the first one that much. The need to start from the beginning for each of the endings is pretty terrible in retrospect even though I did enjoy it, but it would make for some pretty boring streaming. The second and the third game have a lot of quality of life improvements though and I adored them.
But you don't have to start from the beginning due to the flowchart system they have. If it was the ds version then yeah, but the newer ports let you skip all overlapping dialogue and such. Sure he'd have to start from the choices but that's for the most part it, the rest is skippable if it is the same
I only ever played the original, I wasn't aware it had any remakes. If that's true then it shouldn't be too bad.
I doubt that. His main problem with danganronpa was the convoluted story and Zero Escape is a lot worse in that regard.
11037IQ
Man I love this video and I liked the guys streams, even though I like Danganronpa, there is no doubt it has some dumb moments in it. So it's great to see people riff on it!!
this is just greeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaatttt, thank you for making my week brighter XDDDDD
Yeah... _7 30_ made a whole lot better sense as a relevant time FAR MORE than _10 o'clock_ did.
It is the time the time the sprinklers actually go on and the contradiction being that the murder had to happen after _7 30_ and not before, because the sprinklers turn on at that time. The fact that there was a _10 o'clock_ option *and* a _7 30_ option *BOTH* just seems like a purposeful troll on the games part for the purpose of confusing you and being backwards. If the _7 30_ option didn't exist, then the _10 o'clock_ would make *more* sense, but since they are both there, the _7 30_ option, logically, is more right. (Makoto doesn't have an alibi from 10 til 7 30, but not having one before 7 30 doesn't matter, because the scene already cleared---at that stage of the debate, before the tarp is brought up---that the blood would have been washed away at 7 30 if it was done before then.)
I do not understand the level of shit posting spawned from pointing this out... Whatever.
No, you're wrong!
You're not shooting the time, you're shooting the statements.
Hina's statement is completely true, Makoto doesn't have an alibi from 10PM to 7:30AM.
Byakuya's statement is false: He's saying the murder could have happened starting with 10PM, but we know that's not true because of the sprinklers.
You're shooting the most contradicting, false, suspicious statement when playing Non-Stop Debate. In this case' Byakuya's statement is straight up false, while Hina's is 100% correct.
How in the hell do you think it makes more sense to shoot at Hina? What does the sprinklers have to do with Makoto's alibi? He still doesn't have an alibi between 10PM and 7:30 regardless of what happens with the sprinklers.
God, some people don't understand basic logic...
@@Gennosuke1983 you just talked in circles long enough to not only say nothing, but go backwards by saying "what do sprinklers have to do with sprinklers?"
Macaroni, I don't think you actually understood what gennosuke said...
5ilver42, the reason for this level of "shit posting" is because he RAGE QUITTED and took a FULL HOUR to point out a detail in the game before he returned to playing it (and in the end, he was still wrong).
@@QuikVidGuy What they said makes perfect sense. Joseph was being a dumbass here and anyone who takes his side on this is being one too. You shoot at statements you want to CONTRADICT. It makes no sense to shoot at Aoi’s statement since her statement is completely true. You shoot at the person who’s wrong, the person who needs to be contradicted. Byakuya’s statement is the one that’s wrong, the timeframe for the murder starting at 10pm doesn’t make sense when the sprinklers went off at 7:30. He is making an inaccurate statement, Aoi is making an accurate one. Based on this game’s mechanics you shoot at the person who’s incorrect, so shooting at Byakuya here is the ONLY thing that makes sense. Him insisting that shooting Aoi is also equally valid just because she mentioned 7:30 is stupid and blatantly wrong.
Ugg... "I'm not stubborn I'm right!" exactly what someone who KNOWS that their wrong but doesn't want to admit their wrong would say.
or they could be right?
This was so good
BUY MY FUCKING STATUE!
Ah, joe. I enjoy his streams a lot but LMAO BRAINLET
This video is fucking great
I haven’t played danganronpa in a while. What didn’t make sense to him?
He didnt know what that the sprinklers coming on a 10 o'clock was the wrong thing that he was supposed to point out. He's pretty stubborn here
Dane David so, let me get this straight: he almost stopped playing a mystery game because something didn’t make sense?
It made complete sense but he didn't realize it. Idk how he didn't pay attention that you're refuting statements
Dane David he does does he do this a lot? Get pissed at a game when he can’t understand something so obvious? He did this for his xc2 stream. I mean, I know he has to pay attention to the chat and all but this is basic knowledge.
I'm on Joe's side on this one. Byakuya's line about body appearing after 10 o'clock doesn't even make a contradiction because it's true. It's like saying that we live after Big Bang happened. Not right after but after nonetheless
can someone explain it to me ? why is the sprinklers turning on at 10 wrong?
Most glorious . . .
Did he actually stop playing the game over that?
Nope! He and chat argued for an hour and then he kept playing.
Wait...
Wow, he's pretty whiny, huh?
I was going to watch the archives since "Oh boy, a new Dangan Blind, maybe it'll be one of the good ones", but extensive reading of the comments section and his immediate hatred of Taka thankfully turned me away early. Now I just wish Lucahjin would upload on Saturdays again, she's approaching this point, and I'm wondering if she'll notice certain 'corpse details' early.
Joseph tends to give off the impression he's condescending, but he's not that much in reality. He's trying to point out game's flaws as he plays. However, he doesn't praise things usually as much, giving the impression he's a contrarian, pessimistic, and etc. You hit it right on the head though. He might seem annoying at first, but you get to understand who he is and you start having a good time then. I'd recommend trying to watch another one of his streams.
Unlurking Sentinel Another lucahjin fan!!
TheBilateralGamer yeesh... talk about taking the piss to get to the pie. John has an interesting (yet not uncommon)personality type. The unintentional asshole trope.
TheBilateralGamer doesn’t seem like a bad guy though.
How dare someone be critical of my pwecious Danganronpa! Welp, gotta flock to the mindless ones.
This is embarrasing
These were a chore to get through sometimes. It's annoying when people are so salty all the time about the little things. Can you enjoy life for 2 seconds?
200 IQ
This is so funny jsfdjhd
LEON
2 IQ
7.30 IQ
11037 IQ
oh no he has an opinion!
His opinion is kinda based in faulty logic. Like I can have the opinion that drowning puppies is great for the environment. That doesnt mean people shouldn't disagree with it.
It’s not an opinion, it’s just being objectively illogical. The game mechanic is to shoot at an incorrect statement with the evidence that proves it to be incorrect. Shooting Aoi here does not accomplish this because Aoi is not making an incorrect statement. Shooting at Byakuya does make sense because he IS making an incorrect statement and the evidence you use to prove it directly refuted his statement. This is as black and white as it gets.
Its not an opinion if he is objectively wrong. Thats like if I said "cats are clearly the same as dogs" and would demand that opinion be respected.
This is too good!
REEEEEE
This doesn't make any sense
No it doesn't work that way
How does it make sense?
It makes NO sense!
That's not how you do it
What's the contradiction?
What are you talking about?
What the fuck are you guys talking about?
People cant handle even the most mild criticism of their fucking weeb toys
Maybe the criticism shouldn’t be fucking stupid