Forum:Anti-Riku and Anti-Saix

Forums: Index > The World that Never was > Anti-Riku and Anti-Saix

i Zero x What's your problem?! ^{— 09:36, July 27, 2010 (UTC)}

Earlier today I placed Anti-Riku and Anti-Saix into the heartless category instead of the nobody and somebody categories in the image gallery of The World That Never Was but another user moved them back there because "We have no confirmation on what these are supposed to be."

I find this incorrect. Anti-Sora was a heartless that mimicked Sora and his abilities including the ability to wield a false shadow keyblade copy in the first Kingdom Hearts game. So what reasoning is there to say that these two are not heartless created in the image of other beings just like Anti-Sora? They have the trademark dark black/blue skin tone and big glowing yellow eyes (we can't see them on Anti-Riku but based on Anti-Saix I would assume they are there underneath the bandana) and even follow the same name scheme for the heartless created in Sora's image. I believe it foolish to not just say they are what they are.

What are your opinions on this matter?

Lapis Scarab

Embrace... nothing! ^{— 09:43, July 27, 2010 (UTC)}

There's certainly nothing indicating that they are Sombodies or Nobodies (if I'm wrong, correct me by giving a source that says otherwise). They should definitely be removed from those categories at the least. Also, on the subject of the Anti-Sora, what's the confirmation that it's a Heartless? It doesn't have a Journal entry.

i Zero x Talk about blank with a capital B. Man, oh, man. Not even the dusks are gonna crack this one... ^{— 10:13, July 27, 2010 (UTC)}

Well if nothing else I agree with you that there's nothing, not even appearance, that would indicate they are nobodies/somebodies. Anti-Sora is indeed a heartless. Just before you face it on Captain Hook's ship, you encounter Riku who states that he has control over the heartless and then he creates it to battle Sora. AntiSora's page even says it's a pureblood heartless (no emblem on it).

It may not have a journal entry either but the same reasoning applies here. Is there any reason to not call them what they obviously are?