Wikia

Final Fantasy Wiki

Talk:Gilgamesh (Final Fantasy XII)

16,221 pages on
this wiki

Back to page

ZantetsukenEdit

In Final Fantasy 8, where Siefer kills odin, gilgamesh shows up and snatches the Zantetsuken (taking advantage of the situation). Given the theory that the same gilgamesh appears in the numerous games (meaning he has the ability to travel through dementions;escape the void, and shapeshift) it could be deduced that while allmost all of his swords are fake, the zantetsuken is the real deal. Also the excailipoor, he gets that piece of crap in one of the old ones, and enkidu grabs it for him in IX (revealed by a secret note). The excalipoor is a fake excalibur, but a real excalipoor. lol

Stop removing "Given the theory that the various Gilgamesh that appear throughout the series are in fact one in the same, it could be reasoned that this in fact a genuine copy, unlike his other swords, since he acquires the genuine copy in Final Fantasy VIII, depending on the players actions." Anybody who removes this piece of information without discussing here is committing vandalism. The game never states that all his swords are fake, they simply show doubts. It says "there is no Evidence that any are the genuine Article." This also means that there is no evidence that they are all fake. Anybody who has played Final Fantasy VIII and acquired Gilgamesh knows that Gilgamesh receives the real Zantetsuken. Given the theory that all of the the Gilgamesh are the same (since it shows he can travel through detentions in other games, which the article makes mention of.) he would have the real sword. The piece of information does not say he has the real one for sure, but only "Given the theory that the various Gilgamesh that appear throughout the series are in fact one in the same."

But the sword is wrong. Look at the Zantetsuken [[:File:'s swords.jpg|here]]. There is a skull on the blade. Look at Odin's blade [[:File:Odin.jpg|here]]. In fact, Odin's blade doesn't have a skull anywhere but with Gilgamesh, so it is assumed it is fake (flip through the pictures here if you'd like) like the all the other swords which have one thing changed about them. Additionally, place your comments at the bottom of the page. ScatheMote 16:59, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
It should be clear just by looking at the picture that all the swords, including Zantetsuken, are meant to be fakes. We're not idiots, we know what happened in Final Fantasy VIII, but that doesn't change the fact. JohnnyC

Sorry but I don't think that is good enough reason. The models back then had barely any polygons and were otherwise ugly. Square Enix redesigns things all the time. Its sort of like retconning. Look at the buster sword in 7, and then look at in crisis core and advent children. It was changed quite a bit! But does that mean that they are not the same sword? Of course not. For this reason you argument does not hold.

If Square really wanted to make it sure that the Zantetsuken was real, they would make look at least somewhat similar to the original. The Zantetsuken looks little like any other Zantetsuken Odin has wielded (the Zantetsuken has kept a pretty similar design throughout). And with your note about the Buster Sword: I don't really see much of a difference. All the Buster Swords look similar and are clearly the same sword, while Gilgamesh's Zantetsuken is clearly not Odin's. ScatheMote 21:31, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

compare this http://aspergers.dasaku.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/finalfantasyvii-cover1.jpg to this http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/9105/216448-final_fantasy_vii_crisis_core_29_super.jpg notice the completely different guard? Notice the metal around the holes in the new version? Notice the different handle? Notice the different color (the 1rst one was all metallic, while the second one is black except for the edge)? Notice how the second one has grooves and stuff on it to make it look more complex? They also made the second one longer and thinner. They look absolutely nothing alike, other than the fact they are both really big and have 2 holes in them. They are 2 completely different swords, and yet the same. As for you saying odin's sword has stayed the same through each one? lol. No. Just like cid, it looks different every single time. So "it doesn't look the same" isn't enough to prove 100% that a shape shifting dimension traveling sword hunter who killed took odin's sword in one dimension doesn't have it in this one. I'll bet if they re made ff8 the sword would look something like that.

But the two Buster Swords retain the same original design. The two Zantesukens don't. The original Zantesuken is not curved (it's lightning bolt shaped) and doesn't have the skull. And it still doesn't make sense that Square would change how the sword looks when they want to make a direct reference to it being the same sword. ScatheMote 22:15, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
Hello Straw Man argument. We're not talking about the Buster Sword, we are not discussing the Buster Sword's appearance, so don't bring it up. We're talking about the Zantetsuken. Gilgamesh's version of the sword is fake, and is clearly not the one seen in FF8. "I'll bet" means nothing, your speculation on what they would do in a remake of a game is 100% irrelevant, so don't bring that up either. The facts do not support your statement no matter how many you try to make up. Drake Clawfang 22:12, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

They dont retain the same design at all. Nothing is the same other than the fact they are really big and have 2 holes in them. They are just 2 big sword with 2 big holes. And never, never, NEVER, did I say that they wanted to make a connection. In fact, it is quite clear they wanted to leave it up to the player to decide. Thats why they never come straight out and say his swords are fake, but instead they just say that nobody knows for sure if any are genuine. I'm not trying to establish a connection, I'm just not ruling out the possibility. As for "drake clawfang," the reference to the buster sword is relevant. It shows that somethings appearance doesn't have to be consistent between each game for it to still be the same object. If having a different appearance is indisputable proof that 2 objects are not the same, I demand you start going through FF7 articles and "fixing" them, so that everybody knows the buster sword from crisis core and advent children, are not the same buster sword as the one in 7 (since they don't look the same). In fact, every FF7 article is going to need a major overhaul, since tons of things don't look the same between them. Or you can except the fact that when somebody re-designs a sword to have 1000 times as many polygons, they just might change the over all design of the sword as well.

More Straw Men, I'm not even going to dignify your pointless Buster Sword ramblings with a real response. You've no proof the Zantetsuken Gilgamesh uses is real, and we've proof it is fake. Either discredit our proof or provide proof to the contrary. Drake Clawfang 22:53, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

1.)Look up the definition of straw man argument, you know it not. 2.)You DON'T have proof that it isn't the sword. Learn to read. THEY NEVER STATE ALL OF HIS SWORDS ARE FAKE. They only allude to it. They say, "there is no Evidence that any are the genuine Article." This also means there is no evidence that they are not. Argument number 2: Square-Enix retcons, yes RETCONS, the appearance of things all the time. That's why I brought up final fantasy VII. And it's not just the buster sword either, between 7, crisis core, and advent children, there are TONS of differences. So the fact that the sword looks different in this entry from another entry, MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. There goes your second argument. For example, the Excalipoor, which nobody denies he has, it looks quite different from the game he actually got it in. Are you going to say that it's a fake fake Excalibur? Gilgamesh can travel between dimensions, as explained in the article. He can also shapeshift. He also obtains the REAL zantetsuken in FF8. You have no defense, your "straw man" claim was ad hominem, so provide a real counter-argument or don't bother saying anything at all.

Well, to put it this way, every other sword he has is an obvious fake. It makes zero sense that they'd give him one real sword. It can be safely assumed that, like every other sword he has, due to similar graphical anomalies, the Zantetsuken is also fake. I mean, really, if they were going to give him the one real sword he's ever had as canon, don't you think they'd, y'know, make it look at least passingly similar to any one version if you turned your head and squinted? Or, better yet, passingly similar to the one he had as canon? For that matter, Square rarely retcons anything. The only thing they ever really did that for was the Buster Sword. Everything else is just differing incarnations or reasonable design tweaks. There's next to nothing that they ever totally redefined after it was already out there. Thusly, it can be extrapolated that the major change in design is, indeed, intended to indicate the sword in question is a fake. Zantetsuken has always been roughly shaped like a bolt of lightning. For that matter, the difference in polygons between FF8 and FF12 is not so much that the sword wasn't already adequately expressed.
In short, the evidence is piled high enough that the sword is a fake that it's unreasonable to declare otherwise. Bluestarultor Best-of Stellar Arena sigicon BSA 07:55, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

In short, everything about your comment was completely wrong. Square Enix retcons shit ALL THE TIME. For example, look at the entire Ivalice alliance. DO weapons in 12 look like there tactics counter parts? NOPE. Do enemies in 12 look like their tactics counter parts? NOPE. Do they look like their tactics A2 counterparts? NOPE. But they all take place in the same world. THEY ARE THE SAME WEAPONS/MONSTERS/ESPERS. The buster sword was the only thing they changed in the compilation of VII? NOPE. Look at clouds entire design, his hair, his face, his clothes. Details were added to sephiroth's outfit. Look at Genessis in Crisis core and look at genesis in Dirge. Your entire reasoning that "it can't be because it looks different" is completely flawed and idiotic. Nothing retains it's appearance throughout the final fantasy series, ESPECIALLY BETWEEN GAMES THAT ARE IN DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS. I'm not saying IT IS THE REAL DEAL. Only that you CANNOT say that it is. I repeat: YOU CANNOT SAY THAT IT ISN'T. It's a simple matter of, did Gilgamesh visit 12 before 8? Which we can't know.

You are wrong. Whatever rant you might go on about weapon appearances, and however compelling you try to make your argument with Caps Lock, you overlook a simple detail - all of Gilgamesh's weapons are rather pointedly modeled to look like they originally did, with some design features different to indicate they are fakes. Which begs the question that if they went through the trouble to recreate the appearances of his other weapons faithfully, why not do it for the Zantetsuken if it is indeed the genuine sword? Would it not make more sense that the Zantetsuken, like every single other weapon he has, looks like an altered version of the original because it is a fake? I'll answer for you - yes, yes it would. Because it is indeed also a fake. DoreikuKuroofangu - Visit the Soul Shrine! 01:05, January 20, 2011 (UTC)

swordsEdit

occu-27.png
Ser Blue says at 15:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
The Ultimania said he had eight distinct FF swords with him, aside from the katanas. These are the Buster Sword, Gunblade, Brotherhood, FFV's Excalibur, FFV's Excalipoor, FF series (it didnt say which) Zantetsuken and Orichalcon, and the Dragon Quest sword.
Hecko avatar
Hecko Xtalk - blog - anime rants
15:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
That makes no sense to me whatsoever. The only possible logical explanation is that they renamed the Excaliburs of FFV Tournesol, for reasons I have yet to figure out. By any chance, did they add images?
occu-27.png
Ser Blue says at 16:07, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, they did. But I can't scan my pages, but thanks to Renmiri, I can pinpoint you which is which: Ultimania named this Excalibur XII "which is based off designs from FFV, and the one with the moon face is Excalipoor based off FFV, and this is the FFSeries Orichalcon.
Hecko avatar
Hecko Xtalk - blog - anime rants
18:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Seems like I was right then, they have been renamed. However, your explanation opposes the one given here, wherein it says that the "moon faced" sword is the original and the "sun faced" one is the fake (i.e. what would correspond to the Excalipoor). Unless I've misunderstood something of course.

What about Enkidu?Edit

Celes Chère menu
Mymindislost - You made me forget my dreams when I woke up to you sleeping...
TALK - 20:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Shall I add battle stats for Enkidu on this page somewhere, or make another page?
Hecko avatar
Hecko Xtalk - blog - anime rants
20:57, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
On a seperate page, but leave a note about it in this article

Masamune/Genji Glove combo Edit

SmegHead - Just kickin' back...
TALK - 08:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Wasn't sure where the best place for this was but I just wanted to do a little poll: What is the highest number of hits you have got when equipped with the Masamune and Genji Gloves in XII? I have my Balthier as the sole user of these items and during the fight against Hell Wyrm, he did 13 hits in a row! Has anyone done more?
HopeSarasa
Hope Sarasa - Sephiroth and Gilgamesh = <3
TALK - {{{time}}}
My max was 5, and I was barely looking. The rest of the time I do 2~3 hits.

Site 11 Key Edit

Those are nice chat templates, BTW. How do you find the Site 11 Key? I'm just itching to kick Gilgamesh's ass after he ran away, the coward.

SmegHead - Just kickin' back...
TALK - 09:26, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
After completing the Antlion Hunt, head to the Phon Coast and find the guy who fell from Bhujerba (how he survived is anybody's guess) and the Site 11 key will be on the ground next to him.

Gilgy, I <3 ya! Edit

FFIV Protobabil ds
Pablo618 - I am the Iron man Proto-babil!!
TALK - Time for Dark Matter {{{time}}}
I have just played the first fight, and it's by far one of the most entertaining fights of the game!
HopeSarasa
Hope Sarasa - Sephiroth and Gilgamesh = <3
TALK - {{{time}}}
No kidding, I made a save spot just so I could fight him over and over again.

Barheim location Edit

HopeSarasa
Hope Sarasa - Sephiroth and Gilgamesh = <3
TALK - {{{time}}}
I can't seem to find Gilgamesh anywhere on the West Annex, all I keep running into are walls and undead monsters. :/
Winterwolf ff1 psp
Jeppo
TALK - 21:35, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

If memory serves me correct, you have to continue through the West Annex and onto the next screen, then turn around and go through the middle exit back to the West Annex. You'll find him there. You have to have beaten Gilgamesh in order for him to appear.

EDIT (21:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)) Actually, I just looked it up. He isn't in the West Annex, rather the bridge before it. Get to the West Annex via the bridge, but instead of walking through take the middle exit to the North to the previous screen
HopeSarasa
Hope Sarasa - Sephiroth and Gilgamesh = <3
TALK - {{{time}}}

I'm there, and still no Gilgamesh. >_.

And yes, I even completed the hunt. :/
FFTA2-SamuraiSprite
AJDurai - A puppet which bends to the soul's tyranny.
TALK - What use is {{{time}}} if you're not gonna use it?
I do believe you must acquire five colored bottles in your fishing quest. Only then would Gilgamesh appear >:3
HopeSarasa
Hope Sarasa - Sephiroth and Gilgamesh = <3
TALK - {{{time}}}
Oh, guess I'll have to fish away after the H-wyrm goes down. >D

Ultimate IllusionEdit

To make it even worse; this attack in the German version of FF12 was called "Finale Fantasie" which is... well a translation of "Final Fantasy" but really sounds weird since "finale" as an adjective is very old-fashioned and unusual. --Haitani 14:48, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

Level Advice? Edit

Anyone have a suggestion of what level I should try this on...I really wanna do a bunch of hunts before going to ridorana cataract but I dont know if this one is worth trying right now..even though I have Reddas & all, all of my party is at lvl. 47.....?? -user:audrey&roland10

I think you could do it. You have Bubble? You should be able to buy the spell and Bubble Belts from the Clan Shop if you have done enough hunts to reach Gilgamesh. You'll likely level up on the way to Gilgamesh anyway, he will be right at the end of the full Lhusu Mines. You're gonna need the Site 11 key to get there. Watch out though, there is a very tough Rare Game around that might easily kill you even if you can take on Gilgamesh.Keltainentoukokuu 21:04, January 11, 2011 (UTC)
Audrey&roland10 - ...is trying to decide about getting a rib tattoo or not...sounds painful
TALK - 4:17pm 1/11/11 CST
Do you know the name of the rare game or what it looks like? I wanna say I've encountered some crazy thing down there once when I went back for a different hunt...But I will go for it, thanks! And yes I have bubble..
MusicianCrown
Keltainentoukokuu - OH YEAH AWESOME
TALK - Keltainentoukokuu 22:53, January 11, 2011 (UTC)
I think it's called Disma and it's a skeleton monster. At the deep end of the Lhusu Mines, right before the second battle with Gilgamesh, there are a lot of skeletons spawning all over the place. Whenever a new skeleton spawns it has a 5% chance to be the rare one. Doesn't sound like a big chance, but it actually shows up pretty frequently! It uses strong elemental magick that hit all targets in range, so beware of not being wiped out in one hit.

Where's the real one? Edit

If Gilgamesh's Zantetsuken is not the real one, then where is it? Odin has always had a completely different sword in all games after FFVIII, and the Zantetsuken never returned to him! Furthermore, Gilgamesh is the only known possessor of a curved, cyan-bladed, scimitar-like blade, so why not think it could be the original Zantetsuken (perhaps FFVI's incarnation) but modified by Gilgy? And if not, where is the REAL Zantetsuken?

To go even further, the Italian version of the game (which is usually more faithful to Japanese scripts than the English one) said, in his bestiary entry, that the Zantetsu was the masterpiece of his collection, but no one knows if his blades are all real. I only made a supposition, if anyone knows what his Japanese entry said, please corrects or confirms what I said. --Pmbarbieri 17:46, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Gilgamesh is known for not realising the value of things and always chooses the worse sword. He might've traded the real Zantetsuken to a knock-off, because he thought the knock-off looked better. It's not known if his Zantetsuken is a knock-off, but it doesn't look the same it did in FFVIII and all his other swords are also knock-offs, so it's a good guess.Keltainentoukokuu 19:19, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Well, it still resembles a more detailed version of the VI one. At least we should write this. And still, this leaves the question unanswered: where's the real one? Maybe we will never know... --Pmbarbieri 19:56, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Gilgamesh's katanas Edit

Seriously, I don't get it. Why can't Gilgamesh's initial weapons be in fact six Kotetsus? They use the same model, which is not used for any other weapon in the game, and you need them to be officially named to say they are freaking Kotetsus? It's not like there's only one Kotetsu in the game, and therefore his weapons cannot be the same. It's like saying: "Oh, those Imperial swordsmen all have the same weapon, which is identical to my broad sword, but only mine can be the REAL broad sword unless they explicitly state that their is too!"
You don't need an Ultimania guide to see the obvious: if they use the same model as the Kotetsu and there's nothing in or out-game that proves they are other swords, they are Kotetsus. Seriously, what's wrong with that? --Pmbarbieri (talk) 00:08, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

Gilgamesh's weapons may not have the same attack power and hit% as the Kotetsu weapon you can equip.Keltainentoukokuu (talk) 00:26, May 23, 2013 (UTC)
I'd be up for describing them as katanas using the Kotetsu model, because looking at it, it's about as generic a katana in appearance as possible. Drake Clawfang (talk) 00:29, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

Well, Gilgamesh also uses them with one hand, even if they are two-hand weapons. Seriously, gameplay has nothing to do with the models. Do weapons respect their own stats when used during a FMV or an in-game video, unless they're very specific stats? The Buster Sword, the Revolver, the Brotherhood, they're the weakest weapons of their kind, but still their owners use them in almost every game they're featured in. Can't it be the same with non iconic weapons? Plus, this is not Final Fantasy X, where there are tons of weapons but only three or four models per category, they could create another model just for him. It's not that the Kotetsu looks like a generic katana, the Kotetsu IS the generic katana in this game, how about that? --Pmbarbieri (talk) 00:58, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

It is unknown if it is meant to be the same Kotetsu weapon you can get, or just "a katana". Better not to assert with unknowables.Keltainentoukokuu (talk) 01:06, May 23, 2013 (UTC)
I think you misunderstand my point. I saw this and thought of the recent thing with Weiss's page saying his katanas inside of Omega were based on Sephiroth's masamune -- there's nothing to suggest this and they're just general katanas. Looking at the weapons list, most of the base katanas look like, well, general katanas. Perhaps they just gave Gilgamesh the Kotetsu model to cut a corner or due to game engine limitations. In D012 for example, unlike Bartz and Vaan who have all their weapons as part of their model, Gilgamesh's model is unarmed and each of his weapons is its own separate model in the game engine. Why I'm not sure, but maybe it was done in this game too, rather than make a dozen or so Gilgamesh models each wielding his weapons in different states, they make the base model unarmed and just attach different weapon models as needed. Or it could be that the FF12 Gilgamesh at the time would have had to be like Cecil, that is switching between submodels for different weapons, which would have made the model huge.
Point is, there could be plenty of reasons they used the Kotetsu model just because, I don't see why this means instantly that his katanas are intended to be Kotetsus. Drake Clawfang (talk) 01:09, May 23, 2013 (UTC)
That thing about making the Gilgamesh model could be like a trivia point or something if we could find out if it is like in your explanation. :) Cool detail anyway.Keltainentoukokuu (talk) 01:17, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

Like I said, it's like the Imperial soldiers (who have Broad swords, Altairs, Oak staffs, Spicas and more), the Bacnamy (who have freaking Demonsbanes and Demon shields) and the Urutan yensa (who also have Kotetsus), all of them having weapons that use the same model as the equippable ones you can get, meaning they could be those same weapons, why not? As I said earlier, is it necessary that enemies can only have personalized weapons? Even the Behemoth's blade isn't unique to the Behemoth: in any weapon shop you can find the exact same weapon used by those enemies: does it mean that just because it's not in the hand of a Behemoth, it's not the same type of weapon? I just say that those are NOT legendary or unique weapons, and there's NO proof they are not the same weapons. Plus, "Kotetsu" is a descriptive name, just like "Katana" is. Can't we just say Gilgy's initial weapons are "Kotetsu" katanas, or something like that?

About Gilgamesh's model, I don't think it works like the Dissidia one, because the FFXII models are far more complex than those in Dissidia. There's not even a model viewer to see them properly, to my disappointment. I think, though, that Gilgamesh has more than one battle model, especially since he changes in more ways during battle than only in the weapons he uses. --Pmbarbieri (talk) 02:33, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

For starters, I guess I should point out that the Kogarasumaru is identical in appearance to the Kotetsu, so this entire argument is moot to begin with. More than that, we don't know he is using kotetsus. There are multiple weapons in this game that have identical appearances, and just because the kotetsu uses such and such model, it does not mean that such and such model is always the kotetsu. Same goes for every enemy in the game that uses a weapon. For all we know, the katana's in Gilgamesh's hands might be called "Bane of Enkidu" or something by the developers. And that generic soldier's Broadsword might actually be a Broadersword. We don't know. Because the weapon appearance the developers choose to give weapon-wielding enemies is not something that has any relation whatsoever to the item system of our characters. At all. Enemies don't have equipment lists like, say, Tactics, so we can never know what they are really equipped with. The reality here is the Kotetsu is the basic, most fundamental katana in the game, and this generic quality of it is probably why the developers chose to use its basic, generic-looking katana model for Gilgamesh's basic, generic, fundamental katanas.
In short, just because weapon A uses weapon model B, that does not mean that weapon model B always indicates weapon A.
(also, the "Gilgamesh's weapons being separate from his model" in Dissidia thing is probably due to the fact that he randomly chooses a weapon every time he uses an attack, which would demand, coding-wise, that the weapons be separate from his model.) Espritduo (talk) 03:30, May 23, 2013 (UTC)
Kogarasu Kotetsu comparison

Kogarasu (left), and Kotetsu (right)

Th Kogarasu does not have the same model of the Kotetsu in-game, I double-checked it. The picture from the guide is wrong. In this game there is NOT a single weapon among those you can equip that looks like another. Seriously, you are confusing the name one gives to HIS specific weapon with the generic name. In reality, if you are using an M-16 in combat and so does your enemy, then to you the latter is not an M-16? The name "Kotetsu" is the same, it's a label, a brand, a series name, a generic name to indicate a type of katana it's not a specific sword. SO, UNLESS IT'S NOT NAMED DIFFERENTLY IN GAME, which it ISN'T, there are far more proofs that support my theory than yours. There is no reason he shouldn't use the same kind of weapons you can have, even if enemies have technically no equipment.

Really, according to your logic, if an enemy has a Dagger (which is the generic one) then his Dagger is not named Dagger, even if it cannot be other weapon than a (conventional term) DAGGER?! --Pmbarbieri (talk) 09:54, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

In video games the stats that make the weapon as well as the model. In the Zodiac Job System version of FFXII they have weapons that have identical models but different stats, and weapons that have no weapon model at all (looks like the character is equipped with nothing even if they are). It is unknown where Gilgamesh obtained his katanas and what properties they have. He is known for using fake weapons too that resemble originals. It is better not to start claiming something is something if there is leeway.Keltainentoukokuu (talk) 11:19, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

Goodness gracious, that's not the International version I'm talking about, that's totally another business! BTW, the stats don't mean anything other than the power of the weapon when used by PLAYERS, not enemies. I think you don't get what I'm trying to say: the name Kotetsu is the name of the freaking TYPE of the weapon, not a specific weapon, but a specific TYPE of weapon. Also, there can be a Kotetsu knockoff, maybe produced by someone else other than the main producer, but there is no proof those are fake. I think you're making up theories as much as I do, but I have more actual facts to back mine up. You do not have proof that those are not Kotetsu TYPE of katanas. --Pmbarbieri (talk) 11:51, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

That's now how the burden of proof works. I am not asserting anything. We should only assert on the wiki if we know for sure. You originally didn't write on the article Gilgamesh wields a kotetsu type weapon, but that he wields a Kotetsu. The capital name there makes it the specific weapon.Keltainentoukokuu (talk) 12:01, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

My answer here is: in the English translations, as well as most of the articles on this wiki, every weapon name is capitalized. I also wrote they are KotetsuS, plural. --Pmbarbieri (talk) 12:15, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

Names for specific weapons yeah. You can get more than one of a specific weapon (e.g. you can buy more than one Kotetsu from the shop and have multiple Kotetsus). Weapon types are not capitalised though, usually (some articles do it, but I think it is weird to see stuff like "Steiner equips Swords, Knight Swords and Heavy Armor"). A non-specific kotetsu (like one you can't buy from the shop) is just a kotetsu if that really is a type of weapon (I don't know about weapons!). That's how I'd write it anyway, how else could we disambiguate it...Keltainentoukokuu (talk) 12:27, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

The kotetsu is a type of weapon, like a wakizashi, but still, some types of weapons like the Thompson or many other real world weapon types, have their name capitalized (not everywhere, but I generally saw that). Also, if a weapon with a particular name has multiple copies, it means (generally) that has become a type of weapon itself, but the copies are not knockoffs, unless they are copies of a legendary weapon that lack its particular power, like most of Gilgamesh's swords. Sorry if I become a broken record, but the kotetsu is not a legendary weapon, and has no "special power" whatsoever, so there's no reason to make a knockoff, especially since the kotetsus used by Gilgamesh are not so weak compared to the one you can equip.

This is the same reason why I prefer not to say that Gilgamesh's Zantetsuken in this game is a fake, because the game is very vague about that (at least the Japanese version, which I remind you, the English version does not always follow). Furthermore, FFXII bestiary entries capitalize a word every two or three. Is there a reason for that? --Pmbarbieri (talk) 12:58, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

I don't think you are understanding that a weapon model is not the same as the weapon itself. The weapon is the thing YOU equip, with all the stats associated with it. Gilgamesh is wielding katanas that use the Kotetsu's model, nothing more than that and we cannot say any more than that. And no, the Kotetsu is not a type of weapon. It's the name of a recurring katana in the Final Fantasy series and has no specific or notable appearance that would warrant us labeling weapons as kotetsus based on appearance. Maybe in the real world there is a katana named kotetsu, but that means jack all nothing to us here. Do Gilgamesh's katanas look like actual Nagasone Kotetsus? No. Therefore, we have no need to go nuts trying to classify them with super-specific weapon pseudo-aficiando terms. They're katanas. That's all that needs said and all that should be said.
Also, looking at your image there, that Kogarasumaru looks identical to the Muramasa. So...is the Muramasa image wrong too?
As for Gilgamesh's special weapons, they are all fake. The Ultimania goes into detail about each of his weapons and makes it perfectly clear every one of them is fake. Espritduo (talk) 17:44, May 23, 2013 (UTC)
Look closer, they have a slightly different hilt. :)Keltainentoukokuu (talk) 22:26, May 23, 2013 (UTC)
Nah, Bradygames is stupid and used the Kogarasumaru image for the Muramasa, and the Kotetsu image for the Kogarasumaru in both the strategy guide and the FFXII Art Collection book. So now we have no high-quality image of the Muramasa, and have to use the smaller image from the Ultimania, which, thankfully, is correct. Boo-urns. Espritduo (talk) 22:58, May 23, 2013 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki