Feral Fandom cutscene confusion

When Metem first speaks about the WoL to Vamp Fatale, he says thus:
"Metem: As indicated by his appellation, Astronis has climbed his way up the ranks without the use of a feral soul."

But in the very next sentence, he says this:
"Metem: Should this upstart rise to become grand champion, they would be able to do as they please with the Arcadion's soul repository. And it seems they intend to release all the souls..."

This introduces confusion about who Metem is talking about. Who is "they" in this sentence? The WoL? Eutrope, her sister, and Black Cat? The WoL and Black Cat? Either there needs to be a sentence describing who "they" are, or "they" needs to be changed to "he/she".

“…Forename has climbed his way up the ranks….”
“Should this upstart rise to become grand champion….” is still talking about the PC.

“They” clearly refers to the PC and no clarification is needed. Singular “they” has been in common use about 300 years longer than singular “you”, and the lack of gendering pronoun here is not a problem, even if in the previous line they used a gendered pronoun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rongway

“They” clearly refers to the PC and no clarification is needed. Singular “they” has been in common use about 300 years longer than singular “you”, and the lack of gendering pronoun here is not a problem, even if in the previous line they used a gendered pronoun.

---

In general, yes. In specific, our character is usually referred to by their gendered pronouns, and as noted here, the character saying it has used the gendered form in the preceding sentence. It seems likely to me that they just somehow missed setting this one up with the variable he/she.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rongway

“…Forename has climbed his way up the ranks….”
“Should this upstart rise to become grand champion….” is still talking about the PC.

---

Those do, yes. The issue is the pronouns, not the nouns, proper and otherwise.

Quote:

---

“They” clearly refers to the PC and no clarification is needed.

---

No, it is not clear. One does not use the third person singular masculine pronoun to refer to a noun in one sentence and then in the next use a third person neuter plural (which can and often is used as a singular) to refer to that same noun. To be good grammar, the third person neuter plural must be referring to a different noun in this situation. That there isn't another openly stated noun for the third person plural pronoun to be referring to doesn't mean there isn't one hidden somewhere--it means the statement is unclear.

Quote:

---

Singular “they” has been in common use about 300 years longer than singular “you”, and the lack of gendering pronoun here is not a problem, even if in the previous line they used a gendered pronoun.

---

Completely irrelevant. It is a problem, because it's excruciatingly poor grammar to refer to the same known noun with two different pronouns in rapid succession. I expect better from English localizers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

In general, yes. In specific, our character is usually referred to by their gendered pronouns, and as noted here, the character saying it has used the gendered form in the preceding sentence. It seems likely to me that they just somehow missed setting this one up with the variable he/she.

---

Likely the localizers just missed it (or got lazy). I would like to believe that the localizers have a better grasp of English than to think this is acceptable grammatically. I could be expecting too much though, thinking that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Astronis

Likely the localizers just missed it (or got lazy). I would like to believe that the localizers have a better grasp of English than to think this is acceptable grammatically. I could be expecting too much though, thinking that.

---

Mistakes happen. Things slip through even if you check them three times.

It still needs fixing of course, but there's no reason to heap so much blame immediately over something that may not stand out that much. It's not a grammatical error in isolation and won't stand out like one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

Mistakes happen. Things slip through even if you check them three times.

It still needs fixing of course, but there's no reason to heap so much blame immediately over something that may not stand out that much. It's not a grammatical error in isolation and won't stand out like one.

---

True. Though if it hadn't stood out I wouldn't have brought it up--maybe I'm oversensitive because I have a family member who forgets to state her nouns before going on whole wild tangents leaving me to try to read her mind for what all the pronouns refer to. Drives me insane!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Astronis

No, it is not clear. One does not use the third person singular masculine pronoun to refer to a noun in one sentence and then in the next use a third person neuter plural (which can and often is used as a singular) to refer to that same noun. To be good grammar, the third person neuter plural must be referring to a different noun in this situation. That there isn't another openly stated noun for the third person plural pronoun to be referring to doesn't mean there isn't one hidden somewhere--it means the statement is unclear.

---

I honestly do not see any universe where a person with at least an 8th grade reading level would think "they" in that sentence referred to Vamp Fatale or any other previously unmentioned entity, when the two clauses immediately preceding it are talking about the PC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rongway

I honestly do not see any universe where a person with at least an 8th grade reading level would think "they" in that sentence referred to Vamp Fatale or any other previously unmentioned entity, when the two clauses immediately preceding it are talking about the PC.

---

And I don't see any universe where a person can't understand that using multiple different pronouns for the same noun in rapid succession is crappy grammar that needs to be called out and fixed. And yet here we are, with you arguing about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rongway

I honestly do not see any universe where a person with at least an 8th grade reading level would think "they" in that sentence referred to Vamp Fatale or any other previously unmentioned entity, when the two clauses immediately preceding it are talking about the PC.

---

I don't think it's about getting confused over who "they" is referring to – at least for me, the issue is that it is clear, and the person clearly being referred to is established as being "he" or "she", so it's jarring to see the wrong gender used in this line.

"As indicated by their appellation, Astronis has climbed their way up the ranks without the use of a feral soul. Should this upstart rise to become grand champion, she would be able to do as she pleases with the Arcadion's soul repository. And it seems she intends to release all the souls..."

"As indicated by her appellation, Astronis has climbed their way up the ranks without the use of a feral soul. Should this upstart rise to become grand champion, he would be able to do as they please with the Arcadion's soul repository. And it seems she intends to release all the souls..."

Do all of you agreeing with Rongway still agree?

found the guy who has zero friends using more than one set of pronouns

no, this is not a problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0blivion

found the guy who has zero friends using more than one set of pronouns

no, this is not a problem.

---

Ironic coming from the guy who's constantly complaining about the English localization. The ideology trap I set did catch one, though. So thanks for making it clear WHY people are OK with the crappy grammar, that it's not because they think it's actually good grammar or a good localization.

Let me be clear: It's perfectly fine to break the rules of a language when you speak of your friends if they want you to. It's not fine to insist that fundamental rules shared by dozens of languages don't exist because of your friends. Grammatical gender is a real thing and being consistent with it is not optional for good, general writing.

I noticed this too! It was clear to me that Metem was talking about the WoL, but the switch to "they" did strike me as odd and unnatural-sounding.

(Also reminder not to feed the trolls...)

Such a pedantic topic... No wonder the devs, and Japan in general, don't take the Western world seriously. And this is another proof they're right.

Such a waste of forum space just like the topic about the lyrics being "impure".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brandr

Such a pedantic topic...

---

"Rules on Posting in this Forum:
The following is a sample of content suitable for this forum:
- English bugs (grammar, spelling, etc.)"

Quite literally what this forum is for. It wouldn't exist if SE didn't want 'bug reports' on the English localization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eriyu

(Also reminder not to feed the trolls...)

---

I will bash everyone over the head with a Strunk and White until morale improves :D

As already said, grammar is correct.

"They" is a gender neutral pronoun.
Unless it offends you manly towering phallic "secure" masculinity, it's completely fine being used in any context.
Besides, the character, Metem, calls the Warrior of Light, all the time with "they" during the fights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brandr

As already said, grammar is correct.

---

As already said, the grammar is incorrect.

Gender disagreement (tense disagreement, case disagreement) doesn't suddenly become grammatically correct just because of your ideology.

Quote:

---

"They" is a gender neutral pronoun.

---

"They" is the third person plural neuter pronoun that is sometimes used as a singular. Subtle difference, but largely correct.

Quote:

---

Unless it offends you manly towering phallic "secure" masculinity,

---

Gosh aren't we making all kinds of completely unwarranted assumptions today! Very sexist. (Also, an hour and a half later, I'm still giggling over this, so thanks for the laugh, I'm filing this away forever.)

Quote:

---

it's completely fine being used in any context.

---

It is not fine when it's being mixed together with a masculine or feminine third person singular to refer to the same noun, no. The neuter gender may be very large in English, but it isn't all-encompassing.

Quote:

---

Besides, the character, Metem, calls the Warrior of Light, all the time with "they" during the fights.

---

He does, presumably because it's voiced--but you'll note I'm not bringing it up, because in THAT case it's CONSISTENT--Metem doesn't switch to "he" in one sentence then use "it" or "she" or "they" in the next during the fights. (Not only that, there's the possibility in some of those statements that Metem is talking about multiple people--it'd actually be kind of insane for the devs to program all the needed variations!)

*continues the bashing of heads with Strunk and White*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Astronis

As already said, the grammar is incorrect.

Gender disagreement (tense disagreement, case disagreement) doesn't suddenly become grammatically correct just because of your ideology.
(...)
"They" is the third person plural neuter pronoun that is sometimes used as a singular. Subtle difference, but largely correct.

---

Your towering muscular hard boiled very "assured" straightness needs to study a little.

Here are some links to help you on your growing and mind cultivation.

https://apastyle.apa.org/style-gramm.../singular-they

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dic...y/english/they

Bet you didn't even consulted the dictionary before starting this whole conversation about grammar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brandr

Your towering muscular hard boiled very "assured" straightness

---

*cackles*

Quote:

---

needs to study a little.

---

I know all about singular they. BEHOLD!:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Astronis

... the third person singular masculine pronoun to refer to a noun in one sentence and then in the next use a third person neuter plural (which can and often is used as a singular)...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Astronis

"They" is the third person plural neuter pronoun that is sometimes used as a singular.

---

Now, perhaps you can go address the actual criticism I have about the grammar rather than the one you've convinced yourself I've been making!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Astronis

Who is "they" in this sentence? The WoL? Eutrope, her sister, and Black Cat? The WoL and Black Cat? Either there needs to be a sentence describing who "they" are, or "they" needs to be changed to "he/she".

---

Your criticism was already answered, your dying alone on that hill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rongway

“…Forename has climbed his way up the ranks….”
“Should this upstart rise to become grand champion….” is still talking about the PC.

“They” clearly refers to the PC and no clarification is needed. Singular “they” has been in common use about 300 years longer than singular “you”, and the lack of gendering pronoun here is not a problem, even if in the previous line they used a gendered pronoun.

---

As shown, the English dictionary clearly states singular they exists:
"used to refer to a person whose gender is not known or does not need to be mentioned".

If you don't accept this truth, you're absolutely a fanatical, is part of a cult and needs professional help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brandr

Your criticism was already answered, your dying alone on that hill.

---

Nope. You're stuck thinking I'm criticizing the use of singular they. I'm not. Others recognize the problem I am addressing and I trust that the localizers can read English well enough to understand as well.

Quote:

---

As shown, the English dictionary clearly states singular they exists:
"used to refer to a person whose gender is not known or does not need to be mentioned".

---

Yeah, that's exactly how singular they is used. I know. I haven't been filling the forum here with criticisms of the localizers using singular they appropriately, and they really do use it a lot.

As shown in the text that I am criticizing, the gender of the noun IS known, and is not only known, has already had a masculine or feminine third person singular pronoun attached to it immediately proceeding. Switching to the neuter gender immediately AFTER that is jarring because the grammar is bad--it's a gender disagreement, same as it would be jarring and bad grammar if the tense suddenly shifted. Doesn't have a diddly damned thing to do with the typical usage of singular they.

Just as an example, if you start calling a boat "she", you keep using "she". At least for the length of the paragraph. Maybe after awhile you can switch to neuter since boats are both feminine and neuter in English, but it'd be jarring to switch genders immediately.

Quote:

---

If you don't accept this truth, you're absolutely a fanatical, is part of a cult and needs professional help.

---

Aw. You ran out of funny insults. Shame. You're no longer entertaining me.

Quote:

---

Metem: As indicated by his/her appellation, CHARNAME has climbed his/her way up the ranks without the use of a feral soul.
Metem: Should this upstart rise to become grand champion, they would be able to do as they please with the Arcadion's soul repository. And it seems they intend to release all the souls..."

---

This is a nothingburger of an issue and is not even remotely a concern for anyone who has more than a cursory knowledge of how nouns and verbs work in the English language.

The quoted section has the subjects of the sentence indicated in bold, objects underlined, and verbs in italics. the first "his/her" refers to CHARNAM. The second "his/her" refers to...CHARNAME. "This upstart" refers to CHARNAME. "They" refers to CHARNAME (who would become grand champion, as the subject agrees with the object of the previous clause, since the comma indicates a subordinate clause in a sentence. It is referential to the primary clause (in this case, "Should this upstart...")

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eidinskyf

the first "his/her" refers to CHARNAM. The second "his/her" refers to...CHARNAME. "This upstart" refers to CHARNAME. "They" refers to CHARNAME

---

Well, yes. That's my objection from the beginning (regardless of OP's different objection). Metem knows that the WoL goes by he/she, correctly uses it in the first sentence and then uses a different pronoun in the second sentence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

Well, yes. That's my objection from the beginning (regardless of OP's different objection). Metem knows that the WoL goes by he/she, correctly uses it in the first sentence and then uses a different pronoun in the second sentence.

---

I mean "they/them" is a perfectly normal pronoun use in this case. It's extremely common to do this in referential clauses, as the initial clause is already there and the contextual use of it is obviously referring to the initial subject in a text. If there were multiple people involved in the conversation who did not use feral souls and had the intent of releasing all of the souls accumulated in the Arcadion, then I could see the confusion, but the entire dialogue is referring strictly to one individual and "they/them" is a perfectly acceptable pronoun to use in this case.

Again, this is basic English compositional stuff. It's definitively not a typo or an error.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eidinskyf

I mean "they/them" is a perfectly normal pronoun use in this case.

---

In an isolated example of correct grammar, maybe. But in a conversation about a pre-established subject who has been established as (let's say) a "he", switching to "they" means you're not using the same pronoun for the same person throughout the conversation. It's as jarring as switching to "she".

I mean, how many people actually check they’re using proper grammar during speech? Not many I would imagine lol. Isn’t it more natural that way? He’d sound like a robot if they ChatGPT’d his dialogue to be perfectly consistent with pedantic grammatical rules that most people don’t bother with during speech.

Also let’s be real they did it because they’d have to pay the actor more if they recorded two separate lines for he/she

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

In an isolated example of correct grammar, maybe. But in a conversation about a pre-established subject who has been established as (let's say) a "he", switching to "they" means you're not using the same pronoun for the same person throughout the conversation. It's as jarring as switching to "she".

---

I'm not so sure about that - the use of "they" while referring to a subject is perfectly normal and natural, and one which is happens in conversation all the time. You might be making a mountain of a molehill here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

I mean, how many people actually check they’re using proper grammar during speech? Not many I would imagine lol. Isn’t it more natural that way? He’d sound like a robot if they ChatGPT’d his dialogue to be perfectly consistent with pedantic grammatical rules that most people don’t bother with during speech.

---

There is no way in hell you personally need to look up a style guide or consult ChatGPT to make sure you don't accidentally refer to your mom (or sister/neice/girlfriend, pick one) as "they" a minute after you used "she". NO NATIVE SPEAKER does that. Not even little children. The ways native English speakers are liable to make grammatical gender mistakes like that are with things like "all dogs are boys" and "all cats are girls" growing up--that is, they apply the genders too broadly when the masculine and feminine are very narrow in English (all moths were "she" when I was little). NOOOOO ONNNNNE just naturally oopsies into calling their dad "she" or "it" and then needs to ask an AI for correction.

The attempts to excuse a mistake on the part of the localizers are getting ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eidinskyf

I'm not so sure about that - the use of "they" while referring to a subject is perfectly normal and natural, and one which is happens in conversation all the time. You might be making a mountain of a molehill here.

---

Not when you've already used "he" or "she" for the same subject one minute before. It's not at all normal or natural. It does not happen in conversations all the time.

Seriously, "join date Jan 2026, 3 posts in January, all in this thread", people joining the forums JUST to make excuses for the localizers' mistake on this is bizarre.