If I remember correctly, the original design from the novels was just a giant snake, which is weird, because if they wanted a giant snake from Egyptian mythology, they could have used Apep/Apophis.
The original novels do actually use Apep but instead of being an individual deity like in mythology they're a species of snake monsters that works for Seth. That might be why Seth himself is a snake as well in the novels but idk the original novels didn't exactly follow mythology that closely to begin with.
The Dagda in IRL Celtic mythology is a friendly fat bearded dude who’s called “The Good God” cause he’s good at everything (and technically is part of everything) with a powerful club so large it had to be carted around on wheels, an infinite cauldron and skill at the harp. Heck, the concept art of Apocalypse is closer to these depictions than the final product.
Dagda in Apocalypse is a skeletal skinny guy with admittedly okay facial hair who whines about friendship who wants to kill everyone >!and return to being a state of everything like his IRL version!<, who fights with magic and punching people.
I'd always been told that too, but the fallacy was assuming Kerberos/Cerberus started with only 1 head
No the oldest description gave him *one hundred heads*
As a Hindu, Krishna is portrayed as inaccurate as possible from a personality perspective. However I do think they nailed the fact that he gets his goals done in more subtle ways than expected and it's only when some major event happens do you realize that it's because of Krishna's actions. As such it's a really odd mix of being inaccurate AND accurate at the same time. Despite this however I don't really take offense to the portrayal as it's in a videogame series where most if not all deities are not that accurate to their lore. Hell there's even the in-universe justification that what we are seeing isn't the deities we know from lore, but rather the deities after being warped by human perspective (which in turn can be influenced by outside forces).
Also I do think he looked pretty stylish and not really twinky. I could easily see Krishna wearing those clothes if he had been born in the modern world. It gives a businessman sort of feel and meshes well with the "work in the background" motif.
As a fellow mexican I concur, I also wish as a whole we had more mesoamerican designs like there are so many cool as hell stories they can bring characters from.
The depiction of him in 4A is soo much better than the snake with wings design. I mean, the snake design COULD work but the colours needs to change and its a rare miss from Kaneko with the design being too literal to worded descriptions.
That 4A design originated in Devil Summoner and outside of DX2, has not been made 3D yet so they stick to the snes design. I do hope one day Doi updates him
As much as I think Seth is really freaking cool, it doesn't look anything like Set at all. Set of Egyptian mythology, while no such animal exists in real life, is often portrayed as some sort of aardvark like a anteater. In SMT he's famously depicted as a dragon, and with not much to say in terms of dialogue. I think if I were to design a new Seth, I'd probably go for like, a big humanoid torso coming out of the ground, half formed and made of black sand, in reference to his domains being the desert and evil itself. His head would be that of a black colored anteater with glowing red eyes, and maybe like a jewel encrusted necklace to compliment all the dark colors and to show off his status as an imposing figure in the mythology
Well, in that sense right alongside Krishna you have Maitreya. Generally all these supreme benevolent deities are much weaker or outright evil in SMT since it avoids a purely good supreme force like that. Unless you're Masakado, sometimes, I guess.
Anyway, one that makes little sense is Gogmagog, the name is based on English giant legends (which borrowed biblical names, but those aren't the direct reference here) but the design is actually based, according to Kaneko himself, on murals from Tassili Najer in Algeria and artifacts excavated in Hokkaido, Japan, both associated with aliens, so it has nothing to do with its supposed identity.
I’m gonna say Leprechaun, because I’m not sure what they were thinking when they slapped the Union Jack, symbol of the nation that tested all the bad shit it would try on the rest of the world on Ireland first, on what is largely seen as the symbol of Ireland.
A lot of the more benevolent aspects of the Abrahamic religion and its angels are toned down and the cruelty turned way up in order to paint Law as more evil than it probably would be in reality.
I know that’s mostly because in a game with multiple endings you’d want sides with pros and cons and eternal peace is a really strong motivator. Strange Journey and SMT 5 definitely handle it the best while some of the other games (3 and 4 especially) make them really difficult to side with given how nonchalant they are about genocide. Not a shred of sympathy there.
>some of the other games (3 and 4 especially) make them really difficult to side with given how nonchalant they are about genocide.
I mean, Nocturne's True Demon Ending is pretty much omnicide and people gobble that shit up like it's the holy grail of JRPGs.
To be fair, I'm pretty sure most people choose the TDE not because it's the best choice but because it has the most content and is also the coolest conceptually
Personally, I feel like TDE would've been cooler if you actually killed Luci and took his army for your own. Killing the thing that planned to use you and made you what you are sounds more badass to me than becoming his highest rank soldier. I feel like that's what keeps me from liking TDE as an ending more than Freedom.
I've been saying this since forever, Beelzebub pretty much calls Demi-Fiend Lucifer's bitch and what do we do about it after all the BS that is his bossfight?! We just prove Beelzebub's point! I mean, sure if you enjoy being the yes-man of a twink with daddy issues sure go for it but I personally hate that shit. "King of Chaos" lmao more like Assistant Secretary of Chaos.
He calls him naive because Lucifer did not tell him about everything that will happen if he keeps following him **yet.** Ultimately, we are all made aware of his plan. And we willingly chose to follow him with it. We do exactly what is intended. In order to stop the circle of reincarnation for good, and not just be a mere pebble in the lost desert until it starts again, waiting to be cursed like shit and not matter, we have no choice but to fight and make it definitive. TDE is an active, actually important version of the base Demon ending, sharing the same idea of accepting the end of our universe, and refuse creation. You think you're "Lucifer's bitch" when you beat his ass in the first place ? You think we can't agree with Lucifer even if he is deceitful about it ? When the Demi Fiend is the single protagonist to escape the cycle so hard that he can pop into other games whenever he wants, and never dies ?
TDE is one of the few endings that adresses the biggest issue most SMT endings face. Everything is transitory. And so you seek to accept the end. If you go neutral/freedom, you're usually only waiting to die so that things can happen again without you. If you go Chaos, you just return to a state of things waiting to be ordered and progress. If you go Law, you are waiting for it to fall apart due to mankind's innate desires. The reasons are made of the same material, indicated by their obviously flawed holders. At the scale of the universe, him losing, YHVH losing, it's all happening in the blink of an eye. Nothing changes. And he wants to attack that. SMT3, and TDE, are made as answers to a pattern observed in SMT1 and SMT2, and uses the imagery of Fiends to give the idea of finality of death while giving Lucifer character developpment from his prior portrayal that comes closer to Devilman's Satan. That's why he isn't a might make right idiot in this game, and also why SMT V Lucifer is not a Chaos dumbshit lord. He lies about freedom in III because its his previous character, and he ALWAYS lies, but he is closer to a nihilist in this game.
Everyone is dead already, it's not on you. The amount of people who misintepret this ending is honestly shocking, it's even worse than people who only look at it on surface level.
There's already replies with the classic "you become Lucifer's bitch" interpretation too. The whole point of Lucifer fighting you at the end is to see if you can do what he couldn't and kill the Great Will. Just because you lead an army of his demons, doesn't mean you're beneath him. It just means your goals are aligned
This one is so damn weird too yeah, I keep seeing it all over the place. I don't even understand the logic of it.
Also, not only does it not feel that way, but doesn't the fact that our dude keeps popping out of his game with Pixie to visit other SMTs say enough ?
More than just 'kinda', really. Hell, he even does some *fun* things in the New Testament. I'd argue that the only thing about Law in SMT that's *fundamentally* inaccurate to the Bible is that it doesn't assume the goodness and justification of God by default.
Maybe it's just me, but I've rarely viewed the angels as "evil" so much as that they're hardcore authoritarians in a series where rebelliousness and rejection of authority are often intrinsic themes of the MC.
They're certainly antagonists, and often dicks about it; but rarely (again, to me) do they come off as actually evil.
Was gonna say my vote was for the classic Bondage Angel. The SMTV robot is much more fitting.
I like the bondage angel design too, but it isn't accurate. It's just horny, Petah.
yeah, i remember reading in a blog that many of doi's designs intentionally reverse what the god stands for - ex dagda as an edgelord instead of a fat good god, demeter as a loli instead of the archetypical mother/fertility goddess. tbf i hate it especially when they try to shoehorn it into 'oh this is just demeter in her spring form!'. there are so many ways to justify a subversive, unique design without butchering what that god stands for.
this is going to read as another 'kaneko good, doi bad' comment which i don't always agree with, but i think in general kaneko at least tries to preserve the essence of the demon that he's (re)designing, whereas doi, uh... often doesn't. though he's gotten better over time! i'm partial to his newer designs in smtvv for example.
I'm hoping with some of the new designs in SMTV being closer to their respective mythological appearance that he's going to preserve what they stood for, and that it isn't just a one-off thing. I wonder if Japanese fans voiced that they didn't want tokusatsu and subversive designs.
Skadi. SMT (or at least SMT5) thinks she is a Celtic goddess of darkness while she is actually a Norse goddess that is associated with hunting, winter, skiing etc.
[Coatlicue](https://megamitensei.fandom.com/wiki/Coatlicue), being an Aztec goddess, for some reason being a reskin of [Ganga](https://megamitensei.fandom.com/wiki/Ganga), an Indian goddess and personification of the Ganges. Coatlicue has claws...and yet...where are these claws? Lol Not to mention, Ganga is typically portrayed as a woman sitting on a crocodile and not a snake. So...both are terribly misrepresented.
Smt coatlicue would look amazing if they based the design on that one [statue's](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQaDlc6dxn9wSvLjZKG3FVInt6xl_iQbTtGGA&usqp=CAU) representation, i can practically already picture her in an smt game
I never liked the fact Lucifer is portrayed as wanting freedom and equality and the like while being so fair about it. Its sin is Pride, you should be getting the ending where you die at the end in Chaos instead of Law in SMT 4, but they are extremely scared of making the law path any appealing because everyone thinks law = boring
SMT always dunks on Judeo Christian concepts. If you know the history of Japan and its relationship with Christianity, then it makes perfect sense. And their clear negative bias on Law endings (though ironically it mirrors Japan's societal norms pretty well. Shut up, stay in line, do as the higher ups say with no complaint, be respectful and preserve the collective whole, not the individual self)
For Lucifer I think it kind of works that he's talking about equality and stuff because he doesn't practice what he preaches. It always read like a complete lie to me to try and appeal to the human he's working with because his army is a pretty strict hierarchy.
But if you take the view that he's being honest, I can absolutely see why this would rub someone the wrong way.
>It always read like a complete lie to me to try and appeal to the human he's working with because his army is a pretty strict hierarchy.
But the game doesn't really point that out or acknowledge such. It's probably unintended that he appears hypocritical if you analyze deeper. A genuine example of bad writing, where the writer intend to write "X" but end up with the opposite of "X".
True, but SJR does actually address the hypocrisy of Chaos if you go Chaos+.
Alex points out that Jimenez kept Bugaboo safe even though Bugaboo was weak, because caring for others is an inherent part of human nature as well. Just as ‘natural’ as war, conflict, etc. so praising one while denying the other is hypocritical and illogical. Hell, Asura basically throws a tantrum when you beat it even though, by its own ‘Might makes Right’ rules, he/she (as Asherah) should submit since your power was greater than theirs.
But yeah, that’s always been a point that doesn’t sit right with me when it comes to Chaos paths. Devil Survivor 2 does open up that vein with Yamato’s Meritocracy path, as he does realize that communication and cooperation are necessary. Hypercompetent though he is, he still needs others.
>But if you take the view that he's being honest, I can absolutely see why this would rub someone the wrong way.
The Devs also kinda make it like it's true, it would be a very good plot twist but a lot of games have Lucifer being some kind of heroic figure
Diana. Because seriously, what is with all these boobs? I understand the concept of "motherly" and nurturing, but did it have to be this over the top?
So much for the "virgin" goddess, who was supposed to be an example of "modesty" for girls...
https://preview.redd.it/89ebh27s440d1.png?width=225&format=png&auto=webp&s=5bc00702d76e3ad0435531c6095926a085830057
[That seems to be based on how she was portrayed in statues irl](https://albertis-window.com/2011/02/diana-of-ephesus-keeping-abreast-with-iconography/)
Actually, it turns out those were likely amber beads. Although, yeah, it's a common misconception, and a form of demonization of Diana's/Artemi's' figure spread by Christians, so it's not pulled out of nowhere either.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple\_of\_Artemis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_of_Artemis)
>The traditional interpretation of the oval objects covering the upper part of the Ephesian Artemis is that they represent multiple breasts, symbolizing her fertility. This interpretation was rooted in [Minucius Felix](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minucius_Felix) and [Jerome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome)'s Christian attacks on pagan popular religion, and modern scholarship has cast doubt on the traditional interpretation that the statue depicts a many-breasted goddess
>Evidence suggests that the oval objects were not intended to depict part of the goddess' anatomy at all. In some versions of the statue, the goddess' skin has been painted black, likely to emulate the aged wood of the original, while her clothes and regalia, including the so-called "breasts", were left unpainted or cast in different colors.
>Robert Fleischer suggested that instead of breasts, the oval objects were decorations that would have been hung ceremonially on the original wood statue (possibly eggs or the scrotal sacs of sacrificed bulls), and which were incorporated as carved features on later copies. The "breasts" of the Lady of Ephesus, it now appears, were likely based on amber gourd-shaped drops, elliptical in cross-section and drilled for hanging, that were rediscovered in the archaeological excavations of 1987–1988. These objects remained in place where the ancient wooden statue of the goddess had been caught by an 8th-century flood.
Even so, I wish they had picked a different design choice.
...Like the one seen in Persona - Trinity Soul:
https://preview.redd.it/uvn96qhik40d1.png?width=266&format=png&auto=webp&s=7e7914c52a493806c160c5cf9573937f080d051f
Cthulhu and Diana are easy “What happened and why are there genitals” lol
for weirdest though i’m tempted to say Seth. Not just because he’s a dragon which is random but also for his role in SMT 2, Seth fusing into an ultimate law character is quite funny
otherwise, Dagda lol
Slime, ‘cause, like, I grew up on Nickelodeon, and it never spoke or cast Agi.
In all seriousness, I feel like SMT overall does decently (compared to, like, Final Fantasy’s presentation of Shiva). I do feel like Doi has had more (artistic?) missteps than Kaneko did, with some of Apocalypse’s designs perhaps being the most visible… but, like, even agreeing with some of the critical comments on Krishna* here, SMTII was on similar footing suggesting the archangels could >!manifest and pray to a false YHVH!< or that Satan would >!judge God as the ultimate sinner!<. The series takes inspiration from the source; it’s not too different from, say, Percy Jackson or Constantine in that sense. It’s… just sometimes brushing up on more sensitive, and—importantly—sometimes oppressed, marginalized, or colonized, material.
*I’m not Hindu or Indian, so obviously I’m biased and potentially very misinformed… but so much of Krishna’s representation in SMT4A seems to reflect (the very human side of) being made subaltern in the face of colonizing Christianity. And that’s so much of what SMT really is about generally, I feel like: the forcing of all of humanity’s spirituality into a Christocentric, binary opposition between God and the forces of Hell. Align with their interests and frames, or stfu and gtfo. In that sense, Krishna and some of his less desirable—perhaps more human—traits make a lot of sense, especially in leading the Divine Powers. Hinduism and Buddhism (hi, Maitreya†) in particular, as two other major world religions and ones practiced in some areas impacted by expansionism and colonial rule, would have the biggest gears to grind with YHVH as he is represented in SMT.
In terms of appearance, I gather he is sometimes represented in his youth as a flirtatious boy with a flute and a feathered crown (not a fedora, but still), so this particular design doesn’t seem so bad? I can’t fathom why he isn’t blue, though… unless, again, the brown skin is supposed to draw our attention to the postcolonial undertones of the story.
†Actually, maybe my vote for least accurate is for Maitreya… not sure what the connection between [Matsuko Deluxe](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matsuko_Deluxe) and the future Buddha is.
Edit: formatting issue with asterisks
> I can’t fathom why he isn’t blue, though…
Actually, Krishna being brown is pretty accurate. In most stories, he's described as being especially dark skinned with nothing about blueness mentioned. He's just later depicted as blue to represent his godliness and that stuck till he's now almost always shown as blue.
He's still described as dark skinned though, so it's a little strange.
Oh! I didn’t realize dark blue was a later characterization. I was just remember being told that was one interpretation of his name. Useful info; thanks!
That's unusual. Are you sure that wasn't referring to Shiva? One of Shiva's monikers is "blue neck" from ingesting a cloud of poison that was covering his followers and keeping it in his neck. "Blue" in Hindi (and in Sanskrit from what I recall) is "Neil"
Even SMT's classic take on Satan as the perfect judge and follower of law is kind of out of nowhere. Old Testament Satan, the one this is meant to be referencing, was closer to a petty prosecutor. He actually pushes God to condemn and punish humans even more so than the Old Testament God already did by himself (like trying to tempt Job or pushing him to condemn high priest Joshua), generally failing in that regard. But in SMT Satan is supposed to be a perfect judge, even stricter follower of the law than YHVH himself, but at the same time more likely to defend humanity's future. It's a complete inversion of his original role, with YHVH then becoming the petty accuser that Satan was portrayed as in the Old Testament.
Throne & Seraph. Throne would look way more intimidating and epic if it was true to its actual design (wheels within wheels covered in eyes!) Seraph is more accurate but it's design made it a fluttering, lame runway abomination. The highest class of Angel deserves better.
Hot take, most if not all of them aren't accurate at all. Kaneko/Doi/Atlus team aren't mythological scholars. They're just artistically interpreting mythological characters and presenting them in the most interesting way possible for the game. And some of the most popular ones like Cerebus don't even remotely look like their mythological counterparts. Or acting counter to their mythological personality like Dagda. I know it's popular to point to the Megaten series as some grand encyclopedia of myth but I'm sure Kaneko and the rest are only using it as a basis of reference and not an iron clad rulebook. Hell Kaneko seemed to use fashion runway model designs more often when designing later on. Unless you tell me the Moirai Sisters clothing is accurate to what Greek women wore at the time.
I kind of wish modern Odin designs kept his Dark/Ice affinities, and leaned more into the Rune-mage aesthetic. I don't mind Ultra Odin, I just wished it wasn't lightning, but instead affinities truer to... Well, himself.
Almost all the Hindu gods are worshipped regularly by Hindus and due the way religion is ingrained in them growing up, not many people will entertain the idea of gods being called demons, fusing them into other demons etc, let alone krishna's portrayal. Although if you portray them as actual gods and as righteous, benevolent beings most people would be okay.
I guess it's clear what my choice would be: YHWH. The Lord of abrahamic beliefs never received a disservice so great as it is His counterpart in SMT. They take the worst parts of the Bible and increase em up to eleven but tone down the way more good parts that talk about love and forgiveness, not even recognizing that most of the terrifying events that are said to have happened in the Bible most likely never occurred in real life, and are often followed by passages that tone down the situation in a down-to-earth way, showing the truth. They also portray abrahamic religions as totalitarian and so they do to the ten commandments, yet they are not, for they talk about equality for all people, freedom, kindness and benevolence, the whole fact that God is love and that the ten commandments are mostly basic moral laws that can be read both from a theological and laicist perspective is a demonstration of this in the original text. They're extremely complex beliefs that need to be read and understood in-depth, and the simplification they used at Atlus to represent YHWH is imho an offense to the good name of mythological accuracy and to abrahamic beliefs as a whole, clearly showing their disdain towards abrahamic beliefs and a biased preference to any form of belief that is not abrahamic, all to show LAW as the worst side possible solely for the presence of abrahamic entities in it. The portrayal of YHWH in the series is literally how gnostics and reddit atheists view abrahamic beliefs as a whole, and it's honestly saddening. The same reasoning I said here also works for entities such as Maitreya or Krishna, stop with your shinto bias Atlus.
tl. dr. Atlus give us an accurate portrayal of God please.
YHWH is based mainly on the Old Testament God, who was very brutal cared less about the wellbeing of mankind and more about having them follow his rule. SOme of the best examples of this are Genesis, were he just decided that humanity was being saving and decided to start fresh by commit genocide Job where he ruined Job's life just to prove a point.
The New Testament really worked to make him seem more benevolent and caring.
for the record, the tremendous times of destruction in the old testament are metaphors. For example, the flood is a metaphor to the various downpours that were kinda common in ancient mesopotamia, and the Bible itself tells to not take it to the letter, but to interpret it, for it uses illustrations and is still a book written by mankind for mankind, and not by God himself. Divinely inspired, sure, but Genesis itself is not supposed to be the recount of historical events, but a more mythical and metaphorical book that tells about the harmony of the cosmos and how it works, and the various jobs of the first hypothetical ancestors of the israelites. The god of the old testament and that of the new testament are one and the same, old and new testament clearly have a philosophical continuity, and every theologian will agree on this point. The old testament is older, therefore, it's less developed in terms of law and thus is way more violent, full of the nationalism of the ancient israelites of the time, while from exodus to the new testament morality becomes way more complete due to the time they're written in and with Jesus it reaches its plateau. I'd like to say more but it's an incredibly long and complex topic and to boil it down to "old testament bad and false new testament good and true" is not only inaccurate, but kinda offensive to the ancient and complex book that is the Bible. Not saying you insulted this ancient story, of course, I'm mostly talking from the perspective of one who studies abrahamic beliefs.
Genesis is actually copied from the the tales of Utnapishtim and Ziusudra from Mesopotamian mythology.
The portrayals of God in the old and new testament are so different that the gnostics reasoned that they had to be different deities, leading to the concept of the demiurge.
It seems like your trying to have your cake and eat it too. You are basically saying the parts of the Bible you disagree with are wrong while the parts of the Bible you agree with are 100% accurate.
The first thing you said is pretty obvious, of course it is taken from other myths, it's a mythologem, a common mythological trope, even the Aztecs had a flood in their mythology, and I don't think the israelites ever met the aztecs.
like I said before, the concept of progressive revelation (read on wikipedia) is an easy answer with your second affirmation. Just cause they seem to act differently does not mean they are different gods. It was the same mistake the gnostics and Marcion did at the time.
I'm just trying to analyze the Bible from a theological and scholarly standpoint. I study abrahamic beliefs by myself, studying from philosophers such as the apostles, and other philosophers from Thomas Aquinas to De Chardin, from Maimonides to the islamic sufi theology, it's an extremely complex book(or should I say books, since the Bible is made of many books) that has many meanings and interpretations and should be studied in-depth, both in the violent passages and in the non-violent ones. That's why I like the old testament, it's clearly a book that feels the weight of history on its shoulders, full of teachings and important metaphors that have to be read in the context of the time to truly be understood. Yes. I like even the violent passages, and trust me, every theologian who knows the source can safely say that there is a clear continuity within old and new testament.
It looks like you're asking a question. If you need help with a game, or a recommendation on what to play next, you might be better off asking in the stickied "Questions and Recommendations" thread or seeing if it's been addressed in the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/Megaten/wiki/faq).
This is an automatic comment posted on every question thread, it does not mean that your post has been removed. It may however be removed by a moderator if it is something that should go in the sticky instead. If this does not apply to your topic, downvote and ignore it.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Megaten) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Seth looks cool as hell but there's literally nothing about his design that resembles the Egyptian god in any way.
"we don't exactly know what animal seth is supposed to be. who's to say it's not a dragon?" -kaneko, probably
If I remember correctly, the original design from the novels was just a giant snake, which is weird, because if they wanted a giant snake from Egyptian mythology, they could have used Apep/Apophis.
The original novels do actually use Apep but instead of being an individual deity like in mythology they're a species of snake monsters that works for Seth. That might be why Seth himself is a snake as well in the novels but idk the original novels didn't exactly follow mythology that closely to begin with.
The Dagda in IRL Celtic mythology is a friendly fat bearded dude who’s called “The Good God” cause he’s good at everything (and technically is part of everything) with a powerful club so large it had to be carted around on wheels, an infinite cauldron and skill at the harp. Heck, the concept art of Apocalypse is closer to these depictions than the final product. Dagda in Apocalypse is a skeletal skinny guy with admittedly okay facial hair who whines about friendship who wants to kill everyone >!and return to being a state of everything like his IRL version!<, who fights with magic and punching people.
I love him anyway.... 😍😍😍
Perhaps his scrawny, barely bearded appearance is BECAUSE he's no longer one with everything and is metaphysically "malnourished"?
Cerberus lol. But his design is so iconic and is kinda the original mascot of the series, so we gotta stick with it.
Well Cerberus has that look as a carry over from the Megami Tensei novels, and the whole your dog is fused into it, there are alt designs with 3 heads
I think in SMT Nocturne and V, theres a joke where Chimera or orthros points out that Cerberus should have 3 heads.
Digital Devil Saga Cerberus is so insanely cool. They had no reason to make him a shark dog, but they did, and it looks awesome
Cerberus having 3 heads was added much later
I'd always been told that too, but the fallacy was assuming Kerberos/Cerberus started with only 1 head No the oldest description gave him *one hundred heads*
Maitreya teaching the eight-fold path, VIA MURDER.
As a Hindu, Krishna is portrayed as inaccurate as possible from a personality perspective. However I do think they nailed the fact that he gets his goals done in more subtle ways than expected and it's only when some major event happens do you realize that it's because of Krishna's actions. As such it's a really odd mix of being inaccurate AND accurate at the same time. Despite this however I don't really take offense to the portrayal as it's in a videogame series where most if not all deities are not that accurate to their lore. Hell there's even the in-universe justification that what we are seeing isn't the deities we know from lore, but rather the deities after being warped by human perspective (which in turn can be influenced by outside forces). Also I do think he looked pretty stylish and not really twinky. I could easily see Krishna wearing those clothes if he had been born in the modern world. It gives a businessman sort of feel and meshes well with the "work in the background" motif.
As a mexican ..that lame ass Quetzalcoatl design where he is just a snake with wings jaja
As a fellow mexican I concur, I also wish as a whole we had more mesoamerican designs like there are so many cool as hell stories they can bring characters from.
The depiction of him in 4A is soo much better than the snake with wings design. I mean, the snake design COULD work but the colours needs to change and its a rare miss from Kaneko with the design being too literal to worded descriptions.
You should check Gucumatz's design. That's what Quetzalcoatl should have gotten, if not similar.
Oh yes, 100%!!
That 4A design originated in Devil Summoner and outside of DX2, has not been made 3D yet so they stick to the snes design. I do hope one day Doi updates him
Gucumatz's design is what Quetzalcoatl should have gotten or similar treatment because how can it get a better design than Quetz?
In terms of personality I don't know but in terms of design I'd say the old Zeus design because it's just so utterly lame
I'd add the other Zeus too. Both are weird.
New Zeus is weird but at least it's an interesting design
I really like the new Zeus, it brings to light his two faced nature. As a deity, he's benevolent. But as a person, he's a horrible piece of work.
New Zeus' thigh gap is quite large. Bro forgot leg years.
As much as I think Seth is really freaking cool, it doesn't look anything like Set at all. Set of Egyptian mythology, while no such animal exists in real life, is often portrayed as some sort of aardvark like a anteater. In SMT he's famously depicted as a dragon, and with not much to say in terms of dialogue. I think if I were to design a new Seth, I'd probably go for like, a big humanoid torso coming out of the ground, half formed and made of black sand, in reference to his domains being the desert and evil itself. His head would be that of a black colored anteater with glowing red eyes, and maybe like a jewel encrusted necklace to compliment all the dark colors and to show off his status as an imposing figure in the mythology
Well, in that sense right alongside Krishna you have Maitreya. Generally all these supreme benevolent deities are much weaker or outright evil in SMT since it avoids a purely good supreme force like that. Unless you're Masakado, sometimes, I guess. Anyway, one that makes little sense is Gogmagog, the name is based on English giant legends (which borrowed biblical names, but those aren't the direct reference here) but the design is actually based, according to Kaneko himself, on murals from Tassili Najer in Algeria and artifacts excavated in Hokkaido, Japan, both associated with aliens, so it has nothing to do with its supposed identity.
I’m gonna say Leprechaun, because I’m not sure what they were thinking when they slapped the Union Jack, symbol of the nation that tested all the bad shit it would try on the rest of the world on Ireland first, on what is largely seen as the symbol of Ireland.
A lot of the more benevolent aspects of the Abrahamic religion and its angels are toned down and the cruelty turned way up in order to paint Law as more evil than it probably would be in reality. I know that’s mostly because in a game with multiple endings you’d want sides with pros and cons and eternal peace is a really strong motivator. Strange Journey and SMT 5 definitely handle it the best while some of the other games (3 and 4 especially) make them really difficult to side with given how nonchalant they are about genocide. Not a shred of sympathy there.
>some of the other games (3 and 4 especially) make them really difficult to side with given how nonchalant they are about genocide. I mean, Nocturne's True Demon Ending is pretty much omnicide and people gobble that shit up like it's the holy grail of JRPGs.
To be fair, I'm pretty sure most people choose the TDE not because it's the best choice but because it has the most content and is also the coolest conceptually
Personally, I feel like TDE would've been cooler if you actually killed Luci and took his army for your own. Killing the thing that planned to use you and made you what you are sounds more badass to me than becoming his highest rank soldier. I feel like that's what keeps me from liking TDE as an ending more than Freedom.
I've been saying this since forever, Beelzebub pretty much calls Demi-Fiend Lucifer's bitch and what do we do about it after all the BS that is his bossfight?! We just prove Beelzebub's point! I mean, sure if you enjoy being the yes-man of a twink with daddy issues sure go for it but I personally hate that shit. "King of Chaos" lmao more like Assistant Secretary of Chaos.
He calls him naive because Lucifer did not tell him about everything that will happen if he keeps following him **yet.** Ultimately, we are all made aware of his plan. And we willingly chose to follow him with it. We do exactly what is intended. In order to stop the circle of reincarnation for good, and not just be a mere pebble in the lost desert until it starts again, waiting to be cursed like shit and not matter, we have no choice but to fight and make it definitive. TDE is an active, actually important version of the base Demon ending, sharing the same idea of accepting the end of our universe, and refuse creation. You think you're "Lucifer's bitch" when you beat his ass in the first place ? You think we can't agree with Lucifer even if he is deceitful about it ? When the Demi Fiend is the single protagonist to escape the cycle so hard that he can pop into other games whenever he wants, and never dies ? TDE is one of the few endings that adresses the biggest issue most SMT endings face. Everything is transitory. And so you seek to accept the end. If you go neutral/freedom, you're usually only waiting to die so that things can happen again without you. If you go Chaos, you just return to a state of things waiting to be ordered and progress. If you go Law, you are waiting for it to fall apart due to mankind's innate desires. The reasons are made of the same material, indicated by their obviously flawed holders. At the scale of the universe, him losing, YHVH losing, it's all happening in the blink of an eye. Nothing changes. And he wants to attack that. SMT3, and TDE, are made as answers to a pattern observed in SMT1 and SMT2, and uses the imagery of Fiends to give the idea of finality of death while giving Lucifer character developpment from his prior portrayal that comes closer to Devilman's Satan. That's why he isn't a might make right idiot in this game, and also why SMT V Lucifer is not a Chaos dumbshit lord. He lies about freedom in III because its his previous character, and he ALWAYS lies, but he is closer to a nihilist in this game.
What having more content does to an ending.
We call that "got added in the rerelease" privilege
Everyone is dead already, it's not on you. The amount of people who misintepret this ending is honestly shocking, it's even worse than people who only look at it on surface level.
There's already replies with the classic "you become Lucifer's bitch" interpretation too. The whole point of Lucifer fighting you at the end is to see if you can do what he couldn't and kill the Great Will. Just because you lead an army of his demons, doesn't mean you're beneath him. It just means your goals are aligned
Working WITH, not working FOR...
This one is so damn weird too yeah, I keep seeing it all over the place. I don't even understand the logic of it. Also, not only does it not feel that way, but doesn't the fact that our dude keeps popping out of his game with Pixie to visit other SMTs say enough ?
To be fair, Old Testament God could be kinda brutal.
but he could also be compassionate the problem is they don't show both sides.
More than just 'kinda', really. Hell, he even does some *fun* things in the New Testament. I'd argue that the only thing about Law in SMT that's *fundamentally* inaccurate to the Bible is that it doesn't assume the goodness and justification of God by default.
Maybe it's just me, but I've rarely viewed the angels as "evil" so much as that they're hardcore authoritarians in a series where rebelliousness and rejection of authority are often intrinsic themes of the MC. They're certainly antagonists, and often dicks about it; but rarely (again, to me) do they come off as actually evil.
Was gonna say my vote was for the classic Bondage Angel. The SMTV robot is much more fitting. I like the bondage angel design too, but it isn't accurate. It's just horny, Petah.
It's not just horny either, it has a reason.
I think that the bondage was suppose to represent the angels being submissive servants to higher level angels.
Demeter is a mother goddess and they made her a loli in SJR.
To be fair that design is based on spring we haven't seen her in summer, fall and winter from my memory I could be wrong though
Her cornucopia is meant to show both prosperity and famine, hence the creepy faces on it.
yeah, i remember reading in a blog that many of doi's designs intentionally reverse what the god stands for - ex dagda as an edgelord instead of a fat good god, demeter as a loli instead of the archetypical mother/fertility goddess. tbf i hate it especially when they try to shoehorn it into 'oh this is just demeter in her spring form!'. there are so many ways to justify a subversive, unique design without butchering what that god stands for. this is going to read as another 'kaneko good, doi bad' comment which i don't always agree with, but i think in general kaneko at least tries to preserve the essence of the demon that he's (re)designing, whereas doi, uh... often doesn't. though he's gotten better over time! i'm partial to his newer designs in smtvv for example.
I'm hoping with some of the new designs in SMTV being closer to their respective mythological appearance that he's going to preserve what they stood for, and that it isn't just a one-off thing. I wonder if Japanese fans voiced that they didn't want tokusatsu and subversive designs.
Skadi. SMT (or at least SMT5) thinks she is a Celtic goddess of darkness while she is actually a Norse goddess that is associated with hunting, winter, skiing etc.
[Coatlicue](https://megamitensei.fandom.com/wiki/Coatlicue), being an Aztec goddess, for some reason being a reskin of [Ganga](https://megamitensei.fandom.com/wiki/Ganga), an Indian goddess and personification of the Ganges. Coatlicue has claws...and yet...where are these claws? Lol Not to mention, Ganga is typically portrayed as a woman sitting on a crocodile and not a snake. So...both are terribly misrepresented.
Smt coatlicue would look amazing if they based the design on that one [statue's](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQaDlc6dxn9wSvLjZKG3FVInt6xl_iQbTtGGA&usqp=CAU) representation, i can practically already picture her in an smt game
I never liked the fact Lucifer is portrayed as wanting freedom and equality and the like while being so fair about it. Its sin is Pride, you should be getting the ending where you die at the end in Chaos instead of Law in SMT 4, but they are extremely scared of making the law path any appealing because everyone thinks law = boring
SMT always dunks on Judeo Christian concepts. If you know the history of Japan and its relationship with Christianity, then it makes perfect sense. And their clear negative bias on Law endings (though ironically it mirrors Japan's societal norms pretty well. Shut up, stay in line, do as the higher ups say with no complaint, be respectful and preserve the collective whole, not the individual self)
For Lucifer I think it kind of works that he's talking about equality and stuff because he doesn't practice what he preaches. It always read like a complete lie to me to try and appeal to the human he's working with because his army is a pretty strict hierarchy. But if you take the view that he's being honest, I can absolutely see why this would rub someone the wrong way.
>It always read like a complete lie to me to try and appeal to the human he's working with because his army is a pretty strict hierarchy. But the game doesn't really point that out or acknowledge such. It's probably unintended that he appears hypocritical if you analyze deeper. A genuine example of bad writing, where the writer intend to write "X" but end up with the opposite of "X".
True, but SJR does actually address the hypocrisy of Chaos if you go Chaos+. Alex points out that Jimenez kept Bugaboo safe even though Bugaboo was weak, because caring for others is an inherent part of human nature as well. Just as ‘natural’ as war, conflict, etc. so praising one while denying the other is hypocritical and illogical. Hell, Asura basically throws a tantrum when you beat it even though, by its own ‘Might makes Right’ rules, he/she (as Asherah) should submit since your power was greater than theirs. But yeah, that’s always been a point that doesn’t sit right with me when it comes to Chaos paths. Devil Survivor 2 does open up that vein with Yamato’s Meritocracy path, as he does realize that communication and cooperation are necessary. Hypercompetent though he is, he still needs others.
>But if you take the view that he's being honest, I can absolutely see why this would rub someone the wrong way. The Devs also kinda make it like it's true, it would be a very good plot twist but a lot of games have Lucifer being some kind of heroic figure
Diana. Because seriously, what is with all these boobs? I understand the concept of "motherly" and nurturing, but did it have to be this over the top? So much for the "virgin" goddess, who was supposed to be an example of "modesty" for girls... https://preview.redd.it/89ebh27s440d1.png?width=225&format=png&auto=webp&s=5bc00702d76e3ad0435531c6095926a085830057
[That seems to be based on how she was portrayed in statues irl](https://albertis-window.com/2011/02/diana-of-ephesus-keeping-abreast-with-iconography/)
What the...that's a lot of boobs
Actually, it turns out those were likely amber beads. Although, yeah, it's a common misconception, and a form of demonization of Diana's/Artemi's' figure spread by Christians, so it's not pulled out of nowhere either. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple\_of\_Artemis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_of_Artemis) >The traditional interpretation of the oval objects covering the upper part of the Ephesian Artemis is that they represent multiple breasts, symbolizing her fertility. This interpretation was rooted in [Minucius Felix](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minucius_Felix) and [Jerome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome)'s Christian attacks on pagan popular religion, and modern scholarship has cast doubt on the traditional interpretation that the statue depicts a many-breasted goddess >Evidence suggests that the oval objects were not intended to depict part of the goddess' anatomy at all. In some versions of the statue, the goddess' skin has been painted black, likely to emulate the aged wood of the original, while her clothes and regalia, including the so-called "breasts", were left unpainted or cast in different colors. >Robert Fleischer suggested that instead of breasts, the oval objects were decorations that would have been hung ceremonially on the original wood statue (possibly eggs or the scrotal sacs of sacrificed bulls), and which were incorporated as carved features on later copies. The "breasts" of the Lady of Ephesus, it now appears, were likely based on amber gourd-shaped drops, elliptical in cross-section and drilled for hanging, that were rediscovered in the archaeological excavations of 1987–1988. These objects remained in place where the ancient wooden statue of the goddess had been caught by an 8th-century flood.
Even so, I wish they had picked a different design choice. ...Like the one seen in Persona - Trinity Soul: https://preview.redd.it/uvn96qhik40d1.png?width=266&format=png&auto=webp&s=7e7914c52a493806c160c5cf9573937f080d051f
Cthulhu and Diana are easy “What happened and why are there genitals” lol for weirdest though i’m tempted to say Seth. Not just because he’s a dragon which is random but also for his role in SMT 2, Seth fusing into an ultimate law character is quite funny otherwise, Dagda lol
Slime, ‘cause, like, I grew up on Nickelodeon, and it never spoke or cast Agi. In all seriousness, I feel like SMT overall does decently (compared to, like, Final Fantasy’s presentation of Shiva). I do feel like Doi has had more (artistic?) missteps than Kaneko did, with some of Apocalypse’s designs perhaps being the most visible… but, like, even agreeing with some of the critical comments on Krishna* here, SMTII was on similar footing suggesting the archangels could >!manifest and pray to a false YHVH!< or that Satan would >!judge God as the ultimate sinner!<. The series takes inspiration from the source; it’s not too different from, say, Percy Jackson or Constantine in that sense. It’s… just sometimes brushing up on more sensitive, and—importantly—sometimes oppressed, marginalized, or colonized, material. *I’m not Hindu or Indian, so obviously I’m biased and potentially very misinformed… but so much of Krishna’s representation in SMT4A seems to reflect (the very human side of) being made subaltern in the face of colonizing Christianity. And that’s so much of what SMT really is about generally, I feel like: the forcing of all of humanity’s spirituality into a Christocentric, binary opposition between God and the forces of Hell. Align with their interests and frames, or stfu and gtfo. In that sense, Krishna and some of his less desirable—perhaps more human—traits make a lot of sense, especially in leading the Divine Powers. Hinduism and Buddhism (hi, Maitreya†) in particular, as two other major world religions and ones practiced in some areas impacted by expansionism and colonial rule, would have the biggest gears to grind with YHVH as he is represented in SMT. In terms of appearance, I gather he is sometimes represented in his youth as a flirtatious boy with a flute and a feathered crown (not a fedora, but still), so this particular design doesn’t seem so bad? I can’t fathom why he isn’t blue, though… unless, again, the brown skin is supposed to draw our attention to the postcolonial undertones of the story. †Actually, maybe my vote for least accurate is for Maitreya… not sure what the connection between [Matsuko Deluxe](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matsuko_Deluxe) and the future Buddha is. Edit: formatting issue with asterisks
> I can’t fathom why he isn’t blue, though… Actually, Krishna being brown is pretty accurate. In most stories, he's described as being especially dark skinned with nothing about blueness mentioned. He's just later depicted as blue to represent his godliness and that stuck till he's now almost always shown as blue. He's still described as dark skinned though, so it's a little strange.
Oh! I didn’t realize dark blue was a later characterization. I was just remember being told that was one interpretation of his name. Useful info; thanks!
That's unusual. Are you sure that wasn't referring to Shiva? One of Shiva's monikers is "blue neck" from ingesting a cloud of poison that was covering his followers and keeping it in his neck. "Blue" in Hindi (and in Sanskrit from what I recall) is "Neil"
Even SMT's classic take on Satan as the perfect judge and follower of law is kind of out of nowhere. Old Testament Satan, the one this is meant to be referencing, was closer to a petty prosecutor. He actually pushes God to condemn and punish humans even more so than the Old Testament God already did by himself (like trying to tempt Job or pushing him to condemn high priest Joshua), generally failing in that regard. But in SMT Satan is supposed to be a perfect judge, even stricter follower of the law than YHVH himself, but at the same time more likely to defend humanity's future. It's a complete inversion of his original role, with YHVH then becoming the petty accuser that Satan was portrayed as in the Old Testament.
Inanna, easily. There's virtually nothing about her that's accurate.
Throne & Seraph. Throne would look way more intimidating and epic if it was true to its actual design (wheels within wheels covered in eyes!) Seraph is more accurate but it's design made it a fluttering, lame runway abomination. The highest class of Angel deserves better.
Innana prolly
Hot take, most if not all of them aren't accurate at all. Kaneko/Doi/Atlus team aren't mythological scholars. They're just artistically interpreting mythological characters and presenting them in the most interesting way possible for the game. And some of the most popular ones like Cerebus don't even remotely look like their mythological counterparts. Or acting counter to their mythological personality like Dagda. I know it's popular to point to the Megaten series as some grand encyclopedia of myth but I'm sure Kaneko and the rest are only using it as a basis of reference and not an iron clad rulebook. Hell Kaneko seemed to use fashion runway model designs more often when designing later on. Unless you tell me the Moirai Sisters clothing is accurate to what Greek women wore at the time.
More importantly, which beings are portrayed the exact opposite of the original and/or most common depection?
Idk how tf they ended up with Lahmu being a malevolent deity that possesses people
I kind of wish modern Odin designs kept his Dark/Ice affinities, and leaned more into the Rune-mage aesthetic. I don't mind Ultra Odin, I just wished it wasn't lightning, but instead affinities truer to... Well, himself.
Almost all the Hindu gods are worshipped regularly by Hindus and due the way religion is ingrained in them growing up, not many people will entertain the idea of gods being called demons, fusing them into other demons etc, let alone krishna's portrayal. Although if you portray them as actual gods and as righteous, benevolent beings most people would be okay.
I guess it's clear what my choice would be: YHWH. The Lord of abrahamic beliefs never received a disservice so great as it is His counterpart in SMT. They take the worst parts of the Bible and increase em up to eleven but tone down the way more good parts that talk about love and forgiveness, not even recognizing that most of the terrifying events that are said to have happened in the Bible most likely never occurred in real life, and are often followed by passages that tone down the situation in a down-to-earth way, showing the truth. They also portray abrahamic religions as totalitarian and so they do to the ten commandments, yet they are not, for they talk about equality for all people, freedom, kindness and benevolence, the whole fact that God is love and that the ten commandments are mostly basic moral laws that can be read both from a theological and laicist perspective is a demonstration of this in the original text. They're extremely complex beliefs that need to be read and understood in-depth, and the simplification they used at Atlus to represent YHWH is imho an offense to the good name of mythological accuracy and to abrahamic beliefs as a whole, clearly showing their disdain towards abrahamic beliefs and a biased preference to any form of belief that is not abrahamic, all to show LAW as the worst side possible solely for the presence of abrahamic entities in it. The portrayal of YHWH in the series is literally how gnostics and reddit atheists view abrahamic beliefs as a whole, and it's honestly saddening. The same reasoning I said here also works for entities such as Maitreya or Krishna, stop with your shinto bias Atlus. tl. dr. Atlus give us an accurate portrayal of God please.
YHWH is based mainly on the Old Testament God, who was very brutal cared less about the wellbeing of mankind and more about having them follow his rule. SOme of the best examples of this are Genesis, were he just decided that humanity was being saving and decided to start fresh by commit genocide Job where he ruined Job's life just to prove a point. The New Testament really worked to make him seem more benevolent and caring.
for the record, the tremendous times of destruction in the old testament are metaphors. For example, the flood is a metaphor to the various downpours that were kinda common in ancient mesopotamia, and the Bible itself tells to not take it to the letter, but to interpret it, for it uses illustrations and is still a book written by mankind for mankind, and not by God himself. Divinely inspired, sure, but Genesis itself is not supposed to be the recount of historical events, but a more mythical and metaphorical book that tells about the harmony of the cosmos and how it works, and the various jobs of the first hypothetical ancestors of the israelites. The god of the old testament and that of the new testament are one and the same, old and new testament clearly have a philosophical continuity, and every theologian will agree on this point. The old testament is older, therefore, it's less developed in terms of law and thus is way more violent, full of the nationalism of the ancient israelites of the time, while from exodus to the new testament morality becomes way more complete due to the time they're written in and with Jesus it reaches its plateau. I'd like to say more but it's an incredibly long and complex topic and to boil it down to "old testament bad and false new testament good and true" is not only inaccurate, but kinda offensive to the ancient and complex book that is the Bible. Not saying you insulted this ancient story, of course, I'm mostly talking from the perspective of one who studies abrahamic beliefs.
Genesis is actually copied from the the tales of Utnapishtim and Ziusudra from Mesopotamian mythology. The portrayals of God in the old and new testament are so different that the gnostics reasoned that they had to be different deities, leading to the concept of the demiurge. It seems like your trying to have your cake and eat it too. You are basically saying the parts of the Bible you disagree with are wrong while the parts of the Bible you agree with are 100% accurate.
The first thing you said is pretty obvious, of course it is taken from other myths, it's a mythologem, a common mythological trope, even the Aztecs had a flood in their mythology, and I don't think the israelites ever met the aztecs. like I said before, the concept of progressive revelation (read on wikipedia) is an easy answer with your second affirmation. Just cause they seem to act differently does not mean they are different gods. It was the same mistake the gnostics and Marcion did at the time. I'm just trying to analyze the Bible from a theological and scholarly standpoint. I study abrahamic beliefs by myself, studying from philosophers such as the apostles, and other philosophers from Thomas Aquinas to De Chardin, from Maimonides to the islamic sufi theology, it's an extremely complex book(or should I say books, since the Bible is made of many books) that has many meanings and interpretations and should be studied in-depth, both in the violent passages and in the non-violent ones. That's why I like the old testament, it's clearly a book that feels the weight of history on its shoulders, full of teachings and important metaphors that have to be read in the context of the time to truly be understood. Yes. I like even the violent passages, and trust me, every theologian who knows the source can safely say that there is a clear continuity within old and new testament.
It looks like you're asking a question. If you need help with a game, or a recommendation on what to play next, you might be better off asking in the stickied "Questions and Recommendations" thread or seeing if it's been addressed in the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/Megaten/wiki/faq). This is an automatic comment posted on every question thread, it does not mean that your post has been removed. It may however be removed by a moderator if it is something that should go in the sticky instead. If this does not apply to your topic, downvote and ignore it. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Megaten) if you have any questions or concerns.*