FANDOM


  • Ninten is 12 years old in Beginnings, taking place in 1985 according to 1+2. Ness is 13 in 199X. If the year is 1990, he would have been born when Ninten was 4, and if it's 1999, Ninten would be 13. Neither are exactly fatherly ages. Also 'Ana' is clearly a middle-aged woman in Earthbound. It's not possible.

      Loading editor
    • THANK YOU.

        Loading editor
    • There's the possibility of adoption.

        Loading editor
    • How does that change anything, they'd still be too young

        Loading editor
    • The Mother 2 novel also states that Ness's Mother's name is Rachel. No one ever talks about that and still insists on this stupid theory.

      That said while I do agree with the point that Ninten and Ana cannot be Ness's parents, here's a better explanation because you have some stuff wrong.

      Earthbound is ambiguously set in the 1990's, and Beginnings is ambiguously set in the 1980's. Even if one were to argue that the first game is set in 1980 and the second in 1999, that would make the 12 year old Ninten and Ana only 31 by EarthBound. It is the Famicom version of Beginnings that concretely says the game takes place in 1988, but Beginnings says simply "80 years have passed since then" and gives us no year. But then although Mother 1+2 retained other changes that the English prototype that was eventually released as Beginnings made, it kept that the game explicitly takes place in 1988. Either way, very implausible. But most importantly, do people also really think Ana, the daughter of a pastor, would have a biological child with Ninten at just 17 years old?

        Loading editor
    • Yeah we should probably remove those.

        Loading editor
    • Ok seems like I got some stuff wrong, but the point still stands

        Loading editor
    • Actually, here's a new spin.

      The first game is in 1985 and the second is in 199X. However, if we treat X as the roman numeral, making 1190-10, or 2000, which is a reasonable time period in which Ninten would maryt Anna and produce a child. That child would be Ness.

        Loading editor
    • Who would ever write a number as a blend of two alphabets? If the number was specifically 2000, they would have written 2000. The X is supposed to represent an unknown or unspecified digit. Also, Ninten and Ana would be 14 - STILL not enough to legally do anything.

        Loading editor
    • Bugfriend wrote:
      The Mother 2 novel also states that Ness's Mother's name is Rachel. No one ever talks about that and still insists on this stupid theory.

      That said while I do agree with the point that Ninten and Ana cannot be Ness's parents, here's a better explanation because you have some stuff wrong.

      Earthbound is ambiguously set in the 1990's, and Beginnings is ambiguously set in the 1980's. Even if one were to argue that the first game is set in 1980 and the second in 1999, that would make the 12 year old Ninten and Ana only 31 by EarthBound. It is the Famicom version of beginnings that concretely says the game takes place in 1988, but Mother 1+2 and Beginnings that says simply "80 years have passed since then" and gives us no year. Either way, very implausible. But most importantly, do people also really think Ana, the daughter of a pastor, would have a biological child with Ninten at just 17 years old?

      to be fair though teens having kids were actually pretty often in the 80's and 90's so it isn't really that farfetched to say despite her being a pastor. Things happen and love is love in a way and since the date was retconned to the early 80's if we go by what the lore saying the events of George and Maria happened in the early 1900's then yes Ninten and Ana could still be his parents even if its at age 17. It's better than that impossible saying that Ninten is Ness especially considering their ages and how Ness' dad gave him his hat. Their style is extremely similar too and the reference his father made to being a hero could easily be a callback to Ninten's adventure. Plus Itoi wants us to use our imagination so if we were to go by the orginal date, you could easily say that time travel was involved which could make sense for the fact that Giygas conquers the world in the original timeline.

        Loading editor
    • Pokemoniac wrote:
      Who would ever write a number as a blend of two alphabets? If the number was specifically 2000, they would have written 2000. The X is supposed to represent an unknown or unspecified digit. Also, Ninten and Ana would be 14 - STILL not enough to legally do anything.

      Who would ever design a sentient pile of filth as a boss, that had to be placated with honey made from flies? Itoi, that's who. Besides, it would make sense, seeing as Earthbound appears to be more like modern America that anything going on within the nineties over in the States. 

      Secondly, regardless of the retcon of both versions that changed 1980(American) and 1988(Japanese) to 1985, by interpetng 199X as 2000 makes it plausible. While i certainly do subscribe to this theory for that reason, plus the fact that Ninten and Ana both have PSI (due to George introducing it via stealing alien research.) , and Ninten's reference, Ninten's appearance, Ninten and Ana's dance on Mount Itoi...

      Thirdly, about legality..... Do you think love gives a damn about that? Plius there's also the fact that the teen pregnacy epidemic was at its height around the eighties and nineties, so it wouldn't have been too far of a stretch if Ness was born around 1987. Also, why does it matter if Ana is the daughter of the pastor? My friend is uber religious and will still stab somone with his knife if he gets mugged.  Just because someone is religious does not mean they're above law breaking.

        Loading editor
    • Bugfriend wrote:
      The Mother 2 novel also states that Ness's Mother's name is Rachel. No one ever talks about that and still insists on this stupid theory.

      That said while I do agree with the point that Ninten and Ana cannot be Ness's parents, here's a better explanation because you have some stuff wrong.

      Earthbound is ambiguously set in the 1990's, and Beginnings is ambiguously set in the 1980's. Even if one were to argue that the first game is set in 1980 and the second in 1999, that would make the 12 year old Ninten and Ana only 31 by EarthBound. It is the Famicom version of beginnings that concretely says the game takes place in 1988, but Mother 1+2 and Beginnings that says simply "80 years have passed since then" and gives us no year. Either way, very implausible. But most importantly, do people also really think Ana, the daughter of a pastor, would have a biological child with Ninten at just 17 years old?

      The novel, most fortunately for the theory, is not considered canon. Yeet.

        Loading editor
    • I've unsubscribed from this thread no one talk to me ever again

        Loading editor
    • As you wish.

        Loading editor
    • Boysmith2003 wrote:

      The novel, most fortunately for the theory, is not considered canon. Yeet.

      Even so, that doesn't refute the other thing I said about the timeline straight up not adding up.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, it does.
      Original game(pre retcon: 1980
      EarthBound (if we assume my theory is correct): 2000

      Difference: 20 years
      Age of Ness: 13
      Age of Ninten and Ana in Mother 1: 13
      Age of Ninten and Ana by the time they would have had Ness: 21
      Original game(post retcon): 1985
      EarthBound (if we assume my theory is correct): 2000

      Difference: 15 years
      Age of Ness: 13
      Age of Ninten and Ana in Mother 1: 13

      Age of Ninten and Ana by the time they would have had Ness: 15


      While it would have been unlikely, teen pregnancy was very common in the eighties, and reached it's peak around the early-to-mid eighties, as it began in the late seventies. So, regardless of age, it's still possible.

        Loading editor
    • Are you seriously convinced that Ana, who, might I remind you, is the daughter of a pastor, and cannotically highly religious and Christain, would have a child that young? "Possible" with what you said in a technicality, yes, in-character no. "Who gives a damn she's the daughter of a pastor" I do, because it is straight up out of character for her to have premarital sex, that's why, loves Ninten or not. Try reading a little bit about her in the encyclopedia.

      Boysmith2003 wrote:

      Secondly, regardless of the retcon of both versions that changed 1980(American) and 1988(Japanese) to 1985, by interpetng 199X as 2000 makes it plausible.

      What whoa what. Where does this come from!? There is no mention of 1985 in any version of the game whatsoever. Please enlighten me on where you heard 1985. 1988 is the Famicom version. Earthbound Zero (the NES prototype) and Beginnings AND Mother 1+2 (which are all identical apart from language) all do not mention a year. There's just the "In the early 1900s" and then "80 years have passed since then." You're grasping straws and pulling things out of your ass wherever you want just to "prove" this implausible theory.

      EDIT: Mother 1+2 actually says 1988 as well (I have checked), therefore the year being vague in the English version isn't a retcon. Because for this theory to work, Ness has to have been born in 1987, the theory is thus noncanon.

        Loading editor
    • No i'm not, if you read interviews from the localizers, they say that the Japanesze version of EarthBound Zero say 1988, but they changed it to 1980. Then the game was scrapped and shelved. Then in EarthBound beginnings (virtual console release) it says 1985. You might want to pay attention to the game dialogue

        Loading editor
    • https://youtu.be/x2hUZ6CtWi0?t=220

      Okay, sure. Here's footage from the VC release, trust me I checked, the description of the video says it's being played on Wii U VC. It says "80 years have passed since then", not 1985, just like the English Prototype which it is identical to as I said earlier. You might want to pay attention to the game dialogue.

      EDIT: Mother 1+2 actually says 1988 as well, therefore the year being vague in the English version isn't a retcon. Because for this theory to work, Ness has to have been born in 1987, the theory is thus noncanon.

        Loading editor
    • So the "proof" that Ness' mother is named Ana is from some author in Japan, not Shigesato Itoi, who got permission to write an adaptation, which we only know about because it's being fan-translated into english? Doesn't sound that reliable of a source. Besides, it's common for novel adapatations to assign names to otherwise unnamed characters for the sake of the book, that doesn't actually make them the character's real name (there have in fact been several instances of this happeneing). Writers take many such liberties when adapting certain media into a book.

        Loading editor
    • Ice-jin wrote:
      So the "proof" that Ness' mother is named Ana is from some author in Japan, not Shigesato Itoi, who got permission to write an adaptation, which we only know about because it's being fan-translated into english? Doesn't sound that reliable of a source. Besides, it's common for novel adapatations to assign names to otherwise unnamed characters for the sake of the book, that doesn't actually make them the character's real name (there have in fact been several instances of this happeneing). Writers take many such liberties when adapting certain media into a book.

      Rachel, not Ana. (was that a typo?)

      Even then, there's still the whole Mother 1+2 retaining 1988 as the year despite retaining other changes the English prototype that was eventually released as EarthBound Beginnings made, which means the game does indeed cannotically take place in 1988, which alone invalidates the entire theory. The latest Earthbound can take place (which itself is a stretch) is the year 2000, Ness is 13, he would have had to have been born in 1987, which is before Ninten and Ana had met in the first place. I don't understand how and why so many people still insist on this. Saying 199X is the year 2000 is a stretch by itself, but even then it's not enough because the game explicitly takes place in 1988, which Ness would have had to have been born in 1987. Not only did Ninten and Ana not even meet yet at the time, but they're 12 years old, 11 at that point, and Ana is the daughter of a pastor. Why would she of all people ever have premartial sex? How much does this all need to be repeated? Ninten and Ana are NOT Ness's parents.

        Loading editor
    • I was just pointing out how you can't use such an unrelible source as "proof".

        Loading editor
    • I still think Ness could be another descendant of Gorge, meaning Ness and Ninten could be part of the same family but in another way, for example if both of their dads were siblings, that'd make them cousins, or maybe their dads are cousins. I don't have proof but it's the best I got

        Loading editor
    • I'm Pretty Sure The Two Of Them Are Identical Cousins.

        Loading editor
    • PSI Seven
      PSI Seven removed this reply because:
      Off topic
      00:45, June 10, 2019
      This reply has been removed
    • 199x is 2000! x is a roman number!

        Loading editor
    • NessboyNoah wrote:
      199x is 2000! x is a roman number!

      Nobody writes years like that. X means that it's any number that can fit there, so 0-9. 

        Loading editor
    • Y'all, it's been debunked. Stop blowing up my notification feed.

        Loading editor
    • Boysmith2003 wrote:
      Y'all, it's been debunked. Stop blowing up my notification feed.

      You can always unfollow threads

        Loading editor
    • PSI Seven
      PSI Seven removed this reply because:
      Offensive
      15:36, July 7, 2019
      This reply has been removed
    • Wow nice going deleting my comment Boysmith. Ninten being Ness’s father has been debunked.

        Loading editor
    • NXGN wrote:
      Wow nice going deleting my comment Boysmith. Ninten being Ness’s father has been debunked.

      I deleted that comment because it was offensive.

        Loading editor
    • Really? It was offensive? Come on dude.

        Loading editor
    • PSI Seven wrote:
      NXGN wrote:
      Wow nice going deleting my comment Boysmith. Ninten being Ness’s father has been debunked.
      I deleted that comment because it was offensive.

      Uhhh, what was in it?



      ..Just curious.

        Loading editor
    • Bob1667 wrote:
      PSI Seven wrote:
      NXGN wrote:
      Wow nice going deleting my comment Boysmith. Ninten being Ness’s father has been debunked.
      I deleted that comment because it was offensive.
      Uhhh, what was in it?



      ..Just curious.

      NXGN called Boysmith an idiot because he was saying Ninten is Ness's father, which is pretty offensive so... yeah.

        Loading editor
    • Hey,  I didn't delete that. I'm no admin.

        Loading editor
    • PSI Seven wrote:
      Bob1667 wrote:
      PSI Seven wrote:
      NXGN wrote:
      Wow nice going deleting my comment Boysmith. Ninten being Ness’s father has been debunked.
      I deleted that comment because it was offensive.
      Uhhh, what was in it?


      ..Just curious.

      NXGN called Boysmith an idiot because he was saying Ninten is Ness's father, which is pretty offensive so... yeah.

      Mate. I can handle being called an idiot. I've been called worse. It's got no effect on me.

        Loading editor
    • Boysmith2003 wrote:

      Mate. I can handle being called an idiot. I've been called worse. It's got no effect on me.

      Regardless it's still against this wiki's rules

        Loading editor
    • So what? Stil doesn’t excuse this dude from saying lies

        Loading editor
    • NXGN wrote:
      So what? Stil doesn’t excuse this dude from saying lies

      1. Do you know what a lie is? I believed in a theory that was debunked. You fool, I did not lie. Think before you type.

      2. While I agree insults should be thrown when warranted, this is not one of those situations.

        Loading editor
    • NXGN wrote:
      So what? Stil doesn’t excuse this dude from saying lies

      This is honestly just entertaining at this point. Opinions aren't lies.

        Loading editor
    • PSI Seven wrote:
      NXGN wrote:
      So what? Stil doesn’t excuse this dude from saying lies
      This is honestly just entertaining at this point. Opinions aren't lies.

      Good. embrace the chaos.

        Loading editor
    • But they can be overpowered

        Loading editor
    • Does that statement have any bearing on this conversation?

        Loading editor
    • Boysmith2003 wrote:
      Does that statement have any bearing on this conversation?

      I dunno.

      BTW, can someone close this an the other thread about Ninten being the father? It's been debunked.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.