Petscop – Memories Inside The Game – Part 3 (Character Evaluation 2)

Welcome back to part 3 of our Petscop analysis series. Please get comfortable back in your seat. Last time, we looked through each character within Petscop to evaluate their situation, aside from a couple of particularly mysterious ones. Today, on the Panopticon Theatre, we will be going through those characters that we haven't covered yet, and trying to work out what we can about what exactly is going on with them. Before we hop in to the rest of the characters, I want to make a quick sidestep

and add some additional information to the previous video, specifically based on this comment from terminal. There's three sections of this comment I'll address very quickly: Please pause to read the comment. This is a potential alternative read of that scene, and if we read it that way I do agree with the second part completely – the balloon colours were something I didn't address in the video, but are certainly another interesting colour related element. The blue balloon, blue tools and blue t

ext connect this to Anna talking, and we'll talk a little about the tools later in this video. The two calendars in this scene are green and red. These represent, respectively, 1997 and likely 2017. Both calendars indicate the same day, November 12th, which in 1997 is the day Care returns home. I personally think the birthday scene represents both events from November 12th 1997, with Care returning home, and November 12th 2017, when Paul and Jill argued about the disks, at the same time. Yes, it

doesn't mention the looking-in-the-mirror, but it doesn't say this happened immediately after she returned home, so it could be something that happened later, maybe even shortly after this scene – she did just get home, after all. And even more notably, Rainer states very clearly that he's writing this on July 10th – whilst Care is still missing. Maybe the bathroom thing never happened at all, and Rainer is either predicting what will happen or what he thinks will happen. It's pretty unclear. S

econdly: And this additional response from el d: You're both right. I had in mind my own interpretation that Rainer was working with Marvin, and to me it doesn't make sense why he'd try and rebirth someone without Marvin's direction. Actually, it still doesn't – there's very little to explain why the rebirth attempt on Belle was made at all. I think there's multiple ways to interpret Rainer's actions, and my interpretation was a slightly less harsh view on him. There's a completely different int

erpretation that reads as Rainer not being coerced by Marvin at all, and all his knowledge coming from him doing research and investigating. Personally, I can't see how he'd know so much from just research, unless either Marvin kept very detailed records, or Rainer was just assuming a lot of things. He is definitely an unreliable narrator, either way. But it certainly is true that we can't say for certain that Marvin had a hand in the Belle/Tiara rebirthing. And, finally: Again, this is an alter

native understanding. I however, personally disagree with it. It is certainly true that Rainer believes you can't come back from changing from the 'A' to B or NLM state. However, I do think Mike is actually, properly dead – for one, the text at his room reading 'Mike is not inside right now. He is dead.' This doesn't specify Mike A – it's referring to Mike as a whole. There's also too many other potential references to Mike's death for me to feel that it was metaphorical, such as the car and acc

ident references and the pet descriptors. There is a possibility that Mike did just vanish somewhere else and didn't return to the family after the incident that turned him from A to B/NLM, though. I don't think this take is wrong, exactly, just a different read of the situation. As always, YMMV. Thank you all for the comments – Petscop does have so, so many different ways you can read it, and I have really enjoyed hearing from other people and their different takes on certain elements. I also n

ever want to accidentally misrepresent something or provide misinformation, so if I do say something that is incorrect, absolutely please feel free to correct me and explain in the comments or in my Discord. Now, on to the characters. Lina Leskowitz was 9 years old when she allegedly disappeared in 1977. An apparently unmarked grave was made for her – at least, according to Rainer. And also according to Rainer, Marvin attempted to lure her back home with a birthday party, sitting on a bench with

a cake. The party room we see is likely for Lina, as she was 9 years old when she disappeared, and the view out the window is where her figure is seen sitting at the end. Our only real glimpse of Lina is the figure we see seemingly entangled in the machinery in the windmill, and her figure on the bench at the end. In the windmill she seems to be surrounded by a gathering of the pieces, the collectables we see Paul pick up throughout the series. Paul uses the white tool to gather these pieces, c

ausing the figure to disappear. These pieces seem tied to her in some way – especially the party-hat shaped one. The large cone-shaped thing in the school computer room makes a sound described in the closed captions as 'boss sound', and if you remember from the soundtrack video, the word 'boss' is associated with Lina. Also, when we see Lina at the end of soundtrack, she is shaped almost identically to these pieces. The machine in the school requires 1000 pieces to work, and this machine is tied

to Lina through the fact that it is intended to rebirth Care into her. I want to posit that these pieces represent gathering parts of Lina's extended story as you go through the game, and notably, you likely wouldn't be able to gather all 1000 pieces by yourself – Paul had exactly 500 at the end, and we know how deeply he'd explored the game, so it's likely 500 is the max available to a single player. Tiara also collected some, and we do see her pick up pieces Paul also picked up in his run. I

like to think this represents how Paul needs Belle's help to put all the 'pieces' of the story together, but that's very much a symbolism interpretation. Being able to see Lina seems to be an important thing, going off the multiple lines referencing that idea – 'They didn't see her' on her grave, and 'If you can see her, not everyone can', in Anna's letter. What that means, and what might have happened to Lina, are very, very contentious. So, rather than giving you a single theory, I'm going to

give you some of the major ideas about what could have happened to her, going from the most mundane, to the most supernatural, and give you the evidence for each. The first theory is the most straightforward and mundane – Lina is dead. She died at or near the windmill. A popular idea regarding how she died is that she somehow became entwined in the gears of the windmill, perhaps suggested by her figure being seen in the gears when Paul goes inside. It's possible this may have happened whilst pla

ying hide and seek with Marvin and Anna there, which would explain the lines about not being able to see her to an extent. Perhaps they were playing the game together, and Lina crawled into the gears, getting stuck there and being twisted up and killed? To make a slightly gross connection, perhaps the pieces that we know to be associated with Lina are meant to represent the pieces of her body? This may also explain the windmill 'disappearing' in a very mundane way – a child getting stuck in and

dying in a windmill would probably be grounds for it to be torn down by a local authority, as it would be considered a danger. That would explain why there's just a rock there in the present day when Paul and Belle look it up. The photo line – that Anna took one photo and both were there, then another with neither – isn't entirely explained by this, though. It's possible that both Anna and Marvin were so disturbed by the situation – it's a pretty gory death, especially for two children to see –

that both just believed in their trauma that Lina just up and disappeared, or to perhaps believe she was still alive, as we see with Marvin's birthday invitations. However, the photos being minutes apart wouldn't be explained, unless they went back later and just lost time in their memories due to the trauma. There is also the idea that the windmill itself never actually existed and is simply a metaphor – this is something we'll discuss later down the line. This would all connect with the recurr

ing themes of accidents, of imagery of gears, and of the persistent appearance of spinning – there are many objects, some directly associated with Lina, that appear to spin around, and there's also Rainer's mentioned disgust at Care's spinning that he comments on during the casket sequence. If Rainer knew what had happened to Lina, then it's pretty clear why that might make him feel a bit queasy to say the least. It doesn't, however, explain Rainer's accusatory 'what did you do?', or why he beli

eves she has a grave that Marvin knows the location of. Did Marvin perhaps remove her body after her death and bury it somewhere? Some people do connect the ideas of car accidents present in the game to Lina's death as well, but I personally don't see the connection there – it feels, at least to me, that the car accident, whatever it was, is connected to something else and probably happened a lot more recently than Lina's death, considering we can connect it to the orange car, which is almost ce

rtainly Anna's or Marvin's as we discussed in the previous video, and obviously neither of them would've been old enough to drive in 1977. It also kind of ignores the whole windmill thing. This theory, of course, doesn't explain the Soundtrack sequence. However, we can expand upon it a little to make it connect a little bit more: What if that all did happen, except Lina survived the whole incident at the windmill? This would of course be very traumatising for everyone involved. We know at least

Rainer's perception of trauma is that it changes a person's state from A – the neutral – to B and NLM, which are both traumatised states. In this case it's more likely to be B, as Lina doesn't necessarily have trauma relating to the idea of not being loved. Rainer doesn't believe you can come back from this state and become A again, which would at least explain her in-game grave – the grave isn't for Lina as a whole, but Lina A specifically. It doesn't necessarily explain why Rainer would believ

e Marvin knows of a real-world grave location, however, unless that grave doesn't actually contain her body. As for being able to see her – what if Lina left sometime following this incident, breaking contact with the people involved – those being Marvin and Anna. However, she still maintained contact with the rest of the family. This would explain Anna's wording. In this take, Lina has deliberately severed contact with the two of them at least, likely doing so to help herself heal from her trau

ma or due to other issues, perhaps Marvin's response to the incident. Other people can see her – visit her, contact her, etc – but Marvin and Anna specifically cannot 'see' her, not in the literal sense but more in a social one. It would explain why it seems neither of them believe she died. So, the rebirth is not to bring Lina back from the dead in this case, but instead to recreate Lina A in Care. This idea would also explain the Soundtrack sequence – Lina's still alive, so it makes at least a

little more sense. As for why Paul and perhaps Belle would be considered her children, there's a possibility that Lina adopted the two, possibly some time after the Care kidnapping incident. We never knew who adopted Belle, so it's possible Lina adopted her in the first place. We can be pretty sure the new life letter isn't from Anna as it doesn't contain her typing quirks, so it could be from Lina. However, it doesn't make sense as to why she would call her Tiara in this letter, so I think per

haps Belle was initially adopted by a different Leskowitz, then 'rescued' by Lina. Likewise with Paul later on, Lina may have adopted him some time after the kidnapping – if the incident came to light publicly, it wouldn't be surprising if Paul was removed from his parent's care and placed into the care of a family member, such as Lina. It's possible this did happen, as looking at the counsellor scene, we can see there's a possibility that authority figures may have investigated Paul's situation

in an attempt to help him when seeing that he had some sort of face injury. 'I hope you can find your real house'. The next Lina theory is that Anna and Lina are the same person, or swapped positions. There are some variations on this theory, so let's go into it. One variation on this theory, a more mundane take, is that Lina and Anna were twins. Something happened at the windmill resulting in Anna dying, perhaps in the way we discussed before, and Lina decided to take her place. Why? There cou

ld be a few reasons – perhaps the death was not an accident – if Lina was in love with Marvin, perhaps, and wanted Anna out of the picture, or Marvin killed Anna and forced Lina to pretend to be her? They were children at the time, so a petty squabble of some sort resulting in one of their accidental deaths is not out of the question. Another variation is more supernatural, and it involves the idea that only one of the sisters existed in the first place, assumedly Lina. There's two sub-variation

s of this theory – one is that somehow Lina was rebirthed into Anna, the other is that Anna and Lina were variations of each other from different universes. The rebirthing version of this theory suggests that, as implied, Lina was rebirthed and became Anna. This relies on the idea that rebirthing is an actual process that works, which as I've stated before I don't think is actually the case, but let's assume so for a minute. This process at this time was likely accidental, and was also probably

where Marvin got the idea for rebirthing, though what it would involve is unclear – we know rebirthing typically seems to involve music in some way, and we don't have any connection between music and the windmill. Another possibility here is that the rebirthing here is a different process, still involving trauma, such as perhaps again something like getting stuck in the windmill gears. What I'm calling rebirthing here is more of a change of identity, with Lina 'becoming' Anna in the sense that t

he trauma of this incident was so great that her entire personality and identity changed into a different person, that being Anna. Something that could support this theory is that the Lina we see at the end of the soundtrack video contains the colour blue, which is Anna's colour, as well as Lina's pink. As for the idea of different universes swapping Lina out – it's going to be hard to discuss this particular variant of Lina's story without fully explaining the rotation and multi-universe theory

, which I want to do fully in the next video. But the gist of it is – the reason things can happen like the windmill disappearing and the door being both open and closed is that at least two different universes or timelines have converged at points, crossing over their elements into the main universe of Petscop. Something happened at the windmill that caused Lina to be pushed into another timeline, along with the windmill, leaving Anna and Marvin in the primary timeline. Occasionally, something

from the other timeline slips through, or perhaps synchronises, which is why people can only see Lina sometimes, much like the layered DEMO and gameplay footage. The Shadow Monster state seems to somehow affect the ability to see things from the other timeline, which is why Paul could see the windmill when in that state. We'll again, go into a little more depth with this later. So, those are the major theories about what happened to Lina. Personally, if you were to ask my opinion, I'd say the ex

panded first theory is the most logical – it seems to have the most and clearest evidence, and basically covers all bases. I don't disagree necessarily with the third theory, that Lina is in another timeline now, though I do have a few issues with this one, which are issues with the rotation theory as a whole, and as such I'll discuss them more when we go over the theory in the next video. Generally, I'll say that theory feels much more like a relic of early Petscop theorising, when we had a lot

less information, and theories were often more complex and rooted in the supernatural to cover for that. It also doesn't explain things like how Paul could be considered her son. As for the Lina-is-Anna theory... personally I feel there's very little evidence for that one. What do you think? Do you have other perceptions on what happened to Lina? I know there are a few other theories, but they're a lot less agreed upon, and if I covered every single theory in this video we'd be here for hours.

Lina is really the hardest character to explain, as evidenced by the fact that her section of video is more than twice as long as anyone else's. I'm not sure it's possible to put together a completely cohesive and foolproof answer for her story. But nonetheless, she clearly haunts the story of Petscop more than any other character. There are two characters within the game of Petscop who's existence is a little bit of a conundrum, and those are Tiara and in-game Marvin. Let's discuss them a littl

e. In-game Marvin, who I will henceforth distinguish from IRL Marvin by calling him 'IG Marvin', could easily be controlled by IRL Marvin, if we assume the game has some form of multiplayer functionality. This can be supported by the fact that in the 'here I come' scene, when Marvin assumedly goes to Paul's real location, his character completely stops moving –if they were distinct entities, then IG Marvin would still probably move around and do stuff during this sequence. However, the same can'

t necessarily be said for Tiara. Tiara and Belle are very obviously connected. The implication seems to be that Tiara is who Belle was intended to be rebirthed into. However, some form of Tiara still exists within the game, despite the fact that the rebirthing was not completed. Let's have a look at some facts we have. The line 'Tiara says young people can be psychologically damaged “beyond rebirthing”.' from Petscop 3 is interesting, as Tiara's words here seem pretty adult, in contrast to the a

ge Belle would've likely been in this time. It also seems to imply that Rainer has spoken with or at least heard words from Tiara, and that Tiara knows what rebirthing is. The red Tool, when asked the 'Do you remember being born?' question, associates it to Tiara, so clearly that text is directed to her. Tiara again mentions this in the soundtrack video. So the idea of being born is somehow relevant to her. Marvin, in Petscop 15, refers to Tiara as Belle, but she's insistent that she is Tiara, c

learly putting a separation between them. Paul refers to the figure as 'the Tiara character', again distinguishing her from Belle. Petscop 12 is possibly the most interesting bit of information regarding Tiara. Though the text is directed to Belle, I personally suspect the player here is not Belle, but Tiara. I want to walk you through my thoughts here. The text says that the game has been running for around 17.5 years. I don't think Belle was playing the game that whole time, mainly due to the

fact that we know Paul has been in contact with her. As we discussed in Belle's section, I suspect this timer started shortly after the rebirth attempt on her. I also want to point out to you the text saying Belle is 'free', and has potentially been 'rescued'. What does that all mean? Well, I want to posit to you the suggestion that Tiara, the one playing the game in Petscop 12, is not a real person. Or rather, she's an AI, consciousness, or even recording developed somehow based on Belle's cont

roller inputs, and likely influenced or stored during her rebirthing. Petscop 13 calls the game a 'growing organism', and tells us that the players controller inputs may be being collected. Belle was seemingly the smartest tester of the game, the one able to solve most puzzles where others couldn't, so perhaps her data was stored in the game and left to develop for 17.5 years, long enough that the character formed from this data not only learned how to play the game itself, but also developed it

's own identity – Tiara, the person Belle was intended to be. However, Marvin and possibly Rainer still see the data as Belle, as it was her inputs used to create it, and Marvin at least doesn't accept her new stated identity – a common theme with this series and with Marvin. So she's been stuck in the Quitter's Room, slowly developing, until something happens to free her, perhaps something Paul is doing. Tiara would probably remember being born, in the sense of her remembering her creation. The

re are two points of contention to this theory. One is the end of the soundtrack video. The Tiara character says things to Paul that if this theory was true, would not have happened to Tiara, but to Belle, after Tiara was created, unless Tiara somehow found these things out or is being somehow metaphorical. Of course, we can't be 100% sure when the events she's referring to would have happened, so they also could've been from before Tiara's creation. The other point is that in Petscop 22, when t

he Tiara figure comes on screen, the real-world Belle, who Paul is talking to, seems to stop responding to him, implying some connection between them. It's possible that IRL Belle is able to access the console that Tiara is running from still and can take control of her again, but it's unclear. What do you think? There's also the hidden 'Push Bed' message, which was written using the Nifty function, which we know Tiara has access to, and she or Belle are the most likely candidates to have writte

n that. This would imply either Tiara has knowledge of the real world locations, or Belle is again potentially accessing the console. There is also the possibility that IG Marvin, like Tiara, may be a recording or AI. Another potential answer is that Belle and Tiara are indeed distinct entities, but someone else, another child perhaps, was rebirthed into Tiara instead of Belle. There's not much evidence to support this, again, and it still doesn't explain why Belle stops responding when Tiara co

mes on screen. It would perhaps more explain the 'Marvin picks up tool hurts me when PlayStation on' line, as we don't know otherwise how he'd be able to hurt Tiara in any way if she was in fact an AI. If she was a living person, then she could be trapped in one of the rooms much like Paul may have been, explaining why she'd know about the secret door. However, since Marvin and Rainer insist on calling her Belle, it does imply she did start out as Belle. These two characters may have even less c

lear information than even Lina. There's not much consensus or even theorising that I've seen regarding them, particularly Tiara. Do you have any other ideas about what they could be? Let me know in the comments. Now that we've done our best to go through every character, let's look at colour associations and the Tools. Here's a list of all the colours and their associated characters, as far as I figure. There are obviously many instances of these colours appearing, and we can't go through them

all here, but if you rewatch the series you may want to keep an eye out for when they appear. A couple of interesting points: Pink may be associated with Tiara, as there are both pink and purple stripes on her and Belle's egg, and Tiara seems to be the primary user of the Nifty function, which produces pink text. However, her name is nonetheless written in purple. Orange is an interesting one as it doesn't appear to be associated with a specific character very clearly, but it appears in a couple

places, such as the text in the counsellor scene when they say the save name, 'strange situation', and is also the colour of the prominent car. Rainer is a curious one, and I've seen a lot of people associate him with the colour white, but I actually think he's more likely associated with black. White is used for the general game text, yes, but descriptive text, which is very directly from Rainer, is black. A black shadowy figure can be seen in front of the presents during the scene where Raine

r gives the game to Anna, possibly representing him. Also, much like the teal tool being dipped in black paint, he helped paint Anna's walls black to hide the stencils. I have an additional theory about the colour white. It's also the colour of the cubes that represent connected areas, which may be an intriguing link. Interestingly, and I haven't seen many people reference this, but these white boxes seem to mainly appear in places where something bad happened. For example, there's one in the ba

throom, where Rainer probably killed himself, and one in the shed with Care NLM, and one near the road where the car accident took place... most if not all of them are at sites of tragedy. The white tool specifically is the one used to interact with Lina in the windmill. I think the colour white might be connected to deaths – both actual deaths, and the deaths of certain 'states', such as the A state. As for the tools, there's a lot of discussion about what the shape might be. People have sugges

ted it could be an awl, a piano voicing tool, a pickaxe head, a cello, a gourd, some sort of metalworking tool... interestingly, the word for pickaxe in Romanian is 'târnăcop', and the garage computer was labelled with 'tarnacop', without the accents, and was apparently where the soundtrack was sourced from, though this seems to relate more to the machines than the tools. There's also the PlayStation development TOOL, a devkit for the PlayStation, though this is obviously not Petscop-tool shaped

. Honestly, I'm personally not sure it's meant to represent anything at all. It might just be a game mechanic, or even a placeholder asset, which would explain why it's in so many places with so many different functions. They are indeed used as general tools. I wonder if Tool is less of a name, and more of an identifier. It's not Tool, it's a tool. This would make more sense with the pink tool's line 'Marvin picks up tool hurts me when PlayStation on'. The phrase drops articles, likely to save t

he writer time or space in the response – if we expand it with correct grammar, it would read 'Marvin picks up (a) tool, and hurts me when the PlayStation is on.'. Though, what is actually happening based on this answer is unclear – my best thought as to who is speaking through the pink tool is still Tiara, but how Marvin is hurting her is unanswered. If it is indeed referencing the devkit TOOL, perhaps he is somehow hurting her AI through some form of programming? Finally, let's wrap up our cha

racter discussion by quickly talking about the pets themselves. On initial glance, some pets seem to represent certain people, but the more you look at them, the more confusing it gets. For example, the description of the Amber pet can be connected to Care, especially as a fragmented section of Amber's description can be seen in the description of Care's egg. However, there is an actual child named Amber listed in the Petscop Kids reel, and her name is in blue, Anna's colour. Also, Tiara seems t

o have been trapped somewhere, much like Amber. It's very possible that pets are in fact intended to be read as combinations of people or references to multiple characters. Because of this, it's almost impossible to definitively say which pet connects to which person, if at all. To give another example, let's look at Toneth. From the description, we can connect it to Mike by the reference to a painting puzzle, knowing Mike was called the painter. It can also be connected to Rainer, by Toneth's r

elation with Roneth. As it's name is red, it can be connected to Paul, who is associated primarily with red. It could also be connected to Marvin, in that it is the only pet Marvin has in Petscop 20, and Marvin's gamepad voice sound being a dog bark sound could connect to the description's dog story. Interestingly, the sign at the start indicates there were to be 48 pets, and there are 47 unique names in the save files seen in Petscop 19, assuming Belle and Tiara are considered separately, and n

ot including ones like FUCK-FUCK-FUCK which don't include a name. If we include 'family' as a name, then there are 48, though we could also consider Paul to be number 48. It's possible the pets are connected to the testers in some sort of direct way, but Amber is the only one that bears the same name. This makes the sign message a lot more interesting: 'If you are unaware, the gift plane provided homes to over a hundred young pets.' Another theory I've seen is that the pets represent different t

ypes of child abuse, which seems to fit more with the early intentions of Petscop, when things like the Newmaker connection were still being included, rather than what it evolved into. While we're on pets, let's talk about the title of the game, Petscop. It's not a word in itself, but we could break it down. There's two ways I can see it being broken apart – one is to split it as Pets-cop, perhaps using the word 'cop' in the British slang sense, where to 'cop something' means to obtain it, so it

would read as 'obtaining pets'. I don't think this is super likely though, as the creator is not British. It could also be referring to 'cop' as in 'police' - doesn't make much sense with the story. The more likely option I think is Pet-scop. Scop is the old English word for a poet, and yes, it is pronounced 'shop', meaning 'Petscop' might actually read as 'Petshop', making the reading potentially a little darker if we look back at the interpretation of Even Care as a foster house. Interestingl

y, one of the etymological roots of the word Scop is potentially from a word meaning 'to create, or form', from the same root as the English word 'shape', tying back to rebirthing, which is why I think this interpretation is more likely. 'Shaping pets'. Pet shop. Well, there you have it. I tried to include as much as humanly possible without these videos being way too long, but of course there's still going to be stuff I wasn't necessarily able to cover. I try and keep these videos as comprehens

ive as possible without being overwhelming or confusing, so please forgive if it seems like I haven't discussed a very specific theory about a character you like. However, if there's something you feel like I've missed or should be discussed, please say so in the comments – I make sure to reply to every one that I can. Now that we've gone through the story and the characters, the next video it will finally be time to cover overall theories about the story – are there any you want me to go into d

etail on? Definitely let me know! I'll be covering as much of the major theories as I possibly can, so make sure to return after the recess – the play goes on. Thanks for watching today’s Panopticon Theatre performance. What do you think? Did I miss anything? What do you want me to talk about next? Make sure to sub and join the audience if you want to see more.