How will the new timeline diverge from the old?

DanteSC3

[14] Master
Well, "there are multiple timelines in Soulcalibur" definitively answers the multiverse question.
To play devil's advocate, as is my lot in life, apparently, the context of the question was asking about Zasalamel and Abyss based on the ambiguous nature of the games before SoulCalibur V with relation to each other, where between one or a few (or perhaps none, just elements of some here and there) endings are canon to the next game, and this is before we introduced time travel as a concept that can actually occur by the characters themselves. So one possible interpretation of the various what-if scenarios the characters find themselves in in their self-contained game could be that they're on multiple timelines. That wouldn't, I wouldn't think, have any bearing on the new unified one story canon approach. If I were on Twitter, I would follow up this question to ask if that concept holds true in SoulCalibur VI, because this answer by itself is inconclusive as it pertains to our current situation.

Our current Cassandra couldn't be the same because our previous Cassandra never went on this initial quest. She could certainly end up in the same place as the other Cassandra, but if there is going to be a time loop in play here, it hasn't yet become a stable one where there are no variations from round to round and the people involved are literally the same people, memory for memory, thought for thought, and action for action.

Even if that's where we end up going, though, we'll still be looking at one line of time that ran from "Soul Edge" through SCV and then a separate line of time with its own distinct specifics perpetually looping back on itself. The prior line will never be affected by this, nor contain events like Cassandra's new inaugural expedition, Zasalamel's 1590 epiphany, and whatever specific thoughts and actions stem from these newly introduced variables.
I still feel like we're conceptualizing this whole thing differently. With my current choice of timeline model (because we don't know what it is for certain) being the single line (so think Back to the Future), because they've only shown travel back to the past thus far, there are not "two Cassandras", in the meta sense of the word. There is only one Cassandra, and it's the future self of Cassandra that visited her, and so they are one in the same. The act of future Cassandra visiting her past self changed her game plan slightly and convinced her to take an early trip with Sophitia's old weapons, but then she didn't intervene with anything after that. Sophitia and Rothion still got married and are still on track for having Pyrrha and Patroklos.

It's quite likely that in SoulCalibur VII, Cassandra will protest Sophitia from going on her quest for SoulCalibur II events and steal Sophitia's new weapons, as happened previously, causing Rothion to have to forge up Sophitia's old weapons to match her new weapons (so that Sophitia can pursue Cassandra) and then begin work on Cassandra's Digamma Sword and Nemea Shield, since she won't be swayed from that point forward from joining the fight. Whether or not Cassandra does anything differently from there remains to be seen, but remains a possibility. If she does do something that changes the future, then her future self that visited her would be erased, and we would move on to a new stage of history. If she does not, or is not able to do something, due to the Astral Chaos getting in her way, for example, then the loop closes and we're right back to where we were, and she'd try again.

But it does indeed appear that everyone else who hasn't had a timeline-specific event (so everyone other than Cassandra and Zasalamel, as far as we know) has no idea what's going on, are the same people, have their same memories, thoughts, and actions. New actions that don't cancel the previous version of the story's actions are not "different" actions, just because we didn't know about them before, to cut that response before it comes, so Setsuka, for example, is not "changed", in the technical sense, because she's still primed to do her SoulCalibur III stuff like she normally did.

But Cass has no reason to believe that preventing her own sister's children from being born is for the greater good. Saving Sophitia is a desirable goal, and inarguably a good one, but it isn't necessarily the most important one -- certainly not to the extent of treating the children's demise as inherently preferable.
Fair enough, like I said it's only one possible thing that could have prevented Sophitia from having to sacrifice herself, but I do feel like Pyrrha especially is going to present a problem in the future, because that's what happened originally to cause Sophitia to be willing to give up her life in the first place. I still would have volunteered to have the children for Sophitia if I were in Cassandra's shoes, just personally. It would have taken some explaining, to be sure, and maybe I'd have been thrown in the nuthouse or not invited to family events anymore, but it would have been worth a shot. I'm not saying prematurely killing off the children would have been my first choice, it's just among the possible selections. I'm mostly still cross with Cassandra for not acting yet.
 

TresDias

[10] Knight
To play devil's advocate, as is my lot in life, apparently, the context of the question was asking about Zasalamel and Abyss based on the ambiguous nature of the games before SoulCalibur V with relation to each other, where between one or a few (or perhaps none, just elements of some here and there) endings are canon to the next game, and this is before we introduced time travel as a concept that can actually occur by the characters themselves. So one possible interpretation of the various what-if scenarios the characters find themselves in in their self-contained game could be that they're on multiple timelines. That wouldn't, I wouldn't think, have any bearing on the new unified one story canon approach. If I were on Twitter, I would follow up this question to ask if that concept holds true in SoulCalibur VI, because this answer by itself is inconclusive as it pertains to our current situation.
That answer was given a month ago (almost to the day), long after both time travel and alternate realities were introduced to the franchise.

Also, your posit is an odd one from any knowledgeable SC fan, but especially yourself. Your position is that "the relation to each other" of the games before SCV is precisely what we're looking at in SCVI. One can't then have it both ways that Yoshie's comment only applies to games prior to SCVI, yet also hold that SCVI is the timeline seen in the games prior to SCVI ...

The statement is very straightforward: a longtime core developer of the series says there are many timelines in SC. Making that comment anything less than straightforward requires tacking on a lot that the man didn't say.

New actions that don't cancel the previous version of the story's actions are not "different" actions, just because we didn't know about them before, to cut that response before it comes ...

Why would that response come? We never heard about Sophitia taking a dump in the wilderness before, but if it had come up in her Soul Chronicle, it would fit well enough with the first six games.
 

DanteSC3

[14] Master
That answer was given a month ago (almost to the day), long after both time travel and alternate realities were introduced to the franchise.
I'm not referring to our time when the answer was given, I mean the question that the answer was for was in regards to the story in SoulCalibur IV, following SoulCalibur III, and at that point in time of the games, we were not even remotely trying to form one single canon story. So, at that point in development, the idea that you could say there are multiple timelines is valid, as an interpretation of how all of the character stories could somehow all be happening and yet be so contradictory to one another. That does not mean that we are still having multiple timelines in our current narrative.

Also, your posit is an odd one from any knowledgeable SC fan, but especially yourself. Your position is that "the relation to each other" of the games before SCV is precisely what we're looking at in SCVI. One can't then have it both ways that Yoshie's comment only applies to games prior to SCVI, yet also hold that SCVI is the timeline seen in the games prior to SCVI ...
My point is that the multiple slipshod what-if stories being on multiple timelines is a valid interpretation, but now that we are only having one story, one canon, that interpretation no longer applies. I see what you're getting at, if they're confirming multiple timelines exist for the purposes of justifying all of the nonsense stories that couldn't be canon, the canon possibilities, and the actual canon, that that means the multiple timelines still exist, even if we're now only observing one of them, and not all of them, but I'm saying that the need to have multiple timelines in the present narrative no longer exists, and even if we are saying that they do still exist, this serves a different function. What I mean is we would have:

  • All the timelines from SoulBlade, SoulCalibur, SoulCalibur II, SoulCalibur III, and SoulCalibur IV that didn't become canon.
  • The "true timeline", i.e. the events that took place in all the preceding games (or did not, and were fudged) to become the canon.
  • The "new timeline", i.e. SoulCalibur VI, which is an alternate telling of the "true timeline" with modified events due to Zasalamel and Cassandra.

Which I suppose that Rusted Blade found a way to phrase it where I'm mostly okay with, here:

TLDR: How about we call it an "extremely close parallel timeline that, as best we can tell, demonstrates little to no divergence for most characters and purposes, so far." ?
But also remains mostly my basis of contention, that the "true timeline" and the "new timeline" are possibly one in the same, or so close to one another that they're practically identical in most respects, or what Rusted Blade said in the above quote. My interpretation is that the aforementioned non-canon timelines "don't exist" for the purposes of SoulCalibur VI, because it is a "reboot" that gets us started on a blank slate, and those alternate timelines are no longer represented in the new narrative, so for our purposes of observing SoulCalibur VI, the only timeline that exists is the "true timeline", which is, more or less, also the timeline that SoulCalibur VI is taking place on. There are several levels to my line of thinking, I understand that, but hopefully this makes it more clear.

The statement is very straightforward: a longtime core developer of the series says there are many timelines in SC. Making that comment anything less than straightforward requires tacking on a lot that the man didn't say.
Which is why I would have followed the question up to ask if that means it also applies to SoulCalibur VI, to be absolutely certain. The answer he gave, as I read it, only applies to SoulCalibur IV and SoulCalibur III. I may be giving context too much importance, but I always feel context is important.

Why would that response come? We never heard about Sophitia taking a dump in the wilderness before, but if it had come up in her Soul Chronicle, it would fit well enough with the first six games.
Because I had the thought as soon as I said that only Cassandra and Zasalamel were the ones with altered histories so far, the kneejerk reaction would be BUT SETSUKA (and perhaps Hilde as well), and I was trying to nip that in the bud before it even happened, because it's aside to the point I was making.
 

TresDias

[10] Knight
I'm not referring to our time when the answer was given, I mean the question that the answer was for was in regards to the story in SoulCalibur IV, following SoulCalibur III, and at that point in time of the games, we were not even remotely trying to form one single canon story.

My reason for bringing up when he said it is that SCVI (and V; and US) already existed when he said it. If he was trying to confine the statement to a particular segment of the franchise, it would only make sense that he make that even halfway clear.

However, he doesn't say that the statement applies only to certain titles or a certain period of the franchise's development history. He phrased it as applicable to the SC franchise straight-up -- circa July 2020.

Because I had the thought as soon as I said that only Cassandra and Zasalamel were the ones with altered histories so far, the kneejerk reaction would be BUT SETSUKA (and perhaps Hilde as well), and I was trying to nip that in the bud before it even happened, because it's aside to the point I was making.

Again, why would I say a dump in the woods we never heard about before amounts to an altered universe when we don't even know that it amounts to an altered bowel movement? Have I stumbled into an AU where the woman known as "DanteSC3" is unfamiliar with my posts on this subject? =P
 

DanteSC3

[14] Master
However, he doesn't say that the statement applies only to certain titles or a certain period of the franchise's development history. He phrased it as applicable to the SC franchise straight-up -- circa July 2020.
He also doesn't say that it does not, so it's ambiguous, so I would have asked a follow-up question. It could go either way, and I prefer concrete answers.

Again, why would I say a dump in the woods we never heard about before amounts to an altered universe when we don't even know that it amounts to an altered bowel movement? Have I stumbled into an AU where the woman known as "DanteSC3" is unfamiliar with my posts on this subject? =P
It was a blanket statement intended for whomever might respond to it. This is a public thread, right? I didn't get mixed up in a PM chain by mistake? :sc5lei1:
 

sytus

[14] Master
I'm not, or I probably would. But he'd probably have blocked me by now, too... but Twitter goes against my everything, so I'm not doing it.

Providing you're polite he should be able to answer all of your questions. If you do make a Twitter account, just ask if it's okay to have an in depth lore discussion. If there's anything he's not allow to disclose about the lore, just make it clear that you're cool with him not disclosing them.
 

TresDias

[10] Knight
He also doesn't say that it does not, so it's ambiguous ...

Oh, come on, that's not good faith discourse. If you're going to invoke a false equivocation in which unstated negatives are treated as equal to affirmed positives in otherwise innocuous sentences, I cant discuss this any longer. =\
 
Last edited:

DanteSC3

[14] Master
Maybe I misread the situation, but when you initially made your "case closed" point followed by a Cookie Monster emoticon, I wasn't certain you were taking that as a well-defined answer, either. I do believe that my analysis of the multiple timelines existing in the original narrative, for the purposes of saying "the what-if stories totally still happened even if they weren't canon" is accurate, but it's still a different ballpark when we're literally invoking time travel as a thing that the characters actually do. It would imply that they could hop timelines to the one where Aeon becomes king and leads the Lizardmen to take over the world, for example, and that's just silly, and doesn't jive with their taking the narrative serious now.

You didn't address what I said that the "reboot" effectively started us over from a blank slate, which is pretty important to my point of view on things. If we want to take that statement as a positive that multiple timelines still do exist in SoulCalibur VI, does that mean that all those kooky timelines still exist and could impact the story? Because I don't think it does. Obviously, they still can and will do whatever they want with the story, but I'm coming from the perspective that they intend to keep treating it seriously and continue along our one canon story with no side stories that aren't canon.
 

Rusted Blade

[14] Master
To play devil's advocate, as is my lot in life, apparently, the context of the question was asking about Zasalamel and Abyss based on the ambiguous nature of the games before SoulCalibur V with relation to each other, where between one or a few (or perhaps none, just elements of some here and there) endings are canon to the next game, and this is before we introduced time travel as a concept that can actually occur by the characters themselves. So one possible interpretation of the various what-if scenarios the characters find themselves in in their self-contained game could be that they're on multiple timelines. That wouldn't, I wouldn't think, have any bearing on the new unified one story canon approach.
Well, if you won't even take the Word of God at face value, I again question what the point is of trying to convince you to see to the spade for the spade. But that said, I have to comment here, because this may be just the most bold renunciation of evidence yet, and I'm not sure you have stopped to think through your newest argument to its rational conclusion. If you accept that Hideo's comment at least refers to different continuities in the original games (which clearly it does, given the nature of the Lost Cathedral question to which it was a response), then there never was "a" original timeline to begin with. Which of course was an obvious objection to your theory from the start, but one which didn't get much attention because of all the other crazy tangents on four pages of us banging our heads against the wall trying to break you out of your circular arguments. :P

And of course this was always obviously the case: aside from the obvious fact that we have dozens of different endings across the games that couldn't all be true in the same continuity even if we were talking about one game (let alone across the various titles), there's also the logistics that have these characters bouncing back and forth across the globe in the blink of an eye to be everywhere they need to be to ping-pong off one-another constantly, and tons of other issues which make these storylines taking place in different continuities the simplest solution to trying to make sense of it. We hardly needed the confirmation, but there you are: we have it now.

I suspect from your above comments that your argument is that the story of SCVI could still take place inside of any one of the continuities presented in the earlier games (that it doesn't obviously conflict with), or none of them at all. I suspect you even think that if you worked hard enough at it, you could find an exact thread of specific character campaigns that runs from Soul Edge through SCV (Mitsu's story was cannon in I, Sophitia and Kilik's are cannon in II, ect.) that is the timeline which SCVI now retraces and expands upon. Well, even if that were true, you've lost the plot here, because in that scenario, you'd still be having to account for how parts of the "non-cannon" stories got incorporated here (presumably by saying some of those events still could have happened in the "cannon" timeline). But if you already accept that the story of SCVI has elements that vary at least in some details from the many dozens (if not hundreds) of splinter continuities that would be represented in the older games, how can you possibly be confident (or even care!) whether the SCVI narrative fits neatly inside any one of those timelines? Particularly when there are events inside of SCVI that clearly seem to rule this out? Even before we get to the time travel shenanigans which truly make that ship set sail.

The writing is pretty clearly on the wall: SCVI is just one of many parallel continuities (and to be honest, this isn't even something confined just to SCV and SCVI: Broken Destiny and Unbreakable Soul also hint at or expressly reference separate timelines. The only things we know for certain regarding this particular continuity are: A) all of the events which have canonically taken place inside SCVI itself or referenced to have taken place before it, and B) In the previous cycle of the timeline, Cassie seems to have fallen into the Astral Chaos in a similar fashion as in SCIV, after events befell her family that seem to have been either identical or similarly abysmal to those which transpired in various narratives in SCII-SCIV. Presumably many more events will transpire in a fashion similar to that which transpired in various plot threads in previous games. Equally as certain, other events will vary. But since this story is unlikely (indeed I would say clearly certain) not to be a beat-by-beat remake of any of those timelines, but rather its own story that just happens to play out like a "best of" collection of plot beats from those various (originally inconsistent narratives), that really shouldn't be considered either surprising or a paradox that needs resolving. And this is clearly how it always worked.

But this also means the suggestion of a predictive power inherent in the previous games is minimal and far from strict: because if the storylines of past games are just windows into different continuities and/or timelines, we have no way of knowing how events played out in any one of them after the POV of the narrative moved on. So once again, there is no rational reason (internal to the story) to expect repetition. There are external reasons to expect it (laziness on the part of the writers or just plain honest attachment to the previous stories), and I think we'll be seeing most of the same old familiar faces with time, and probably major plot thread recycled wholesale. But there's no guiding principle (that can stand up to scrutiny given the evidence within the plot and the assurances of the creators) as to why things have to happen in a manner that echoes the plots of previous games--and it's pretty clear that we have to expect some combination of the two (retooled older plot lines with new twists), even if we can't be very confident about what those ratios are going to look like, at this point.

The statement is very straightforward: a longtime core developer of the series says there are many timelines in SC. Making that comment anything less than straightforward requires tacking on a lot that the man didn't say.
I believe the appropriate idiom that is usually used to capture these kinds of rhetorical contortions needed to try to fight cognitivie disnonace and believe in something against all mounting evidence is "mental gymnastics". And though we might say that the last four pages here are a combined routine that would win the all-around gold for Dante in the Mental Gymnastic Olympics, I would look away now, because it seems to me that she has begun her vault run and is just about at the spring board, but refuses to see that Hideo has pulled the mat out from under her landing spot. "It was there before!" she bellows as she approaches the vaulting platform, "So it has to be there when I get there again!!" AND SHE'S AIRBORNE--FOR A MOMENT SHE SEEMS TO EVEN REFUSE TO OBEY THE LOGIC OF GRAVITY! My GOD, SHE'S GONE FOR THE YURCHENKO WITH A TRIPLE DENIAL TWIST--SUCH ATHLETICISM! ...but the ending is likely to be about as graceful and fun to watch as Nyte reacting to news that boob physics are out in the next title. Kappa
 

DanteSC3

[14] Master
Well, if you won't even take the Word of God at face value, I again question what the point is of trying to convince you to see to the spade for the spade. But that said, I have to comment here, because this may be just the most bold renunciation of evidence yet, and I'm not sure you have stopped to think through your newest argument to its rational conclusion. If you accept that Hideo's comment at least refers to different continuities in the original games (which clearly it does, given the nature of the Lost Cathedral question to which it was a response), then there never was "a" original timeline to begin with. Which of course was an obvious objection to your theory from the start, but one which didn't get much attention because of all the other crazy tangents on four pages of us banging our heads against the wall trying to break you out of your circular arguments. :P
Except I addressed that in this post, along with the other things you brought up in your subsequent paragraphs. Yes, each game had multiple timelines in the original run, I conceded that point. But each subsequent game took all of those timelines and made a "true" timeline from which it built its new set of multiple timelines from, so on and so forth, up until SoulCalibur V. So that does mean that there is "a" timeline to pull SoulCalibur VI from, that being the "true" timeline that led to SoulCalibur V, the first game in the series to decide to not do the multiple timelines thing, because it's a convoluted mess.

The question then becomes are we just on that timeline, or are we altering it? That's the core question at hand in this topic, as I understand it. Thus far, we haven't altered it, though Zasalamel and Cassandra are certainly equipped to do so. That's where I stand. I'm trying to not go on at length and put it as simply and concisely as I possibly can. That's it. That's my position. It's pretty straightforward, I believe.

"mental gymnastics"
But I will stick that landing with the utmost grace and poise, I assure you!
 

Rusted Blade

[14] Master
Except I addressed that in this post, along with the other things you brought up in your subsequent paragraphs. Yes, each game had multiple timelines in the original run, I conceded that point. But each subsequent game took all of those timelines and made a "true" timeline from which it built its new set of multiple timelines from, so on and so forth, up until SoulCalibur V. So that does mean that there is "a" timeline to pull SoulCalibur VI from, that being the "true" timeline that led to SoulCalibur V, the first game in the series to decide to not do the multiple timelines thing, because it's a convoluted mess.

The question then becomes are we just on that timeline, or are we altering it? That's the core question at hand in this topic, as I understand it. Thus far, we haven't altered it, though Zasalamel and Cassandra are certainly equipped to do so. That's where I stand. I'm trying to not go on at length and put it as simply and concisely as I possibly can. That's it. That's my position. It's pretty straightforward, I believe.
Address in full in my last response.

By the way, I do share Tres' opinion that it's unreasonable to try to wade through this situation logically by insisting that negatives be disproved. That's just not how the philosophical burden of proof is meant to work in rational debate, because it is typically an impossible task that can be invoked to stonewall on just about any point.


But I will stick that landing with the utmost grace and poise, I assure you!
I know, I know--you're certain you're Keri Strugg. But in this instance, I'm pretty sure you are this young lady. But I will say this about you--I do think that when you peel your face off the floor, you're a likely to have a similar good-humoured vibe about it, which is something. It's just taking tediously long for this faceplant to unfold. ;)[/QUOTE]
 

DanteSC3

[14] Master
Address in full in my last response.
I'm not sure which part isn't addressed, though I did end up going into more below unintentionally as my train of thought kept chugging along.

By the way, I do share Tres' opinion that it's unreasonable to try to wade through this situation logically by insisting that negatives be disproved. That's just not how the philosophical burden of proof is meant to work in rational debate, because it is typically an impossible task that can be invoked to stonewall on just about any point.
I understand and even agree with that sentiment, but my point is the question was a SoulCalibur IV and SoulCalibur III question, not a SoulCalibur VI question. It's a difference that matters. SoulCalibur VI's "reboot" status is still not completely defined, and even if it's accepted as true that multiple timelines exist, like I referred to in the post I just linked to address your previous response, it seems likely to me that all of the alternate timelines have been deleted, that we've started with a blank slate on SoulCalibur VI, and are only following the "true" timeline, that is the timeline that the games followed moving forward. Like SoulCalibur II clearly proceeded with Kilik and Xianghua having defeated Inferno, SoulCalibur III clearly proceeded with Raphael having defeated Nightmare and Amy and himself becoming malfested, SoulCalibur IV clearly proceeded with the clash of the swords awakening Night Terror and the surge in power awakening Algol, and SoulCalibur V clearly proceeded with Siegfried defeating Nightmare, but surviving (so Hilde's ending, more or less), and then things calmed down for a bit, with Soul Calibur going dormant and Soul Edge using Raphael's body as a host in secret (implying Raphael died on his quest for Soul Calibur). There is a "true" timeline, and thus that is the timeline that SoulCalibur VI is poised to and has been following.

I know, I know--you're certain you're Keri Strugg. But in this instance, I'm pretty sure you are this young lady. But I will say this about you--I do think that when you peel your face off the floor, you're a likely to have a similar good-humoured vibe about it, which is something. It's just taking tediously long for this faceplant to unfold. ;)
I feel like it only seems like I'm crazy because I'm mostly standing alone in my viewpoints, being one of the five people who even cares in the first place, to have the "radical" idea, that I feel is perfectly reasoned, and if you guys are smashing your faces against walls then I'm for sure doing the same over here whenever you don't clearly see my points that are rational too, just in a different way. It's not that I'm being antagonistic towards you guys or anything, either, so when you get frustrated to the point of "why are we even trying to talk to her?!" that makes me legitimately sad, it's just we are very much not on the same page about things, more than anything else. I don't think I'll faceplant as hard as you think I will, but no matter what happens, it's not going to turn me into Nyte.
 

TresDias

[10] Knight
Is it too early to speculate that the Hwang we're going to play as in SCVI is from the future? His announcement trailer's cinematics show him rescuing Mi-na, who is wearing her SCIV garb, and then Hwang fighting SCI-era Nightmare/Inferno -- something I'm pretty confident never happened in the original timeline.

Not to mention Hwang is now displaying all these Taki-like mystical abilities we've never seen from him in the original timeline.
 

CelestialZodiac

[12] Conqueror
Is it too early to speculate that the Hwang we're going to play as in SCVI is from the future? His announcement trailer's cinematics show him rescuing Mi-na, who is wearing her SCIV garb, and then Hwang fighting SCI-era Nightmare/Inferno -- something I'm pretty confident never happened in the original timeline.

Not to mention Hwang is now displaying all these Taki-like mystical abilities we've never seen from him in the original timeline.
Not really. Do note that this game is a retelling of events before SCV with a dash of untold parts about every character. This is the first time we see Hwang using some magic in his moves that he probably picked up during his journey and this is the first time we learn about it. Maybe that is what Hwang has been doing all this time in the bus.
 

Metroidwave

[04] Fighter
Welp, just started the Nightmare side story.


Legends is canon now. Iska's in the driver's seat of Nightmare. Is that a big enough divergence that it can't be ignored?
 

Aiddon

[10] Knight
Welp, just started the Nightmare side story.


Legends is canon now. Iska's in the driver's seat of Nightmare. Is that a big enough divergence that it can't be ignored?
According to the Library entry
This Iska seems to be born from the amalgamation of souls inside of Soul Edge, so she's basically an alternative Inferno.
 

Metroidwave

[04] Fighter
According to the Library entry
This Iska seems to be born from the amalgamation of souls inside of Soul Edge, so she's basically an alternative Inferno.
Yeah, read that too.
But at the same time, the one that appears to Siegfried mentioned traveling with him during a conflict against the Ottoman Empire and seizing Soul Calibur (not sure how that happened when Xianghua had it, but it gets mentioned). It's possible that Acht was made from Iska's soul merged with others, but honestly my theories belong in a different thread.