untuvakana

This was depressing

29 posts in this topic

On 24/04/2017 at 5:10 PM, Satoshi Ookami said:

Unravel >>>>>>>>>> LiS

Nuff said

 

On 28/02/2018 at 0:01 AM, StoRmAreA said:

lol you cant compare a sackboy thingy with a "real human" story

 

That's weird, because you BOTH just made a comparison.

 

I always find it weird when people try an "apples and oranges" argument, as you can compare everything with anything, it's just that some comparisons make more sense than others.

 

In this case, Unravel and Life Is Strange both are games, both have a story that tries to tug the heartstrings, both feature stuff that can't happen in real life. On the other hand, one is a graphic adventure about a hipster girl, the other is a platformer about a yarn creature, with other stories going on in the background.

 

In this case, I was the one starting the comparison with these two games, because I was disappointed with Life Is Strange as it tried too hard, while I thought Unravel's approach was much more effective in creating an emotional thrillride for me. Yes, part of that may be personal preferences, but it's my opinion nontheless.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/02/2018 at 0:01 AM, StoRmAreA said:

"real human"

Aaah, now I get why Unravel was so much better!

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The theme of time-travelling really affected me and made me think several things, mostly personal but the thematology of over-cheesy-hipsterish-nooneelsemattersexceptmybae-bs really threw me off. In my hands, Arcadia Bay lived another day. With great power, comes great responsibility.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found the final decision kinda moot when in my first playthrough (I did it on PS3 and PS4, so took both paths, just on different systems) I saved Chloe only to see them drive through a town with a little damage here and there.  Sure, some people were dumb enough to be outside the night before and might have been killed, but I saved all the ones I could save on my way to the diner, which was still standing, so obviously they're all ok.  So I found the decision to either "let your best friend (who might be more) die to save the town" or "save her and let the town... sorta not look good in the morning but everyone I care about is still alive anyway, so...." to be an ineffectual choice.  If the town was wiped off the map, giant crater, bodies everywhere, death death death, then sure, the sacrifice would have been much harder to make.  But the real choice turned out to be 'dead best friend' or 'some mad insurance companies who have to spend millions to fix up the town', and that was no choice at all.  I was a little disappointed to say the least, especially since I didn't think I'd really enjoy the game, just wanted some quick plats, but I really ended up liking so much about it and got a bit invested, and the BIG FINAL CHOICE turned out to just be the meh final choice, at least to me.  I'm sure others have different opinions, but I know my theory has a lot of support, it was the first thing I googled after finishing the game and found countless other people who thought the same way I did.

 

On that note, if anyone has ever seen the aftermath of a terrible hurricane or tornado, they know that Arcadia Bay barely got touched, at least based on what it looked like while driving through the town at the end.  For comparison, this is how it should have looked - actual tornado - and this is how it was depicted - not bad.  Notice how all the buildings are still standing, and while some have major damage, no one taking refuge in them from the storm would have been significantly hurt.  Also notice most of the debris is probably from fences and other shit, and that the town doesn't actually look too bad.  If the intent was to really wipe the town out, then the devs should have done that.  But I can't see this imagery and take the concept of the bay being destroyed seriously.  I've seen worse damage first-hand from minor earthquakes with no injuries.

 

So to fully respond to the op, if you make the other choice, then yeah, it can be very sad.  But otherwise, it wasn't really sad or depressing at all.  There's really no emotional investment with the past victims, even Rachel, the end choice we've discussed, and if you didn't screw up saving Kate, then there's really no one you (Max) or the player would actually lose.  But feel free to disagree, I won't be offended :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.