#and im sorry about the length of this

[god-of-this-new-blog]

What if the two worst guys in the whole world were madly in love with each other?

[devotion-disorder]

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/3dFHa31qxQ8?feature=share

10/10 would smash Yuri buuuuut this vid lived rent free in my head, I don't wanna skip to my next life just yet-

no because i can vouch that she is 100% correct. of course everyone's built different but i have almost the exact same opinions as her...they dont call it rearranging your guts for no reason yall.

BUT you can also make a lot work with a bit of time and patience :D and when you're sequestered in the deepest part of the woods, trapped in a village that most people that don't even know exists, there is definitely more than plenty of time :) though Yuri also tends to be impatient, so......................... good luck? ^^;

[katabay]

original thief series basso & garrett :)

ngl, it's about quality over quantity for me. an npc can have a total of three minutes of screen time, but if they have a cool name, they can live rent free in my head and I'll spend several hours trying to decipher drawable features from a blurry screenshot of pixels

there is a vague hint of a story here, and that's because every time I try to play thi4f, I get incredibly frustrated with how Not Fun the game play is. like, is the story good? well. but it has a PLAGUE. that should've given it instant 'I'll replay this once a year' status in my heart, but the game play sucks so bad that I've never finished it. I can't believe Not Fun gameplay beat out my obsession with narrative plagues.

anyway, the idea is basically if the original era had a game with a plague centric narrative and some other stuff I liked out of thi4f thrown into a narrative blender, with a heavy dash of horror thrown in because some parts of the thief games were scarier to me than entire dedicated horror genre games.

⭐ places I’m at! bsky / pixiv / pillowfort /cohost / cara.app

[box953]

your tags on your last ask have intrigued me, what are some Heiffel/Loveberg parallels??? I'd love to hear them

I've been a Heiffel truther since I first listened to w359 (the stripping scene really sold me on it too) but I've only started to get into Loveberg in the last couple days, so I haven't had the time to consider parallels between them yet

the tldr is that i think the personality similarities between Lovelace and Eiffel make for an interesting experience for Hilbert. Lovelace dies on the old mission and oh sad but it had to happen but then he meets his next crew and Eiffel reminds him just enough about Lovelace to make him squirm.

HOWEVER. I never get prompted to talk about my loveberg agenda or my loveberg to heiffel pipeline so im going to use this as an opportunity to go insane for a few paragraphs. Ok? Ok.

so maybe parallels isnt the best wording for it bc like . It is definitely kind of about the dynamic parallels i think they base-level play out very similarly due to Lovelace and Eiffel being similar in the ways they are. But also i think it’s just about. The coexistence of both relationships in the same timeline. The way they could bleed into each other.

so like. The personality parallels between Lovelace and Eiffel are pretty obvious in the beginning, right? When Eiffel and Minkowski first find her voice recordings and she sounds exactly like someone Eiffel would get along with and exactly like someone Minkowski would despise working with. You see that when Lovelace shows up, too, but she’s also an authority figure and also at the moment going through sooo much fucking trauma right now that it kind of puts a damper on that part of her personality, i feel. She’s a little busy surviving rn.

that is to say, i feel like a pre-canon Captain Lovelace would have been the most like Eiffel, personality wise. Which i think is important.

I enjoy Hilbert’s relationships with characters without any romance behind them. I think they stand really well as their own strange, convoluted narratives. However, when I am applying a lense of potential romance, a lot of the appeal to me comes from Hilbert fighting a losing battle against himself and the decades he’s spent devaluing human life. The way he talks about his relationship with the things he’s done and the people he hurts fascinates me. How conscious he is that he’s hurt people. Something something ‘Do not think this was easy for me. None of it was easy. None of it was nice.’ Some sort of implication that he still feels, he just doesn’t acknowledge it. There’s no space for that. Log it, move on, don’t dwell on it.

With Lovelace, I think it was just accidental. I think he doesn’t realize that he cares about her, values her, until it’s too late and he’s tripped and fell and gotten himself into a weird situationship with his commanding officer. The difference in their first meeting as shown in the final episode vs their relationship shown in Change of Mind is just so… ugh. He’s a part of her routine. He meets her at her room when she wakes up to update her when he was actively avoiding interacting with her during their first meetings. Something happened there. They fall into a routine, a dynamic, he respects her, she goes to him for advice, or to rant about her idiot subordinates. I’m just ranting about why i like them in this era atp ANYWAYS.

The point is. He stumbles into accidentally giving a fuck but then, obviously, everything that happens, happens. He respects her but only enough to think she’d be smart enough to see his perspective, never enough to change his mind on his life’s work.

and then the Alexander Hilbert grieving processes (and lack thereof) commences. He acknowledges that the loss of Isabel Lovelace is objectively unfortunate but that’s as far as it goes, as far as it’s ever gone for anyone since he was a child.

and then he meets his next crew, on the same ship he had just been on for years, and there’s Eiffel. And he’s… not Lovelace, obviously. He’s not even got a modicum of the competence she did, even if they’re both equally as obnoxious. But I still think there’s a level of that parallel between the two of them that kind of haunts him.

And it’s like, whatever, it doesn’t matter, he’s a better man than this. He’s killed before, experimented before, and he’s going to do it again. But what are the consequences of never grieving? What happens when you accidentally have some semblance of feelings for your old captain and then she dies and you just kind of go okay. And then try your best to move onto the next task.

i think it leaves him vulnerable to just having it happen all over again is what I’m saying. I think he has to monitor Eiffel and constantly keep an eye on him to observe the decima project in action and despite everything he’s doing to distance himself from this team (everything about his whole act in season 1. You know. The playing the mad scientist bit up to eleven.) he develops some kind of infatuation for Eiffel. Study your lab rat for too long you accidentally become bisexual. Whatever.

I just. Grips the sides of my chair. I just think it’s neat. I just find them interesting. I dont. Care. (I’m lying.)

[thatonecrookedsmile]

You will acept your fate... Before the end..

------

Without much creativity to come up with a good line/phrase. I had to improvise.

It's been exactly 1 year since Bendy and the Dark Revival released...jeez. Already? I'm telling you, time doesn't make sense anymore, everything is going slower and faster at the same time. It's crazy!

I was in the middle of drawing something more specific for the anniversary but…I didn't finish it lol. Like always! But I have this prompt that I finished a few days ago and that I was hoping to post along with 2 more drawings. But I think today is a more ideal day to post this.

So as a anniversary present I give you guys…Angst™. With the boys. Very ideal.

I remember having another idea for this prompt but the current idea popped into my head so I decided to abandon the previous one. I found it more interesting. A "What-if" idea I had at the time the game launched partially inspired by something specific I thought about these two. Based so much on what I've seen and read about these ink creatures, and on the general idea of "2 minds in one".

I confess that in the end I started to question whether this is the way I see the relationship between these 2 and all this business of "two in one package" that they have. And I still don't know if this is really my vision. I just had a drawing idea that I thought was cool and I just stuck with it until the end. I didn't have many second thoughts until I got to the finish line.

Changing the subject: The anniversary.

I can't believe it's been 1 year since this game came out. The time flies! Good to know this finally released after 3 years.

I don't think I've ever talked abouy my thought on the game before,or at least,not the game as a whole. I wanted to leave this for the specific anniversary drawing, but hey. Why not here?

In short: I really liked it! I've been waiting for this game for a good while so when we finally got that final trailer last year, you could say I was pretty excited for the next 2 weeks until release. I don't know if I knew exactly what to expect from this game, and there's always that fear that I won't end up liking what I play when it released. But I really liked it! Loved it, I would say. I had a lot of fun and I believe I can say that, in general, I had a pretty positive experience with it.

Of course, I have my own grievances and complaints about some things in the game (some probably talked about here on Tumblr and others not) that I would like to see improved for next game,The Cage. But even with these complaints in mind, I wouldn't say that it took away my enjoyment of this game. Especially considering that the positive points (or at least what I consider positive in my opinion) for me, prevail over the negative ones.

At the end? Yeah, I really liked Bendy and the Dark Revival. Happy to see it finally released and be able to play it. I personally believe that we are in a good direction when it comes to the games, and I can't wait to see what the future holds.

Happy 1 year anniversary BATDR! And happy birthday to both Little Guy and Big Guy (Little Bendy and the new Ink Demon,respectively).

Love you both.

[hinasho]

I'll tell you what people's problem with The Crow 2024 is — I'm a longtime fan by the way, I own the comics, I watched all the movies, so on.

The Crow 1994 managed to get the soul of the source material (comics). The Crow is a story about overcoming grief and acceptance of death — the author wrote Eric's story during his darkest periods of grief after his girlfriend was killed. So the story of Eric and Shelley have meaning, they are meaningful characters to a lot of people. Brandon's movie, while with some differences from the original story, still carried the same themes beautifully and the tragedy that happened during the filming made people (me included) turn protective over the memory of The Crow and it’s meaning.

There were three other movies after The Crow 1994 but they never dared to touch on Eric's character, instead they created new ones like Ashe Corven, Jimmy Cuervo and Alex Corvis. And those movies suck, don’t get me wrong, but people don’t have a problem with them because they didn't touch on Brandon's Lee legacy and di their best to stay on theme — grief and acceptance. They are their own thing, and that's that.

So did the comics. Eric story is the first main one, but no one took him and tried to continue it, he's pretty much untouchable, he has his beginning and his end. Instead, they created new Crows for their stories: Joshua, Iris Shaw, Mark Leung...There's a long list of existing Crows with their own stories.

The problem with 2024 The Crow is mostly that they called it a remake and took Eric's names to a character that doesn’t even resembles the original Eric — and I'm not saying in physical appearance, I'm saying his essence because the original Eric is a killer of bad guys, but he's also pretty charismatic; he loved life, he was gentle with the little girl Sarah he was friends with, he was kind, he was thoughtful, he even jokes around! Which, to many people, Bill's Eric does not resembles even a little bit of Eric's other than his name and neither does his story matches the themes and soul behind The Crow franchise.

The main gripe The Crow community has with the 2024 version is them taking Eric's and Shelley story, then changing it so much and losing it's soul when the easiest thing to avoid all this controversy and review bombing would've been just be like "Hey, we're making a new Crow movie, but we have created our own original protagonists for it!" just like people have been doing for years, because that's what 2024 Shelley and Eric feel like to people — original characters who just happen to share the names of the OG's.

Anyway, I watched the 2024 version and while Bill did a phenomenal job as always with what he was given and he looks so damn good, the story just...Didn't get me at all. There's not one bit of The Crow essence in there for me.

Hello, thank you for sharing your thoughts! 💞 I finally watched The Crow 1994 and City of Angels today (still need to watch Salvation & Wicked Prayer) so fortunately I now have a bit more context.

The problem with 2024 The Crow is mostly that they called it a remake

So to begin my breakdown: The 2024 isn't a remake of the 1994 movie. This seems to be a widespread misconception. But in all of the clips and trailers Lionsgate has released, they clarify that it's a "modern re-imagining of the original graphic novel". The movie never claims to be a remake of the 1994 film.

Now a fair debate could be how closely tied (or not) the '24 movie is to the graphic novel, which the two are remarkably different, but based on the reviews and comments I've seen, fans seem more inclined to keep comparing it to the 1994 adaptation despite Lionsgate never claiming they were trying to remake that specific film.

So basically, comparisons between '94 Eric and '24 Eric don't really hold up as valid criticisms in my opinion, because the director had no intention of adapting the '24 film from the '94 movie in the first place.

the original Eric is a killer of bad guys, but he's also pretty charismatic; he loved life, he was gentle with the little girl Sarah he was friends with, he was kind, he was thoughtful, he even jokes around! Which, to many people, Bill's Eric does not resembles even a little bit

'24 Eric is still a killer of killers. He only kills those that attack him first or had something to do with his and Shelly's deaths. He never kills needlessly.

In regards to him loving life, 2024 Eric does in droves! He actively hates having to kill so many people and takes no enjoyment out of it. The opera scene, while fantastic, wasn't a fun moment for him. Since her death, you can tangibly feel that all he wants to do is get back to his simple life with Shelly. He loves her and he loves the life they had.

As for him being charismatic, I can see your point there. In the graphic novels (from summaries I've read), GN Eric does have a morbid sense of humor and at times played around with his kills before finishing the job. His relationship with Sherri was brief but sweet and he gets a cute cat!! He continues to form relationships even after Shelly's death because of his charisma and kindness.

From a writing perspective, I believe all of these moments are intended to humanize Eric given the GN begins with him as The Crow pretty much immediately. We are introduced to him already in the throes of his grief and seeking vengeance.

In contrast, the '24 film paces the transition MUCH slower with the first act being about how Shelly and Eric meet, and the growth of their romance. I believe Director Rupert Sanders used those scenes to humanize the characters instead, which he accomplishes as both Eric and Shelly feel like they're just normal people dealt a shitty hand who only want to live their lives together. You can see the love they shared and how pure it was.

Basically, the core of the characters remain the same, just told in different ways throughout the story. In the graphic novel, James O'Barr humanizes Eric & adds levity in the midst of the carnage, while Rupert Sanders adds it before the carnage. Despite the timeline differences, both succeed in showing that Eric isn't a mindless murdering machine, and is just a regular guy who's been driven to the point of madness.

(It still would've been a nice touch for '24 Eric to adopt a cat for Shelly in the movie though.)

Bill's Eric does not resembles even a little bit of Eric's other than his name and neither does his story matches the themes and soul behind The Crow franchise.

From my understanding, the main themes behind the franchise are grief, the difficulty to move past it, and divine justice.

All three Erics suffer from visions of Shelly, who's memory plays on a feedback loop as they go about their spree. Something both the '94 and '24 films don't do, however, is touch on GN Eric's self harm tendencies. Which isn't a criticism! I'm merely discussing the different ways they show Eric's state of mourning.

The inability to move on is also still prevalent in the '24 movie. It's an active choice Eric makes when Kronos gives him the option to get his life back, and instead Eric submerges deeper and signs away his soul. He steps into it with his eyes wide open knowing he's damning himself forever.

Meanwhile in the graphic novel, Eric is already submerged. He is already a walking corpse, the embodiment of a heart so broken the only way to put himself back together is to weaponize the shards of his loss. I believe this is who '24 Eric develops into after the second act when he signs away his soul.

In the first act, he is human. In the second act, he is transitioning, and in the third act, he has truly become The Crow. Too deep in grief to escape it. The main difference between the '24 version and the GN version is that we see '24 Eric's journey to reach that final stage. It's the difference between character-focused narratives vs parable-like storytelling. Neither is inherently better than the other, just different.

And when it comes to divine justice, hmmm.....

In the GN, Eric and Shelly are killed and brutalized due to a completely random act of evil. The gang that killed them and assaulted Shelly had zero connections to the couple and were just some cruel, awful randos off the street. Based on what I've read, Eric nearly kills all of them without difficulty. Most of his hardship comes from his own bouts of depression and misery.

(By the way, by having the villains all be mediocre average goons, and majority of Eric's troubles be psychological, the GN focuses more on the danger of all-consuming grief, highly likely because of the trauma James O'Barr was experiencing when he wrote it. Meanwhile both the '94 and '24 films have Eric struggle a lot more during his fight scenes, elevating the danger of his physical opponents. But this is a tangent, back to what I was talking about!)

By all of them being average goons, the story gets across that: yes normal everyday people can and are capable of atrocious acts of evil, and yes they deserve to face the brunt of their crimes and divine punishment.

However in both the '94 and '24 movies, Eric and Shelly's deaths are not random and are planned crimes to silence Shelly. And both come up with a "big bad" for Eric to face off against. In the '94 movie, it was Top Dollar, a criminal kingpin, and in the '24 movie it's Vincent Roeg, a rich executive who's also a crimelord.

BUT what the '24 film does differently is that Roeg is also a supernatural being himself, who's made a pact with the devil to trade innocent souls for immortality.

This is probably the only area in which I agree with OG fans on that a central theme was changed. Because by making the main antagonist "unnatural", it's no longer about everyday, normal people committing horrible evils. It's about a supernatural entity on par with The Crow.

I think Rupert Sanders wanted to focus more on the supernatural aspect of The Crow universe. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing and definitely made for a fun movie, but I do agree with OG fans that the "grounded" nature of casual human cruelty was lost in that regard.

By implementing this change, the weight of Eric's vengeance is also changed. Because now it's no longer just personal. As the character of Kronos says in the movie, they need Eric to kill Roeg because he and all the deaths he's caused are unnatural and they essentially need Eric to tip the scales back into balance. While Eric's primary motive is still about doing right by Shelly, there's now an element of saving the world from an unnaturally superpowered tyrant, rather than the everyday cruelties of man.

So in this aspect, I do agree that a core theme was changed between the graphic novel and the 2024 movie. This still doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad story, just that Rupert Sanders had different intentions.

Because this still connects to the previous theme, the inability to move on and cope with death. Except now it's portrayed in the antagonist as well. His power is completely about his refusal to accept his own mortality. However, this does, like I said, detract from the normality of evil theme. So it's basically a gain and a loss 😅

(Plus, as I was writing this, I thought about how Eric's motivation is changed as well. In the '24 movie, Eric's goal is still to do right by Shelly, but it's to save her. Because if he succeeds, Shelly will be resurrected. This adds a noble spin to his killing spree, whereas the GN and the '94 film are solely about overwhelming rage at the loss of a loved one. There is no resurrecting Shelly. It's about enacting divine justice against their killers before traveling to the afterlife together. They're already dead and there's nothing GN Eric can do to change that, unlike 2024 Eric.

On the flip side, while this "nobler" take may feel like a negative change, I think it's countered by the fact that Eric succeeds in saving her, but is still dissatisfied because he's unable to actually be with her. GN and '94 Eric were able to find peace and reunite with their loves. '24 Eric only gets about 5 minutes before she's resurrected and he's stuck in purgatory forever.

At the end of the '24 film, both Eric and Shelly are dissatisfied as they can no longer be together. It's a bittersweet ending that feels more bitter than sweet. So while there is a "nobler" cause behind Eric's actions, the tone of the story is still very grim.

This is also why I believe the way the 2024 movie ended was with the intentions of a sequel where Eric does achieve his own peace. But that's a different conversation!)

...the easiest thing to avoid all this controversy and review bombing would've been just be like "Hey, we're making a new Crow movie, but we have created our own original protagonists for it!" just like people have been doing for years, because that's what 2024 Shelley and Eric feel like to people — original characters who just happen to share the names of the OG's.

Sure! I don't disagree. Well, I don't really think anything deserves to be review bombed unless it's content that's actively harmful. But I don't disagree with the original protagonists angle. Changing the names couldn't have hurt.

That said though, and I say this as gently as I can, Eric's character existed before '94 Eric and does not need to end with the '94 movie. I think it'd be one thing if the 1994 movie created the story of The Crow and that was the first iteration of Eric's character. But... it's not.

Multiple re-imaginings and adaptations of books / comics have been around since forever. The show Smallville and Man of Steel both adapt Superman in wildly different ways. Shakespeare's Taming of the Shrew has had five different adaptations, and yet no one shits on 10 Things I Hate About You (1999) or Deliver Us From Eva (2003) for being modern re-imaginings. Awhile ago, me and my friend were discussing our favorite adaptations of the Little Women novel. Her favorite is the 1994 film while my favorite is the 2022 modern Kdrama!

I bring up all of these examples to say that there is REALLY nothing wrong with doing modern re-imaginings of older works, and tweaking characters and plotlines to reflect the changed style of the story and time period.

What's most important is that the heart of the story is kept. At the end of the day, The Crow is about an innocent man who enacts divine justice against he and his lover's murderers, while struggling to cope with her loss. Based on the graphic novel and what I've seen of the 1994 movie and the City of Angels sequel, the world of The Crow says that life can be fair and that no matter how high, or low, or cruel, or spineless, someone is, that karma is a bitch and it IS possible for them to reap what they sow.

I truly think the 2024 adaptation captured that feeling, even if it may look different than what people might be used to or expected.

Instead of being upset about how unexpected it is, try going in with an open mind and seeing the story Rupert, Bill, and FKA Twigs wanted to tell. I've read and seen a few interviews by now, and these three were genuinely passionate about the characters & story, and you can feel that in the movie.

And even if you still have no interest, the other parts of the franchise you do enjoy aren't going anywhere. The 2024 adaptation doesn't effect them in any capacity. The stories you love still exist and the new addition can't harm or take them away from you.

[fogwitchoftheevermore]

Yes! The ways the mechs and mcyt handle narrative have always been so similar to me but I've never been able to put it onto words. Would Love to hear what you have to say on the topic (after you have had a good sleep)

HI, it's time for me to get insane. Thank you for sending this ask cause now I have an excuse to maintag the post, lol. Also, I'm going to be using the term MCYT interchangeably with MCRP (Minecraft roleplay) for my own sanity. You'll know what I mean from context clues, I think.

So, hi, anyone who doesn't know about The Mechanisms. This post is going to be about some meta analysis tools that popped up in the Mechs fandom when it exploded in popularity back in 2020-2021. Due to the nature of both the Mechs and MCYT (which I'll get into in a moment), these concepts are generally very helpful for meta analysis of MCYT as well, and I think you guys would love them.

First of all, what was The Mechanisms?

The Mechanisms, originally known as Dr. Carmilla and The Mechanisms, was a band that formed in the late 2000s. It had a rotating cast of members, though most of the stuff you can easily find from them (such as their albums) was made when they had 8-9 consistent members. The Mechanisms officially released seven albums and one single before the band broke up in early 2020. The reason this band is similar at all to MCYT comes from a few things- the characters the band played, the stories the band told, and the archival aspect/age.

Because the Mechs were not a regular band, it was also a storytelling experience. Each Mechs album tells it's own self contained story (except for the Tales to be Told albums, which feature songs with their own stories that don't tie into the album at large). But furthermore, each Mechanism is a character. All the members of the band had characters they played, acting as a band of immortal space pirates moving through the galaxy on their ship, The Aurora.

The similarity to MCYT here is, of course, the characters. It's not always as simple to tell the difference between MCYT characters and actors as it was with The Mechanisms, seeing as (a lot of) MCYT doesn't start with the acting/roleplaying intention that the Mechs started with. But nonetheless, they share the understanding that even though this isn't a play or a TV show or whatever scripted medium, and that even though these characters (sometimes) share similar/the same names as their creators, they are, ultimately, characters the creators are putting on in order to tell a story. Whether that story is something more connected to the base characters (less roleplay heavy servers, Mechs backstory beats) or a story where the characters themselves are filling a role to tell a new story (more roleplay heavy servers, Mechs filling in for characters on the albums to tell their stories), there is always a story to be told.

There is also, as I said, the archival aspect. Archiving is massively important to both The Mechanisms and MCYT. It's definitely a lot harder with the Mechs than with most MCYT stuff, since the Mechs are a whole lot nicher, but that is not to say it's easy for either group. Archiving is vital to keeping both fanbases, and both sets of characters, alive, and there is only so much archiving you can rely on the creators of either to do. Those of you who take this task on are genuinely so awesome and I love you.

Alongside the archiving aspect (and as such, the lost media aspect), there's also the age of the Mechanisms, and (similarly to MCYT), the large number of people involved in the project, which results in lost and oftentimes conflicting canon beats. Mechs lore was not a strict, planned out thing. Large swaths of it were made up on the fly or forgotten down the line and rewritten or just made to work because the story needed it. As such, a lot of Mechanisms meta analysis had to reckon with the fact that the story was often telling you two or three or more things that could not be true at once nonetheless were, or was telling you something with the assumption that you knew something else, but that something else is now impossible to track down. So, sometimes, you just had to pick and choose, or try to reconstruct that lost knowledge. Similarly, varying POVs and gaps in time or gaps in story result in a similar concept for MCYT analysis- sometimes it doesn't really work if you take every piece of lore into account, so you just can't, even though every piece of lore is equally canon; or sometimes, a specific source is lost and you have to trust the memory of people who saw or were involved in the source instead.

Now, what is narratomancy? And how is it relevant to meta analysis of MCYT?

Narratomancy is the name for a few concepts of meta analysis that popped up when the Mechs fandom exploded in 2020-2021. The term was coined by @lucky-sevens (who, unlike anyone else I bring up in this post, I feel comfortable tagging because they're inactive, lol, so this won't clog their notifs), but the credit for various concepts under the umbrella of narratomancy can go to a ton of people. Personally, I'm going to be heavily referencing one post in particular by @/gunpowderedtim when it comes to the four main pillars of narratomancy, and how they are relevant here. (BTW I know OP of that post has shifted at least a bit to the MCYT fandom as well, so if you see this and would like me to tag you properly, please let me know!)

(EDIT: I was informed in the replies that lucky-sevens did not, in fact, coin this phrase, but they can't remember who specifically did. Alas another Mechs thing lost to time.)

Narratomancy refers to the general concept of the narrative as a thing within the Mechs universe. The narrative, a story that wants to be told, is an (at least semi) sentient creature that is bending the universe to its will in order to be told. This living narrative helps to explain and work through some of the problems or plot holes in the narrative, and understanding this helps a lot for meta analysis, or even just understanding the story. As stated above, I'm going to be breaking down four main pillars that the post above identified, and how they may be relevant to MCYT meta analysis. Not all of them are going to work- these were concepts made up for The Mechanisms, after all, and for all their similarities, it's not a perfect 1 to 1. Let's get into it!

Pillar 1: Universal Story

This is a pillar that has one really important and relevant concept, but I do have to bend a bit of it in order to make it work. Namely, what we're calling "the universe" here. But it's still quite important. You'll see.

As mentioned up top, The Mechanisms were originally called Dr. Carmilla and The Mechanisms. Dr. Carmilla (both the character and the creator) eventually left the Mechs to do her own thing, tell her own story, but the story of the universe at large is still hers. She's still got her name in the title, she's still the one who created the original lore, so to the universe, she's still the main character. She might not be the main character of any given story, even any given story she participates in, but it's all her universe in the end. As such, both her stories and the stories of The Mechanisms are canon, but they might not be strictly canon to each other. Because ultimately, The Mechanisms were the universe's vessel for telling stories, and sometimes the stories they told made for a weird concoction of conflicting canon, so you just had to accept that these conflicting canon beats were both canon, but which one was canon depended entirely on which story you were looking at, which one was trying to be told, who that story specifically was about (this is a concept that'll come up again later).

The reason this is a bit less relevant to MCYT in that, if a roleplay server is being well run, you (hopefully) won't have a main character in this way. And even if you do, that main character is not always going to be the creator of the server/universe, ala Carmilla. But again, it's not irrelevant, because I think this can be applied when you're looking at individual POVs of any given event or server.

Every character is the main character of their own POV, even if they might not be the main character of any given story beat or event. They have their own lore and story to tell in that POV, and when you sit down to watch their POV that is the story you'll get. It just so happens that said story might have things that are canon to it that are not canon to other POVs, that cannot be canon to other POVs, and you as the fan have to reckon with that. Sometimes these things might be small or not something that's gonna really throw you, like the conflicting Magic Mountain lore in this season of Hermitcraft. Other times, these might be really big things, like Martyn's Watcher lore in the Life Series.

But either way, while the idea that there is a Universal Story that has a clear main character doesn't really apply to servers, it certainly ties in to the idea of POVs. And furthermore, the "all of these stories are canon, but not strictly canon to each other" idea that comes along with Universal Story is a really vital thing to keep in mind when it comes to MCYT.

Pillar 2: Casting Call (Narrative Role Filling)

There are two main parts to Casting Call. The first is that The Mechanisms have a role in the stories they tell, even the stories that are not their own, like the album ones. These roles are often trope heavy, or based on pre-existing characters that the Mechanisms themselves have similarities too. The second is that the Mechanisms slot into these roles not necessarily because they want to, but because they have to in order to make the story work. Because the narrative wants them to help the story along to the ending.

This is definitely more relevant in roleplay heavy servers, but it still comes up on just about every server out there. While for the Mechanisms, the divide is between "the character I am" vs. "the character I am playing so the story gets told", the divide for MCYT tends to be a bit more "the person I am" vs. "the character I am playing so the story gets told". This divide (and people's inability to understand it) is the reason why MCYTs so often have to give the "Remember, we're all friends in real life and anything that the others weren't comfortable with wouldn't be in the videos" disclaimer. Everyone involved in this story is playing a character to move the story along, and that character may be totally removed from their real life person (such as Scott playing Xornoth in ESMP s1) or pretty similar to their real life person, but dialed up so they can tell a story, get a reaction (I don't know any of these people in real life, so I can't confidently pin someone down for this, but you get what I'm talking about).

Regardless, there is a story to be told, even if that story isn't thought out in advance, and that requires people playing the villain or the damsel in distress or the knight in shining armor sometimes in order to get it done. And, tying back into Universal Story, who is playing which of these roles can change as the canon of each POV changes (such as in Third Life, where who is filling the "villain" role depends entirely on which POV you're watching).

Pillar 3: Story Echoes

Story Echoes are a very Mechanisms based concept, because unlike everything else here, they are explicitly canon. This concept refers to the fact that The Mechanisms' stories "echo" throughout the universe, or repeat over and over again. It's in different places and different times, but these stories are out there, over and over again.

This one can apply to MCYT, but I have to admit, it's a stretch and a half. Ultimately, the way this applies here is in the fact that there's no such thing as an original story. Every story borrows from or is inspired by or is similar to another story out there. It's the nature of story telling. The first example for MCYT that comes to mind is fan Life Series, stories that take the mechanics of the Life Series but put them somewhere else, somewhen else, with someone else. However, Story Echoes are explicitly the same story repeating over and over again, which isn't really the case with this example. As I said, it's a stretch, but I didn't want to skip over this pillar entirely.

Pillar 4: Narrative Imperative

And the final pillar, Narrative Imperative, also referred to as Narrative Flow. Despite this one also being explicitly canon to The Mechanisms, it is also very relevant to MCYT, and in my opinion, the most important concept on this list for MCYT meta.

Narrative Imperative is explicitly canon in the Mechs universe when it comes to how The Mechanisms heal from injuries or death. As discussed in this post from the official Mechanisms tumblr, that healing factor functions at "whatever speed the story wants it to". This concept of "sometimes stuff just happens because it must for the story, even if it doesn't make sense or actively contradicts previously established canon" has been brought up before when we were discussing Universal Story, in respect to lore, to roleplay based story beats, for both groups. Here, it's more discussing a fact of the universe at large, a fact of how the Mechanisms function. And while the general concept of Narrative Imperative can be applied to literally any conflicting lore thing in any MCYT server or story (it's flexible in that way), I think it works best when talking about how game mechanics tie into the story.

What does death mean for this character? What does death mean for this character when on this specific server? What does death mean for this character on this specific server in this specific moment? What does logging off mean for this character, on this server, in this moment? What does voice mod or discord calls or chat mean to this character? What do skin changes mean? What does the Player Heads mod mean? What does sleep mean?

There are a million mechanics you can ask these questions about, and you can get a million different answers to each of them. Death can and does mean wildly different things on different servers (see: a Hardcore series like Naked and Afraid versus Hermitcraft). But it can also mean wildly different things on the same server to the same character at different points in time (see: the concept of "canon lives" on DSMP). Death, and numerous other game mechanics, mean whatever the hell the story (and the universe and creators involved) wants them to mean. You just have to take it in stride, the rules aren't clear because if they were, there wouldn't be enough freedom to tell a story.

Even on servers where it seems like the rules are clear, like the Life Series or other death games, death doesn't always mean what the rules say it does. Take glitch deaths, for example, like Loony's (almost) glitched death in season 1 of Deceit SMP. He glitched into a wall and should have died, but Legundo was allowed to cheat (use creative) to save him, or, had he died, been allowed to use cheats to bring him back, for fairness' sake. But this doesn't only apply to glitches- take one of Scar's off camera deaths in Third Life. I don't have the source for when Martyn talked about this on hand, but Martyn has mentioned that Scar technically died earlier in Third Life, when Martyn just snapped one day when Scar provoked him, killing Scar in a short, boring fight. There was nothing technically illegal or unfair about that kill, like with a glitched death, but when all was said and done, everyone agreed it just sort of... felt bad. That it didn't feel like a good story. So, the death was overturned, and the server went on as usual. The rules may have been clear here, but sometimes rules get in the way of a good story, so they're disregarded, simple as that.

MCYT stories are not being told in spite of their medium but in harmony with them. And as such, that means that sometimes, the narrative rules above all, and narrative imperative says that this mechanic is going to work like this, at least for now, at least for me. It might not ever work like that again, for me or for anyone else on the server, but it works like that in this moment, so you take it as is.

So, yeah, there's my essay! My final thoughts: Go listen to The Mechanisms. Go listen to Maki Yamazaki (Dr. Carmilla). I hope you enjoy these four concepts and keep them in mind when you are analyzing or playing the space of MCRP, because I think they are really helpful things to keep in mind. Have a good one.

[california-112]

The rules: Without naming them, post 10 gifs of your favorite TV shows, then tag people.

I was tagged on the original post by the wonderful @autistic-crypt1d, but I'm making a separate post because all of these GIFs are mine! :D I love games like this and this was very fun to do, thank you for tagging me :)

I'm no-pressure tagging @azure-firecracker @hogans-heroes @crowwithacomputer @exuberantocean and anyone else who wants to join the fun! :D

[qprpbj]

oh thank god ppl aren’t crucifying me for saying i like it better that darry dropped out of school over just not going at all i feel so vindicated. i think it makes sm more sense for his character and—-

[maburito]

!!!!!!

This is!!! I don't know if i can say poetic but I'm!!!!! got so much thought about this scene alone!!!!

[surreal-duck]

id post more on insta if it were not for the fact. that i have a fair few irls on it like ill already pick and choose what i do put on there and its not like its a secret per se but. i just would not be able to look them in the eye if they knew a good couple years of my life, several art canvases and a portion of my soul has been dedicated to these two random ass guys. same goes for when i meet enstarries irl (which is relatively not that rare) i will simply never mention a word abt mdyz ever. anyways that aside ygs should look at this nugget i fecked up somehow

[humanundead]

Now that you’ve finished Faiz, who had the most painful show ending: Kenzaki and Hajime or Takumi and Kiba?

its definitely kenhaji for me no question... like. Okay. certainly takumi and kiba were painful but i think there's some sort of closure to be had there right. like yes losing kiba is really painful in the moment especially when takumi wasn't able to make amends with him before he died. but like. if someone's just dead and that's the end of it you can kind of start to move on after a point right. but for kenhaji they don't get that closure the pain is eternal..the other is out there. literally Right There but just out of your reach. forever. for literal eternity. they dont get to die it never ends the torment just goes on forever

and they let themselves have hope things will change and they'll see each other again even though they know deep down the hope won't change anything. like when someone is just dead so it's easier (still really hard! but easier) to move on because you know its over. theyre not coming back there's nothing you can do. but kenhaji will never really be able to let go or move on like that (see: the drama CD and novel) (i also havent seen paradise regained yet so idk if they get into that at all...sorry 😭 planning on watching it at some point tho)

and also something ive been rotating in my mind a lot with the implications it has for post canon is the like. undead mind connection they have after kenzaki starts jokerifying in the wild chalice arc? like its established that they can sense when the other is in pain/in danger...and if that continues to happen after theyve separated its so. you know the other is in pain or going through something and you don't get to talk to them or know what happened or if they're okay.....Augh

and i also think its especially painful when you consider kenzaki's character arc...like he starts the show as a complete loner who's never had any real friends and thinks no one cares about him. but throughout the show he grows close to kotarou and shiori and hajime and everyone else. and he's so overjoyed to have people who truly care about him and he comes to realize (although i don't think he ever fully accepts this) that he has value and means something to the people in his life. he's never had that before. Only to give all of that up. for hajime. so hajime can live. he's right back where he started

and yes kenhaji do get zi-o but this actually does make it worse because when the world resets they remember. they get a taste of what it's like to finally have a life together and it gets ripped from their hands. and they don't even get the luxury of forgetting it ever happened. they get to remember that. For ever for the rest of time. like i think the immortality aspect really adds a whole nother dimension to the torment nexus here that you just dont get with anything else...you have to live forever knowing the one you love is out there and you can't ever see them again. (and also thinking about kenzaki adjusting to being an undead....hajime's the only one on earth who truly understands him and what he's going through with being an undead and being immortal. and he can't ever see him again)

and dont get me wrong i enjoyed takumi and kibas dynamic but theres something about kenhaji that makes me really truly bonkers yonkers. like. They invented love.....i think i'm just a lot more invested in kenhaji so it hurts more. plus i thought the final arc in faiz was kind of rushed and i had a lot of mixed feelings on it in the moment, i've only started to kinda come around to it after letting it sit for a little? so it didn't hit as hard as the ending of blade did for me. its just. like. the pain of knowing someone loves you enough to put you before the whole entire world and sacrificing their own humanity and happiness so that you can live and then you don't even get to share your life with them.....you just have to live with that forever....Fucked up and evil sick and twisted

in conclusion Kamen rider blade 4ever <3

[thegreatyin]

HELL YEAH POWER ENDING SEEKERS ARE MY FAVORITE MR CARDS GENRE i mean they're all my favorite because i legitimately love seeing different people's interpretations of the power ending and the weird fucked up (the fucked up part is important, one must always make their bat fucked up) OCs they make as a result of it. but also i think there's a lot of really fun stuff one can do with a human who deliberately chooses to discard said humanity in order to ascend as a potential replacement for the very figure they're desperately Seeking to learn about and potentially avenge. i'm always kinda surprised it's not more common tbh?? nemesis and BaL just (very very understandably) lend themselves more obviously to seekers i suppose

also that alt strategy is totally valid. it's basically what i pulled with caeru's account all the way back before finishing heart's desire + a not insignificant chunk of evolution. have fun with the dream collecting :)

[aceyanaheim]

My real Christmas present was Athena coming back for this saga anyways ty Jorge

[tothechaos]

You mentioned the facade of museums being a factor in threshold fear and it made me think that my default mental image of a Proper Museum™ is probably a little skewed lol so I wanted to know if you'd ever heard of and what just ur personal thoughts are on the fuckin bonkers looking exterior of the Royal Ontario Museum

(as a bonus it's not a museum but about 2km away from the ROM is OCAD university which also has a uh unique look. Toronto architecture is crazy 😂)

oh FUCK yes this is incredible. it kind of reminds me of the taubman museum in roanoke, virginia in the us!

i know that its not an uncommon sentiment among art historians to dislike for art museums to look Like That because they feel like it detracts from the art but like. i LOVE a fun and funky museum (as someone who is primarily in contemporary art which is mostly where you see this type of architecture), but i also appreciate the fact that while the royal ontario museum isnt your greco-roman style temple, its still A Big Nice Brick Building, but its finding a kind of mid ground between the past and present! choosing not to acknowledge the history of museums doesnt mean that its not there; it is impossible to grow without acknowledging where you came from!

[leadendeath]

face reveal x

creature jumpscare.