#bitch but not in a sense that you get game but in a sense that youre simply an asshole

[thecoolerliauditore]

Pls tell me about Scott's views on women in general pls I'm begging you

o7 and I'm sorry

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

fyi, the post itself isn't NSFW, but I'll be getting all gender theory in this bitch so I'll be referencing a lot of things and putting in pictures of naked ppl sometimes. maybe skip this one if you don't like that

(long post)

Disclaimers

An explanation for the tweet up there

I usually don't write these because I assume the people on my blog have enough sense to realise when I'm talking about the characters vs the CCs or are comfortable enough being a little confused, but I feel the need to extra-clarify here and expand on how I specifically view C vs CC because I think it differs a little from the average person.

To me, C and CC are two separate entities but not entirely disconnected. What differs (e.g. the exclusion of irl relationships -- their wives, kids, etc.) is poignant enough to severely detach them from the people they originated from, at least in my eyes, but there's also the fact that these are not scripted characters, just creators being themselves with a hint of behind the scenes drama-adding and improv thrown in.

For example, CC Pearl is a car nerd. So I assume her character is too.

This is where I state very clearly that yes, a lot of these thoughts come from things I've seen on Scott's twitter, which is undoubtedly the CC and not the C. However I, to me, am still talking about the C because any observations/judgments I could make on actual irl youtuber CC guy Scott Major would be tabloid at best and slightly invasive at worst. I'm seeing these statements within the context of "the death game guy would say this too and I'm writing this based on that", not "this is the inner psychological workings of the youtuber because I, as a fan, can totally tell".

TLDR I don't consider this post RPF but you might. This is a little more RPF-y than my usual stuff. If you don't rock with it we cool.

Everyone is weird about women, and that's okay

One short-hand I've used in the past to talk about Scott and women is just by saying that he's "weird about women" which I'm sure isn't exclusive to him.

(shitpost I made awhile back)

I see a lot of people now who love "villains" and "evil" but when it comes to any traits resembling real life evil (e.g. misogyny in this case) they suddenly become insecure. Just a couple of days back a saw a post on twitter essentially asking for permission to continue liking CC Scott in spite of the "bad things" he did.

And I think, in order to present an analysis like this, I must address that mindset first.

This is not a judgment on Scott's morality, nor is it trying to dissuade you from liking him. This is not saying that he is any more misogynistic than any other player in the series. This is just me pointing out Scott's attitude towards women and what I read it as, nothing less or more.

The feelings that me pointing these things out - be they apathy, disgust, anger or, what I would hope to see most, interest - are your own. I'm not here to tell anyone how to feel and never will try to police that on my blog.

Scott's Relationships with Women

aka. oh yeah this is about minecraft.

Scott and Cleo || "Yeah, you can kill me."

Scott and Cleo's alliance is arguably the strongest in the entire series, spanning through all five seasons and remaining unbroken with no (serious) drama attached. You'd expect from this that they two have a very settled and stable understanding of eachother, yet this isn't a case.

Their power dynamic shifts dramatically from one season to the next.

3L's initial Widows Alliance began on fairly equal footing, built on the mutual agreement that they were waiting for their respective partners to die. Both understood they were eachothers' "plan B" and felt comfortable in that arrangement.

Come LL, Cleo does what she couldn't in 3L, and initiates that plan, going to Scott after her last alliance, the fairy fort, fell apart. Scott requests nothing from her in return.

DL is the longest the two spent as eachothers main ally. Cleo is the one who initially proposes teaming up to spite their "cheating" soulmates and Scott agrees. Cleo admits to Martyn in private that she's aware she's taking advantage of Scott (which I've always interpreted as her talking about all seasons, not just DL). Due to the time they spend together, it's here where it becomes apparent that their initial assumptions during 3L were not entirely accurate, as Scott shows a level of gameplay competency much higher than Cleo's (e.g. teaching her how to axe-crit) but despite this Scott never berates her or thinks any less of her value as his ally.

LimL is probably this pairing at their most unhinged, as Scott, despite once again asking for nothing (or very little -- I'll be honest I'm a bit fuzzy on this) in return from Cleo, allows them and their allies to butcher him repeatedly for time. He gives more time to the Clockers than he does to Martyn, his closest ally that season. Despite this, Scott is never ever considered as a "family member" by the Clockers, despite them giving that title to even temporary allies (like the Bad Boys being their cousins) -- even Martyn gets a title with Scott completely unattached.

SL is relatively more chill, but shows that the two inevitably end up teaming together even despite their oath to avoid eachother that season.

The point being -- again and again, we see Scott literally and metaphorically making sacrifices for Cleo, with the only real transaction he requires from her being that she continues having his back when times get rough. This is despite that he's aware she isn't any more capable than he is and the fact that so far it has only been Cleo in rough times (LL, LimL and SL) and never Scott.

Speaking from a purely transactional perspective, Scott is not getting a bargain here -- and even Cleo seems acutely aware of it, judging by her comment during DL as well as the way she tends to speak of her survival capabilities very lowly in general ("rubbish pvp skills and spiffy one-liners"). I'm speaking in this sense because I've seen discussions in the past about the transactional way Scott views relationships but rarely does Cleo get brought up.

This is at stark contrast to how he treats Jimmy, whose predicted death was what spurred on Scott and Cleo's alliance in the first place.

Scott assumes Jimmy is "incompetent", where he assumes Cleo is capable. When Jimmy messes up, he reprimands him, when Cleo struggles to crit him, he patiently teaches her. When LL begins, Scott's first instinct was to look at Jimmy's lives and note that he was "useless to (him)", but holds no objections to Cleo joining his alliance despite her already having enemies being a potential liability. In SL, he jokes about how Cleo and him being allied is a given and pretty much expected of them, whereas in LimL he explicitly requests from Jimmy a recognition that he still cares ("say love you back!") before he will help him.

Scott and Gem || "You HAVE TO kill me, Gem,"

In SL, Gem settles in very easily in a leadership position within Gem and the Scotts due to her trying to live up to her reputation but also due to Scott and Impulse's more laid back, passive playstyles.

Both Scott and Impulse let Gem kill them for extra health this season, although Scott is arguably much more subservient than Impulse is, with him not only insisting that she kill him in the final episode but also not fighting back (and only yelling for her to stop) when she starts hitting him with a sword during the episode where her task was to literally kill everyone on the server.

Once again comparing her to Jimmy, Scott in 3L had a tendency to brush aside Jimmy's concerns over alliances (e.g. Jimmy questioning if they could trust Cleo) while in SL Scott runs his plans by Gem (and Pearl and Impulse) in terms of who he wanted to team up with (specifically excluding Joel from the potential mounders alliance) implying he held her opinion in some form of regard.

Before this becomes less of an analysis of Scott's treatment of men vs women and more of Scott's treatment of Jimmy vs everyone else, I think it's notable enough to mention that he and Martyn also lacked this sort of communication in LimL. He would inform Martyn of his plans, but rarely was it ever framed as a request.

SL almost feels as if Scott has slid Gem into the slot he had previously designated for Cleo in 3L (his girlboss ally) as he provides her and pretty much forces onto her by the end the acts of service he'd become accustomed to performing for Cleo.

Scott and Lizzie || "You killed her! I don't.. I don't know what to even say!"

Relatively shorter section because this is the one woman he hasn't teamed with, but there's still some interesting stuff I wanted to touch on.

In LL, one of the first thing Scott does is yell at Pearl to revenge-kill Joel for boogey-killing him. Pearl does as she's told and Joel's wet miserable pathetic LL life gets worse from there.

Several episodes later, the roles are reversed -- Lizzie lies to both of them and manages to isolate and boogey-kill Pearl. Scott, instead of reacting with the anger he had for Joel, is almost in a state of shock as he asks Lizzie to let him down so he could collect Pearl's belongings. He doesn't act aggressively towards Lizzie at all, with his most antagonizing act against her being to lie about his intentions when giving her a wither skull.

In SL, he's the only one aware of her early permadeath, but keeps quiet about it almost as if he's in a state of shock akin to when he saw Lizzie kill Pearl in LL. It's not until the others have noticed when he finally brings it up.

Scott and Pearl || "Tilly death do us 'part"

I wrote a whole post just for their relationship alone so for the sake of my sanity I'll be leaving this here.

So now I get to dedicate this section to the meat of this post -- how the way Scott treats women in general impacts his relationship with Pearl and how I view his heel-turn on her as seeping with relevance to Pearl's perceived gender.

In all three of the previous sections, the running theme is that Scott is 1. kinder and more patient with women, regardless of their competency and 2. someone who likes to be in a supporting role to women, occasionally aiding them more than he aids himself and his closer male allies (e.g. Jimmy and Martyn). As shown with Cleo, he assumes that girls have it together, but even if they don't it's not a big deal. When a girl's actions are truly disastrous, such as with Lizzie's, he goes into a state of shock and doesn't really react, preferring to swallow it down and not acknowledge it.

With the amount of times he sacrifices himself, I don't think it's a reach to say that Scott values his own life less than he values the lives of his (female) allies. This specific point actually does extend to his male allies too, shown when he's happy when Martyn literally backstabs him in LimL, but just as with the Martyn post where I point out his victim status-ing doesn't end at only women but includes all the women, Scott has pedastal-ed all the women he's teamed with.

Lizzie is, once again, the exception here due to his limited interactions with her. However that's actually somewhat patched over if you look at adjacent series (such as x-life) where he definitely shows her a level of admiration and respect.

Back to Scott and Pearl.

Their relationship during LL is very standard of how Scott treats women. While the power dynamic between them is obviously more caused by the initial life trade agreement, I don't think it's a far reach to say that Scott is somewhat comfortable in the arrangement.

However, this is also the first thing that sets their relationship apart from Scott with Cleo or Gem -- Pearl is the one making sacrifices, not Scott. She is the one "sacrificing" her lives to him, just in a more non-violent way as allowed by the season's mechanics.

When viewed through this lens, Scott trying to make it up to her and wanting his effort acknowledged makes even more sense. This is suddenly uncharted waters for him. His assuming that Pearl doesn't value him as a person goes hand in hand with him valuing himself less than her.

What Scott has with Cleo or Gem, situations where the other party is clearly uncomfortable with how he treats himself (Gem) or actively aware they are taking advantage of him (Cleo), is equalized to him because he is inherently worth less. What he has with Pearl, on the other hand, looks more equal to most people (lives vs labour) but is wildly imbalanced to him.

It's one of the many factors I see going into Scott's weird decision to abandon her in DL.

An Interlude, Before We Get to DL

La Pieta, Michelangelo

So this has been a lot of words so far and some of you might be wondering at this point: why say Scott is "weird" about women when so far this has been describing how he values women more, is kinder to them, is more patient with them, etc.? How is any of this behaviour remotely misogynistic?

And I would feel horrible if I forced you to read through all of my DL thoughts before I clarified this -- Scott is not your classic wifebeater "women are lesser" misogynist, Scott is someone who subscribes to misogynistic schools of thought and probably considers himself an ally to women, when in reality his beliefs are still rooted in dehumanizing them and these beliefs end up harming the women around him as well as himself.

After all, seeing women are your superiors is still not seeing them as your equals.

I know it's a bit of a meme on this blog at this point. But. Sigmund Freud identified what we know refer to as the "madonna/whore complex", which he described as a pattern of behaviour in men who separated women into being madonnas (pure, holy and admirable) and whores (debased, sexual, deviant). We'll be focusing on the former, the madonna, as it is more relevant to Scott's character.

Freud proposed that the madonna figure was something men projected onto women as a replacement for maternal love. These women are sacred and untouchable, literally as the projection of the maternal role onto them also makes it so that the sufferer cannot feel any sexual attraction towards her (keep this in mind for later).

Scott projects the madonna figure onto his female compatriots -- they are to be protected, served and supported. They are goddesses, queens, but they are never human. The madonna role in of itself is not inherently harmful to the woman, as seen with Cleo who takes control and advantage of it. However, it is enforced, as seen with Gem who at first revels in the superiority but almost breaks down when Scott offers him up as her sacrificial lamb one last time.

I linked this Utena AMV awhile back when vaguely talking about Scott and women, and this was the point I was alluding to.

Girls are beautiful and pure. They don't spit on the street, they don't piss on the street, they don't build hierarchies -- they subvert all the expectations of masculinity that I hate having to deal with. They are my escape.

But what about the girls who do spit on the street? The girls who piss on seats? Who build social hierarchies, who size up their competition?

The girls Scott interacts with are all painfully human. Cleo weaponizes his beliefs and take advantage of him. Scott is smart enough to know and accept this. Gem's playing into a role she has been assigned into by not only Scott but everyone around her. Scott supports the character she plays. Lizzie reflects traits he hates in Joel and Jimmy, but for her, he looks the other way.

Are they "demons", as the song says, or are they no longer girls at all?

(demons, gods, but never humans)

Weaponized Femininity and Women In Total Control of Themselves ;)

Hylas and the Nymphs, John William Waterhouse

Historically, weaponized femininity I'd argue is one of the oldest tropes in storytelling. Whether it's nymphs or sirens or witches or succubi or even more roundabout cases like Helen of Troy, there's countless stories of men's sexual attraction to women leading them to disaster.

One way to view these stories is to see them as warnings, don't let womens allure be the end of you.

There's a lot of good writing done on the femme fatale trope both in the context of weaponizing femininity and as a sexist way to argue against victims of sexual assault, as these stories often say that men who experience attraction to these "evil" women no longer have agency over their own actions.

Look at the painting above, for example - is it the nymphs who are responsible for drowning Hylas, or is Hylas climbing into the lake of his own accord?

Despite the fact we all know sirens, nymphs and succubi aren't real, the belief that men will simply lose control of themselves when encountering a particularly alluring woman persists to the modern consciousness. That there's something inherently dangerous about women and attraction to them.

(this is not 100% applicable to Ninja saying he won't stream with women, but it's the real life example I felt most comfortable putting in here)

Now, let's combine this with what's been said so far -- let's say you don't hate women. You love women, in fact, and you hate the way men treat women. You hate men, in fact.

Yet, you still believe in this inherent power women hold by being female and the loss of agency that men experience when attracted to them -- how disgusting.

It quickly becomes easily to not only demonize men for sullying the holiness of women, but also men, masculinity and attraction to women as a whole.

(apologies for using twt discourse in the meta post but this flew by my TL and i had to grab the irl example of mens non-violent attraction to women being used to frame them as misogynistic before the stupid app refreshed and i lose everything forever)

"To Venner" is a student film exploring a world set within this belief, where all the women have vanished and the men have become monstrous figures as a result of their pent up sexual frustration. fyi this is one of my favourite student films (and ive watched a bunch), but I do think its messaging is worth breaking down (especially its juxtaposition of dirty horrible monstrous sexuality vs pure and beautiful romantic love)

NOTE: this film is super graphic, lots of violence and nudity. have fun. or not

I admit this section is a bit hard to gauge as everyone in the series is gay as fuck. The closest in-series example I can think of is Scott reacting to Martyn's antics in DL with a sort of indigence but otherwise I can't really think of an example of a man expressing attraction to a woman at all, let alone one Scott reacted to. However, I do think it's still worth talking about because it opens up some interesting trains of thought in regard to Scott and Pearl.

For Scott, he himself has never been part of the picture. He's gay, after all, which gives him an edge over the bad straight men who objectify and assault women. Likewise, there's little evidence to suggest he finds the expectations of masculinity frustrating, but I don't think it's too far a reach considering how common of an experience that is for gay men and his adapting of more feminine mannerisms.

Double Life and Corruption

As mentioned in my previously linked post about Scott and Pearl's relationship, I do think Scott experiences what he would name as attraction towards Pearl, so my writing will reflect that.

Pearl is. ahem. not like other girls.

Not actually. But to Scott, she probably isn't like other girls.

She remains unaware of his different standards for her (how could she when she had nothing to compare them to), she acts out, sometimes violently, against Scott's urging (such as when she stole from Scar's wagon). She maintains their already irregular dynamic, and while she appreciates his care for her, she never quite falls into seeing him as a source of subservience the way Cleo or Gem do.

At the end of LL, right before the 1v1v1v1, she monologues to herself that she no longer has to feel bad for killing Scott. Which, in turn, implies she expected Scott to give it his all against her as well.

She entirely fails to embody the madonna with her immature naivete and her questionable morals. She is unpredictable, she doesn't take what she is owed, she is a monster in a lot of ways.

Scott, too, is a monster, to himself, for how he feels about her.

The very foundations of your understanding of yourself being ripped apart aside, let's rewind to the madonna/whore complex. To sexualise the madonna is to corrupt her and make a monster of yourself. Suddenly, you are no better than the men around you, the ones you've grown to hate. Suddenly, you are the grotesque figures in films like To Venner. You are Hylas and she is the nymph. And you are so stupid. Your worldview crumbles around its flawed foundations.

Scott is, however, immune to this corruption. This is a theme that appears in Empires as well, but throughout the traffic series he's prided himself on being loyal and kind and good. His monologue leading up to LL's 1v1v1v1 summarizes it quite well.

He can't let himself or anyone else see this side of him, but the energy needs to go somewhere. To defy fate, abandon your soulmate, is to admit you had a fate in the first place, is to acknowledge that she was your soulmate in the first place.

I've previously talked about how fate and romance are very ingrained in Scott's belief system, if it was anyone else it would've been amazing. He could've been like Bdubs and Impulse or Ren and Bigb, diving into domestic life and performative romance with a stranger. Or the world could've made his happy ending from 3L real, as he got to be Jimmy's husband all over again. I think it says something that he accepts Cleo as a "soulmate" before Pearl.

So what do you do with all that energy and tension, clearly apparent to yourself and everyone else, when you can't let them observe your feelings?

You project them.

Shout-outs to @/legally-allowed-to-slime for pointing out Pearl's comment early on in DL that she "feels like (she's) been broken up with" confirms she never saw Scott in a romantic sense. The "crazy ex-girlfriend" and "this is why I'm gay" comments really did come out of thin air, or perhaps insecurity.

Pearl is the crazy one. She's insane, because she wants me. She wants to be with me, so she does all this crazy stuff. She's lost control of herself because she wants me. She's disgusting.

I mentioned before that Scott is not your classic misogynist, but this is where the gears start turning. Scott's views of Pearl echo that of other players, most prominently Ren and Martyn, that Pearl has been overcome with some sort of corruption. She has become the witch, the demoness, the whore, in their eyes. Scott does not want to be the same as these men and I think his overcorrecting his behaviour in SL makes sense when you view it from this angle, but for now he has to rely on more traditional misogyny in order to navigate this new obstacle.

"Corruption" also implies that she had to have been pure (or at least pure-er) beforehand, something Scott personally knows is not true, but it falls in line with defaulting women to being "madonnas".

This is a Scott post but. shout outs to Ren for being all of this about Pearl but without the complexity of Scott like he literally accuses Pearl of seducing Bigb what the fuck man.

Pearl is, of course, none of that. But she plays into the role of being the witch much better than she fared playing into the role of the madonna.

Sidenote: I know I'm looking at this from a Scott/Pearl POV but I do feel like you can omit Scott's attraction if you look at it from a purely "pearl not performing to standards of femininity I expect and she makes me realise I don't view women as a whole as human which makes me feel weird so now we have to do this" POV. Like idk I think the exact reason he abandoned Pearl is going to be lost on everyone forever so any analysis I could perform is going to suffer at least a little bit of making-shit-up-itis.

I do also think there's something to be said about Pearl being pushed until she performed a role, any role and generally failing at Being A Girl tm but that's another post i think. yknow shes um. a bit. 🏳️‍⚧️ (but also very much not at the same time idk that's gonna need its own post)

anyway yeah uh the minecraft movie looks crazy huh

[cuntela]

bill cipher

[stupidrant]

im seeing the pattern of being an atreus/angrboda fan (or u just like them) and having to go through this weird initiation process of: liking them in the game (wether its themselves, their relationship or both), then trying to find content of them only to be shocked to see a bunch of haters (on both sides but angrboda gets it the worst and thrud is often times oddly used against her), only to then get severely disappointed and realize u probably have to do a bit of contribution yourself which isnt bad but it sucks when its characters that are ridiculously hated 😭😭😭

[danandfuckingjonlmao]

dan and phil are like jesus in that they’re dramatic ass fruity men in their 30s always going like “i am making this SACRIFICE for THE PEOPLE” and everyone is like “no one asked you to do this in fact we’d all rather you just did not do this” and they’re like “IT IS TOO LATE NOW YOU HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES THIS IS WHAT YOU WANTED” and we’re like “no no we didn’t want this actually and you made this decision with your whole ass adult brain you truly could have just not done this and we’d all be better off for it but now we all have to suffer because YOU refuse to say no to shit” and i think that’s ridiculous stupid annoying awful beautiful

[haunteddragonssun]

I've been playing this game called Sea of Stars and I am no longer normal about it.

I literally need to go to sleep but all I can think about is that fact that my fav, my boy Garl (photo below) is going to die and I have to be a normal person in the morning.

This boy waiting TEN YEARS (not knowing he'd need to wait that long) for his best friends to finish school and trained ALL ON HIS OWN so they could all go adventuring together once they were out.

They (the trio of friends) try to prove themselves as kids causing a monster to attack and Garl protects his friends losing an eye in the process (not a spoiler literally the prologue to the game).

He sneaks in one night (to their magical school in the sky) to leave them cookies cause he misses them.

He's the voice of the group because surprise of all surprises, two kids spending the entirety of their formative years (like 8-18) only having each other and 1 teacher do not develop adept social skills.

Those two only had each other for ten years and after meeting Garl again NEVER make him feel left out or like they out grew each other.

He wants to stay be their side forever.

They want him with them forever.

AND HE IS CURRENTLY ON THE VERGE OF DEATH AND I HAVE TO GO TO BED BECAUSE CAPITALISM DEMANDS I WORK IN THE MORNING!!!!

How am I supposed to be normal about this?!??!?

[turtlespancake]

me when i write a character who is prone to dooming themself and then they run off and doom themself. core traits are stubbornness and a willingness to disregard their own humanity gET BACK HERE IM NOT DONE WITH YOU

[primordial0riginator]

I need to play more Hades <- girl who spent all of last night playing Hades

[californiaquail]

cannot fucking wait to get this new covid vaccine shoot me tf up ‼️‼️

[refridgerators]

HAAAAATE WITH MY ENTIRE LIVING FUCKING BEING when people call dr. ratio self centered… his whole arc in every fucking thing he’s ever been in is about how he views other people and his role as a doctor, like…

i get it if u don’t care about lore, cus i can understand that sometimes. but how geniuenly ignorant can you be when you think someone who works as both a DOCTOR and PROFESSOR hates humanity. like????? his work revolves around other people entirely he would not be able to do the shit he does if he was as arrogant and mean as yall called him out to be.

i get it, he can be snarky. but like… have you tried living in the same universe, no, working MULTIPLE TIMES with someone who goes entirely against your philosophy of logicism and intelligence for prolonged periods of time???? no, i don’t fucking think so. i would, too, get slightly irritated at that person because they’re so stupidly foolish, and yet they survive each time they make a bad decision so they never learn their fuckinh lesson. fuck you.

”oh, but he literally sculpts statues of himself doing cringe poses!!! why would he do that if he didn’t have the biggest ego ever!!!?” ARE YOU FUCKING STUPID??? sorry. whew. his voiceline when he erects the statues is ”for the theatere of the mediocre”, which implies that the only reason he makes the statues public is to entertain his ’mediocre’ audience. he doesn’t do it for himself, he does it for OTHER PEOPLE. BECAUSE HIS CHARACTER FOCUSES ON HIS LOVE FOR HUMANITY AND THE WAY HE CARES IS QUITE WEIRD I KNOW BUT HE CARES IN HIS OWN VERITAS WAY. sorry.

ratio follows the path of the hunt, which means that he has a set goal that he works very hard to achieve, or at least wants to strive for. ratios goal is to eradicate ignorance from the universe. this can be gathered from not only his character stories, but also from his title. in the cn version of the game the doctor part of his title is the same term as that of a medical doctor, not someone who owns a/multiple doctorate(s). this means that he sees himself as a healer more than anything, and what he wants to heal humanity from primarily is ignorance.

he does this in multiple ways. firstly, in his ”acceptance test speech” (idfk what to call it, it’s in his character story 4) he expresses ”if ignorance is an ailment, it is the duty of scholars to weed it out and heal the universe.” this informs the other people in the intelligensia guild that they, too, should treat ignorance like a sickness that plauges humanity, thus taking the problem more seriously. secondly, (i don’t remember where i read this but i SWEAR on my life that it’s canon) he has mentioned before that the reason he is so ’mean’ is because he wants people to realize how stupid they are. it sounds awful, but he’s smarter than all of us so stay with me now. the reason he says that is because he knows the first step in learning something is accepting that you don’t know it, so he wants people to realize their foolishness in order for them to want to become smarter, thus making them forgo their ignorant tendencies. isn’t that amazing? look, i know if he was my teacher i’d be crying the first fucking lesson, but it’s still a good strategy imo. make people realize how dumb they are, making them want to not be dumb, making them solve the problem you hate so much.

he’s very dear to me if you can’t tell. i’ll stfu now i promise

[waywardsalt]

Hey, thanks for the response on the post where I asked about what people dislike ab totk! I genuinely appreciate it a lot, and you summarized most of my thoughts about this beautifully!

Here's something you might find interesting: something about this game's pacing REALLY bothered me from the start, and I think I know what it is. Totk, despite being an open world game that you can pour a ton of time into, feels short. It's a really weird feeling, and I think it can be explained in that Nintendo is trying to use the linear storytelling format for a nonlinear game, which is also why the ability to see the tears in a random order was disorienting, and why the stories from the ancient sages felt so repetitive.

The gameplay is long, but the story isn't! If you compare it to Skyward Sword, for example! In sksw, you go through each of the areas once, and then again with some changes, and then again with more. There's several clear acts, and even if the game is super super linear and recieves criticism for that, it works really well in that context. Additionally, the characters more than make up for the linearity of the story. Totk tries to take that same format, but doesn't seem to understand that this format is for a linear story. It only has a very brief story, and the story to gameplay ratio is so dragged out that unless you get invested in the world, it all starts to feel really stupid and pointless. Unfortunately, totk fails at getting us invested, too.

I really hope this made ANY sense at all, ty again for the input!! I love the responses I'm getting on that post djbdjsndns :D

Hi, you're welcome for my uh... totk rant, I guess? I covered a lot of stuff in it but I wouldn't say I covered everything bc there is... a lot abt that game that rubs me the wrong way in one way or another.

totk is definitely an odd case, it being an open world game that does try to adhere to linear game rules, you’re right- and i’d say the story is severely kneecapped by that attempt on the game’s part to have its cake and eat it too. it tries to mix what botw brought to the table with what was done in the past, but because botw is vastly different in what it does than past zelda games, the result is a messily paced, poorly-told, gameplay-focused with piss-easy mandatory puzzle segments result, failing to capture the advantages of linear games and instead making those specific parts considerably weaker.

people give linear games shit for… honestly, im not totally sure, as someone who really enjoys linear games. they allow for a good focus on story and character, mostly because you can have a set pace and passing of time and order of events. totk tries to implement linear style elements into a game where you can do anything out of order, so in the end the story is surprisingly brief but slow paced because you have to travel so far for everything and they have to account for you doing everything in any order, hence... repeating the same fucking information as a reward for four of the dungeons (which, i don't care how you feel about this game, is an awful fucking choice i mean holy SHIT), and is probably why the interactions with the new sages include very brief character arcs or something, they wanted to include some kind of linear character stories but it all just got stuffed in between a bunch of mini-main quests.

the fact that effectively half of the main story happens ages in the past and is communicated through brief cutscenes that can easily be encountered out of order, too, is kind of a pitiful way to tell the story. they're all basically glorified exposition dumps since nothing about them will change, they're all events that have already happened and have nothing to do with the player except hyping them up i guess.

the dungeons themselves are awkwardly transposed from a more linear game style with them relying on a specific skill to some degree, but they just fall so flat compared to past linear zelda dungeons. in botw the divine beasts honestly worked because the mechanic of manipulating the beasts themselves and the activating of switches fit perfectly with the setup of the dungeons being huge machines, while there isn't as good of a story example as to why totk's dungeons have the same switch mechanic. botw's divine beasts work pretty well in an open world setting. totk's just fall to pieces in an open with setting, even discounting how ascend could just snap them in half entirely. you just... can't have the same kind of dungeons as past zelda games in an open world format. once you take out the array of specific-use progressively-earned items, you're just left with this tiny little gmod ass toolbox to do what felt like baby's first loz-style dungeon. go to the clearly marked waypoint, do one (1) simple puzzle, get reward.

i miss mini bosses, rooms with puzzles that had to be solved to unlock a door or a doorkey, and even the experience of wandering around just trying to figure out what to do next. honestly, the first half of the lightning temple was the best part of all of the dungeons put together, and then we're back to 'go to four different rooms to do four different easy puzzles'. linear games have genuine advantages over open world games, and open world games have their own advantages. in the story segments, totk just ignores the advantages inherent to it's game's basic style in favor of trying and failing to emulate the advantages of a very different game style.

totk is so paradoxically unable to tear itself away from the series' past while at the same time disregarding series staples and even big parts of its own goddamn prequel.

in my experience with the game, as far as i can remember, i believe i went around and opened all of the towers, did some shrines and the depths, got the master sword, did the main quests with some side quests, then sped through getting all of the memories in order, then did the final boss. in between all of that, i managed to get all of the armor, do every single shrine, and open the entirety of the depths. i did not give a single damn about the story by the end. for me, with my playstyle, everything was just... spread out over such a long period of time so there was barely any urgency at all, i experienced the memories all in quick succession while already knowing the big twist (which. btw. i didnt care about. i wasnt really endeared to zelda and link's lack of visual interest during cutscenes just brought up the question of if he doesnt care why should i), and since this game's story is more linear, it just felt so disjointed and strange and... not important.

with botw it makes pretty good sense why link may take ages, why you could get the memories however you want, all of that. zelda is keeping things with ganon on pause for you. all of the big stuff happened in the past. you are here in the present, in the ruins of the past, a blank slate come to eventually complete the mission that you had failed, at the same time discovering this new world and becoming re-acquainted to it with this strange second chance you've been given. totk doesn't have this excuse. at least in past zelda games, you did things in a specific order, so when you wanted to fuck around, it was usually something related to or based on your progress. if you want to fuck around in oot what you can do is based on where you are in the game and even then it all ends up wrapping back around to bolstering link for the end. getting hearts, better items... like every side quest in every other loz game did. in totk you can do a sidequest for like. one flower. and what does that even do for you. it doesn't have the excuse of the honestly pretty well crafted setup and world state of botw.

i really don't know what happened during the development of totk, and i can't imagine it was the smoothest thing in the world, esp considering the pandemic hitting in the middle of it. but just... it just feels like it failed in so many regards and was just... so disappointing, and yet people are heralding it as the best zelda game and- this is not what i want a zelda game to be! i want a zelda game to have those wonderful puzzle-filled dungeons with well-written main characters and music that fits the setting and feels supported by the game's events and a unique setting with unique little nooks and crannies and good pacing and act structure and like. some kind of heart to it. not just another big open-world game created to be the big open world game where you can do this one amazing specific cool thing that TOTALLY is worth the $70 or whatever else it may be priced around the world.

idk. to me what makes zelda games zelda games is the linear storytelling and those complex dungeons and specific method of progression, and botw's new open-world emulation of the sense that loz 1 gave does not and probably will not ever be able to mix with that linear style unless you have massive in game game style shifts to allow for it. either return to the old format or just commit to the series becoming Triple A Open World Game Series Number 34

[kakusu-shipping]

I apologize for not posting anything at all. I'm no where near the end of VLR but these people have invaded my brain and I can't do anything about it.

[rangieatme]

“If it were not for you, my Daisy, I would have belonged to Belial long ago. For there is no one else in this world, my most beautiful, maddening, adorable wife, that I could ever have loved half as much as I have loved you. My heart beats for you,” he said. “Only ever you.”

[conspiracydawg]

got around to reading nona the ninth and I think I finally have to concede that I'm just not picking up what these books are putting down. there's some cool concepts but it feels like the author is actively avoiding them most of the time. also finding the constant quips and references annoying, and not really sold on the central relationship of the series, which leaves very little for me to be happy about. I'll read alecto because I'd like to know what happens next, but I can't help but feel I'll also be relieved when it's over

[delphiniumarchangelmoon]

You ever decide to give a YouTube channel a second chance after deciding g you didn’t like them years ago

And then you remember why you didn’t like them

[unnerving-presence]

not my nemmy obsession folding me into a chair bc i’m playing re3r

[lollybliz]

BESTIE do you think you'll be able to get totk soon I wanna see you Experience it so bad now that I finished it (dw I won't spoil just be careful to block the spoil tags and unfollow my fandom blog if you're following it)

Oh I pre-ordered it, I've had it since day of release, I just haven't had as much free time as i would have liked 😭 ive gotten the paraglider, and haven't had the time to get past that, but I'm working on it fdnfndndkdndjs I Very Like falling alarming distances, as I suspected I would :chef's kiss: