#i found this one lackluster and narratively frustrating.

[tommycorriander]

Hazbin Hotel, Helluva Boss, And Disability

I am disabled. This is something I've talked about a handful of times on this blog and on my Twitter, and anyone who knows me knows I am a disabled man. As a result, while I do enjoy dissecting media and politics, the need to be an advocate for disability issues would have fallen on me to some extent regardless. Disabled folks are often left out of conversations regarding diversity in media, in a continued oversight from able bodied peers.

What does this have to do with the Hellaverse?

Both shows contain at least some small amount of disability representation; specifically, they both have characters that are physically disabled. In Hazbin Hotel this is Vaggie, as she is missing an eye and prior to the finale had lost her wings. In Helluva Boss, the characters would be Fizzarolli, a quad amputee, and the unnamed deaf child in the special. The only character I ever see talked about in regards to their disability by the wider fanbase is the unnamed child, and on a smaller scale in critical spaces I occasionally see remarks on Fizzarolli's disability.

This is a problem.

For as much as fans of one or both shows would love to claim diversity in their shows, the lack of disability representation and the lackluster portrayal of the minimal representation is poor. And I haven't seen any of my fellow critics discuss this, which I feel is an oversight, though I don't fault them for this as there are many problems with both shows and they tend to have their hands full. However, this angle of viewing the shows has been overlooked, which is why I wish to discuss it today.

Firstly, I'd like to specify what I mean when I discuss disability. While the conversation regarding the Hellaverse is primarily centered around physical disability as this is the only form of disability portrayed in the shows, coded or otherwise, disability comes in many different forms. Intellectual disabilities and mental disabilities are just as important for representation in the media as physical disabilities. Among physical disabilities, there's also a difference in visible and invisible disabilities, the latter of which is hardly ever shown in media compared to the former. Ideally all forms of disability would be portrayed equally and with respect, but unfortunately this isn't the case. I also don't expect every show to tackle every demographic at once; this isn't a reasonable request, and to be very clear, my issue with the representation in HH/HB does not come from every single unique experience with disability not being covered, but rather with the narrative the creatives behind the show and the show's fans continue to push: that both shows are diverse and are, in some way, more progressive than other shows.

This isn't the case for many reasons. Fellow critics have gone into depth about the show's lack of representation of women in nuanced roles, the lack of queer women, the racist ways in which the very few characters of colour are presented, the lack of trans representation, and even the way sex and sexuality is presented being rather conservative at times. That isn't the focus of this essay, but I would implore anyone who is reading this who is somehow unaware of the previous issues to seek out essays that talk about those points; Cassidy Whiskey on YouTube has a three-part series that covers a multitude of topics, not just issues of representation, and I would have recommended helluvareceipts on Twitter, but her account has sadly been deactivated. I'm sure there are others, but I'll lose focus if I try to name every single person to go to. If you're willing to trawl through general pettiness in the critical tag (which, let's be real, that is probably how you found this post) you'll find well-worded critiques as well.

Back to the topic at hand. The lack of representation of people with disabilities is already frustrating, but there isn't a complete drought: Vaggie, Fizzarolli, and the unnamed imp child do exist, after all. However, their representation is not just flawed, but even exploitative in some ways.

First we have Vaggie. Aside from the visual of her missing eye and seeing the incident in which she lost that eye, nothing comes of it. She never has to contend with the difficulties that come with impaired sight, and it's never brought up by other characters. In the training scene between her and Carmilla, it's not a factor: instead, her greater flaw in the physical realm when it comes to combat is having longer hair. This is an extreme oversight, which I believe shows that Vivienne and the various writers for the show never actually take into consideration what should be a major element of a character, that being her impaired vision. Furthermore, the loss of her wings isn't even considered at all, with her somehow gaining them back at the end of her training montage with Carmilla. This could have been an excellent vector to discuss physical disability in a coded form, with her wings being a stand in for more traditional forms of limb loss. Still not ideal, as I believe it's better to have forthright depictions of disability over metaphors, but it would have been something. Instead, it's never a factor, and worse, it's effectively cured. As far as representation goes, Vaggie might as well not even count.

That's all that exists for Hazbin Hotel. In Helluva Boss, we have two characters, and I will save the unnamed child for last, because that is where the real issue with the representation is on full display.

So, Fizzarolli. He is a quad amputee and potentially hearing impaired, though the latter is speculated on due to a single scene which I discuss later. Since that scene is the only time it ever comes up, I will focus on his amputee status. He lost his limbs in a fire, something we see on screen. I will disagree with some of my fellow critics in that this scene should have been more detailed; I feel that had the scene shown more of the damage dealt to Fizz's body it would have come across in poor taste, and focusing on the tragic aspect of disability usually ends up feeling like trauma porn in the hands of poor writers, which Vivienne most certainly is. I do not trust her to handle a more detailed scene with grace, especially given her track record (more on that later). It is ultimately for the best that the scene is mostly brushed over, even if it would have been better in the hands of someone with the maturity and sensitivity to cover such a topic for more to be shown in regards to his injuries.

Otherwise, Fizzarolli is mostly fine. He's shown not just surviving but thriving, he has a loving partner (criticisms of the portrayal of said relationship not withstanding) and generally sees success in his life while still having to grapple with the realities of his disability when it comes to his prosthetics being prone to damage and potentially shutting down. I would, in the hands of anyone else, like to see more of this character and what his daily routine looks like as a disabled man.

Unfortunately all the good will built with Fizz comes crashing down when we get to the unnamed imp child in the Fizzarolli special episode. This child is the poster child for virtue signalling. Frankly, it's disgusting how a majority of the fandom seemed to ignore how fetishistic this portrayal was. This is where the real meat of the essay comes in to play.

This unnamed child is given a single scene, and is then promptly forgotten about and never mentioned again. They are introduced as being a fan of Fizz here to view the competition, there is a brief exchange between the two, and then we all move on. And yet this scene was championed as somehow revolutionary or a sign of the top-tier diversity and progressiveness in Helluva, when in reality this type of scene has been done to death. This is tokenism.

One major stumbling block many of the people championing this scene seem to get tripped up on is a very simple question: why was this child a child to begin with? Really, this seems like a simple question, it shouldn't have much thought. Sometimes characters are kids. But within the episode it's clearly shown through multiple different avenues that this is an adult show. The performances are dripping with sexuality, several of the fans of Fizzarolli are there because Mammon sells sex robots of the guy, there is no mistaking that this is something no child should be at, let alone by themselves.

So why was this child a child? Simple: brownie points.

It's a lot more difficult for people to share clips of a wholesome moment from your show if the person Fizz was interacting with was an adult. People are ableist, this is pretty par for the course; as a disabled person I find it generally safer to assume people are ableist before proven otherwise. I can guarantee if this scene were to be between Fizzarolli and a deaf adult fan as opposed to a young child, it would not have been championed as this amazing representation by mostly able bodied fans. And that is by design: if Vivienne genuinely cared about representation, if she truly wanted to show something meaningful to her adult fans in her adult show, she would have had the interaction be with an adult. But that doesn't get her clip shared around on social media. That doesn't get her brownie points for inclusion. It's safe, it's palatable, it's sickeningly wholesome, and it's insulting for that. This is a show for adults, something Vivienne and company is adamant on, and yet they treat their audience like children. As a fan, you should be insulted to have this key-jingling one minute clip presented to you. You should demand more, demand better.

Unfortunately I do not see ever getting better from Vivienne. She has made it very clear she truly does not care about creating art, she really only stumbled into being championed as a paragon for animation because her majority white and able bodied fans saw the inclusion of primarily gay men and thought that was good enough. She does not give a damn about disabled people, and she never will. To expect good disabled representation from her is like expecting good queer representation from a Marvel movie; she is in it for the money, and it just so happens that the inclusion of that scene makes money.

Addendum thoughts that were too long to put into the tags: I would like to make it clear that disability, because it presents very differently, is experienced very differently by many different people. If you felt seen or represented by the disability representation in either show, that's fine, and I don't want you to feel bad for feeling seen. Ultimately disabled people are largely given scraps; I have not once seen someone with my particular physical disability portrayed in media. Sometimes we latch onto things that are subpar or lacking; my criticism of reception to this scene is targeted primarily at able bodied audience members who may be lacking in this perspective and to also champion fellow disabled people to rightfully demand and expect better. Thank you for your time.

[andrewwtca]

the Aubrey problem (or how Omori's writing failed her)

Also available to read on Archive of our Own.

I really like video games. If the fanfiction, theory posts, and occasional essays weren’t enough, here’s me saying it—I really like video games! They’re a conversation between writing, art, music, and human interaction, between the player, the game, and the characters in them. Of course, not all games have all of that, some being only text-based, some being lifeless wastelands, but whatever they end up choosing to work with, they often do something amazing.

Sunny is one of my favorite protagonists in any realm of media—video game, movie, book—and he genuinely changed the way I view the world. Not just him, but the entire world built around him, Headspace and its charming inhabitants and the wondrous sights and music, the creative bosses that leave so much insight, the beautiful overworld that is Faraway and a nostalgic look into what we leave behind, and what we return to.

So that’s why I’m so disappointed I don’t like Aubrey.

This game blew my mind away when I first saw it—my first experience with the game wasn’t even my own playthrough, but sitting through a 20-hour longplay!—and I lost so many hours of sleep twisting and turning and trying to make peace with the grief it left me feeling. And after finishing, I realized that its flaws were plenty, but not enough to drag me out of my enjoyment. But Aubrey? Aubrey didn’t make me feel the way I knew she was supposed to.

That frustrated me, especially as I became a bigger and bigger fan of the game. I had no qualms about liking her archetype, the feminine bully with a tragic backstory, and yet I do with her.

As someone who craves literary analysis and in-depth looks into every media I consume, I just needed to know: what made me dislike Aubrey?

And after over two years of being a fan of the game, I’ve finally figured it out: it’s a good mixture of 1) lack of explanation, 2) rushed self-awareness, and 3) lackluster narrative choices. And I’ve found the words I needed to explain these concepts, so please join me on my messy journey to understanding what went wrong with Aubrey.

preface

If you’re an Aubrey apologist, this essay is not for you. I’ve heard plenty of arguments about why Aubrey was actually in the right, not limited to “Basil deserved it,” and, “Aubrey was hurting too,” so I’d like to begin by stating that Aubrey was a bully very clearly.

Rejecting the notion that she actively harmed others is rejecting a core component of understanding her character. Before we dive into her character and how the writing failed her character arc, I would like us all to be on the same page: she physically, verbally, and socially bullied Basil. It was not Basil’s fault, and it will never be a victim’s fault to get bullied. She is not the victim of her own crime, just like how Sunny is not the victim of Mari’s death, and Basil is not the victim of Mari’s hanging. We, as the player, are to recognize their responsibilities in their actions. The same must be extended to Aubrey.

Some people feel the need to deny this aspect of her character to justify her actions and/or justify liking her. Firstly, the purpose of this essay isn’t to villainize anyone for liking Aubrey. I’m simply analyzing what was attempted with her character and why it didn’t strike a chord with me and so many others. Secondly, as Kel wisely said, “Just because you did something bad, doesn't make you a bad person.” I’m not here to say that Aubrey is a bad person—no, nobody in Omori is ‘good’ or ‘bad’ and labeling characters as such is taking away the nuance they possess. And I’m certainly not saying liking a character who did something bad makes you bad, either!

Liking Aubrey is in no way a problem (which makes me a tad bit sad that I need to clarify), and I’ll even go as far as to say kudos to you, but if you bend and twist to stop her from holding any responsibility for her actions, that’s when problems arise. Basil is a fictional character and won’t care if you think it was his fault he was bullied, but for the people around you who may have been in similar positions to him?

And lastly, I want to say that if you cite sexism as the reason people don’t like Aubrey… actually, this is the perfect transition into the analysis.

gaslight, gatekeep, girlboss

Femme bullies are not a new phenomenon. Perhaps it’s the break from the stereotypical sweet feminine girl that makes them so fascinating, using their femininity to not sing to animals or wish for a man, but pull down others and advance their status.

I, for one, adore the femme bully trope. Especially if they’re one who used to be extremely kind and underwent some sort of ‘fall from grace’ that led to a bastardization. But, as for all bullies, if they are left without a proper backstory and motivation, I’m turned off from them. Most humans are not mean just because they can be but rather are products of how they were raised. When these causes are ignored, the trope falls flat, and instead of being a good reconstruction, it’s a flat stereotype.

The best way to analyze this is by comparing Aubrey’s character to good examples of femme bullies in the past. Specifically, I’m picking my favorites: Asuka from Neon Genesis Evangelion, Nanami from Revolutionary Girl Utena, and Sophie from The School for Good and Evil. I’m going to do a quick (and a bit sarcastic) overview of their characters in their respective media, but a quick warning for suicide in Asuka’s overview, and animal cruelty in Nanami’s.

Asuka is a pilot for one of the mechas, the Evangelion, and she always thought of herself as better than everyone. Well, of course, she would: she studied hard, worked harder than everyone around her, and she’s just naturally talented. And yet, she’s still always threatened by others and how they can ruin her status. Specifically, for the course of the show, she targets Shinji—he’s this nobody from nowhere who could suddenly pilot an Eva, while she had to fight her whole life to get here! How is that fair? And what has that asshole been through anyway? Did he have to see his mother’s corpse after she committed suicide as a small child? Did he fight for his mother’s love his entire life just for her to kill herself? Does he have to fight for male attention just so he isn’t thrown aside? No, of course not! So how is any of it fair?

Nanami is the sister to the wonderful student body president Touga, and she wants nothing more than his attention. And with her being the youngest of the cast, one cannot be mad at her for not understanding the severity of violence and finality of death, so her anger as a small child with a kitten whom Touga adored is also understandable. One simply cannot be mad at her for drowning it. So, of course, you cannot blame her for wanting to punish the ever-elusive Anthy and Utena, who Touga has become fixated on. What does Anthy or Utena have that Nanami doesn’t? They’re stupid girls, not Touga’s sister. No matter what, Nanami is going to win her brother’s affection (and in her pursuit, ignore how horribly he’s been manipulating her the entire time).

And Sophie is the Witch of Woods Beyond, capable of powerful spells beyond the imagination, from a place that few know of. And she wants nothing more than for her own fairy-tale ending—why do all the princesses around her get princes and castles and beautiful dresses, and she’s doomed to being hideous and alone for the rest of her life? Who decided that for her? She’s beautiful, after all, so she should be a princess! It doesn’t matter who stands in the way of her happily ever after; especially not if it’s Agatha, her lifelong best friend. No matter what, Sophie will not end up like her mother who died all alone, with her husband forgetting her and moving on. Sophie will be loved, no matter who she has to hurt.

What do they all have in common? Firstly, they’re all girls. As stated, femme bullies are different from masc bullies, especially as they reveal aspects of femininity and womanhood in general that many people—see, a male audience—will neglect to face, and overall uncover sexism that's still present in both media and society. Secondly, they’re all bullies, and they targeted someone in particular who they saw as detrimental to their happiness. And thirdly, they all had specific upbringings that conditioned them to have their ‘falls from grace’. What is this third, unidentified thing?

Mommy issues!

(Sorry, I know Nanami technically has a brother complex, but I just wanted to say mommy issues.)

A pattern has been developed with all of these girls. They all start fairly, what one can call, ‘feminine’ or at least, per standard stereotypes. They’re gentle and sweet and shine when needed. And they all have a ‘fall from grace’—a moment, or sequence of moments, that leads them to reject traditional femininity and embrace a more vengeful version of it. And a final moment, where they are faced with their opposite, who represents all that they do not have.

Asuka was sweet and kind and bubbly until her mother killed herself. After that, she dedicated herself to her studies and getting adult male attention through means of the over-sexualization of herself. And then, she began to bully Shinji.

Sophie was sweet and kind and bright until her mother died. After that, she idolized her mother’s false display of femininity and became obsessed with becoming a princess. And then, at the School for Evil, she began to bully Agatha.

Nanami was assumedly sweet—she deviates from this pattern slightly, being built off assumptions of a good past rather than showcases—until she was brought into this family and became obsessed with her brother and was manipulated by him. After that, she became desperate for his attention, fighting any other who could take it. And then, she began to bully Utena (and Anthy.)

While Nanami does deviate from this pattern, they all have clear origins. They were not bullies from the start. As aforementioned, in the face of an adversary, the majority of people do not turn to hurting one another. Something in their pasts, their ‘falls from grace’, was the foundation of their actions, what led them to believe what they were doing was okay. It’s not justification—it's a much-needed explanation. After all, if you do not understand, how can you empathize?

Still, you may fail to see my point. The game has lots of hints of Aubrey’s troubled upbringing. And that’s exactly what the problem is. These girls have clear origins while Aubrey’s is muddled.

Of course, I don’t expect Omori to have spoon-fed me details of her past. You can put the pieces together by walking through her home and seeing bottles laid on the ground. But, even in a game dependent on nuance and having the player put certain things together, it’s better to leave things out directly rather than to work a way around.

To build up a good femme bully, we need a good origin story. What happened to her that made her turn to violence? Why should we care? We know Aubrey probably had a troubled childhood. But the game doesn’t supply enough. It leaves too much to fill in the blanks. I know that Asuka saw her mother’s corpse, I know that Sophie was forced into a misogynistic viewpoint upon her mother’s death, and I know that Nanami was manipulated to hell and back. I know what these girls have been through so I know why they ended up walking their paths.

But the game simply doesn’t reveal enough about Aubrey. Fan speculation is not enough. Canon interpretation should not be confused with fan interpretation—according to the fans, Aubrey’s father is a deadbeat, and her mother is an abusive, neglectful alcoholic. According to the game? Aubrey’s dad is “strict”, and her house is an absolute disaster. The house is one of the biggest clues as to Aubrey’s childhood, and while some may praise this as ‘showing and not telling’, the game never tries to make workarounds for the other characters (which I will dig deeper into later). I can assume what happened in her house but it’s not my job to find ways to empathize with the character; that is the story’s job.

This is the first of Omori’s three sins and we haven’t even scratched the surface.

actions speak more than words, or something like that

I recently saw a post that I thought would make a good intro for this section. It’s an apologist post for Aubrey, discussing how the game did treat her with just enough harshness—that because she’s been beating herself up, because she’s suffered a public breakdown, because it took kindness to help her heal, it’s proof of her regret. There’s some good Basil blaming in there too, with a strange turn saying that she refused to leave Basil’s house because of her willingness to turn over a new leaf. And it ends with a weird claim that she was a “good person all along,” (implying an argument otherwise), but I’m not here to rat on that post.

Despite how frustrated the post made me, I am inclined to agree. It’s black-and-white to state that Aubrey didn’t change at all. If you compare her first Faraway appearance to her final scenes, she’s a completely different person. Which would've been nice if the change didn’t take two scenes.

Much like how I compared Aubrey’s backstory to that of other femme bullies, I’m going to compare Aubrey’s redemption to that of my favorite redemption story in all of media: Riku from Kingdom Hearts (the fact that I’m so in touch with his story may also explain some of my disappointment with Aubrey’s).

Riku starts off his journey on Destiny Islands. He’s always wondered what lies beyond his small home and dreamed of taking a sailboat with his best friends, Sora and Kairi. However, jealousy is an awful thing—Sora and Kairi are close. And it seems that Riku has been hearing about how they’re thinking of leaving him behind. So, he does what any teenager dealing with larger-than-life feelings does: he gives in to the magical Darkness and effectively kills everyone on the islands, separating him, Sora, and Kairi (don’t worry—everyone comes back.)

By the end of the game, he’s come to his senses, but it takes a lot of time. He fights with Sora a lot because he just knows, deep down, that he’s right and Sora is wrong, and if Sora would just listen…but no. Sora keeps abandoning him. So he has to work through that and all the feelings that accompany those abandonment issues, he has to work through the question of “What is even making me want to kill my best friend, anyway?”, and he has to work through “Wait…can I kill my best friend?” So, it takes a lot of time for him to get to his senses.

And then, he goes through hell. Literally and metaphorically. He dedicates himself wholly to making up for what he did. How? Well, he first identifies what he did wrong—he separated from his friends, he gave in to his jealousy, and he submerged his home in Darkness. He apologizes for it directly—although he doesn’t have a chance to speak with Sora right away, he's constantly apologizing for the fact that he gave in to the Darkness, so much that it became a running gag to some fans. He put up distance—he didn’t feel like he was owed forgiveness right away (or at all, but that’s a different matter) and didn’t stick at Sora’s side to wait for his best friend to forgive him. He worked hard to show that he’s changed—it would be a much longer essay if I attempted to explain the lengths he went through, but it’s not limited to allowing himself to be possessed, going to literal Hell, forcing himself into isolation, and enduring multiple handicapping injuries.

Long story short? He really, really tries to make it up to Sora. And when he and Sora finally talk (it took three years in real life, took perhaps a year in the game), Sora doesn’t even hesitate to forgive his friend…though it may be in part to Sora just being Sora. Nevertheless, Riku had earned that forgiveness.

And then, after that, Riku continues to give himself hell! He never stops to sweep what he did under the rug. It’s a part of him, after all, an ugly past but his past nonetheless. It does not define him but it cannot be forgotten, otherwise, he hasn't learned anything at all.

Deep breath. We talked a lot about Kingdom Hearts in an Omori essay. But it’s important to understand the sheer depth put into his redemption: identification, distance, and work.

What’s most frustrating about Aubrey’s arc is that fragments of this good writing exist, but that’s what they are: fragments. I would like it to be stated for the record that everything I explained for Riku’s arc wasn’t me creating speculation based on what the games said. It’s what the games literally came out and said. Aubrey however…

Identification—she apologizes to Sunny, Kel, and Hero by saying “I’m sorry, guys… I’ve been acting like such a jerk.” While I may give her grief for the usage of the word ‘jerk’ when perhaps a stronger, more evocative term would’ve done a better job, it’s certainly better than what she said in front of Basil’s door: "I just wanted to say that… I’m sorry for the way I’ve been treating you.” Completely separating herself from the issue at hand. 

Distance—none. She's immediately reintroduced to her old friend group, at a rate that ended up giving me whiplash the first time around. The question, “What about the Hooligans?” is never brought up, and things are back to how they always were, with no problems at all.

Work—Aubrey stayed the night at Basil’s house, wanting to make sure he was safe. To which, if you end up getting the neutral ending, you get the most insightful message of Aubrey’s arc (which is technically non-canon): “I'm so sorry, Basil. Please forgive me…” If getting the good or bad ending, her staying the night meant literally nothing, as Sunny’s fight took the reins.

These are fragments of a character arc. These are fragments of good characterization. While I praise Omori for how often it appears realistic, this kind of exponential growth simply isn’t. In what world, does someone who’s been bullying someone for four years, take less than two days to realize she’s been a bully and decide to change the entire course of her life?

While I could rat on Aubrey, this isn’t her problem. This is the game misreading what makes a good redemption. Redemption means work. It means effort. It is not a character simply changing their ways. Those characters feel cheap and empty—there’s a reason, after all, why the majority of fans always characterize Aubrey as the mean girl she’s shown to be when she first appeared in fan works. It’s because the ‘new’ Aubrey, the Aubrey buried under layers of hurt, hasn’t earned the right to exist.

The Riku I love in Kingdom Hearts III has earned the right to be angsty and gay and happy and his new self because he’s put in 17 years' worth of effort to become that person. It’s beautiful, it’s inspiring, it’s hopeful—you can make a mistake and go past it. It doesn’t define you. You can be forgiven. You can have hurt and have been hurt and still be worthy of love and loving.

The Aubrey at the end of Omori has not earned the right to be there, simply put. She’s the product of lazy, or ignorant writing, and it feels harsh to type out, but there’s no other way to describe it. Her self-awareness happened too quickly. She passes by Sunny’s house every day, sees Kel playing basketball every day, and could freely visit Mari’s grave whenever she wants—there were four years for her to change who she was. If Kel wasn’t able to give up his toxic positivity until the bitter end of the neutral ending, it’s quite hard to believe that a few hours of just talking made her change her ways. Especially considering that the Hooligans were characterized as her new, accepting friends, who love her and hear her out.

And again, the best fragment of an arc that could’ve been appears in the neutral ending! While it was not directly Aubrey’s actions that led Basil to take his life, it’s very impactful to see her begin to blame herself. It’s not right for her to blame herself—but that’s perhaps the only scene in the entire game where I really sympathized with her. It’s the only scene in the entire game where I truly saw that she wanted to change.

A quick note I wanted to pull out before finishing: the inclusion of the Hooligans. They were, again, fragments of an amazing arc. While they could’ve been a good way to show how kind Aubrey still is, they are thrown aside and mainly included in scenes where Aubrey is still being a bully. It’s in content outside of the game (see: Aubrey birthday comic) that they contrast Aubrey’s harsh exterior and show her sweet insides. But no, they’re underdeveloped and unutilized to make Aubrey’s arc feel doable.

There seems to be a very clear culprit to both this and the femme bully problem, and a solution that should’ve been considered more deeply.

rome wasn’t built in a day

There’s a loud rumor in the Omori fandom that Omori was originally supposed to take place over ten days rather than three days. While I’m not sure how much merit this rumor has, the fact that it exists leads me to my ultimate point:

Omori should’ve been longer.

Specifically, Omori should’ve taken place over a longer period.

EDIT: Before we continue, I just had an excellent conversation with a friend ( /ᐠ ._. ᐟ\ﾉ ). This solution only applies to if one is unwilling to change Aubrey's core character; essentially, the extent of her bullying. By making her someone who goes out of her way to torment Basil, significant screen time is going to be needed to properly unpack all that's been given. Making the base game ten days is only my opinion of the best choice, but there are other ways to solve this. However, the best course of action would be to change the extent of Aubrey's bullying on Basil—in other words, changing how Aubrey's anger presents itself.

For example, she would simply hold a grudge over what she believed was Basil destroying the photos, being extremely passive aggressive towards him. It would make a reconciliation between her and Basil, much, much more doable as well, perhaps him seeking her out in the first place in a peaceful manner to look for the photos. The lake scene could be an emotional explosion for her, perhaps finding out Basil just gave the photo album to Sunny, who is literally about to leave, and then pushes him into the lake. Then, the reflection she has next would fit what has tonally been established, seeming doable. She had, after all, been on good terms with Basil, even if for a little while.

By ‘lackluster narrative choices’, I am referring literally to the belief that Omori should not have been a game that took place in three days. I’m not here to argue about the game's mechanics—should Headspace have been that long? What is the point of a world created to serve as escapism, which should be fleeting moments of happiness, when it ends up being longer than the real world?—as much as I’m here to argue that this is a flaw of the game’s writing as opposed to a game design standpoint.

I’m not going to pretend I know how to make a video game. I’m enthusiastic about them, I follow their development and creation, and I strive to learn as much as I can about the ones that are dear to me, but I’m not going to pretend I know the first thing about making a video game. Omori’s development is one of the most infamous parts of its legacy, and the notion of extending the game would’ve only been another strain on the extended period between its announcement and its final release.

But, I know how to tell a story. Or, at the very least, I know what makes a good story. Now, the three days format of the game serves its other protagonists amazingly.

Sunny, whose arc mainly develops through the interfering ideas established in the real world and the ones previously established in Headspace, doesn’t need an extended time in the real world. His story takes place in his dreams, and the foundations of Headspace are already extremely insecure, based on the idea of covering up the truth. But when faced with a separate truth in reality, despite only a brief exposure, the lies created to protect Headspace fall apart. So Sunny’s arc does not depend on how long he spent in the real world.

Kel and Hero, on the other hand, have a very small arc. They are not flat and are very much dynamic when you compare how they started and how they ended up. However, the majority of their arc had taken place off-screen. The majority of their characterization does not occur through direct interaction with Sunny—we don’t learn about Hero’s depression because of him having a breakdown, but rather Kel discussing it. And in that same scene, we learn about Kel’s toxic positivity and the strain it’s taking on him, rather than through the game. This recontextualization is perfect for Kel and Hero. The change that occurred after Mari’s death is not easily seen by Sunny, and through it being slowly revealed instead, we learn the nature of their changes. Nonetheless, their changes occurred after Mari’s death and another change will occur most likely after the revelation of the truth—either way, their character arcs do not depend on the length of the three days. No amount of time would’ve changed them without Sunny revealing the truth (and as aforementioned, Sunny’s time was well spent in Headspace).

And finally, Basil. He's in the same boat as Kel and Hero, having an arc that occurs entirely off-screen. The difference is, however, the amount of emphasis the game puts on what happened to him as opposed to a few cutscenes with the brothers (though it is understandable, given his role as the game’s deuteragonist). His arc is a downward spiral, from an already unstable boy to an insecure mess who becomes obsessed with the sole idea of keeping his best friend safe. While it’s a progression of who he used to be, it’s development nonetheless, and it also happens off-screen. Given Basil’s fragile mindset, furthermore, the appearance of Sunny suddenly was enough to throw him off, given he was already planning on taking his own life. His rapid spiral into an even worse mess which leads to the fight between him and Sunny, therefore, is understandable. And, similarly to Kel and Hero, his real change will only occur after Sunny reveals the truth. Basil’s character development does not at all depend on how long the game would be.

The simple fact is that the other characters do not go through a drastic change on the days that Sunny comes out, and Sunny’s change was fueled by the existence of Headspace, not by the real world. The game taking place in three days does not affect the others. That is good storytelling. Using the game’s time frame to properly convey their arcs having occurred off-screen.

Aubrey, however, is not subject to that same praise. Her arc occurs on screen—while she descended to becoming a bully after Mari’s death, the arc we the viewer are supposed to acknowledge is her redemption. And three days just isn’t enough time.

The last two problems I covered, a lack of detailed backstory and a general lack of redeeming actions, lie in the same problem: the game went past those scenes far too quickly, as though Aubrey’s redemption is not essential to understanding her. It’s as though the game is trying to place importance on relationships and the joys of rekindling, rather than having to actually rekindle a relationship, having to put in the work. If the game had been slightly longer, Aubrey’s story could’ve been dealt with in a far more effective manner.

I am not Omocat, nor am I a part of the development team. I do not have the ideal solution for what could’ve been. I do, however, have a few ideas that I’d like you, my audience, to consider. How much do you think the game would’ve changed if it was ten days instead of three?

As already explained, Sunny, Kel, Hero, and Basil would not have had any significant difference if the game took place longer. Perhaps, there would’ve been a more natural awkwardness present that accompanies talking to someone for the first time in four years, but aside from that, the events of the game would’ve just taken longer.

Aubrey, however, would’ve had some actual thinking time. Her fight in the church would be her turning point, and her then isolation would feel like she had time to think things over. For a few days, Aubrey would have to be absent, and given the impression she left on the players, this absence would be heavily felt. It would be her return so much more effective, especially if she returns as someone who is unsteady due to their actions.

For the next few days, leading up to Aubrey deciding to stay the night at Basil’s house, we have the chance to know and forgive her better—perhaps, similar to Kel talking to Sunny about Hero’s depression, Aubrey can explain what it was like growing up in her household. Not as a defense, but as an explanation. She would do things with the rest of the group, and she would at a more natural rate, be integrated once again. And not just anything! She would actively help them with whatever the ten days would have to offer, and it would show that she is hurting over her actions.

And, finally, when she would decide to stay at Basil’s house, it wouldn’t feel like the game was just trying to have the cast together for one last moment, but it would feel like she’s trying to bridge the gap of all the hurt she created. When she would go to Basil’s door, it wouldn’t feel like the game was just trying to convince us to forget about her actions, but it would feel like she’s reflected and attempted a new leaf. And hopefully, the game would offer a more heartfelt apology, given more context and material to work with.

Four years of bullying can’t go away in ten days. But that’s not what the game was trying to argue in the first place—it wasn’t fully erasing Aubrey’s action, but trying to create the stepping stone for a way back. But the three days poorly argued her case, with a rushed and lacking version of redemption, and it made her ‘final character’ feel poor.

At the very least, ten days would have allowed the audience to empathize and begin to understand her. And, more importantly, it would’ve made sense that she understood the weight of her actions. And the Aubrey she became, whoever that girl would be?

She would’ve been so, so loved.

a little love in our lives

This has been on my mind for an awful lot of time. Sunny, as aforementioned, is one of my favorite characters of all time (if not my favorite), but the entire cast has a spot in my heart and is very dear to me. That includes Aubrey, but she benefits from association, which hurts me—I hate when girls in media are defined by their relationships with other guys. I wanted to get to the heart of why I couldn’t get her to stand on her own.

To summarize: Aubrey’s character was criminally mismanaged. Instead of it being a hopeful story of redemption, someone finally breaking the cycle of abuse and breaking free of her toxic household, seeking forgiveness by taking an active part in Basil’s healing, she is let off too quickly and makes all her further scenes feel twice as empty. The ideal solution would have been to have the game take place over a larger period, rather than a rushed three days, to allow the audience to empathize and relate to her.

Aubrey apologists truly astound me. I find so many flaws in her writing, and yet other people manage to see those flaws as perfections. I see people making very absurd, ableist arguments, and it makes me question the humanity of many fans, but I’ve always been intrigued by how many different perspectives there are surrounding her. I’ve seen some who relate to her because they were bullies or because they’ve been abandoned by others; so some valid reasons, and others very concerning. But it’s telling how our own experiences make us relate to different characters and help us understand why someone stands in the places they do.

…do you see what I did there? I started talking about relating backgrounds and how that benefits our understanding and— yeah, I suppose you understand, if you got this far (almost 6k words, you should be proud of yourself). If you’re still unfazed and believe that Aubrey’s writing was splendid, all the power to your fannish behaviors. But if I’ve opened your eyes a bit as to the flaws in her writing or if I’ve been able to explain your dislike of her, then I’m glad. It’s important to discuss things that didn’t stick the way they were meant to so that we can do better and we can learn.

Omori’s writing failed Aubrey. Some fans took that as a challenge. I’ve said before that canon interpretation should be separate from fanon interpretation, but I’d have to be heartless (Kingdom Hearts pun intended) to say that many fan’s interpretations didn’t get me to feel with her. I think Aubrey could’ve been brilliant, and while Omori didn’t fully capture that, a lot of fans did. So to everyone who makes art, whether it’s a drawing, a written work, a video, a song, an edit, or whatever, thank you for sharing it. Thank you for telling your stories.

I feel like writing these analysis pieces without connecting them to our own life experiences is pointless. So, to everyone else, please tell your stories. Tell your stories of redemption and love and forgiveness, because that’s what Aubrey’s story was meant to be about, and that’s what we all need in this world. Tell your stories, no matter what they are, because that is what ties us all together. We are made of stories and we return to them. We learn from them and we become better people. We become kinder—and we could all use a little more kindness in the world.

Thanks for reading!

[buckera]

This has been on my mind (obviously with everything that's been happening) and I'm curious if I'm alone in it. Do you sometimes think maybe they missed the window with buddie? That it should have happened in season 4 and maybe now they're trying to tell us it's too late? They keep digging the hole deeper for eddie, with shannon being the "the love of his life" he'll never get over and I just wonder if it'll ever make sense again in a way that's not a "consolation" because that would be unfair

so much to unpack here and I doubt you'll like my answer but I'm behind on asks anyway so why the hell not.

so here's the thing.

I am so SO happy that they didn't do buddie in season 4. a rushed season affected by covid with literally one episode lead-up? if we lean into the idea that the shooting/will arc was supposed to be that, that is.

(but mind you that has never been said or confirmed, they floated a bi Buck storyline that got shut down, at which stage we don't even know, could possibly have been before even having a script written for it and way before they even came up with the shooting arc itself.)

but if we lean into that then I would've found it lackluster, personally. I know not everyone holds the same opinions and that's totally fine.

but having two characters who have previously only ever dated and talked about women* suddenly kiss and start dating, without coming out, self-realisation, any other preamble aside from "you almost died/I almost died" which isn't exactly a new predicament for either of these characters...

(*in Buck's case the bi crumbs were huge and I always felt that it could've been a pretty natural progression if they just let us know that actually, Buck was out this whole time it just didn't come up on screen lmao but in all seriousness from a general audience standpoint? having both of them suddenly be together? even though, we had a lot of subtext, I just doubt it would've worked as well as it could work now.)

I mean sure, it might've been just the start and then they could've done a bit more background work for it in season 5, but even if Fox didn't shut it down (again, just a simple bi Buck storyline, not even two main characters on the show suddenly being in a queer relationship or leading up to it at the very least) the risk of not getting renewed for season 5 would've been higher than ever, so for them to leave it hanging at the end of the season would've been unlikely imo.

just to reiterate before moving on: all of the above is based on speculation and what ifs.

and about buddie in this current climate, well... I talked about this extensively so just to keep it short; though I'm more than content if not, I still believe that buddie will become canon eventually.

and ngl I find it kinda frustrating how little faith some of you have in the writing of the show when this season proved more than anything that they are finally back on focusing on the characters and actually have ideas about where to take them instead of having every single one of them running around in circles.

sure, some of the storylines are more than bonkers, but this is 911 and that trend started in season 1, so if you don't like that, then maybe this isn't the show for you. because this season with all the insanity and heartbreak was and is so far, quintessential 911.

both Buck and Eddie are well established, complex characters and they deserve to be taken on a narrative journey separately and together if buddie should happen. yeah, clearly neither character is in a place right now, but what's the rush?

we have at least one more full season ahead of us, that could be more than enough time to take them there.

and I know that anytime I say this there are at least ten people in the notes saying that we had 6 years of lead-up, so it wouldn't be rushed, but I can't help but disagree.

Eddie still has no idea how to be in a relationship and actually be in it. yeah, sure, he and Buck have been playing house for years, but the fact that neither of them seem to recognise that is a big issue on its own. and Buck, for the first time since Abby, is in a good place romantically. like the ship or not, it's canon that he's more content and happy than ever and everyone around him thinks so too.

now, we don't know how long this relationship will last and if/when it'll end and why. but if Buck got the chance to discover this part of himself without trauma and significant pain, with the people around him being supportive and patient, then I don't want Eddie thrown in there with a halfhearted realisation-to-kiss-or-confession within one episode either.

I have trust that if buddie is about to happen, it'll be handled well and in no way, shape or form would it be a consolation prize — especially because Tim is no longer bending over for the bullying of the fans and just goes by his own rules and only gives as much as he wants to. as he should.

honestly, this whole "gimme and gimme now" attitude is so stupid. and frankly, the notion that a popular queer ship would actually have a real chance to go canon has just relatively recently became a thing and now so many people almost feel entitled to it, which then spoils their experience with what's actually going on as a whole.

if your enjoyment of the show is solely dependent on a ship becoming canon? then maybe watch something else, because you're just setting yourself up for heartache, one way or another.

[chaos0pikachu]

I sort of knew by episode 6 of Only Friends that we would end up with a show that differs from Jojo’s initial vision. The combination of FirstKhao’s very loud ardent fandom, the way BL audiences struggle to digest anything that differs from the corrupted innocent/uwu baby/messy bitch dichotomy, the way fandom has a tendency to gloss over sexual assault or coercion and the fact that the show is characters driven, and lately audiences cannot consume these shows without needing explicit disclaimers from either the writers or the characters- I just knew something would go wrong. I still really enjoy the show but I have been thinking about how the audience affects the narrative. The difference between the way the audience views Ray/Boston/Mew which for once isn’t due to bad acting- Ray and Boston are understandable archetypes in BL so the audience is receptive to them whereas Mew exists in a type of grey area where he is sanctimonious and proud and insecure and discerning which outside of the scope of BL would be interesting but within the BL framework some people found him hypocritical and manipulative. I also think it’s a problem with the writing, some things were never explained, the animosity between Boston and Mew, Top’s relationship with sex, why Nick didn’t reach out to Mew with the sex tape, also the structure of Top and Mew relationship which never really felt fully comfortable so the audience has no reason to root for them. It’s a shame because I could see Jojo’s vision in the beginning but now due to constant cuts and storyline changes the narrative is this bloated, half formed thing held together by great acting and potential. I am also a little bit irritated that this ended up becoming a formulaic BL towards the end (granted the show isn’t finished).

Anyway, I really enjoy reading your comments in this show :)

Unpopular opinion, but I don't like attributing the show to solely Jojo. Unless there's been an interview where Ninew, Den, and Best all say the idea and original pitch for the show was Jojo's and Jojo's alone and they were just brought on as support, otherwise this isn't "Jojo's Vision" it's a collective vision from a large group of people. This all goes back to that phrase "in p'jojo we trust" which I think, frankly and bitchily, is stupid flat b/c no creator always bats 1000 each time. Fans putting creatives on a pedestal like that will only lead to disappointment and in worst cases anger. Which no one on the cast and crew deserve even if I'm finding the writing to be a slut shaming self-righteous mess of a narrative.

I also have to admit, I'm not overly familiar with these formulaic BL tropes that seem to have been popularized by gmmtv shows. All the gmmtv shows I've watched - 1000 Stars, 2gether, (1) episode of theory of love (had to drop that shit QUICK), (3) episodes of 2gether, made it an entire 6 episodes into Fish Upon the Sky - I didn't like any of them lol none. zero. zip. I wasn't able to pick up on any specific tropes b/c I found the stories so lackluster, badly produced, and ultimately dragged out.

I was willing to give Moonlight Chicken and Only Friends a chance because it looked like something very new and different from the studio as far as their BL went. I was disappointed in the former, and I'm more so frustrated with the latter. I think conceptually MLC worked better as a cohesive narrative at least, with consistent themes. Only Friends is overall, inconsistent.

We can say that now, we're in the endgame, there's two episodes left. The show has been overall inconsistent in it's narrative, tone and themes. Which is why I find it overall frustrating. I think it had a ton of potential, I was expecting something of a lower budget and messier Queer as Folk, but the show won't commit to that. The reek of branded couples is all over the fabric of the show. Like with other shows of there's the branded couples are actively harming the overall strength of the narrative - come for me tinhats - because the narrative can't thrive like it should. And that's where all the wasted potential goes to die - b/c the fandom doesn't seem interested in exploring anything other than sandray fluff fanfic I've almost given up on the ao3 tag.

The snake that is gmmtv's promoting their actors as part-time idol couples is beginning to eat itself. Imo it's actively making their shows worse; both in a macro sense b/c scenes are getting cut or scripts are getting changed b/c capital is being threatened, and in the micro sense of people just being miscast completely in roles they aren't suited for.

My ideal ending would be for topmew and sandray not to be together at the end, but it'll happen not because it's narratively sound but because money is on the line that's completely outside of the show itself. Don't get me wrong I know everybody's gotta make money and what not, but it's how I feel regarding like, Marvel films or Disney remakes. They're so watered down, and overly produced in order to garner mass capital and it harms the potential of the narratives. It harms art.

Since my ideal narrative ending won't happen, my ideal fandom ending would be more folks writing fanfic that explored the different aspects and potential the show could have had. Maybe starting with making Chuem, Ray and Mew less slut shame-y or at least someone calling them the fuck out on it. Providing Boston and Top some more nuance. Or hell, go full camp, explore what the trailer originally sold us on which was true complicated tied up mess. Maybe Mew realizes Ray actually ticks off all the checks on his list for a boyfriend, oop now he's developing REAL feelings for Ray so that complicates things further with their friendship, and the two's relationship with Sand and Top. Maybe Sand and Top had a hate fuck to get out all the tension between them and being second best for Ray and Mew. Maybe Boston's always been envious of Mew and had genuine feelings for Top. Or maybe Boston slept with Top b/c Mew has always been a self-righteous slut shaming ass to him so revenge happens. Maybe make Chuam an interesting character, instead of an audience insert who exists just to call people (boston it's boston) whores, and let the audience know who we should view as a "good" or "bad" person let the lesbian be messy too!

I wanted a full meal at the cookout with the plate piled and instead the crew served me potato salad

[hotdrinks]

Honestly, at the start of the book I was very invested in Truant and the way Zampanò's work seemed to have a tangible effect on his life. But later on his footnotes mostly devolved into lengthy gratuitously detailed sexcapades, not to mention him having, let's just say, not the greatest views on women. All of this capped off with one of the most baffling, but oddly fitting, ends to his story that left me not knowing how to feel about him.

However, the middle of the book itself, the one that focuses on the fictional cult (as in cult around a movie) surrounding the Navidson Record and, ofcourse, the exploration tapes dwarf any lackluster writing in the footnotes. The Navidson Record has to be one of the most if not the most profound and innovative peice of horror media I have ever encountered. I envy anyone who gets to read it for the first time. It's a huge book, but I wish I had set a stricter time frame for myself when I first read it because it's a visceral experience that can lose its punch if dragged on for over a year.

WAUGH!! Okay anon I hope you're still there. I waited to read this message until I finished the book just to keep my perceptions of everything as uninfluenced as possible.

First of all, the way women are written in HoL is something I definitely struggled with the most. Trying to parse through Watsonian/Doylist interpretations. Sort of wondering for a while if maybe Danielewski just doesn't (or at least didn't at the time) write women very well (still not sure where I stand with this one but Karen's chapter did definitely help me feel a little bit better about it).

And yeah Truant's sexcapades put me off for a minute but once it became clear that they were just his way of trying to bury his grief and what was happening to him they annoyed me less. And while it frustrates me that women are often used as plot devices in this way (without being given their own agency or depth) I do think this part of his story was necessary to his character development and narratively relevant (I was worried for a second that it wasn't lol) and personally it endeared me to him once he moved past it.

I also think his poor view of women is condemned in the text. Or at least it's something he outgrows. Like how he convinced himself he was so in love with "Thumper" without ever knowing her name, and when he finally asked it was too late. He was just looking for something easy to save him, missing out on connections because he was seeing everyone as a life raft and not a full person. The parental trauma of it all. (This is where my thoughts about women in HoL start spiraling fhdjs)

Overall I stayed really liking him the whole time, even though I didn't expect to! I just found him really sympathetic. The pekingese footnote had its intended effect on me I think lol. Also I like a sorta purple style of writing sometimes, so I didn't personally find his footnotes lackluster, but I can understand how they could grate on others. There are just certain lines in those notes that I think I'll remember forever, just because I think they were written so beautifully.

Also!!! "Visceral" is the perfect word to describe the Navidson record!!!! The format making you experience the House alongside everyone is soooo effective. It really does just instill grief in you while you read it, there were parts that made me cry and cry like a little baby boy in my own home. I was like shouting and talking to the characters while I was reading. And the ending was perfectly bittersweet to me. It's so good and so special I'm really happy I read it, I definitely want to read it again eventually.

[was-it-really-worth-it]

Game 223 - Boyfriend Dungeon by Kitfox Games

What did I think it was at first? A friend of my husbands mentioned this game to me before it came out, so when it dropped I had to check it out! I'm also vaguely aware of some ~discourse~ surrounding this game, so I wanted to see what it was like and if the angst surrounding the lack of content warnings was really as much of a problem as mentioned on the tin.

I won't be able to discuss this game without spoilers, so check the cut below to read my thoughts...

How was the character creator? It's actually pretty solid! You can choose your pronouns and appearance (there are no genders in the game, and your romance options aren't gender dependent) and you have MANY chances in the narrative to define what sort of person you are. I remember that I could choose whether I was a vegetarian, my favorite drinks, if I drink alcohol, my family relationships, my personal history, if my grandma made empanadas, and I'm sure I'm forgetting some. You can also friend-date people! You don't have to romance everyone! You actually can't romance the cat, which is probably good.

How was the game? There are two main halves to the game. The dungeon crawly gameplay felt like an easier, bouncier Transistor? I did not pay much attention to clever gameplay like dodging or parrying and I was able to beat the game without difficulty on standard settings. This was honestly the least exciting part of the game - the only annoying part was that I did have to grind a little at the end of the game which I did not love. Foolishly, I tried to level all of my relationships at the same time - I didn't know that once you max your relationship with someone your relationships with others are easier to develop. I still would have probably liked one more dungeon.

Oh, and you can romance multiple weapons! I didn't see the "polyarmory" pun in the game once which I think was a missed opportunity. I didn't realize at first that this was an option and was pleasantly surprised. As a polyamorous person I don't think this was a perfect depiction (basically, your relationships with everyone else are paralell and there's no direct conversations - just hinting) but it's not a bad take for a dating simulator. Plus an affirming mother figure made me feel warm fuzzies for something I'll never have.

I romanced pretty much everyone and found them all very charming. All of the romances are quite fluffy and sweet - no major conflicts which counterbalances the darker nature of the main plot. My personal favorites were Rowan, Isaac, Sawyer, and Jonah, though Pocket was also super cute. You don't get locked into routes either - I started my route with Sunder as a friendship but was able to turn it into a romance later on.

The music is really nice, and the still art is cute - I found the cinematics a little lackluster.

What did I not love? Overall, since I found the gameplay inoffensive, I think my criticisms boil down to three main categories...

At first, I felt frustrated by the nonbinary representation in the game. The first nonbinary person you encounter (other than the player) is Sawyer, a college student who's quite concerned with social justice and is a little immature. They don't really know how to fend for themselves and a lot of what you do to help them grow as a character is teach them basic life skills. This felt kind of stereotypey to me? I did really like Sawyer though! Later on, I did encounter Holmes (who is only available as part of a DLC) and Rowan (who is hidden off the map and completely missable, but still a great character) and they both balance the nonbinary character scales a little, but I wish Sawyer had either been a little less cliche or that Rowan was less missable.

I also struggled to hook into the storyline with Seven. I thought his character was really cool and I enjoyed getting to know his story, but it seemed a little unlikely to tumble into a romance with a K-pop idol in my small beach town? Also, nobody ever reacted to him being hella famous - even Sawyer kept their shit together and interacted with Seven like a person. I get that this is a silly quibble in a game where a cat welcomes me into its cat dreams, we fight monsters made of my personal doubts, and where I have the option to date a vampire - but it's there.

Lastly, the elephant in the room - the stalking storyline. I don't have a history with stalking, but I do have a history with creepy overly persistent men (and as an afab person, I feel safe saying most of us do). Eric's texts creeped me out so much at the start of the game that I actually put it down at first because I felt kind of panicky. However, I pushed through it - and I wound up really enjoying the game. This won't be the right solution for everyone, and I hate that such a diverse visual novel / fun dungeon crawl is tied into that narrative - but you probably couldn't separate it from the narrative in the same way that you could change the "Mom" texts. I think adding the CW at the start of the game was the way to go. I did like that I had options not to redeem him or apologize to him.

At 8 hours and $19.99, was it really worth it? I really did enjoy this game a lot. This is more for you if you like visual novels and less for you if you like challenging, harrowing gameplay.

[maxellminidisc]

The Bequeathed was interesting in that it was equally frustrating as it was at least entertaining. Like I enjoyed the attempt at delving into gothic drama and mystery in this rural setting but it provided the bare minimum amount of narrative heaft required to pull it off so when the "twist" came the impact was lackluster and maybe a bit too predictable if you are familiar with common beats within these genres.

It had 2/3 strong ideas between its 2 sets of (maybe even 3) main characters but they felt like samples of each concept with thin threads to bind them and it honestly could've worked sooo much better by either editing down one or the other to make it a movie OR gotten more episodes to expand these ideas it wouldve been stellar. Some might say expansion is a bad idea cause they found it too slow but I found the pacing very steady and typical for a mystery!

My biggest complaint with it though was that it made the central figure who sort of has all this shit thrust upon them and become the center of a swirl of chaos become increasingly hard to empathize with despite the work in the beginning to do so lol and it never really pushes them enough to be likabley bad or morally grey, but more so ultimately pathetic or even incredibly foolish in later decisions.

But other wise its like a 6.5/10???

[carnilia]

Finally got around to watching Bad Times at the El Royale. My summary & review is: what if Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood was a much better movie?

[venomade]

It's probably a combination of consistent sleep deprivation over the past week and the fragile state of the union but there were some aspects of CS S4 I found lackluster and I felt the series finale was incredibly rushed (and as someone who doesn't buy "innate" human natures, I was frustrated with the way the narrative scripted some of Graham and Carmen's choices. I did like that Graham doubled down however, and accepted what he'd done and who he'd chosen to become). But overall it entertained me and I had fun and I have PLENTY of new content to vid with. Every major character had a proper arc and each major relationship was given a satisfying resolution (especially chase and julia wow) with the obvious exception of one being VERY open-ended. I'm just so happy this show exists and I'm glad that overall, Carmen and Shadowsan got what they deserved

[loregoddess]

Ib and Ff7

FF7 is under the cut bc I Had Some Thoughts about it, and I am so sorry.

Ib:

Favorite thing about that game: I was NOT expecting to end up as emotionally invested as I got after like, a handful of minutes playing it? Like it's a little indie rpg maker game and yet it's honestly one of the most impactful games I've ever played.

Least favorite thing about that game: The motion controls are a bit wonky which like, small indie rpg maker game mechanics are to blame, but it made getting out of the mini-maze hell when I was on my "I have to save Garry" run.

Favorite character in that game: Garry, I've never gotten so attached to a fictional character in such a short amount of time only to be BETRAYED by my own choices, resulting in him being dead and in a painting for my first ending.

Would I recommend it? Why? Yes yes yes, it's free, it's fun, and it only takes like, 30 minutes to play.

Free space to go off about something! Despite Mary being the antagonist and responsible for Garry's death in several endings, I do feel a bit bad for her and wish there was an ending where Ib could like, save both Garry and Mary. It doesn't make much sense for the overall mood of the story, but still.

Rating out of 10: 9/10, good game overall, strong narrative, slightly wonky controls, excellent soundtrack, endearing aesthetics.

FF7:

Favorite thing about that game: It has a really interesting plot and cast of characters, and just a really strong narrative overall. Getting into all the extended compilation stuff was easy because the initial game experience left me wanting to explore more. The Remake does a really good job integrating a lot of this extended lore into...whatever the Remake's narrative is trying to do.

Least favorite thing about that game: The fandom--Okay, for real though, in the original game I hated Aerith's death. Like, yes, from a story perspective as the player because she was one of my favorite characters, but I actually think that was strong writing for the narrative development. What I mean is that mechanically it was a hideous decision because it leaves this gaping hole in the game. Maybe the player was using her and now has to try and get a character they weren't used to using up to level speed with Cloud and whoever else they were using for their main battle party, and that's just frustrating from a player perspective, but also when she leaves she takes everything except the materia she was carrying with her and the player looses access to that entirely for the rest of the game, but can still purchase her staffs and stuff from in-game vendors? Like, knowing this now what's the point of using her at all for the first part of the game? There's literally no point in leveling her up when I could use the exp for someone else, and there's no reason to buy her any good equipment because her most powerful staff is in the last dungeon you can use her in and you could give her any throwaway bracelet because you're going to lose it anyway. It literally makes no sense from a mechanic standpoint and I hate it because the original game's mechanics are already wonky (although that wasn't entirely rare for that era's jrpgs) but then just having this mechanical gap appear halfway through the game just messes things up even more. The original FF7 game has a lot going on in it, but because there's so much I feel it lacks the sort of polish it could have had, and I especially feel that Aerith's death just made the lackluster mechanics feel more insulting. However, the Remake has so far done a fair job of balancing the party mechanics so that even if the writers do decide to kill off Aerith again, I don't think there will be the mechanical gap that the original game suffered from because the Remake is much more mechanically balanced and well-designed.

Favorite character in that game: Aerith and Tifa, even when I was playing through the original game with it's really wonky writing (or localization, maybe), I just liked them a lot. Aerith breaks a lot of the "jrpg squishy healer girl narrative's heart" tropes I've come to expect, and Tifa had a lot of depth stemming from all that was going on in her personal character arc, and I really appreciated the writing for both. The Remake's kept the momentum and added even more details that make me love these two even more. Special mention goes to Nanaki (Red XIII) because would it wouldn't be a game series I've been obsessed with if I didn't love one of the characters the main writing team loves to ignore.

Would I recommend it? Why? Y...yes? I mean, sort of. Like my very long rant shows, I'm not actually a fan of the mechanics of the original game, and that's saying a lot since I actually love a lot of old game's for their wonky mechanics. But like, I had a hard time figuring out the internal logic and battle systems, and I'm still not even sure what healing magic scales off of right now, or the most effective use of materia and other items to their maximum effect, which is something I usually pride myself for knowing in jrpgs. The story is really interesting, but there's also a lot of plot gaps that sometimes get explored in extended lore but were never hinted at in the original narrative (like, when I found out that Tseng and Rufus not only survived their "this character very much just got killed on screen" deaths, but got quasi-redemption arcs, I was so, so confused). Also the general pacing is really weird, like the Midgar section sets up the Turks as being Really Serious antagonists, but then they just. End up being comic relief for the rest of the game, and slightly annoying boss fights. Rufus gives this really dramatic speech about how he's going to be a tyrant who rules by fear and then spends the rest of the game Not Doing That, instead chasing after Sephiroth and failing and then dying but not really dying bc as I noted, that got retconned. Hojo is literally one of the most evil characters in the story and the root of almost every issue, but you also get directions from him on a beach surrounded by girls in sexy (for PS1 era graphics) swimsuits, and it's like, why? So like, the original is decent and has a lot of interesting points, and the ost is amazing, but the mechanics are wonky and the actual plot flow is...weird. So like, if you just want to know the story, watch a playthrough, but if you want the challenge of the wacky mechanics (which I know damn well people have figured out and made incredibly strong end-game teams), then go ahead and play it yourself. As for the Remake, I would suggest at least watching the original game to get to know the narrative to better understand how the Remake is changing the direction of the story, but also like, I'd recommend it just because it's plain fun, the mechanics are pretty easy to pick up, the ost is still amazing, and the narrative is even more rich. I would suggest a handful of things from the extended compilation works to better enjoy some of the Remake additions (i.e. the novel where Kyrie and Leslie first appeared as characters, they're both actually super amazing and the Remake only skims the surface with them), but like, it's not necessary for the overall enjoyment of the Remake.

Free space to go off about something! I've gone off about enough already, but I would suggest avoiding the fandom if you're interesting in getting into the game because there's so much petty arguing over shipping nonsense and what is or isn't canon, like, it's not the most toxic fandom I've ever seen but it's not what I'd call fun either. Would fully recommend the entire compilation though, I really loved all the novels/short stories, and even just watching playthroughs of the games related to FF7 was so much fun and added so much depth to the world and characters. Would recommend Advent Children, but only after playing/watching the original game and reading at least On a Way To a Smile (and additionally reading The Kids Are Alright for the Complete version of the movie) because nothing in the movie makes any damned sense otherwise.

Rating out of 10: Original game is 6/10, and the Remake is 9/10

[princeasimdiya12]

That anon is an asshole. Why do you hate Shuichi? I think he fits the theme of truth and lies, but his character development is a complete joke as he has zero struggles after his waifu dead. He never once second guess his actions in class trials and doesn’t even think of major consequences (killing the de facto prime minister and not noticing a serial killer is amoung them). His stans over analyze his actions and try to justify everything he does.

They were quite a jerkhole. I can imagine that most stans would be protective of their favorite characters if anyone were to express disapproval.

And thank you for giving me the opportunity to express my personal feelings on the matter anon. And those are some interesting reasons to dislike him but I have some other reasons.

My answers will be hidden under the “Read More” because they’re long answers. But these are my thoughts and reasons for why I hate Shuichi Saihara.

Reason 1: The Protagonist Switch was Lackluster

Right off the bat, I personally dislike that we were promised a unique and compelling protagonist like Kaede only to switch her with a generic insecure protagonist like Saihara. The use of the protag switch isn’t a bad plot twist and it can be clever, it’s just that the result of switching Kaede for someone like Saihara left a bad taste in my mouth.

I loved Kaede because she was unique as a DR protagonist. Along with having a colorful design and talent, she was assertive, confident and willing to take charge. She was actively involved in the story by stepping up as the group’s de facto leader and trying to motivate them. She was also flawed in the sense that she was quick to butt heads with others and she didn’t completely trust others or practice her own beliefs of trusting in friends. And personally, I’m not even upset that she tried to kill someone. It’s still considered something different for a DR protagonist to do, especially if it was for the greater good. 

But when we get Saihara, he continues the trend of being a generic sad boy who feels insecure about his talents and wants to be stronger. Most of his screentime is spent moping about his problems and how he doesn’t feel good enough. He doesn’t have the same presence as Kaede and just stays in the background while the rest of the cast move the story as much as they can.

In all honesty, if they had introduced Saihara as the new protagonist, or at least make it so that his predecessor wasn’t as compelling as Kaede, then I wouldn’t have been too upset. At the very least I wouldn’t have gotten my hopes up for a protagonist who was actually different compared to the past protags.

Reason 2: Waifus In Refrigerators 

For those that don’t know, fridging is the concept of (brutally) killing off a fictional female character in order to create an emotional impact for her male love interest and his character development.

Kaede’s death and how it impacted Saihara is textbook fridging.

I strongly detest fridging since it robs a female character of her agency and role in the story. It treats her as a tool meant to motivate her male love interest to either avenge her death or grow as a person. Kaede’s death along with her final wish is what pushes Saihara to try and beat the killing game. And from then on, Saihara will take the moment to reflect on Kaede’s tragic end and how he inspired him with her kindness. Kaede loses her identity as a complex leader who was willing to commit murder for a greater good. Everyone just remembers her as Saihara’s innocent dead love interest who inspired him to keep on fighting. It’s also worse in the 6th case when it’s revealed that Tsumugi took advantage of Kaede’s trap to kill Amami which further pushes Kaede into the image of an innocent angel that did no wrong.

And it’s also frustrating since this isn’t the only time that the Danganronpa series has killed off its female characters in order to develop their male love interests.

In SDR2, Peko dies trying to save Fuyuhiko which in turn motivates him to stop acting like a jerkhole and be more cooperative with the group.

In DR3 Future Side, Chisa is the first victim of the killing game which pushes her boyfriend Munakata to become a more direct antagonist towards Naegi for protecting the Remnants.

In the same series, Kyoko allows herself to be poisoned in order to protect Naegi. It’s through her death that Naegi decides to confront Munakata in a final showdown. And while Kyoko does get brought back to life at the end of the show, it should be noted that she was only brought back just to be part of Naegi’s happy ending package. She loses her agency and is brought back just to be his newly revived girlfriend.

In DR3 Despair Side, Chiaki is brutally killed in order for her classmates to become Remnants of Despair. But it’s her final heartwrenching moments with Izuru that inspire emotion inside of him aswell as deciding to turn against Junko.

So Kaede being killed for Saihara’s development is the fifth fridging example in this series and it sucks that Kodaka and his crew rely on this trope throughout Danganronpa.

Reason 3: The Narrative Forces You To Like Him

Another issue that I found irritating about Saihara is how everyone began praising him.

Just after the first case, everyone constantly praises and coddles Saihara for being such a great detective and for growing so much. For me, that praise feels undeserving since he barely did anything to earn it. Thinking back to each of the past protagonists, they didn’t have everyone’s respect in the beginning. They each had to work had and face adversity throughout their stories in order to earn their praise and respect. Even Kaede, who despite being a confident leader, had to deal with people frequently judging her leadership and actions. So I find it questionable that Saihara already earned everyone’s respect after solving only one case. 

By having all the characters praise Saihara, the narrative pushes you to accept him as the new protagonist and recognize how awesome it is to have him. But for me, it just makes me dislike him even more. I refuse to like something just because everyone else does and it won’t take away my admiration/love for Kaede.

It’s also jarring since anytime a character has the spotlight, it somehow has to involve Saihara.

“Wow Himiko! You’re much more expressive now than before. Just like you Saihara!”

“Man, it sounds like you had a harsh life growing up Harumaki. Just like you and your detective work, eh Shuichi?”

The narrative can’t help but force Saihara to be around and praised by the people around him despite the spotlight not being on him in that given moment. 

Reason 4: He’s Not a Good Detective

While Saihara’s role as a detective may fit the theme of Truth and Lies, that doesn’t mean he was good at the job. My issue being that he was unproductive and biased for the role.

While he did set up that trap in Chapter 1 to catch the mastermind, he doesn’t do anything as proactive in the later chapters. He spent most if not all of his time going to training with Kaito and moping about his problems. It goes on like this for 4 chapters and it takes Kiibo threatening to blow up the school before he actually gets to work on solving the mystery of the killing game. As a detective, you’d think he would put more effort into actually solving the mysteries of the killing game or try to put some thought on who the mastermind could be.

The biased part comes with how he interacts with others and how he’s more critical of people based on how they treat him. Saihar has a tendency to be very judgmental towards the students and doesn’t look at the entire picture. 

He writes off Ouma as the embodiment of lies and doesn’t bother trying to learn more about him or his true motivations. 

And on the opposite side, he openly praises his friends while blatantly ignoring the problematic things they’d done throughout the story. 

He considers Kaede to be an inspirational role model despite how she betrayed him and wanted to commit murder behind his back.

He worships Kaito and treats him as a perfect hero despite never noticing his ongoing illness or the fact that Kaito didn’t trust his friends enough to reveal his own insecurities.

He deems Maki a reliable friend despite the fact that she went behind his and everyone’s back in order to kill Ouma and was willing to gamble everyone else’s lives if it meant taking revenge on the supreme leader.

Shouldn’t a detective be more persistent when presented with a mystery while also acknowledging all the sides (both good and bad) of a given person? If his personal bias was treated as a flaw by the narrative, then that would actually give his character significant depth. Especially if he worked on managing his biases and learning to acknowledge all the sides. But it isn’t treated as a bad problem.

For me, the fact that he’s supposed to be a detective who “grows stronger” and is so good at his job despite all of this really rubs me the wrong way. If anything, it shows me that he’s really bad at the job.

Also, I would like to bring up that I don’t count him investigating the murder cases as being a good detective. Why? Because Hajime and his class in SDR2 were able to solve their class trials without a detective figure. Being a detective, or having one, doesn’t make solving the class trials any easier.

Reason 5: An Unnecessary Cliche

Personally, I really see no reason for why Saihara’s character needed to be the generic insecure protagonist for this particular installment of Danganronpa. It’s the same cliche storyline featured in a grand majority of anime and light novels. It’s repetitive and irritating knowing that so many stories focus primarily on a sad generic boy who doesn’t feel good enough and wants to be stronger. 

It’s also worth mentioning that in comparison, the past protagonists at least had narrative reasons for why they were generic and insecure in the first place.

For Naegi, he was the first protagonist of the installment and his normalcy was meant to contrast the extremely talented and radically different students he’d be involved with. As the game progresses, he uses his normalness to bond with the students and rally them together in the name of hope.

For Hajime, he’s treated as a deconstruction of the generic insecure protagonist. It’s because his feelings of inferiority and longing to be special that he decides to accept Hope’s Peak’s experimentation and become Izuru Kamakura: an incredibly talented super-being who lost his humanity.

For Komaru, she was regarded as an ordinary girl that had the potential to lead others which is recognized by the adult resistance and Monaca. So throughout the game, both sides were pushing her into becoming either the next symbol of Hope like Naegi or next symbol of despair like Junko. But she ultimately decides to be neither of them and wants to be her own person.

There were reasons for why each of these protagonists were considered generic and insecure as it contributed to the narratives. But for Saihara, there’s really no solid reason for why he’s the only normal one of the V3 cast. And everyone is more than happy to praise him as the best one out of the cast despite doing so little to earn it. At most, Tsumugi reveals that Saihara being an insecure boy who grew stronger thanks to his friends was for the sake of a fictional storyline. Obviously it was meant to mentally break him but it honestly feels like a weak reason to keep the trend of a generic insecure sad boy. Not to mention there are other reasons for why I believe this doesn’t work.

The setup for the “Danganronpa is a fictional TV show” twist didn’t have enough buildup so it doesn’t make the cliche that strong.

Saihara still continues the role of the insecure boy who grows strong and saves the day. While Tsumugi states that his role was written for him, Saihara still continues the tropes of his archetype by saving the day. It’s ultimately because of him that he’s able to convince his friends and the viewing audience to give up on Danganronpa. It was the writer’s way of having their cake and eating it.

If the reveal was meant to be a shot at how it’s become a cliche, then why not live up to it? If they wanted to show how Danganronpa was running for too long or how it’s cliches were getting old, then why not commit to those ideas? Instead of having everyone praise and worship Saihara, make them question if they’re really going to depend on a generic guy to save them. Instead  of being just a cute quirk, actually show the negative sides of Saihara’s anxiety and depression and how they would hinder him from participating in trial discussions. Maybe even have Kaito lose his temper at Saihara because of how much he mopes around.

There’s so many ways they could have gone with deconstructing Saihara’s stereotype or showcasing how it’s become old and stale. So it feels disappointing that they never went that far.

And another reason for why I dislike his characterization is because it brings to mind Ryota Mitarai from the DR3 anime. Just like Saihara, Mitarai is a main character who’s described as generic, insecure and spends most of his time whining about how useless he is. Despite this, he manages to survive the killing game since the other more unique characters are killed or move the events of the story. I personally found Mitarai to be a frustrating character. I detest characters who constantly whine about how useless or miserable they are as a means of getting sympathy from the audience. So having to deal with Saihara who more or less shares multiple characteristics with Mitarai felt very exhausting.

Conclusion

So those would be my reasons for why I hate/strongly dislike Saihara. I can admit that alot of these reasons weren’t so much because of Saihara or his actions but how he was written throughout the story. He still did alot of things I didn’t like don’t get me wrong, but alot of fault can be traced to the writers and how they decided to write him and Kaede’s characters. I still find his archetype as a generic insecure boy who mopes around to be an unappealing archetype but I’m sure most of his fans would suggest otherwise.

If you’ve managed to read everything here, I’d like to thank you for taking the time to do so. I can’t imagine many people would want to read a critical post targeted towards one of the most beloved characters in Danganronpa. So thank you for doing so.

And as always, if you agree or disagree with anything I’ve written, you’re more than welcome to reblog this with your comments. I’m always up for friendly discussions. 

[mistakenot4892]

Some thoughts of Heart of Deimos.

I made a reddit post but I thought I might repost it here and see if the response is any different. Mild spoilers for Heart of Deimos, the most recent Warframe update, under the cut.

First off, this is a bit of an effortpost, and it will be quite meandering and confused, sorry about that. We are now two days into Heart of Deimos and I had some thoughts I wanted to put on paper as it were. There's a TL;DR at the bottom.

The Bad:

In all honesty, taking into account the usual DE release-then-fix cycle and the quick patching they've already done to things like the Son token costs, there's very little about this update that I think is objectively bad. Deimos might be the single best open world release of the set, lack of a catchy musical number aside. It's not any buggier than any other release, which may say more about DE's QA than anything, but I have fallen through the map a few times, and host migrations have broken multiple vault runs.

The combined token system is a pretty big departure from the other open worlds, and I found it very confusing initially. Without the prior context of using Ticker for bonds in Fortuna, I think it would be really opaque, particularly for new players who aren't already up to speed on how the open world resource loops are expected to work. Alongside the complex token system, it's also understandable that people are frustrated with the expectation that they -must- participate in mining, fishing and conservation to get the tokens, since these don't really leverage the well developed aspects of gameplay.

The initial quest was lackluster from a storytelling perspective, with some really nonsensical events, a lack of development for each individual beat, and a frustrating lack of building on the already existing lore in favour of introducing new lore. It was pretty blatantly a tour of the zone mechanics, though maybe we'll see a more engaging plot when the equivalent of the Profit Taker and Exploiter bounties are introduced over the next year. The new warframe being dropped in by Mother as an afterthought, without a scrap of context, almost felt worse than the way previous quests have just given us the blueprint with no explanation at all. Protea's quest felt a lot clearer so it's disheartening to see them taking a step back there.

Finally, prior to finding the Albrecht lore I thought the playable content of the update was quite short and uninteresting.

The Good:

The Family voice acting is really, really good. Some of the writing is a bit iffy in the classic overwrought DE sense (which IMO is charmingly earnest anyway) but the delivery is fantastic, and while initially I was put off by the characters being shallow, I came around on it - I will go into more detail under 'The Ugly'.

With regards to the grind: even though the resources from the open world minigames are mandatory, participation isn't - so far I've run conservation exactly once, for about an hour, and I am clear for the third rank up with the Entrati. The world drops and bounty loot are more than enough to cover the vast majority of other costs, which is honestly fantastic. For all the complaining, DE has definitely learned from PoE and Fortuna with regards to letting people dictate their own playstyle without handicapping their progress. You can focus down specific requirements with specific minigames, no trouble, or you can just play bounties and run and gun your way to incidental loot. The combined token system was really confusing initially but combined with the incidental drops it makes progression quite organic without forcing you to spend your time on any particular task (looking at you, pre-Thumper PoE). There also seems to be a pretty solid spawn chance for tokens in the caves of the open world, and since the rank ups are now 1 of each kind of token instead of 10, this is possibly now a feasible way to skip the conservation grind entirely.

With regards to the lore: despite my earlier complaint about narrative quality and disconnection, DE does seem to be tying Parvos, the Entrati and the Glassmaker together, which is interesting. Prior to finding the Necraloid area and hearing the excellent Albrecht Vitruvian lore (seriously, mad props to the writers and the VA, the fourth log gives me powerful Darkest Dungeon narration vibes) I was ready to drop the game until a few patches and more content was added, but now I'm fully willing to grind for a couple weeks to hear the rest. I'm curious to see where they will go with the Heart and the Man in the Wall, particularly in regards to stuff like the reliquary drive and how it relates to the Necraloids and pre-warframe Orokin technology in general.

The Ugly:

The Family are the ugly, get it? This bit is mostly just because I want to talk about the new characters and the themes of Warframe as a narrative.

There's a kind of tension around the family that I initially found offputting - here we have a family of immortal alien gods who made their name ripping secrets from the flesh of reality, literally sprouting from the meat flowers of an infested moon... and they act like the cast of Arrested Development, switching between lofty poetic proclamations and petty squabbling that wouldn't be out of place on a sitcom. At first it seemed like it was just bad writing. Over time though, with exposure to the wider plot and the various deeper interactions, I started to warm to it. It's really interesting how DE has juxtaposed the deformed appearance of the Entrati, their perfect-marble-statue-like Orokin aesthetic, the pulsating infestation, and this very human, very relatable behavior. It really pulls back the skin on the Orokin as a people and uses a bit of clever metanarrative to show us that even the Tenno remember the Orokin as being more than human, when they were just as flawed as anyone else.

The individual characters felt very shallow at first, like cardboard cutouts of the typical family transplanted into a blob of writhing meat, but the pleasant surprise of the relationships mending between Entrati rank-ups and the subtle undercurrents you start to notice when interacting with them over a longer timeline really turned that on its head. There's some really excellent combinations of writing and delivery that add subtleties to each character, like the Daughter's undercurrent of thirst for either the Tenno or for butchering mutant fish, or the animalistic yearning of the Son and his bleeding heart hidden under the callous and cruel facade.

Family, parenthood and belonging are arguably the core themes of Warframe's narrative - the Tenno are orphan children clinging to a single parental figure who herself is a stolen child, while their allies like the Ostrons and the Solaris are people who cling to their human connections and their shared culture despite outside forces, and draw their strength from each other. The grand enemies of the setting are collectivist empires who have shredded their humanity in pursuit of strength and profit respectively. Then you have the Orokin, whose grand flaw is hubris in isolation, and a deliberate abandonment of shared humanity in pursuit of impossible perfection. The entire Parvos questline related to blood, with Nef wanting to abuse it for gain and Parvos denouncing him. Even the Sentients, arguably the only alien culture in the setting, love their families and oppose the Orokin and by extension the Tenno largely in defense of their people.

DE has leaned hard on quite creepy, quite -relatable- strangeness to give the Family depth, which helps reinforce that they're demigods of a dead empire, even if they are also quite friendly and personable. It lends some real weight to the way the Orokin have been depicted as cruel, hollow people, since we now have direct evidence of how their culture and the expectations of their various roles tear at those interpersonal connections. There's a lot of heart and clear work put into developing these themes, and I think that it's a bit sad that the quality of the writing is frequently overlooked in the broader Warframe community in favour of focusing on the flashy mechanics and cool new novel features. DE's writers are some of the best in mainstream video gaming currently, and even with my complaints about the main quest earlier, this consistent ongoing thematic cohesion and the variety of individually good beats more than make up for incoherent feature-driven storytelling.

TL;DR:

Despite some teething issues and bugs Heart of Deimos might be the best open world update so far, the way DE presents the Family and develops on the overarching themes of the story are pretty excellent, and I am excited to see where they go with it. Thanks for reading my incoherent and largely irrelevant thought-spew. Have a good one.

[ranger-report]

Review: THE WITCHER 2: ASSASSINS OF KINGS (2011)

With the first Witcher game under my belt, I decided to plunge straightaway into the second game in the series: The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings. Expecting little beyond improvements in graphics and controls, I was very curious to see how the game delivered on the cliffhanger ending of the first game, in which Geralt of Rivia defended King Foltest of Temeria from a would-be assassin, only to reveal that the killer was also a witcher. I’d had a decent time with The Witcher: Enhanced Edition, particularly in the storytelling aspects and the choose- your-own-adventure narrative, but had found myself frustrated by dated game design and graphics and lackluster combat. Still, it was, by the end, an arresting experience that had captured my intrigue enough to make me want to go back and replay it to see what paths I could have chosen. Choice is truly the number one aspect of The Witcher, in that Geralt generally chooses not to choose sides, but is often found forced into doing so. Choice is also the highlight of The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings, so much so that by the end of the game I was nearly horrified with how all of my decisions, ambient though some of them were, had stacked into a neat pile of awful fuckery. If you want to feel good about what you’ve done by the end of a game, The Witcher series might not be for you. But if moral ambiguity and robust, branching paths are what you seek, then read on dear reader, because things are about to get immediately messy in what is some ways a vastly superior sequel to the first game, but in other ways falls short of the narrative potential established by its predecessor.

From the start, Witcher 2 is once again a big game of Choose Your Own Adventure. Opening with a prologue establishing Geralt’s involvement in a political assassination, the player is continually given agency over where Geralt is going, what he wants to do, and how he is going to do it. This is at once the game’s biggest strength. Just as in the first game, Geralt’s choices have domino effects that tumble down the slippery slope of lesser evil decision making, affecting what characters do and whether or not they might appear elsewhere in the game. And, furthering the CYOA aspects, certain portions of the grander story are hidden from sight should Geralt choose to go down a different path. Maybe some characters will have happier endings than we see them get if Geralt decides to help them instead of quest elsewhere -- maybe not. Perhaps the biggest departure from the previous game’s style is that the entire second chapter of Witcher 2 is different depending on which side of a conflict you choose to enable. This, of course, is also all based on whom you’ve sided with previously, with deft moments of quick situational judgements, some of them timed. Give the elven rebel his sword so he can defend himself, or push him to the side so you can leap into the fray yourself? Not every decision is placed in front of the player as a monumental choice; some of them are as simple and clean as whether or not you pick up an object in front of you, knowingly saving someone’s life. This makes the world -- and the story -- feel surprisingly alive, vibrant, always on edge as though the lightest touch in any direction will spell consequences for some and reward for others. This does, however, create a shorter gameplay experience overall. Where my full playthrough of the first game was close to fifty hours, I clocked in just over thirty hours here, but this is partially because the full content of the game cannot be seen in only one playthrough. There’s a massive amount of game to be held, but the unfortunate reality is that it can only be seen piecemeal. It’s like getting to the end of an actual Choose Your Own Adventure novel, only to realize there’s a vast amount of pages left unread because you didn’t take the roads less traveled...or simply traveled differently. For better or for worse, the first time through this game will leave the player with the sensation that there is a lot that they didn’t get to see, despite the freedom of branching paths being thrilling and adventurous. And the story itself isn’t nearly as investing as the previous game. Geralt’s adventure in clearing his name of wrongdoing and tracking down his memories are at the forefront of his story, but in the background is a complex, political plot that simultaneously is and isn’t important to follow. Decisions made by Geralt heavily affect what’s going on, even as Geralt himself is constantly growling about how he wants to track the kingslayer and a missing friend. But the game and the characters populating it continually drag him back to the fray because they need him, dammit, and if he wants the means to his ends then he’ll have to endure everyone else’s shit. Perhaps that’s the point: Geralt’s actions continually change the entire world around him, whether he wants to be a part of it or not. That said, the straightforward narrative is defiantly strong here, partly because the branching system demands it need be. This is a Story with a Purpose, the Purpose being to establish a series of unfortunate events happening around Geralt, if not to Geralt. But when it’s as bland as it is -- save for the bits where Geralt is trying to clear his name -- it can be difficult at times to maintain a steady pace. And the entire third act takes place in a ruined elven city which is a chore to navigate, nearly ruining the momentum and the whole of the game’s experience; there’s two disasterously difficult combat engagements to wade through as well as a grating boss battle with a large beast, not to mention a magical puzzle which demands navigating the labyrinthine ruins if you want to discover what it is. And yet, by the end, the house of cards comes tumbling down into the awful realization that everything behind the scenes has been doing its utmost to raise the stakes high enough to win the whole pot, and depending on Geralt’s actions, it does so to varying degrees. I sincerely doubt there is anything close to a happy ending in one of the alleged 16 conclusions the game contains; if anything, it can only go from shitfucked to fucked-with-hope-on-the-horizon. And, despite the sometimes slog, that’s effective.

Gameplay has seen a heavy upgrade. Gone are the original title’s point and click controls, replaced with a more intuitive interface that relies heavily on action and exploration. Similar to Arkham Asylum’s Detective Vision, Geralt can use his medallion to scan the world around him for interactive elements or objects to search through. Neat in concept, but oftentimes the execution is lacking; it can be incredibly difficult to find objects on the ground left by corpses without always using the medallion, as they can get lost in the surrounding scenery. Upgraded, too, is the combat, which is thankfully no long a boring fucking exercise in clicking at the right time to string together combos. Geralt rolls, swings, magics at the click of a button, using the WASD and mouse camera to keep an eye on the action. The triple division of combat styles -- fast, strong, and group -- are replaced with a fast and strong attack bound to the two mouse keys, and upgrades can make it so Geralt’s attacks can hit multiple people. Blocking is integral, but Geralt needs vitality for a block to be effective, or it will chip away his health. I both enjoyed and did not enjoy the new combat system. It’s functional, but I couldn’t help but feel out of control in tense moments, attempting to roll or dodge or block or use signs between sword strikes. Geralt only swings at whoever he is targeting, not simply in front of him, so if you accidentally turn the camera to the wrong angle while trying to attack he will swiftly turn and swing at someone else entirely, leaving him open to devastating counterattacks from behind. Frustration can mount quickly, as it seems that Geralt is a whole hell of a lot squishier this time around than in the first game. Sure, the first Witcher had plenty of moments where getting overwhelmed could happen in the blink of an eye and Geralt would turn into fresh meat, but Witcher 2 makes every sword fight feel like an exercise in dodging just to stay alive. Maybe I wasn’t playing with enough patience, but it felt like I spent more time rolling and running to regain health than I did connecting with satisfying blows. Sometimes, quicktime events pop up during major boss encounters, which are devastatingly difficult in needless ways. Just like in the first game, Witcher 2 will absolutely dial up the volume on the difficulty knob without warning and around an unseen corner, to an extent where I found myself pained by exhaustion and anger at yet another GAME OVER scene. This is compounded by the strenuous camera, which is awkward at best in outdoors environments, frustratingly awful in close quarters hallways. Making things even worse is the game’s departure from the previous healing methods in The Witcher: where potions could be downed on the fly, and food eaten to regain mild portions of health, now the only way to heal is potions while meditating, or simply by meditating. Without the ability to heal in the middle of combat the thoroughly aggressive enemies will stymie even seasoned players as they watch their health bar helpless disappear with no respite.

Graphically speaking, this is leaps and bounds better than the original. High-detail, crisp textures, far draw distances, I very rarely had any stuttering or framerate issues. At worst, there was minor pop-in and fade in, some seams showing where textures were laid out, and jittery models here and there. Also, motion blur and bloom were turned on by default. Never fun. It was an absolute job to take in the world on hand, with the variety of monsters and humanoid characters to encounter, lovingly rendered with tons of color and flair. Outside of the story, this is where the game truly shines. Before there had been low-res models being reused left and right, but here nearly every character model (outside of factory-line soldiers) feels unique enough to recognize in and out of combat. It’s really a fucking wonder to behold. It felt the same as the graphical leap between Uncharted and Uncharted 2, with nearly an overwhelming amount of detail in the world to take in, dizzingly put together in a way that is breathing and living.

That said, is the game actually an improvement over the first title? Well, yes and no. Graphically, interactively, yes, to an extent. The branching narrative is bold, but feels like there is so much you’re missing out on once you’ve chosen a particular path. For example, there’s a dragon that exists in the game, and its origins are shrouded in mystery. I only discovered them based on a trophy I got at the end of the game, which felt like a huge cheat to learn that way. If the game had told me something about the dragon’s nature, even down the path I took which actively led me away from the dragon, then I wouldn’t have felt disappointed, but it didn’t. I learned the answer through a trophy. And in many ways, while this game does things better than the first game, it’s only to slight degrees, and while I do want to go back and play this again, it’s difficult to do so after a somewhat disappointing first run. Geralt’s story was excellent, and kept me on the edge of my seat whenever it came around, but everything else that happened felt largely disconnected from what was driving Geralt this time around, and ultimately only served as setup for the third game in the series. Again, perhaps that’s the point: perhaps Geralt will have to face the weight of his decisions, that which defines the world at large whilst he maintains a selfish lean towards his personal goals. Geralt of Rivia both is and is not the most important person in this story -- he is but one man who is forging a path towards his wants and needs, but maybe he’s crumbling kingdoms along the way, intentionally or no. While I’ve heard nothing but Game Of The Year praise for The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, I’m keeping my expectations tempered based on this sequel, which is fun and daunting and clever, but the drawbacks are hefty, saved only by the draw of the lead character and the living story itself.

Final Score: 7.5/10

[doom-dreaming]

Big Sigh: aka my thoughts on BL3

Okay. It's 4 in the morning and I have managed to fuck my sleep schedule completely sideways and I've been reading people's complaints and criticisms for about an hour now so here's what I have to say about Borderlands 3. This is gonna get long, buckle up.

Borderlands 3 has potential that was never fully realized and it seems half-finished and underdeveloped.

Now, you might want to take this with a grain of salt because I haven't actually played it for myself yet, but I've been watching streams of whatever I can get my grabby little hands on and here are my impressions.

I agree with the majority of you who say it was a disappointment. I feel like we were overly hyped. Maybe it was just active imaginations and excitement and love for the series, but when my friends and I can come up with at least three different storylines for the twins alone that are (in our opinions) better than what actually happened?? Something went wrong, narratively.

You all know I could talk for hours about all the different visual aspects of just Troy and how we got answers for virtually none of them - but I won't fixate entirely on him this time around.

In general, there's some kind of disconnect between what we were expecting and what we got. Characters seem one-dimensional or just "off" in some way, and granted, it has been seven canonical years since BL2 (so about five since the events of Tales, if I remember my timeline correctly) and people do change. Seven years is longer than you think, especially in an environment where literally anything could happen.

But in order for that change to be believable, it needs to be backed up by canon. I'm not saying we should have gotten a bunch of side quests that detail the years between then and now for every single character, but even just a few lines here or there as we go about our missions would have been better than leaving a gaping hole. Too much of a hole is not "let the audience fill in the blanks," it's just bad writing.

Rhys and Vaughn? As far as I know, they barely acknowledge each other. I know a lot of people are displeased with Vaughn's development and while I like the feral Vaughn, it's just a single aspect of his character. In Tales, we got to see him transform from a nerdy, gun-shy dude into someone who embraced the danger of Pandora and learned how to roll with the punches. I'm glad to see how confident he's become in BL3, but again, I feel like they distilled his character down into just one basic part.

I was actually pleased with Rhys, to be honest. I think his voice acting captured the essence of Troy Baker's, and I think he retained more character fidelity than some of the others.

Fiona, Sasha? We don't necessarily need to see them (though I would have loved that), but even overhearing a conversation from some NPCs regarding "those grifters Rhys used to run with?" "Oh yeah, I hear they're Vault hunting now" would have been fine. Just something to acknowledge that they're out in the world doing something.

I've heard big complaints about Aurelia and while I haven't played TPS and don't have too much of a grasp on her character, I can see the frustration. From what I've gathered, she doesn't seem the type to go full bloodthirsty, full money-hungry like she was made out to be. Again, seven years can change a person, but if you're going to make a change that seems out-of-character without context, then give us that context. Once more, it seems like a distillation of character to further a plot that, frankly, would have been better and more interesting if they hadn't done it.

I'm going to briefly touch on the whole Aurelia/Troy thing again (weird jealousy aside) because I've found out why it rubs me the wrong way. The twins don't operate like that. From all other negotiations we see, it's either cunning diplomacy or brute force. Aurelia didn't need to fuck Troy to get him to torture Monty Jakobs for the Vault Key. He would've done it anyway. This whole thing seemed like an attempt at an obligatory sex joke that, again, needed context to make us believe it could reasonably happen. But instead we got nothing, just a weird scene that seemed out of place for both characters involved. The only thing it contributed was foreshadowing that "the sister always wins."

And speaking of the twins, here's the meat of the problem: wasted potential.

Let's look at what we've got. Sirens. Twin sirens, one male. Already a game-changer. These guys are a living, breathing anomaly in the rules of this universe. Add in the beautiful religious aesthetic and the mystical Great Vault and we've got ourselves some amazing options.

But what did we get? We got a lackluster sibling relationship (although it did have some gems, I'll admit). We got a half-hearted betrayal that ended up amounting to nothing. And in the end? We got our ultimate villain on a quest for more power. Y a w n.

Why doesn't Tyreen listen to her father as he pleads with her? Why does she hate him so much? Where's our context?! It seems like a lack of communication more than anything. Typhon never once refers to Tyreen as a monster, which is how they saw it growing up. In fact, she seems to be the favorite. He calls her "starlight." He begs her to listen, that the Great Vault won't give her the power she wants. He's remorseful of how he raised them, resigned to what they've become, but up until the end he's trying to convince her to stop until it reaches the point where he knows he can't anymore.

What got the twins from point A to point B? I get it, shitty parental behavior leaves lasting trauma, especially when there's a layer of bad communication on top of it. But show us this, somehow. Please Gearbox, give us context. The vulnerable moments we got from the twins and Typhon left me wanting so much more of that, in particular. The talk about their childhood, the stargazing, Troy's admission about their mother, all of it was just a hint at something deeper that I feel like we never got to fully explore.

I feel that way about the whole game. Everything was the tip of an iceberg and we never got to see the rest underneath.

Imagine if Ty wanted to find the Great Vault because it would allow Troy to live a healthy, self-sufficient life. What a plot, huh? Supportive villain siblings? How dare I. What if they'd realized their mistake before it was too late. What if something woke up anyway? Something more ancient and more dangerous than ever. Let the Eridians have their time to shine. They've been a background force this whole series; pull the biggest twist and tell us that not all of their civilization was lost after all. For God's sakes, tell us more about sirens. We learned jack about shit for all their promises of "sirens will play a big part." Do the twins count as one? How do the powers pick the person?

This is getting incredibly long, so here are my closing thoughts. It doesn't feel finished. It feels like they released a half-finished ending to a series. The final events wrap up cleanly, hardly giving a new opening for a sequel, and yet there are still holes and loose ends galore in the story. I know that we still have DLC to get through, but given all of this, I'm trying not to get my hopes up.

Give us more story, deeper story, deeper characters, and most importantly, context.

Anyway. You know where to find me if you want rewrites and fix-its.

[ogradyfilm]

The Rise of Skywalker: Interplanetary Conflicts and Family Feuds

[The following review contains MAJOR SPOILERS; you have been warned!]

Well, to quote the late Orson Krennic: “We were on the verge of greatness. We were this close.”

I’ve been a staunch supporter of Disney’s Sequel Trilogy since the release of its first installment back in 2015. Despite its superficial flaws (particularly regarding its underwhelming antagonists) The Force Awakens’ compelling visual motifs actually inspired me to start writing reviews and essays again following a prolonged motivational drought, and although The Last Jedi was a bit... controversial (but let’s face facts: this fandom has been irreparably toxic since the Special Editions hit theaters, at the very least), I found its rich thematic subtext to be absolutely captivating. Unfortunately, the Skywalker Saga’s alleged grand finale—apparently representing a deliberate attempt by J.J. Abrams to “clean up Rian Johnson’s mess,” to paraphrase one especially venomous, but not entirely inaccurate, Twitter post that went viral (a ridiculous sentiment, by the way; contrary to popular opinion, there was nothing for Abrams to “fix”—because Johnson never “broke” anything!)—is more flash than substance; stylistically, The Rise of Skywalker is certainly a thrilling adventure, but its efforts to resolve nearly every lingering plot thread while simultaneously expanding upon the established lore leaves the story too muddled, jumbled, and busy to be completely satisfying.

[FINAL WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW THE BREAK!]

Let’s address the most glaring blemish right off the bat: all of the film’s major revelations are predictable to an almost insulting degree; indeed, a savvy viewer might initially dismiss the blatant foreshadowing as misdirection because the implications are too obvious. This isn’t necessarily unusual for the franchise, which generally utilizes twists in order to streamline the mythology (Vader becomes Luke’s father, Leia becomes Luke’s sister, we learn that Vader built Threepio in his youth, et cetera); thus, the idea that Emperor Palpatine somehow survived the destruction of the Death Star and went on to orchestrate the rise of the First Order (right down to growing Supreme Leader Snoke in a test tube) honestly feels... fairly typical. 

The developments surrounding Rey’s “true” parentage, on the other hand, are significantly more frustrating. The Last Jedi’s approach to the character—positing that she was merely the child of nameless scavengers that “sold her for drinking money”—was a powerful statement, making her choice to join the battle against tyranny... well, a genuine choice, rather than the inevitable outcome of some prophecy tied to her bloodline. Abrams’ decision to essentially reverse Johnson’s interpretation, instead turning Rey into Palpatine’s granddaughter, greatly diminishes the overall stakes, depriving our heroine of any sort of agency and reducing the galaxy-wide conflict to yet another family feud—a new generation putting on an encore performance of the same old melodrama.

Ultimately, Kylo Ren’s mask perfectly epitomizes the movie’s underlying shortcomings: in The Last Jedi, he shattered it in a fit of rage, symbolically abandoning his aspirations to become a worthy successor to Darth Vader; here, however, he needlessly and haphazardly reassembles it—an empty gesture that serves no real narrative purpose. The visible seams where he welded the fragments back together remain as evidence of his lackluster craftsmanship.

Then again, Wedge Antilles shows up for five glorious seconds—a welcome cameo after his absence from the previous two episodes. So all is forgiven, I suppose.

Seriously, though: my objections to its core concepts notwithstanding, The Rise of Skywalker’s smaller, subtler pleasures—Chewbacca’s heartbreaking reaction to Leia’s tragic demise, the unexpected return of Han Solo (as either a literal ghost or a Force-induced hallucination) and his subsequent reconciliation with his son, the diminutive Babu Frik’s numerous legitimately humorous moments (the series has rarely been this effortlessly funny)—were strong enough to redeem the experience for me. And isn’t Star Wars all about redemption?

[moriganstrongheart]

Uzumaki – Review

by Junji Ito 2013, Viz Media Hardcover, 648 pages, $32.00 CAD

Rating: ★★☆☆☆

Good: Beautiful line art, appropriately disturbing Bad:​ Campy, ridiculous horror elements, insubstantial

I had heard of Junji Ito and seen some of his strange artwork before, but I had never really gotten the chance to read any of his manga. As seems to be the case most recently, I came upon Uzumaki by chance while frequenting a local market. The book was recommended by a bookstore owner, so I decided to pick it up. It’s a hefty volume, containing all chapters from the original run of the manga, including the bonus extra chapter Galaxies. I think that Uzumaki lives up to what made Ito infamous—that is, his incredibly detailed and disturbing line art illustrations portraying often horrific distortions of nature, with specific focus on corrupting human bodies in terrifying ways. More than the writing or overall narrative, I believe Ito’s artistic talents are what define Uzumaki as something worth reading, if such a thing is of interest to potential readers.

I have personally never really been a fan of the horror genre; funnily enough, I think Uzumaki is the perfect example of why that is. I can imagine horror genre fans finding pleasure in the deformation of reality—in seeing what is normal being twisted into the surreal and being morbidly fascinated by it. Perhaps this is enough for some people, but not for me, and there’s really little else of substance in Uzumaki. Characters are either stupid or incredibly passive, with the worst offender being the protagonist Kirie. Most chapters are based around a single premise, with only a few of these chapters really contributing to the overarching narrative. There are elements here and there that impact the overall plot, but it’s obvious that Ito was focused solely on exploring his weird ideas, instead of wanting to write a coherent narrative spanning multiple chapters. I won’t go into detail about each story, but suffice it to say I often found the premise in almost every one of them ridiculous and as campy as horror can be, from people turning in large snails to corpses springing out of coffins. And through it all, no one acts like human beings. Granted, it’s explained that everyone in the town of Kurozu-Cho is being influenced by “the spirals”, but I think Ito is asking too much from the reader here. I know there are one or two stories that held my interest throughout, but even as I write this, I would not be able to recall what happened or what the premises for these stories were. As with most horror, there’s no substance to the writing or the plot, with all of the focus being placed solely on macabre.

It probably does not help that Ito’s art style falls short of being appealing. I know that may sound strange considering the subject matter, but I don’t want to confuse “appeal” with “beauty”. Ito has created some equally  beautiful works of art, as well as some terrifyingly ugly pieces that made me squirm just looking at them. I expect horror to be ugly in that sense; beauty can be frightening as well, but more often than not we attribute horror with ugliness. What I have issue with is his character designs and the acting of said characters. Almost every character reminded me more of porcelain dolls than people, with stiff movements to match their lackluster personalities. It may seem equally strange to criticize the movement of people in a static medium like manga, but when there is so much energy in Ito’s line work and so much going on around these characters, it’s frustrating to see them simply standing around with a wide-eyed stare. It’s just such a huge contrast to some of the beautifully detailed line art that it only helps to exacerbate how unlikeable these characters are.

Unappealing character designs

Disturbing, but beautiful

I think what I’m most disappointed by is the ending of Uzumaki, beginning with the destruction of the town up to the main antagonist’s victory, as much as there is a win-loss scenario and an antagonist. The frequent tonal shifts and the lack of structure sapped any kind of tension I may have experienced, once again making it difficult for me to care about any of the characters. I was rather apathetic to the fact that all the characters die at the end, which should speak to how little impact they had on me.

I wish I could say that Uzumaki is a great manga, but I think it has only reinforced my disinclination towards horror stories. Most of the chapters are stand-alone stories that rely on the shock value of their premises to entertain, transforming them—in my mind at least—into pure camp. I even laughed out loud at some of the situations Ito put his characters through—it just became so ridiculous sometimes. Though, if you’re a fan of this kind of thing, I don’t think you can go wrong with Uzumaki. It has all the trappings of what I assume is good horror, and if the popularity of its imagery online is any indication, others seem to agree it’s worth reading. The art alone is something worth admiring, as long as you can stomach some of the nastier pieces Ito’s mind was able to conjure.

Official Manga Website