*sigh* thoughts on Nintendo's botw/totk timeline shenanigans and tomfoolery?
tbh. my maybe-unpopular opinion is that the timeline is only important when a game's place on the timeline seriously informs the way their narrative progresses. the problem is that before botw we almost NEVER got games where it didn't matter. it matters for skyward sword because it's the beginning, and it matters for tp/ww/alttp (and their respective sequels) because the choices the hero of time makes explicitly inform the narrative of those games in one way or another. it matters which timeline we're in for those games because these cycles we're seeing are close enough to oot's cycle that they're still feeling the effects of his choices. botw, however, takes place at minimum 10 thousand years after oot, so its place on the timeline actually functionally means nothing. botw is completely divorced from the hero of time & his story, so what he does is a nonissue in the context of botw link and zelda's story. thus, which timeline botw happens in is a nonissue. honestly I kind of liked the idea that it happened in all of them. i think there's a cool idea of inevitability that can be played with there. but the point is that the timeline exists to enhance and fill in the lore of games that need it, and botw/totk don't really need it because the devs finally realized they could make a game without the hero of time in it.
154 notes
·
View notes
can you explain what makes stardew valley right wing?
It's a game about being a landowner in a small town. The game is anti-monopoly but the solution to monopolies is small business. A lot of people mistake being anti-monopoly for being anti-capitalist. Being anti-monopoly is a fairly common point even for libertarians to hold.
And once again for the people who take offense to this: the game's politics are right wing. This doesn't mean I'm calling you a trump supporter for playing it or whatever. It means the game is literally about being a landowner. I enjoy this game and I am a communist. Given the lack of understanding of class, you are probably right wing, you are probably a liberal, but not for playing stardew valley.
258 notes
·
View notes
You know what, I keep mulling this over and I think I'm just going to write it because I keep second guessing myself and I need to share.
SO. Back in my big, long Wolfwood post, I pointed out this scene below and how the pale eyes/use of Vash's name/etc shows actual concern here
The next shot is of Wolfwood's shoes running, and by the time we see these two again, they're at the hospital and have to overhear from the staff what happened to the hitman - which means that Wolfwood did not run after the shooter, he ran to get medical help. That's what I stated before.
But here's the thing: leaving Vash there while he runs to get help is... kind of stupid, because even though Wolfwood shot at the hitman, he's clearly still alive and still gunning for Vash. Wolfwood refers to him in present tense - "He is obviously a hit-man" not "he was".
Immediately after, Keele, who's moved up to the roof, says the following - "I need to get a clean shot in." On it's own, that's not a strange thing to say - he needs to finish this, quickly, before he's discovered. Except... it kind of is an odd thing to say, if Vash is still just lying there. Keele is on the roof, directly above his target - I would expect a clean shot to be fairly easy to take.
You might be thinking, "oh, but maybe there's a crowd around Vash now and he can't get a clean shot with all the people"... but this makes no sense, because Vash is only as injured as he is because Keele clearly doesn't care about collateral and fired on both Vash and the civilian woman in the car. Even if you argue that there's too many people to be "justifiably collateral" in Keele's eyes, he could still easily disperse them by firing more bullets - we don't see anyone who appears to be able to fire a gun here except Wolfwood, and he should be gone to get help at this point.
So, what's with the clean shot thing? He's never seemed to care up until this point, he was just unloading all his bullets at the guy, and a grenade. The only thing I can think of is that he needs to ensure his aim is accurate. It's likely he's firing at a moving target.
Wolfwood's arm is stretched out over Vash in the second panel of the image above. Neither one of them knew what became of Keele until later at the hospital. Vash's entire body is bandaged - he was in no condition to move himself, and we only see one set of shoes in the running panel.
Tldr; "Wolfwood picks up Vash and carries him while booking it for the hospital" is not only a perfectly valid interpretation of this scene, but also, imo, one of the most rational ones. I rest my case.
...Actually I'm probably just losing my mind. Ignore me.
171 notes
·
View notes