#it's literally them and I'm not taking criticism

[mareastrorum]

Hello! I’ve been looking at your blog after Critical Role episodes for a couple of weeks now and I have to agree with you wholeheartedly about pretty much all of it. I wanted to ask you your opinion on the idea that a majority of us are calling Bells Hells the bad guys because all they’re doing is ‘wanting to dismantle the oppressive force that aims to destroy an entire established society of innocent people’. I’m having trouble understanding what oppressive force that is?

Thanks for the ask! There's two parts to this, so I'm going to address them separately.

First, there is no "oppressive force that aims to destroy an entire established society of innocent people." Like, the only group that came close to that in this campaign was the Weave Mind and the Imperium, which intended to take over Exandria in its entirety and subject the entire population to hivemind slavery--but Bell's Hells did little to oppose them. Vox Machina (backed up by an army) demolished the Imperium's main forces at the Exandrian base of the bloody bridge. The Mighty Nein killed the Weave Mind and then started mopping up their allies that remained on Ruidus. Bell's Hells did nothing to support that rebellion other than assist on a scouting/sabotage mission and then flee.

Otherwise, there is no force aiming to destroy society. Ludinus wanted Predathos out so it could eat the gods, and there was no intent about anything other than that. He did not care one way or the other about collateral damage. Predathos doesn't either, but it wants to eat, and we do not know what level of divinity is too small for it to prioritize. And let's be serious, unless a god flees and lures it away, there's no reason for Predathos not to look at a planet full of life and think, "Hmmm, it might not taste good, but I am so fucking hungry."

A good while ago, when the Hells had initially reached Vasselheim, I saw discussion of whether Vasselheim and other Exandrian forces intended to wipe out all Reilorans and other Ruidus-based species. I think Evoroa's plea and assistance made directly to the leadership of Vasselheim has already prevented that potential result. Of course, the Exandrians are working together as a collective of dozens of factions, and each of those has untold numbers of individuals working for them. It's possible some of them will insist on war anyway, but given the actions of the three campaign parties, I don't see that happening on an organized scale. Regardless, Bell's Hells aren't focusing on that right now, and nothing they could/would do with Predathos would affect that either.

The only other faction that comes close to that idea is the Betrayer Gods, but they don't care about society. They want genocide. They want to murder every single mortal in existence, and then torment their immortal souls for all eternity. I literally cannot overstate the disdain the Betrayers have for mortals. They are Exandrians' ultimate enemy. The Divine Gate is the only thing protecting mortals from the Betrayers, and it requires every god to unanimously agree to drop it. That is phenomenal protection. There's been no serious threat to it since its creation.

In particular, I want to highlight that "the gods" as a category of entity are not a united faction. The gods don't rule anything on Exandria--not even Vasselheim. That's a purely mortal project! Mortals decided to build a city dedicated to the gods, and given that it's filled with their followers, the gods have historically spent particular attention to protecting it. That makes perfect sense, and it doesn't mean the gods are in charge of it.

Obviously, there will be other factions across Exandria that could fit that bill, but Bell's Hells hasn't had to deal with them in this campaign. Like, chaotic evil factions exist, they're just not in this story right now.

Next, whether Bell's Hells are villains, bad guys, etc.

I've written up how I assess villains in my pinned post. That's my general approach to any type of story, whether it's interactive, written, oral, etc. It's a very broad overview of when is a villain an effective narrative device? I am rather harsh in my criticism of villains: if they didn't improve the story, they should not have been included at all.

We could cherrypick through the various episodes to come up with an argument that Bell's Hells are the bad guys, but my problem with them is that they aren't effective villains. A villain's primary purpose is to highlight a theme in the negative: what is the wrong thing to do in these circumstances, and why is that? The reason they aren't effective is that they don't have a motivating purpose.

Bell's Hells are a chaotic faction that consistently deviates from whatever is requested of them. They claim to be for the people, then denigrate and oppose every faction they've encountered. They claim to have changed their minds about some of the gods (the Matron and the Arch Heart in particular), then repeatedly ignore or contradict the plain statements told to them, but they still seek out the gods' instructions regardless. This carelessness or apathy makes it impossible to map a philosophy onto the PCs other than "I felt like doing it in the moment."

None of them have been able to articulate a reason that they chose this path. Maybe the players will come up with some hamfisted excuse next episode, but it's still going to be unsatisfying from a narrative viewpoint. This stream had hundreds of hours to show that and instead needs someone to say it in the last episode. It's terrible storytelling, and none of them could claim that it was impossible to see this confrontation coming. We've known it was coming since Ludinus successfully bridged Exandria and Ruidus. There was time, and it was not spent wisely.

Going beyond dialogue, there's no consistency to Bell's Hells's actions except the desire to kill Ludinus. That muddled any potential message that could be conveyed about them as villains in a story except "kill Ludinus in particular." We can't even say they oppose any existing hegemony because none has been established in Exandria. There's no racial, economic, social, religious, etc. group dominating the world. Again, as said above, the gods don't rule anything, and they're stuck behind the gate.

Any potential to build Bell's Hells into worthwhile villains was squandered. Everyone but Orym had an explicit, tailor-made opportunity to lean into their darker personality traits, and every one of them chickened out--except Ashton, who gave into his desire to be special and have power to lash out at people standing over him. Unfortunately, Ashton's attempt to absorb another shard of a primordial would have also broken the game on a D&D level, so that got reversed and reworked into a character moment that also had no lasting impact on his character arc. Ashton hasn't bothered exploring it since. That's really the core problem: every time the PCs had the option to pursue a villainous path, they ran the fuck in the opposite direction, then dithered about what to do.

Without conviction, villains are merely bullies. They're just here to be mean, stop other people from getting what they want, and jeer at others when they get their way. We saw that in this latest episode. There's nothing Bell's Hells wants. They don't even want to be involved. They're just doing it because they can't even commit to going home--because they're player characters in a D&D game, and the players didn't want to switch to new characters.

That makes for a terrible villain story. Like, once we see the final episode and all the PCs have had an opportunity to take action and speak on their own behalf, we'd be able to revisit this with more definitive statements. Unfortunately, I can't think of a single way this could go that would correct the flaws I've already listed. It's far too late to correct the characters' lack of direction to develop a coherent villain arc for any of Bell's Hells.

[vidavalor]

You never know but I'm pretty sure that there is no Great Plan, other than for all to live freely by making their own plans.

I think that Armageddon is not just the Biblical, end-of-Earth kind but the idea that a person is a planet of their own, too. The big, global/Biblical war types of Armageddon are metaphorical for a person's own mental health struggles-- their own personal Armageddons-- that, if unchecked, could cause the end of their worlds aka themselves and the world they've made out of their life and the people in it.

The Nice & Accurate Prophecies seem to me to really be all just a series of well-observed, realistic, and empathetic life advice and notes on how to unfuck yourself if you get stuck. You can break down the prophecies and apply them to the different plots in the story but you can also just take them as good advice for living your own life, too, as needed.

I think that one of the big messages in the story overall, though, is to always think critically about what messages you internalize. It's to not blindly follow the words of another but to be open to listening to viewpoints, thinking critically about them, and then crafting your own world view.

It's just like the horoscope in The Tadfield Advertiser that The Voice of God brings up. There's nothing wrong with reading a silly horoscope on a bad day and allowing its intentional vagueness to feel applicable to your life in a way that you might need or want in that moment. What would be wrong would be blindly believing it to be some kind of Divine Sign in such a way as to not think critically about the sources and the validity of the advice.

As The Voice of God points out, many things in the horoscope can be correct... but not all of it is always correct. The horoscope in question, for instance, says that you should avoid salads... and we all know that it's not actually healthy to do that. It's showing that if you put blind faith in something without thinking critically about it, you're actually putting yourself on a very unhealthy path.

The Voice of God is talking about a horoscope, yeah, but... she's also not just talking about a horoscope.

She's also talking about the bullshit, manipulative kind of life guidance like that of influencers like Famine, about different forms of propaganda, and, more than anything else, she's talking about all religious texts... especially, The Bible.

It's a warning to people to be open to the ideas of others and curious, always, but to also think critically about the motivations of those behind and pushing those ideas, instead of blindly following them. It's a warning to not blindly follow the words of another but to read and study everything you can get your hands on and then make up your own mind on what you believe is the correct path.

It's perfectly fine to say 'there's some good stuff in here that I needed to hear today but the bit about the salads was totally incorrect' and move on. Whether it's a silly horoscope or any other secular thing or whether it's The Bible that we're talking about doesn't matter. Resist thought control and groupthink through being curious and learning everything you can and thinking critically about everything you take in.

I've got some quibbles with Agnes Nutter's writings, even though I like many of her prophecies quite a lot, and I'm amused by the fact that my main issue with them is the vagueness of what she wrote and how some people might mistake the meaning of it by looking at it too literally and... do I now not actually sound like I might as well be describing The Bible? 😂 Pretty well-played by this religious satire, no? *giggles*

Books Can Go Up Like...

...paper.

The expression is: "[x] can go up like paper."

It's used as a warning to be careful in having certain, highly flammable materials around open flames. The simile is in how, of all materials, one of the easiest to catch fire and go up is paper.

Something on fire is something that is going up or burning up... but what is the end result of that fire?

What goes up in flames is really something that is burning down.

During S2, our visiting angels to the bookshop help to teach us a recurring metaphor: books = people.

When Muriel asks Crowley for a book, they describe books by saying that "books are like people, only portable." For much of the season, Jim works hard to group the books together in a way that is thoroughly illogical when applied to literal books but actually brilliant if applied to those metaphorical books known as people. He's grouping books together by the first letter of the first sentence of each book. By their shared origins and experiences. By the things they have in common so that they feel less alone.

Books, written by people, are a metaphor for people.

So, when Nina says during the bookshop attack where they are trying to keep literal demons at bay as a metaphor for keeping Aziraphale's own inner demons at bay: "Why all the fire extinguishers?", Aziraphale recounts when the literal books went ablaze in S1-- at the same time as when he went Up-- when he explains:

Aziraphale points out that, as is often the case with metaphorical books, there was once a fire that burned down every book in this bookshop. In a moment of Aziraphale's own going Up, so, too, did the thing metaphorical for himself-- his bookshop and all the books in it.

The literal books all went up in flames and then fell down, charred into ash, all around the fallen angel who lights the good kind of fire in the book known as Aziraphale and whose trauma from this particular, literal fire is such that he needs a fire extinguisher within reach in every room, in hopes that that might be enough to keep the bookshop, its books, and the metaphorical book who owns it from ever going up in flames and burning down again.

Fires start, though, and there's another idiomatic expression of note, too: What goes up must come down. It's just gravity.

[princess-charlie-of-hell]

honestly the show should have gotten charlie to put her foot down and tell her dad that he can't permanently stay in the hotel because 1. He's literally the king of hell, any potential residents might be scared shitless of his presence and drive them away, 2. Again, he's the king of Hell, he has a job to do, running Hell, that he didn't do correctly cause he's been stuck making rubber duckies. I know he's in a state of depression due to Lilith's absence and it's reasonable that he's not in the right place but it's not an excuse to ignore his duty to fuck around the hotel and make his daughter, who he neglected for a long time, uncomfortable. He's a grown adult, I'm not gonna baby him because of his condition (unlike the majority of the fandom cuz he's their poor sad uwu baby 😒) and neither should Charlie. Forgiveness doesn't happen overnight, if Lucifer wants to do right for Charlie, then he should get off his sorry ass, take responsibility by being an actual king and help Charlie in any way he can while giving her the space she needs.

Hardly agree, I don't think that Lucifer living in the there is neither good for the hotel or his relationship with Charlie

Like you already he said he could scare potentially residents away and I think people there could be uncomfortable with having the literally highest ranked person living there, like image being an ordinary person and the king of England is living in the same hotel as you

Also Lucifer and Charlie barely had contact for 7 years and then suddenly living together again? Like the hotel is huge but it is still a huge change living in the same building as your parents. I have a good relationship with my parents and still live home with them but i image after not living together with them for years and then suddenly moving back together would definitely cause some problems

Was there even a conversation between them where the two talked about how it would be when Lucifer lives there or did he decided it by himself to move there and didn't even ask her? We didn't saw anything in the show, so i could image both happening

How he handled his duties in the 7 years is something i ask myself, I don't image that he took care of them in himself so did he told someone to do it for him? We see in Helluva boss that Satan took practically over as the boss in court but i don't think he took any other Tasks from Lucifer at least nothing we know about. And we know that Satan uses his absent to tell lies, like that he ruled before Lucifer so that kind of backfired

Like the other sins probably rule their specific rings themselves without Lucifer, i can also image that before Liliths disappearances she ruled over pride ring with Lucifer and took care of the sinners there as we see that Lucifer didn't really seem to care about them

I personally believe that the ars goetias and Overlords also have a huge influence in pride. I personally headcanon that Paimon took over many of Lucifer's tasks as in the mythology he was describing as his most loyal servant (off topic but why isn't there more fanart of Paimon x Lucifers this is the real old man yaoi and not RA) and is the only "King" from the goetias we see in hellaverse

That with babying of Lucifer is something i agree especially that in my opinion Charlie forgave him too fast but that probably was because of the fast pacing of the show. But i don't really want to criticized him too much because of his depressions because i am not an expert in it and don't want to say anything wrong. One thing which annoys me is just when people use the excuse that he is too hurt because of Lilith disappearance and there for completely blameless for his bad relationship with Charlie and blame anything on her and ignore the fact that She was Charlie's mother and Charlie is hurt too

But in the end i don't think that it is going to be a problem in the show, simple because the writers won't probably make it one. Like i think they want Lucifer too bad to be part of the main cast and will ignore the theoretically problems which he could bring with him. Why focusing on the female characters of the main cast who didn't had much spotlight in the first season, just let us add a new male one who will steal the spotlight from them anyway especially his daughter, remember Charlie? The actually protagonist of the show!

Like we will have 3 woman in the main cast (Charlie, Vaggie and Nifty) and 6 men (Alastor, Angel dust, Husk, Lucifer Baxter and Sir pentious). It are double so many man than women there. At least i think it was said that Baxter probably will take over Sir pentious place in the hotel and that pentious background how he ended up in hell will be showed. Remember when people said that helluva boss is a male lead show and Hazbin hotel a female lead one?

[meear]

umineko fans are the original "if you don't like it you just didn't understand it" people. I genuinely cannot think of anyone more annoying and obnoxious, except SNK fans, except not even them, because in Umineko's case that behavior is enabled by the author himself. It's crazy how a story that spent hundreds of hours discussing the value in several coexisting interpetations will have both characters and fans turning around and tell you that actually you're completely wrong for thinking a certain way

The crazy part is they don't even realise how their smug attitude about being part of R07's very special club of people who "have love" and the superior way they act about holding the true answer are EXACTLY the Erika traits they criticise in readers who don't think like them. "He spells it out but you still cannot see it? Lol" "are there still people who can't accept the literal canon answer? lmfao" "you know you're exactly the goats r07 wrote about right?" (Because r07 is a god who cannot possibly be contradicted, this is supposed to be the worst insult somehow) (these fans cannot seem to decide who the goats are an analogy for, considering they'll scramble to say they only represent the story's witch hunters as a criticism of true crime fans when you call out r07's arrogance, yet they'll smugly tell you you're just a goat when you question the story itself. Thank you, it's nice to know that Ryukishi wrote about me, but that doesn't answer the fucking question, Brian)

It's incredibly ironic. How did a story like Umineko create and encourage so many people to sanctify one "official answer" and taking any other attempt as an insult?? Like is anyone feeling how ryu07 completely fucked up at what he was trying to do?

"So I won't open the catbox and reveal what actually happened on the island." oh, that's cool, I actually really like that! I agree that ultimately the true events of that day are a pretty trivial part of the story, and it's way more interesting not to know - "anyway it's Rudolf and Kyrie and it happened exactly like so and so, and Shkanontrice did this and that".

... Okay, well I really wish that had remained a mystery forever, since the point was that any truth would've been anticlimatic, and the choice to reveal that genuinely kills a lot of what made Umineko's appeal to me, but I guess we can still have fun with EP1-4 and try several alternative theories for the sequence of events- "here's the manga explaining everything in detail and if you didn't get it have you tried maybe having some more love? It would be sooo clear if you had love lmfao. you literally cannot comprehend my work unless you have"

... I really wish that guy would stop making assumptions about the inner mind of complete strangers who read his work, but I do enjoy getting to choose an ending! it really fits in with Umineko's theme of choosing the truth for yourself and making your own path that you can be happy with, as long as you keep thinking- "the Magic ending is meant to be the true end btw. if you prefer the other one you pretty much have no heart lol, it's obviously framed like a bad ending and there's only one acceptable choice and one way ange can find happiness"

... man, I'm so bored. Why write a game like that and then make it so that some choices are better than others instead of letting people think for themselves? Why would you force an interpretation on people/Ange when I've been led to believe that the narrative was against that sort of things? You want to highlight the value in your vision of "magic", fine, but why am I the heartless bitch for disliking that perspective and even trying to see things differently?

Why would you write a whole game around the really fun concept of several tales happening at the same time and the existence of endless truths inside the same catbox only to open the catbox and tell me "NO, you need to think a certain way, and if you don't like my answer FUCK YOU"

I understand that maybe he just had a specific answer in mind but I'm sorry the way he write the ending simply does not match the vision he seemed to have in the earlier chapters.

I genuinely respect Umineko as a work, I think it's one of the most ambitious stories I've seen and there is some amazing writing in there, but if Ryukishi wanted to allow for people to keep thinking and discussing what it means, he has failed miserably and I'm not talking about confession of the golden witch, I'm talking about the way he and his minions have shut down any possible discussion under the guise of "you just don't get it" (rephrased to "you don't have love" to make it sound more enlightened) and it's soured my enjoyment of something that should've been an amazing story. What is even left to discuss here when everyone has pretty much already made up their mind?

[an-au-blog]

my professors giving me test after test is the only thing keeping me from posting the most heart wrenchingly devastating shuggy fic right now. And you lucky bastards should brace yourselves because once Friday rolls around my keyboard is catching fire with everything I'm cooking up, I'm so serious.

But for now all I'll say is...

Nothing's New - Rio Romero

Blue Hair - TV Girl

Promise - Laufey

Let You Break My Heart Again - Laufey

I Want You - Mitski

Break My Heart Again - FINNEEAS

Step On Me - The Cardigans

Jacket Over Hoodie Over Shirt - Marco Aziel

Judy Byrd - Juniper Avenue

You Were Perfect & I'm Sorry - Mickey Darling

Becca - The Sukis

EVERYTHING - The Black Skirts

[bixels]

The Ryoko Kui interview's reception is such a disaster over a pretty normal (yet still flawed) interview between a non-Japanese fan and Japanese artistic. This is discourse for discourse's sake, and it's no surprise that almost every Twitter user I've looked at who's using this interview to parade Kui around as a goated mangaka standing strong against Western ideology is anti-trans.

Like, I do think the interview was kinda wonky with its focus on fandom culture, which Kui clearly didn't have much interest in. But sometimes that happens. Sometimes interactions between two people, especially a fan and a creator, two people who view and interact with a piece of media in completely opposite perspectives, don't click. Does this really need to get blown up into a "West vs. East culture war" issue.

Anyways, Kui saying "I don't consider my audience's interpretations when writing. I leave it to their imaginations, but I have my own read on things too" is the healthiest, most normal thing an artist/writer who wants a non-parasocial audience could say. Artists and writers use this line all the time. If Kui didn't enjoy autistic Laius or Farcille headcanons, she would have probably voiced/signalled her discomfort, like she did on the topic of Senshi fanservice. Overall, Kui handled the interview really well. Props to her to sticking to her guns and keeping a healthy disconnect from the fandom. While I think the interviewer could've/should've been more tactful and restrained, the flaws in their questions is not a symptom of the woke mind virus trying to wriggle its way into the pure Japanese psyche. It's the sign of an over-eager fan who sees a piece of fiction differently than its creator.

[celtrist]

Why does Vassago already have merch, we haven't even met him yet

[strqyr]

there are so many youtubers whose names i wouldn't even know if not for people complaining about them constantly and i feel like that's saying something

[perilegs]

do even half the bg3 players think about, or at the bare minimum, read/listen to anything said in the game. ever.

[juney-blues]

99% of conversations on anarchism about here are hampered by people having no clue what anarchists are talking about when they refer to "the state", including, it seems, the anarchists themselves.

[cassianandfenrysaremyboyos]

I'm sorry but this just pisses me off (Not Hunt obviously, but Bryce)

Bryce rant incoming which you can just ignore and I'll probably delete later

But Bryce just puts all the blame on the Asteri. And yes ultimately they are to blame in the larger sense of things. But Bryce plays a direct role in leading them down the path that results in Hunt, Ruhn and Baxian being caught. It was her need to find out Danika's secrets with no thought to the consequences, her idea to go to the Eternal City. And she takes NO personal responsibility for it at all!

Hunt is blaming himself for everything that's happened. Even when it's not his fault at all. When we're in his pov he's constantly drowning in guilt, thinking about how he should of done more, he should of tried harder, he should of been better, how it's all his fault this happened and that his friends suffered.

And then Bryce does none of that. When we're in her pov she doesn't really show any major guilt. I can't think of any times when she blames herself like Hunt does. And I'm not saying she should be wracked with guilt. But a normal person, a good person, will usually feel bad and will feel guilty and blame themselves to some degree when something bad happens and people they care about are hurt, regardless of how big or small they're involvement is, or even if they're not at fault at all, case in point Hunt being wracked with guilt even when it's not his fault.

And to make it worse she acknowledges that Hunt warned them, warned her. But that she disregarded it and would of done it no matter what.

And then she has the audicity to say she doesn't regret it. And she thought they were on the same page. ON THE SAME PAGE!!?? Hunt made it clear in hosab that he didn't want to go down this road again, that he didn't want to get involved. YOU just didn't listen Bryce. And yeah Hunt's an adult, he can make his own decisions and he could of said no and not gone. But of course, OF COURSE!! he wasn't going to let Bryce go down that road alone, because he loves her, and doesn't want anything to happen to her, and wants to protect, so of course he would never desert her. But that doesn't mean he wanted to do it!

For Bryce to be that unaware of Hunt's feelings, when he explicitly stated them. For her to be that disconnected from her mate's feelings that she's surprised that he wasn't really on board is kinda unfathomable to me. Just that complete lack of awareness really does make her look quite selfish/self centered.

Anyway sorry, this post is a mess but I just had to vent

And then when Hunt mentions the consequences he and his friends faced, Bryce makes it about her pain. She's hurt that Hunt mentioned that they suffered. And the worst part is, Hunt then regret's it, he regrets saying something that hurts Bryce, because he cares about her and feelings. And she does not consider his feelings to the same degree

It just pisses me off

[genericpuff]

to sum up the last post for anyone who doesn't feel like reading an essay tonight

ok this is the pettiest i will be about this because obv if i didn't care i'd just move the fuck on, and i SHOULDN'T care, so let this be my last little 'hoorah' on this with a little added note that i think all of y'all should consider (whether you enjoy my content or not)

rachel has all the freedom to make this comic and make more off it than i'd ever dream of making off my own work (which is like, damn, you go girl, get that coin), that's her choice to do so and none of us can take that way from her nor should we feel like trying lol literally, she's not obligated to care about what I or anyone else thinks because a lot of us are people who just spend way too much of our free time talking about this comic.

but it's our time to spend. we don't tell the fans of this comic how to spend their time discussing it and gushing over it, we can't take that away from you either, more power to you if you can love this work unconditionally.

so that said, i also have the freedom and power to do what i want with my time. even if that means sharing opinions you might think are a "stupid use of my time" or a "waste of my life" or whatever have you. maybe it is stupid but it's my time and i'll use it however i like 🤷‍♀️ especially when it's in my own space on my own blog, it's not like I'm DM'ing or tagging Rachel with my opinions, she doesn't need to see them and I wouldn't consider it in good taste to do that because it would be genuinely awful of me to think I'm entitled to forcing my opinions down RS' throat. I'm just a chronically online weirdo on Tumblr making shitposts and expressing myself in my own way. It's not that complicated.

What's ironic (and kinda shitty ngl) is that we know people have a tendency to send Rachel or her mods "proof" of the criticism from the anti/ULO communities as a way to "do good by her" and notify her of it happening. and all I can say to that is like... really? you know RS is sensitive to criticism so instead of just leaving well enough alone, you send it at her or post it in her own areas where you know she can see? what's the point of that exactly? you want to protect her from harsh criticism or shitposts, that's all well and good, but y'all are doing the complete opposite of that by taking opinions on the internet not meant for her eyes and... putting them directly in front of her eyes. as much disrespect as i may sling at rachel on a daily basis here, she doesn't deserve that - leave her alone, leave me alone, yeah? (‾◡◝)

[eggman-1]

I swear i see more posts complaining about people complaining than people complaining. "People are saying EOW isn't a real zelda game-" bitch WHERE?? WHO??? I'm not asking because i want to find them, but seriously, what are you TALKING about. Where are you finding this

[rosalesbeausderholle]

I like how in my life I went from: "I am intrinsically different from other human beings because I'm smarter and a better person than everyone else, but I will always be alone for it, though" as a child, to "Well, people are very different and not everyone is as bad or as dumb. There's lots of people who are worth it and lots of people who are good and smart. It's not just me!" as a teen, then back again to "I am intrinsically different from other human beings because I'm smarter and a better person than everyone else" as an adult. And yes, I am on antidepressants.

[snowstories]

BOTW's story is kinda weak because it sucks at information distribution, but I think it did a great job incorporating the gameplay into the narrative. Breath of the Wild is an open world game, meaning the onus is naturally on exploration and freedom. By contrasting this main gameplay loop with the memory flashbacks and given information of the past, it manages very naturally create a narrative of past vs present and restriction vs freedom.

Almost everything we see of the past in BOTW creates this stifling feeling of repression. It is a past filled with restriction, where everyone is given a very narrow role to play and punished when they do not play it well enough. Everyone is always prim and proper, anchored by tradition and the 'right' way to do this.

By contrast, in the present, if you want to spend a whole day trying to make your way through Hebra in your underwear, you can just do that. Sure, you can also just beeline for the Divine Beasts and then the castle, but few people (speedrunners not withstanding) will do that, and moreover, people aren't supposed to do that. Breath of the Wild wants you to spend your time fucking around rather than completing your divinely ordained world-saving quest.

This creates a contrast between past and present, where Link and Zelda are pushed into restrictive roles by precisely this destiny. Link is still mostly a vehicle of projection for the player, but is nevertheless established as a character in his own right in the game, and what limited notes of characterization we get indicates that he was absolutely miserable in the past. In memory cutscenes he's stoic and unemotive (probably part deliberate characterization, part effort to preserve his status as a blank slate), and Zelda's diary establishes him as not talking because he's afraid of saying the wrong thing. Whichever way you read his character, he's clearly very repressed.

And in the present he's spending a whole day seeing if he can get a picture of a bug, or eating dubious food, or chasing ducks or whatever. Because that's what you're doing. And since you're probably having a great time, you're gonna project that on the character designed to be projected upon. While I do still think past!Link could have done with a little more emoting, the game overall does a good job utilizing Link's status as a player insert to create/add to the story and its themes.

BOTW's chosen story is one set in the past, mostly about Zelda and her failure to fit into the role she's given. It's a story of restriction and repression. It is a deliberate contrast between the freedom the gameplay gives you. With this, it does a great job incorporating the gameplay into the story; rather than a game where every second you spend screwing around and exploring feels at odds with the urgency of your quest, the fact that Link, the repressed and miserable knight of the past, is screwing around freely feels like character development. Now having the freedom to screw around rather than single-mindedly pursue destiny is the point of the story.

In addition, it adds to the game's overarching theme of past vs present. In the flashbacks, we see an overreliance on Sheikah tech and ancient plans, hailed blindly as a savior when we know exactly this will be everyone's doom. Breath of the Wild never posits that we should ignore or scorn the past; on the contrary, it encourages exploration of it, both in the past with Zelda's character via her fascination with Sheikah tech, and in the present, with encouragement to uncover Link's past and the gameplay's incorporation of Sheikah tech. However, it cautions against worshipping it. The past is something to uncover and honor, but not a thing to live in; ultimately, you must forge your own path in the present. This is reinforced through the freedom of the gameplay and the aforementioned contrast it creates between the past and present. Following the past brought doom upon Hyrule a hundred years ago; doing so again would surely repeat this. You are encouraged to ignore the blueprint of the past and forge your own path. Even and especially if it involves riding your horse everywhere but the plot points.

By the very nature of the game's design, you are creating a story where Link wakes up in a wild future filled with endless possibilities and obtains a freedom that was inherently restricted in the past, letting go of the past and celebrating the future.

It's not groundbreaking or revolutionary or anything, but I think it's a very solid example of incorporating gameplay into the narrative.

[what-shitfuckery-is-this-ew]

I want people to read their scientific articles before sending them to me. Like actually read the entire thing or at least read the conclusion. Reading the first line and thinking that that means you understand the entire topic is very inaccurate, and it makes you look like a joke when i actually read it and find that it contradicts your point.