• aleph@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Thanks for the explanation, although I don’t find it a particularly acceptable one. The sequence wasn’t funny enough to justify the dramatic shift in tone in an otherwise family-friendly game, IMO. Also, making the protagonists unlikable in a game where you’re supposed to find them sympathetic is a very weird design decision.

    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      To take the devils advocate position: is conflict not necessary for drama, and effective conflict is one that affects its audience?

      • aleph@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The issue isn’t the use of conflict as a dramatic device per se; it is essentially forcing the player(s) to perform a seemingly unnecessary and unpleasant action against their will.

        The fact that both main characters in the game appear to immediately decide that violently murdering their child’s favorite toy is the only course of action and that no alternative is offered is really jarring. Giving the player some agency in choosing an alternative way to to go about it would have solved the problem completely.

        • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m curious about comparing this to say - the white phosphorus scene in Spec Ops: The Line, or the airport scene (“no Russian”) in COD, rescuing Ellie instead of giving humanity the cure in The Last of Us…

          All things that are arguably a lot worse than pulling a leg off a stuffed Elephant and all require on-rails player action in a game.