Yooo thanks for watching, just wanted to give a shout out to those who helped me with the video! Finn M-K He produced the music for the theatre scene. Super talented multi-instrumentalist! ru-vid.com/show-UCPFa8eILLBJpwiDmxTprpoQ Miles John He animated the hospital scene, go check out his animations! ru-vid.com/show-UCjUcbqrP3JnuUKdybiJoJmQ YMS/Adum Y’all probably already know him, but did you know he did a let’s play of LiS and BtS? I even used a brief clip of it at the start of EP 3 of this video! Go check it out for much less kind take on the franchise. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-I1sRqkJEhWs.html
I feel really bad for the mom. Poor woman has to put up with bullshit from both her husband and daughter. Just from the way she talked and acted, you could tell she probably felt broken inside.
@@memo-fq3ps It's sad because a lot of kids would rather have caring parents than biological ones. Her mother raised her for years, took care of her basic necessities, made sure she was healthy and looked after and because she isn't related, the daughter she's raised sees her love as fake and like she'll never be an actual mum. It's disgusting and selfish, especially when you consider how many kids wish they had different parents.
Rachel saying that her parents’ love isn’t real cuz her stepmom isn’t her birth mother pisses me off. I was lovingly raised by my mom and stepdad-aka my true dad-all my life. The sperm donor sends me money twice a year and that’s it. Blood doesn’t matter if there’s no love and effort.
And i was raised by my bio father that ive cut contact with at 15! Life's weird sometimes huh? Sometimes having a bio parent isnt the best thing. Not always a loving home for a kid to go back to after school.
I am kinda in an inbetween situation but even I got mad at it. My parents are sepersted and I really arent close to my bio dad but I also dont call my stepdad dad even though he lived with us since I was 5 since I still regularly had contact to my bio dad. But I would never say that his love or care towards me is useless because he isnt my bio dad.
@@RR-on4sk exactly! They weren’t together anymore, and boy he made that clear, but we’re supposed to be like “ah cool!” Just cause he said he kissed her cause they were parting ways? Hugs exist, you know, or even a handshake. Like, he has a WIFE. and she’s just silently over there watching him try and explain himself like she didn’t find that fucking weird? It’s unrealistic. Even if she gave some sort of reaction at the dinner table, it was more of just a “omg!” Not “what the fuck?!”
@@user-es2zm5rg4x My best guess is that she chose to discuss it later rather than undermining him by confronting him in front of their daughter, as most competent parents would do.
For a game that's not supposed to have powers, Rachel screaming at a tree being emphasized by wind animation and immediately resulting in a thoroughly crisped tree really _looks_ like one.
tbh, Chloe being able to convince other people with that cheesy and wannabe-edgy dialogue really can be seen as superpower. No real person can convince others about anything with lines like the ones in that game.
A hero, a hero, claims a warriors heart I tell you, I tell you, the Dragonborn comes With a voice wielding power of the ancient Nord art Believe, believe, the Dragonborn comes
I KNOW RIGHT ! At the beginning of the game, it really seemed like it was going supernatural and I remember people really debating what power she was going to have. Oh and I also remember seeing somebody ranting about how "yes Rachel is a chameleon, because of her bad writing. You want her to be a super popular rich girl ? Fine. But also an edgy rebel ? Of course she will ! And you also want her to fulfill the power side of this game ? This can happen as well !" and really, this oddly supernatural scene confirm this feeling of her having 10 different writing at the same time.
It's almost fitting that they call Rachel a chameleon. Just like it's a misconception that all the stars in the sky are dead, it's untrue that chameleons change color to fit their environment. They actually change color depending on their mood and body temperature, and I think comparing Rachel to a creature that sticks out like a sore thumb is very fitting considering her voice acting.
It fits with the "all the stars are already dead" bit. They have an idea and a point but don't search into it and just make an half ass statement that could be better and is half correct
My best rationalisation for why Chloe always wins these backtalk sections is that everyone she talks to is so bewildered by how terrible and low effort her comebacks are that they physically can't bring themselves to make any further response. As if they're thinking "Holy shit, is this girl actually serious?"
Or their brain just shuts down from the sheer stupidity. I had that happen once. Someone asked me 7% of 100 was. My brain just stopped dead to protect itself.
Honestly, I don't think Rachel even liked Chloe. I think she just played her and used her because she needed help leaving Arcadia Bay. When she kissed Chloe in the game, it didn't even seem real to me and I feel like she did that to manipulate Chloe into genuinely wanting to leave her mom behind.
I agree. She used Frank for drugs and manipulates him with sex. Frank actually did have real feelings for her, then Rachel got with Jefferson and couldn't manipulate him.
Wait. Are you telling me that Chloe fans are blaming Rachal Amber for Chloe's faults? Chloe the person who famously said "Gotta blame someone, or else it's my fault" No self awareness there at all, huh?
To be fair, Chloe from the prequel game isn't nearly as bad as Chloe from the first game (in my opinion). In the prequel game, she just seemed like your typical rebellious and bratty teen. She was a bit selfish at times, but there were moments when she is more empathetic and actually did things by the goodness of her heart (giving the kid the money back after attempting to steal it for Frank, looking for Rachel's mom, supporting Rachel when she finds out about her biological mother, etc). In the original game however, she's pretty much just as bad as Rachel. There's a saying that says that who you spend time with is who you become. Chloe clearly was so close to Rachel that she started to subconsciously share some of Rachel's traits as they hung out more and more. I mean, she even started using the word, "Hella" because of Rachel. I also think that if Rachel was willing to send Chloe off to break into her dad's office and look for her biological mother in a sketchy area where she could get herself killed or in trouble, she probably made Chloe do her dirty work on other occasions after that as well, thus having Chloe face even more trauma. Mix that with the horrible influence from Rachel and the trauma from losing your father at 14, it's not a good combination. Of course Rachel isn't the only reason Chloe is a bad person, but I think Rachel sort of enhanced her worst traits.
To be fair, Chloe from the prequel game isn't nearly as bad as Chloe from the first game (in my opinion). In the prequel game, she just seemed like your typical rebellious and bratty teen. She was a bit selfish at times, but there were moments when she is more empathetic and actually did things by the goodness of her heart (giving the kid the money back after attempting to steal it for Frank, looking for Rachel's mom, supporting Rachel when she finds out about her biological mother, etc). In the original game however, she's pretty much just as bad as Rachel. There's a saying that says that who you spend time with is who you become. Chloe clearly was so close to Rachel that she started to subconsciously share some of Rachel's traits as they hung out more and more. I mean, she even started using the word, "Hella" because of Rachel. I also think that if Rachel was willing to send Chloe off to break into her dad's office and look for her biological mother in a sketchy area where she could get herself killed or in trouble, she probably made Chloe do her dirty work on other occasions after that as well, thus having Chloe face even more trauma. Mix that with the horrible influence from Rachel and the trauma from losing your father at 14, it's not a good combination. Of course Rachel isn't the only reason Chloe is a bad person, but I think Rachel sort of enhanced her worst traits.
Yea the only thing that makes it excusable is that technically she isn't keeping a diary - she's just pretending that she can still talk to her friend. If it wasn't for the letters to Max, i seriously doubt she would've been doing it, too
i don’t really buy that she’d care about max after that long either. the “letters” were super unrealistic, and seemed like the writers only thought of her as an extension of max lol
As someone who played the first game, I remember being frustrated with it my first playthru. Game breaking glitches didn't help, but that wasn't what put me over the edge. The final chapter's absurd stealth section was annoying. Being given a binary choice for the conclusion that makes all the prior choices irrelevant was what pissed me off. I picked the "save Chloe" ending out of spite for the game because I knew it was the "wrong" choice. That's just me tho.
Bcs we as players spent time with Chloe and through some clumsy storyteling became invested emotionaly with her, plus the finał choice is between progresing further with our heroins (even though the Arcadia Bay destruction ending last 2min or so) and a complete destruction of our love story (note that this ending last way longer/is more fleshed out than the other). For me it was a clear message with ending was corect by the developers. People moan about "this isn't fair, I worked so hard to save her" or "she does/ does not deserve Max" when ther is an ending that's negates all our previous choices. The Chloe death ending is for me still a progres bcs of all that Max experienced, even if by that time line she/we didn't acomplish anything tangible, she still has the memories of it as we do. It reminded me a bit of one RU-vid artist who after finishing her work would then destroy it as a some form of freeing herself from it, not beinng defined by it. People wer outraged at her in the coments for that as if her work belonged to them, while she simply stated that she will remember her work an make more in the future.
I remember Joshscorcher doing a video on 10 hated characters you’re supposed to like and he suggested that Chloe could’ve worked as an antagonist and that being with her could lead to a bad ending. I wonder how different Life is Strange would’ve gone if they made Chloe an antagonist
Chloe would not work any better as an antagonist, mostly because she’s a very shallow character. She’s a jerk because she lost her father, became isolated and then lost her best friend; it’s not a bad start but we never seen her move beyond any of that. She’s never confronted with how or why she acts the way she does and is never told “you need to be a better person”, but just excused because of her tragic backstory. I doubt that would change if she were an antagonist.
Was that the start for the coming tornado? Forest burn, some nature magic and more magic and some shit and then tornado. Or is it because Max rewind future too much? Or something else??
Showing Rachel at all was a mistake. She was set up so mysteriously in the first game, nothing ever made sense - she was a completely different person for everyone in Arcadia Bay. Pulling off her character would have required a stroke of genius.
The expectations for her character were set far too high; the perfect popular girl who everyone loved. Hell, even Victoria had respect for her. Bringing her back gave the writers the astronomical challenge of getting the audience to fall in love with this character too while keeping our expectations intact.
@@TheMedicatedArtist Personally I think they succeeded in bringing her to life. I find her writing to be extremely complex and layered. Best thing about this game. Every line of dialogue she says has like 6 different interpretations. It's awesome.
@@calistusjay60 I agree. Her wide range of facial expressions coupled with her dynamic tone of voice really sold her as a quality character. Don't even get me started on the poetry that was her dialog. It's hard holding back tears of admiration every time I hear her intelligible speech.
@Ahmed malaki Might want to think about that for a bit, lots of well regarded pieces of work can be considered "fan-fiction." Like Insomniac's Spider-Man game, yeah they were paid to work on it but the writers are fans and not all of them are officially connected to Marvel. So you could argue the story they wrote was in a way fan fiction, just very high quality fan-fiction in the form of a licensed product.
@Just a normal nazgul technically Steve Ditko is responsible for creating Spider-Man. Stan Lee just knew he wanted a young rookie Superhero, he took the idea to Jack Kirby but Kirby kinda just made a spiderthemed Captain America. So then he asked Ditko to take a crack at it and we actually got the Spider-Man we know. These stories and characters are group efforts, and even after these original people have long since passed the character is still going. As long as something is true to the original character it doesn't matter if it's "official" or "fanfiction" because even officially made stories can screw up the characters while fan content could be a much better representation of them. It's about familiarity with the source material, not some official position.
Maybe my sense of humor is fucked but the line in your outline "David blames Rachel for corrupting Chloe with crime and homosexuality" is so fucking funny to me
@@visassess8607 It's half a joke sure, but there are some people who genuinely believe in stuff like that. I could imagine David being the type if the game really wanted me to hate him and didn't fail miserably
That line about the soldiers in civilian homes made me laugh. I can't believe that this was written into a game, which tries to make me care about the protagonist. It's something that Cartman from South Park would say when he wants to make himself look like a victim
Something as small as an unmonitored stretch of fencing with a "No Trespassing" sign is a great enough affront to Chloe's sense of freedom that it warrants the double-bird, but then Step-Dad gets mildly annoying and suddenly she's _all about_ steadfast obedience to the Law and the ideals of democratic-republicanism.
@Afqwa my point was exactly that. Cartman constantly sees himself as the smartest and always thinks he's right in the end, even though he mostly pays the price for that. Both Chloe and Rachel have too many of his character traits making them look like complete morons or unintentional parodies of main characters
David's characterization is so different then how he's portrayed, I don't know how bad the writers are but they somehow want to paint David as some evil, over-bearing step-dad but end up somehow painting him as a sympathetic, well-intentioned guy struggling to reachout to his step-daughter.
They should have started in the middle of the chloe/Rachel relationship. It should have followed Chloe’s almost obsessive friendship and desire for a romantic attachment while Rachel leads her on for her personal gain. It should have been a sort of origin story for why Chloe mistreats Max so much. Make it obvious that she is horrible to max and thinks that it is an example of being a good friend because that’s how Rachel treated her and she thinks that’s how things work.
@@summerrose8110 I don't think so, like, he's a literal psychopath, I know his parents didn't support him but Nathan murdering both Rachel and Chloe if you choose to sacrifice her doesn't exactly cover up.
@@bruh-sz3wy That boy didn't kill Rachel at all. That was all Jefferson. And as for Chloe, that puta deserved what was coming for her. She was literally blackmailing him and antagonizing Nathan. And Chloe TRIED TO ROB the boy. Dontnod glossed right over that. That angers me at Dontnod for trying to manipulate everyone into thinking Chloe is this cool person, but no she's the absolute WORST. I know she's fictional, but she is the God awful garbage character that has ever been made and she should NOT be celebrated or praised like Dontnod and Deck9 does. The cast of Life is Strange shouldn't be so blind to all Chloe's evil manipulations, abuse towards Max, and gaslighting. When I first discovered this franchise, I didn't know anything about it. I actually believed it had some potential. I was wrong. This game is more focused on praising abusive relationships and looking at shallow expositions. People are so desperate for same sex relationships they'd rather settle for garbage like Life is Strange. Dontnod should be ashamed of themselves. They should be disgraced for creating Chloe in the first place. Why aren't they cancelled? Why are people still blind to the gender biased stupidity? People called Warren a stalker, but turn a blind eye to everything Chloe does? WHY?! I question why this Life is Strange even exists, because it's trash. People trash Twilight, but more people should be trashing Life is Strange.
@@summerrose8110 I hate Chloe too, she's too bitchy, but Nathan just bulling people, bringing guns in a frigging school, his rich kid attitude made me hate him. I heard the theory that Jeffersh*t killed Rachel but blamed it on Nathan but I'm not so sure about it. The characters I loved are Max, Kate, Warren, Alyssa, Victoria, Taylor, Ms Grant and Courtney.
Why are people NEVER afraid of meeting their "real mother/father/family"? Especially when circumstances show that the "real" family members is dangerous or otherwise someone you shouldn't rush to meet? From experience, I say that the people who raise you and love you genuinely, are more important than those who don't really care, or are destructive to the family
People can pretend that blood doesn’t mean anything but when you see your own blood, you immediately feel a connection. I agree with your statement but the calling of your own blood might be stronger than you expect.
Unless you're adopted you wouldn't really get it. It's hard to explain to non adoptees, but every kid from a closed adoption goes through that phase of yearning to find their biofamily. I won't make actual contact, but I still have a vague need to see their faces.
I remember a lot of streamers getting teary eyed with this game whether it was lets play or live streaming. I feel this game manipulated a lot of people into reading deeper into what was given, rather then what it was actually showing. The fanbase were a better Rachel than Rachel was.
That is actually a pretty common tactic in lazy writing nowadays. If you provide the barest outline of a character or plot and leave people to naturally fill in the blanks, they will, in their own heads, create something better than you ever could. An added bonus of this strategy is that people will become emotionally attached to their creation, since the vapid, empty shells of a character are, almost by design, filled in by personal perspectives and other subjective justifications. This is how you get people who will defend the quality of writing that is, by every available metric, terrible. Ultimately, the lesson is to not write the story for the author. If you find yourself justifying a plot or a character with things not present in the work itself, that's pretty good evidence of bad writing.
@@Santoryu90 After season 3-4, it's hard not to say they used emotions just to cover up the whole mess, especially since the future season was the worst of them all.
That opening scene always made me hate Chloe so much more because THE POOR TRAIN DRIVER TRIED TO HIT THE BRAKES AND HONKED SO MUCH. Imagine you see a teenager standing on the tracks, but because of the distance you wouldn't be able to stop! The driver would be blamed and probably thought they were going to kill her and was terrified for her... and Chloe just playfully jumps off the track? WTF? The driver would've been blamed if she got stuck on the track like in the first game but she's edgy and wanted an adrenaline rush/may have suicidal tendencies? I would've cried and screamed if I was that driver because they were alert and tried so hard to stop and honked several times to warn her but she just didnt move until the last second???
And Ashly Burch and Hannah Telle still think Chloe is a powerful feminist icon. I've seen videos of them playing the game and they fucking defend Chloe's toxic behavior. Max too.
@@javiergonzalez.6150 The more I think about it they really were glorifying toxic traits that females do and never get accountability. Funny when I was playing both games I liked the male characters more than the females no matter hard the game tried to manipulate me to ignore Chloe's toxic and abusive behavior towards EVERYONE. The characters that had potential, but done so dirty is Brooke. I hate how they made her be jealous of garbage hypocrite Max. The Warren hate is absolutely stupid and hypocritical. This game is the most sexist and misandrist piece of shit I've ever witnessed and the fact that people tried to flame me for calling out Chloe's actions makes me fucking sick. I bet you had Chloe been a guy and was toxic like that to Max nobody would be okay with that, but the fact that Chloe is a female she gets a free pass to be Amber Heard. Rachel was no angel either and I'm glad she died the way she did. This whole not holding females accountable for their actions thing really pisses me off. Nathan's story was way more intriguing because HE'S AN ACTUAL VICTIM OF ABUSE. I disagree with the notion that he killed Rachel. It's just like how Scar gaslighted Simba to believe he killed his dad. And I've had people insult me by saying I sympathize with a murderer and need help. Typical twisting of words and interpretation. I don't excuse what Nathan actually HAS done, however he is a teenager who was gaslighted and manipulated by a pedo teacher. Also another reason why I think Nathan didn't kill Rachel, his reaction when he shoots Chloe. That is not the reaction of serial killer. Jefferson on the other hand, how calm he was as if he's done that before. Nathan was more erratic and shaky. And there's that medication he's on that gave him muscle spasms. That's why I say Nathan did not kill Rachel, he's a victim too. Jefferson abused him too. I got angry at Max's selective bias whenever she ignored male abuse. Chloe abused her the whole damn game and Max was too stupid to see how Chloe manipulated and gaslighted her. Also I have to point this out, Max and Chloe have NO chemistry whatsoever. It's very thin, artificial and forced. I think the writers only did it so they can get brownie points with the LGBTQA, but it's not authentic. And besides Max IS NOT friends with Chloe. All Chloe does is bully, gaslight, abuse and force Max to do her bidding like a slave and if Max questions it Chloe coerces Max by mocking her like a bully would. At least with Victoria I believe she actually does have redeemable traits. The scene if you choose to comfort Victoria, she's actually genuine even the scene at the party she knows her flaws, but gets extra pressure from her parents to always be perfect, so Victoria has to do immoral things to please her parents. I actually liked that with her. Kate too. Kate comes from a very religious family, so imagine what she experiences. Alyssa was cool too. I also hate how Dontnod made Mrs. Grant say that whitewashed lie about the Native Americans and British and French(Spain too) invaders "having peace and prosperity". I played Life Is Strange, because I saw potential in it, but the way Chloe's was a tool to manipulate the audience to believe that Chloe is a good person while ignoring ALL of the toxic things she does really grinds my gears. Good thing I was in my early 20s when I played this, so I hated Chloe and knew she was garbage from the get go. However I'm sure teenagers played this and got tricked into thinking Chloe was good. That's sad how Dontnod tried to gaslight kids with lies. And with this Amber Heard thing out now I will forever call Chloe Price the doppelganger of Amber Heard.
I thought the same too! I played LIS before BTS though..But when the parents were introduced in BTS,it made me wonder why they never appeared in LIS..Especially with a missing daughter.. Unless they moved away at some point? I didn’t really care about the parents but this made me wonder..Still,I don’t think anything is mentioned about Rachel’s parents during LIS.
It's so dumb, it's been a while since i played but I'm pretty sure there's a line of dialog you can get in the first game where Chloe makes it out like they don't really care that Rachel is missing. Like really? cos in the prequel it seems like they cared a whole bunch about Rachel, like that was literally the whole plot of the final episode. but ok. dumb writing
Goddamned laughed at the fire scene. Like it went from 0 to 100 real quick for no reason with Rachel screaming like a banshee and Chloe looking dumbfounded at Rachel screaming while a forest fire was happening. I felt like that this didn’t need to happen for dramatic effect. Instead, I kept laughing at that ridculous scene. lol
Although I didn’t laugh I totally get where you are coming from that scene actually made me hate Rachel completely. Who the hell burns an entire forest down because they got emotional 😒
Honestly, that felt like a normal person watching someone displaying what looks like a supernatural power and being very worried about what this means to me.
It's so out of place given the writers tried to hard left turn into a "grounded, realistic" story (which it wasn't, but I digress). Rachel having some sort of power would have been an interesting element to pursue.
Pretty ironic how Rachel and Chloe imitate that girl on a laptop with a Valley Girl accent when in reality that's pretty much half the characters in this game
Why is James Amber the bad guy? He’s trying to take care of his daughter and then suddenly tries to kill his ex? Does anyone think this is poor writing?
i dont like how he resorted to having sera killed. that was such a stretch. like he couldve just been like “oh okay you’ve been sober a year?? well we can work this out - you can see rachel if you get drug tested every month to ensure that you are staying sober for seeing her” OR SOMETHING. HIRING DAMON TO KILL HER IS SO UNNECESSARY
No yeah I was confused. I actually didn’t catch that until I watched this video a second time through, and even still I had to double check to see if I heard uricksaladbar correct and yeah...for some reason James wants her dead. And no yeah, it is poor writing. Basically what it seems like is that the writers noticed that the other characters were a lot more sympathetic and understanding than Chloe and Rachel. But instead of trying to write Chloe and Rachel as better characters, they went with the easier option of making the others comically evil. It’s a way to make Chloe’s and Rachel’s opinion feel right and justified because Jame’s line of logic can be invalidated since wanting someone dead is morally bad. And if they can paint him as morally incorrect, then everything he has said to Rachel and Chloe can be ignored and that means Rachel and Chloe are the “right.” It’s the same with David. A lot of the stuff that he thinks and some of his actions that he makes all make sense and seem to have good intentions. But if he was a likable, sympathetic character, then that would mean Chloe would come off as a whinny brat. So how do they fix it? Let’s just make him a misogynist. And controlling. And maybe even some physical abuse in there. There we go. Now everything he says can be invalidated because he is “bad person.” And everything Chloe says and does is right, because she is “good.”
@@azaraxy I take law courses in school and Sara would not have a leg to stand on. They live in America and if you abandon your child for over a year you lose your parental rights. Adding onto the fact that she was a heroin addict and was absent from her daughters life for over 10 years without paying child support she would be fucked. Hell she would need a lawyer for criminal defense because she would be charged with child neglect and fraud for not paying child support for fifteen years.
@Summer Rose Considering Victoria respects Rachel but tries to drug her anyway makes me think it's jealousy, especially since the first game shows how insecure she actually is.
i've seen so many playthroughs and people are always so angry at victoria but when rachel does THE SAME THING, they're like "YAS QUEEN!!" like? make it make sense?
As weird as it sounds, I really like how the art slowly degrades as the game goes on, reflecting on how the writing itself degrades in quality. Anyway, almost done with the video and it is pretty good. Also there’s a lot of persona music in this video lol
He adds a lot of persona music in all of his videos I think lol, probably just games he likes. Noticed a lot more undertale tracks myself since I'm more familiar with it
@ lol isn't stupid nor is it lying? it's just expressing laughter in text, you just don't like people using the word. Cringy is embarrassing, which lol isn't, which you're also saying
That's probably why she's better. It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than open it and remove all doubt. Edit: the same thing happened to Alison DiLaurentis in Pretty Little Liars. She was this larger-than-life bully whose death was one of the main mysteries on the show. Then they brought her back for fanservice and she not only sucked but she destroyed the whole show.
@@sweeety969 Oh yeah, Alison DID NOT deserve a happy ending. Marlene King is a shit writer. And to make it worse, Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa is making the PLL remake and True Blood too. Those properties are doomed.
I feel that one of the reasons why Chloe's character is so bad is that there's this weird disconnect between her actions and her Dad dying, which in the first game was portrayed as the reason why she is this way. Chloe is a rebel without a cause, if her actions were more closely linked to how her father died it would make her a lot more interesting. If he, for example, died because he got mistaken for a criminal by the police, Chloe lack of trust for authority would be more understandable because you could see where she is coming for, and she would have a more believable reason to why she hates her step-dad, who is from the military.
Omg your story is actually really good and comes from a very logic standpoint! I actually mean it her family had a conflict with authority then being a rebel and hating David who's a veteran would make a lot of sense
What if her dad had died because a Prescott was drunk driving and hit his car, then bailed himself out and escaped legal trouble because of money and power. Not only it would show just how bad the Prescotts are (adding to the first game) but it would explain why Chloe hates Arcadia Bay and doesn't respect authority there, because the Prescotts own the place. Joyce is trying to pull Chloe out of her "rebellious phase" because the Prescotts are threatening her.
Would've been more interesting. Playing as Rachel as this cross between Chloe and Max while playing through a story similar the first one with the knowledge that Jefferson is the killer. Might have retconned the story a bit, but I would've liked to see Jefferson slowly morphing Rachel into what she is in this game.
It was made during the VA strike of 2016-2017. Almost everyone who worked on the game was non-union and the director wanted someone who had a good voice, only to push them into doing an impression of the character rather than her own thing
Never ceases to mildly annoy me seeing Chloe scare the train operator into slamming on the brakes right at the beginning. Poor bastard doesn't need the kinda stress a possible suicide-by-train prank is gonna give them lmao.
Knowing the awful PTSD train drivers experience when they hit a person or a car it makes me furious, there's a high chance the train driver went into full on panic
@@dustyrose192I mean talking about how train drivers get ptsd from hitting people/cars as a response to a scene that lasts 10 seconds in a game is asking for it. I mean Jesus Christ dude
Shinji sacrificed the entire world into the hands of God and I still like him more than Rachel and Chloe. At least what he did was reversible and he learned his lesson.
I do hate it when people say stuff is fanfiction level writing. When fanfiction can have great writing in it, it's all about how good the writer is and how much they care
There is genuinely good fic out there, plenty of it. But even if there wasn't, the way its constantly mocked would still leave a bad taste in my mouth... much of it is written by beginners or amateurs and is shared for free. Its literally just people having fun and sharing their ideas about media they love, i just find it so mean spirited how scornful ppl can be about it.
To me fanfic on book levels is not a fanfic anymore. It's like a non-con book or light novel at that point. You can tell when something is a true "fan"fic
32:45 I love that urick basically gave up on trying to properly draw Rachel after this point. I seriously cracked up after finding out that finger thing was supposed to be Rachel.
I like Frank too! Granted he had/could have douchy moments and I was surprised I came to like him near the end of LIS..I had to redo the Max,Chloe,and Frank interaction at the beach a few times cause I didn’t want him to get left hurt or killed.
@@calistusjay60 Yeah, especially since Frank saves you multiple times in Before the storm. Plus he have a soft spot for doggos, and even if I'm not the biggest dog lover, isn't it supposed to be number 1 reason of why a character may not be that bad ? xD
I don’t know if we should still like him tho. He was fuckin Rachel when she was 18 and Frank was 32. I know you’re an adult when you’re 18 but that’s still fuckin weird regardless.
Hi, im 15 and my life's kinda crazy, my dad cheated/beaten on and my mom my mom stayed with him. i knew about it and had to stay quiet, then they divorced after he almost died and now she has a new bf that has a wife and 2 kids n my closes friend moved away and the other one died and now i have all kinds of messes up trauma!😁 i should be a character in this game!
@@kashregester3974 how about Nobody cares?, And nobody should?, If you have problems the best person to solve them is you not anyone else ,also stop attention seeking , acting edgy wont get you anywhere , and it won't help you solve your problems , dont use self diagnosed mental issues as excuses for bad behaviour,if you have actual mental issues find a way to deal with them or reduce their effect on you and your behaviour , find a hobby or somethin , and learn how to cope with your problems and solve them instead of denying them that's it have a good day idc if you respond or not
@@QueenSydon yeah kinda got to far with That response But my point is still , using edgy bullshit to get sympathy and bullshit , is pathetic and is sign of victim mentality , whichs bad for your own mental health
As someone who's biological parents gave me up leaving me to be adopted Rachel's whole thing feels so WEIRD like? I've never once felt my mom's love was a LIE maybe I said something like that as a bratty kid because dumb stupid kid BUT RACHELS LIKE WHAT 17 HERE?
I don't think she actually said anywhere that she can't love her adoptive mother, she clearly does, but I think anyone who is hit with the news that their mom isn't actually their mom is going to be troubled about it for at least a few days. Yall expect so much out of 16 year old girls lol
@@jesspavlichenko5745 She literally said in the game her dad who loves her no matter what and would go into hell for her is a lie. Her stepmother who loved her unconditionally is a damn lie. That's a stupid concept, and it makes no sense.
Wait so Frank the drug dealer who was treated like a complete joke in the first game is the type of person to put their life on the line to stop a hired hit
@@CT_Phipps But Chloe did not know that Frank slept with Rachel when they met in the first game. Franks writing just did not make sense in the second game.
Ehtlam zone I’m thinking it’s Rachel influence that made him nicer? Maybe her disappearance affected the way he acted. I don’t know, I’m just a nerd who likes art and games
I knew a “Chloe” (same name and personality) in real life and she was just awful. I was having flashbacks the entire time playing the game. Didn’t even hesitate to choose Arcadia bay
The first time I played this one, I never felt the "allure" of Rachel. She reeked "sociopath" out of every pore and her emotional outburst came off to me as whiny and manipulative- but NOT in a charming or suave way, more like a child pitting their parents against each other.
I wish u ppl would stop throwing around serious terms like sociopath to describe teenagers who act out. Its ridiculous & I can guarantee y'all were stupid as children too even if it was by doing or saying different things to Chloe.
@Philosophy someone having an emotional break down over their father that they lost that they were extremely close to as well as feeling the loss of their best friend moving because of how much she loved her is exactly the opposite of a sociopath. there is a difference between someone acting tough after trauma and avoiding showing feelings bc of fear of being hurt versus a sociopath. Chloe is not one
@Philosophy Chloe is called a socipath moreso than rachel in these comments, not by you directly but majority of comments here. i dont disagree with you that rachel had some extreme emotional issues, probably more than chloe because she hid hers. i mean anything is possible its just sad to see how many people just openly call people serious terms
Dude, it's the same for me lol. I felt bad for Chloe when the game first came out. Now I just see her as an edgy little shit, and also have a crush on Max. Btw, why does Rachel look so unsettling.
@@Itariatan I think because Max is a cute,good looking cinnamom roll aka best girl while Rachel is just as good looking (even tho everbody in the game said she looked like a model) and has an awful personality and is a manipulator and cheater aka that one mean bich in every school lmao
As someone who also really dislikes Chloe, I wish I could make other people understand the relationship between Chloe and David. I had similarly lost my father when I was 15, only for my mother to quickly marry someone who is VERY similar to David. This relationship is my favorite part of the game, but I feel like Chloes awful characterization ruins this incredibly nuanced dynamic. There is a genuinely interesting story here: the hatred/resentment you hold for the replacement of a loved one, your home dynamic completely changes and you can feel like you lose all your safe spaces. Not only is your dad gone, in his place is someone that you not only dislike, but also fundamentally disagree with. He has flaws, but so do you, and one of those flaws is that you hold a grudge. In my case, my mother lied to me about dating him for months, adding something like this would add more to why chloe feels this way. Instead, for people who haven't been in this situation, the relationship feels misplaced, because David is trying to be kind. I feel like properly exploring this would have been so good and valuable, showing the complicated feelings when you hate what someone represents and how they changed your family and your life, but they are trying to be kind to you. THIS is complicated, THIS is drama, and I'm so pissed that this situation that I find so deeply relatable was ruined by chloe being the fucking worst
Thats such a good point. I'm so sorry about your dad and that you have been missing him since such a young age. I lost my dad this year at 26 yrs old and even though LiS got me bawling my eyes out during that scene in which Chloe smashes up the car that killed her dad, I hated her for the way she treated David. David came across as a flawed but good person who just tried to reach out. There simply wasn't enough nuance and therefore, to me, the true feeling of betrayal and replacement didn't come across. Thats why I got really annoyed with Chloe's behavior instead of understanding her, even though I lost my father myself. They could have done so much more with it to make their relationship far more real and with that, more complex and raw.
Yeah...I had a problem with Joyce because she just moved him in without considering Chloe or allow them to familiarize themselves first. I'm not saying she shouldn't be allowed to move on or be happy, but there is a lack of communication between them. So yeah, I sympathized with Chloe for precisely the reason you explained. I also agree that Chloe's behavior makes the complex situation lose impact, though.
@@LoveRegi00 Joyce has tried everything she could to help Chloe, but Chloe is a prick to her mother. Joyce needed help, she didn't know what to do with Chloe anymore. I would put Chloe in military school.
I think the best writing choice for Rachel would have been to make her a manic pixie dream girl, but one who is self aware about it and the personality she projects is more or less tailored to be charming and attention grabbing. Her real personality could be a more bitter, cynical, emotionally fragile, and slightly irresponsible one and Chloe could have been the one person Rachel allowed to see even a glimpse of it. Fits with the fire metaphore, works with rachels story arc and who she was set up as in the first game, her character, and the theme of the ugly truth and beautiful lies.
This!!! When I played the first game, this was what I assumed she was like. A manic pixie dream girl on the outside, but a narcissist when that is peeled away.
I was expecting Rachel to lie to her about Jefferson and the drug dealer , to justify it by saying she only flirts with them for good grades and drugs, like how cheaters tell the person they are cheating with that they love them more despite not breaking up with the other person out of selfish reasons, to have a character bring it up far too late for chole to listen
While James is cartoonishly evil with his actions toward Sera, say, am I the only one that would also NOT let her meet Rachel? like- If I had a teenage child (who I noticed has self destructive tendencies) and my ex-partner who left 15 years ago because of their heroin addiction and neglectfulness, a person who for YEARS preferred money over shaping up to be with their daughter --though I wouldn't personally pay someone to leave me alone but desperate measures I guess-- just comes up to me 1 fucking day and goes "hey I've been 1 year sober, can I be a parent now?" I'd also throw them out, boi you had YEARS and you think 1 is fucking enough? Sure you care for her according to some letters and I do not deny genuine want to be with my hypothetical daughter but I won't let someone who is essentially a stranger to her and is someone I do not longer trust NEAR her until I am sure they aren't dangerous, until they can prove to be trustworthy again, you have 1 year of having your shit together vs almost +15 forgive me for not being accommodating
Ehh, no, I think that's cruel. The mom sent letters, clearly missing her daughter, and did the right thing staying away while she was struggling. But wanting to see her as soon as possible when she is drug-free is totally understandable, and if I was the parent, I would not deny her that (to be fair, I would have told Rachel from the start that her mom was not her biological mom to avoid confusion later, or her feeling lied to). I'd let her see Rachel, albeit with me supervising. Rachel, at that point, was old enough to where she could meet up with her mother for coffee from time to time. Had Rachel been a child, I would not allow her to have custody, however.
Honestly, I prefer James's character over Chloe and Rachels. Up to this point (episode 3...Im not finished yet), I feel like James is just coming from a place of trauma. It still doesnt mean that lying to Rachel about the true well-being of her mom was right but it does mean that hes coming from a place of struggle and hardship. I think its wrong to say that James is inherently evil or cruel towards his daughter because, in the end, he was the one that had to deal with the trauma and raise a child for 15+ years...Sera did abuse her child when she was just a baby so I dont blame him for being a little wary of her request to see Chloe after 15 years. Of course, however, you can see the mom's perspective when it comes to her wanting to see her daughter again. Shes finally turning her life around and when she requests to see her daughter, shes denied that right...I believe that the both of them are just misunderstood (especially James based on how the game characterizes him). They both had their struggles and are still, currently, trying to fix them. James is overprotective out of fear and trauma while Sera is a former drugs abuser who has a history of abusing those closest to her (negligence).
Personally I thought Before the Storm is okay. I honestly felt like it wasn't really needed. Tbh I was more interested in Nathan Prescott. Obviously he's a jock, bully, and engaged with Mr. Jefferson. But in Before the Storm he's a nerd and is the one being bullied. So what happened? What finally made him crack? How did he get involved with Mr. Jefferson? Was Nathan blackmailed because Mr. Jefferson found out about him wanting drugs to cope or was there something else? I'm surprised nobody ever mentions Nathan.
To me before the storm cant happen as i felt this game follows it own timeline away from the first game but that just me and the ending of the room shows the main timeline from the main game
@@summerrose8110 I mean this entire prequel is literally just fanfiction with a budget so I think that says plenty...not even half-decent fanfiction. This is fanfiction written by a 12 year old with no romantic experience and gained any knowledge on the subject by watching crappy tween dramas that couldn't even get a second season or died halfway through the first.
I think we should've played as Rachel in this game. The sharp-tongue mini-game could've been used for her but it's far more obvious manipulating. And have her walk through the path to her death by cheating on Frank with Chloe, her manipulating Chloe, then her finally speaking to Mr. Jefferson? And as soon as she spoke her first sentence with Mr. Jefferson, the game ended?
That was my thought as well. Since everyone had their own unique vision of who Rachel was in the first game, it would only make sense we get to play it out in the prequel. We could decide if she was just an emotional manipulator, or if her affections was genuine.
I think they should've made her prettier, just to get the "mesmerizing beauty" aspect more clear. Maybe also have her Backtalk include flattery and such, i also think it would be cool if you could pick different makeups and various hairstyles and outfits for her, since shes supposed to be a cameleon.
I think it's the not knowing that causes the freakout. People who adopt are advised to discuss this with their kids at an age appropriate level as they grow up
I was honestly really looking forward to Rachel being this bright ball of energy and optimism but with similar interests to Chloe. But nope, generic edgy girl, basically the same as Chloe except people like Rachel. Edit: Ok now I’ve watched the conclusion I’m even more disappointed they didn’t make Rachel like this. A cheerful optimistic type who we find out is careless to the point of toxicity. God why wasn’t this what they did?
Really disappoints me how in the first game they made Rachel out to be this perfect girl everyone liked. Literally EVERYONE was talking about her like she was the daughter of Jesus himself. And instead we just got Chloe 2.0. I don't see how she had such a high reputation, she didn't seem that charismatic or charming at all.
It's effed up that Chloe and Rachel drugged Victoria, ESPECIALLY since years later, Chloe admitted to Max that Nathan drugged her. How is she going to complain about something happening to her that she WILLINGLY did to some other girl? No matter how mean Victoria is, Chloe is no better. Seriously, I NEVER understood why Chloe's character is so beloved.
Youre upset that they gave the cup back to someone that tried drugging them? What if max drugged Jefferson when he went to inject her with it, how would you have felt?
@@madelinef2486 As it was already explained in the video, if you let Rachel take the blame, she is not part of the school play anymore. But before the play starts Rachel takes her role back anyway by drugging Victoria. And it was not even Victoria´s fault that Rachel got kicked out of the play, the game portrays her as a mean girl, but so far she has done nothing to deserve this. You could say that the game was trying to imply that Rachel is selfish, she´s willing to do whatever it takes to get what she wants. Her morals are so low and that’s why she started her relationships with Frank and Jefferson. And perhaps this scene tried to imply that Rachel even helped Jefferson when it came to the Dark Room (since in the prequel she is already ready to drug someone for such a petty reason). But as the video states, the prequel lacks self-awareness when it comes to this scene. Also, even if Victoria tries to drug Rachel there should have been many other things that Chloe and Rachel could have done like informing their teacher or pour the contents of the cup out. Eye for an eye in this kind of situation is not justice, it just makes "the good guys" look bad. And remember how serious issue drugging people was in the first game? Kate, Max, Chloe, Rachel and countless of other unknown girls were victims of being drugged against their will. But here it is played for laughs. *shrugs*
Well, this is why i never finised before storm. I sick of rachel un-matured and manipulated chloe to fight every people. Ukhhh.. And later chloe use max and guilt tripping her everytime. God... That hella mess.
It's always a double standard on one hand they like to say that "Your parents don't have to be biologically related to you" then in the same breath they talk about how they hate their dads. It's basically the canary in the coal mine for a woman with a destructive personality.
@@grandarkfang_1482 The analogy basically means an early sign of imminent danger. It comes from the fact that miners would carry canaries in coal mines with them. If dangerous gasses, like carbon monoxide started to collect, it would kill the canary, signaling to the miners it was time to leave immediately.
As someone with BPD I can definetly see that. I was annoyed a lot of times by her behavior, but before I watched this two videos I never saw how bad of a person she actually was, because it all seemed so normal for me. (I also had many friends with BPD, so I am used to stuff like that) It helped me to put a lot of things in perspective
To be fair, Jefferson is even better at manipulating people and has a perfect mask hiding his true nature to the point that the entire school admires and loves him, and Rachel was being groomed by him during the time she desperately tried to leave Arcadia Bay. And it was implied in LiS that Rachel knew about the Dark Room, since she says Jefferson is "kind of scary" in her letter to Chloe, and behind that letter is also a piece of the same paper that had the code of the Dark Room, and David caught Rachel bringing the same drugs to the campus that were used by Jefferson on his victims and she was interrogated by the police.
I’m less than 10 minutes in and already having trouble just because of how painful and awkward this game is. Nice use of Persona music, by the way. Makes me wanna go replay it, lmao.
According to Overly Sarcastic Productions, a Mary Sue is a character who's written in a way that dampens the story because the entire world revolves around them. From what I'm hearing, Rachel is a Mary Sue in that regard. It's not that Rachel's perfect and "Has no flaws", it's that literally everything in this game (and potentially the original) revolves around her. Her actions shake the world around her. To the point that we (The Main Character) can't change anything. The most we get is some flavor text and that's it; nothing important changes.
@Nanaman They mainly said that because it's the most consistent factors. While the most commonly accepted definition is "A perfect character with no issues or flaws", that definition is super vague and can be interpreted in different ways depending on the person. Still, OSP did talk about a couple of offshoots/spin-offs of the Mary Sues, and one of them was the "Jerk Sue". The Jerk sue is a character who is an unabashed asshole with next to no redeeming qualities, but everybody still caters to her every whim because she's the writers' favorite. From watching this video, that seems to be a very accurate description of Rachel in my opinion.
i think you touched a point many people miss: mary sue characters are not inherently flawless people. rather, they are defined by how everything revolves around them. there is even a subtype of mary sue called anti sue, where the writer tries too hard to dodge the mary sue pitfalls, but fails to adress the actual issue
It's also that Rachel's flaws, as the game portrays them, are meant to endear the player instead of raise logical red flags. The same problem with the original LiS is that the game itself never challenges Chloe's attitude and behavior, but gives her an unhealthy free pass.
@@s3studios597 Naruto or Naruto Shippuden? Kishimoto didn't fair well with the characterizations and now that I think about it, he just rinsed and repeated what gave his characters 'motives'.
Its crazy to me that BTS never once explored anything with Frank nor Jefferson and all the while never explored her actual flaws regarding this. She was with the Vortex club. Was hooked up with Frank. And was intertwined with Mr Jefferson enough to have a problem with him and ultimately be murdered by him. How can you NOT explore that? I wanted to see more scenes with Rachel in these scenes with Frank and Jefferson. How her in these situations came to be. This game takes place during the time period she was with Frank and dealing with Mr Jefferson. Really though...how did this game just have her hide that? BTS should've just been played through Rachel instead of Chloe honestly. Showing what her relationship with Frank was actually like. How she got hooked up in the Vortex club. How she got tangled up with Nathan and became one of his victims. Idk how the writers just decided that seeing those things wasn't important.
Agreed, that would have been much more interesting. Unfortunately, I think the reason why these aspects about Rachel were left completely unexplored, is because they didn´t want to ruin fanservice, and didn´t want to give any spoilers about LiS to those who play BtS before the main game. That´s why the story is about Rachel´s family that has nothing to do with LiS. At least we get a good sense of Rachel and her motivations if we pay attention to all the clues about her that are peppered throughout the first game. I think LiS wanted to show that many people in the Vortex Club have seemingly "perfect", but chaotic personal lives (Dana, Nathan etc.), including Rachel. It´s even implied that Rachel knew about the Dark Room; In her letter to Chloe she says that Jefferson is “kind of scary”, and behind that letter is the code of the Dark Room, David caught her trying to bring illegal pharmaceuticals to the campus - Jefferson used those same drugs on his victims - and she was interrogated by the police. And technically, it was Nathan who killed Rachel. There are many clues in the game that support this, and there was even an unused letter for episode 5 from Nathan to Jefferson (who has avoided Nathan for several months now and is angry with him) where he admits "Yes, I know I fucked up with R."
“Oh, and she’s best friends with the most bestest, perfect, talented, popular girl in school, and everyone loves her and or is jealous over her goddess demeanor!” Can you get a character description, that sounds more fan-fiction esc! Jesus!
You know, I actually always wondered why people think others admire these so called "perfect" people, especially in high school. If this person is so amazing there is a bigger chance that they would be an outcast because people would rip on them, especially teenagers who are extremely self conscious and therefore already rip on everyone for no reason.
@@chaoticgoodcreations947 Speaking as someone who is in high school, not 100% Yes, its inevitable if someone gets more attention obviously they’ll face more scrutiny from others. But people who are I guess by definition “popular”, for the most part are treated fine. They however aren’t Marry Sues.
I mean, platonic and romantic love are kind of different. But I do see your point. In all respects, that mindset of Rachel's is flawed. But I guess she might be into that?
Could have been a game were Jefferson slowly manipulates Rachel and turns her into the Rachel in this game. Chloe could confront him, but Rachel does the whole emotional manipulation thing. Might have retconned the first one, but I'd be down.
The story makes Rachael the Mary Sue of unconventional villains. Everyone bends over backwards for her and acts like she’s amazing and the story acts like shes a master manipulator, when she has the personality and wit pf soggy cardboard
To be honest that characterization for Rachel could still work if they rewrote Chloe's in the original and made her have trust issues instead of abandonment ones.
I often listen to let’s players play games with my phone turned off (ex: LIS) but I kept forgetting who was who in this game too especially in the scene where they used the binoculars to imitate people. I had no idea who was saying what
She was obligated to participate as part of her union membership and not doing so would have gotten her kicked out from the union and blacklisted from dozens of major studios for the rest of her career, not to mention burning many personal/business relationships which is almost entirely how you get by in the creative industry. Hard to see how she's virtuous for doing what she did.
@@Channel-gz9hm people like to act as if ignoring or not participating in protests has no effect on these people's career. Like you said, they'd get tons of shit if they didn't and it's just a safer bet to go along with the masses and protest. Not saying she or anyone else that participated didn't care at all, but really the safer bet is just to keep your publicity in check rather than risk voicing any differing opinions.
I also kinda felt with her role as consultant with the new studio it possible Ashley gave theme the ideas on what they needed to do and a copy of the first game to work on but might of used only a few of Ashley motes and used their own to make their own take on before the storm ignoring what Ashley might of intended
As soon as I paused to read your summary on how a prequel could work, an 1 out of 2 unskippble ads started playing. Very clever I also like how the animation slowly degrades in quality as the story degrades
Man, even Victoria ended up being a better character than Rachel. She genuinely felt bad for what she did to Kate and recognized that she was a bad person, and because of that she wants to be a better person.
also, in life is strange 2, she stays in contact with David, thanks him for saving her, and shoes herself to have become a generous, humble and grateful person
By the way, Ashly Burch did say in a livestream, upon playing the Farewell episode and spotting her name credited as "writer", that she had NOTHING to do with writing Before the Storm, all she ever had was like a talk with the Deck Nine staff -- I do appreciate you making the difference from Dontnod since both development studios are ages apart in story quality (yes, BtS is horrible).
2:23 ok I can't hold it in anymore. The visuals are so beautiful. Your art, color schemes, editing, and stylistic choice makes this commentary even more enjoyable. ESPECIALLY the car crash scene
honestly , I liked the idea of Rachel in the first game BECAUSE we never got to meet her. Hearing Chloe and everyone else talk about how great she was made everyone think of this "perfect girl", everyone would have their own version of who Rachel was and why we wanted her back. Playing the second game just left me deissapointed. I didn't want to safe this Rachel, I didn't care for her and thought Chloe would've been better off without her. Which makes whatever I did in the first game less valuable to me
Like in Heather’s where Heather becomes this martyr and everyone makes their own version of her after her death, even though she’s a horrible person. I totally agree!!
during the first game we literally saw rachel's toxic traits from the stuff in frank's van, she was a flawed character from the getgo, before the storm just expounded upon that.
It infuriates me how the fandom treated Rachel exactly like the characters, as if she was a powerful goddess who could do no wrong. She is not powerful and extroverted, she's impulsive and manipulative.
@@summerrose8110 my g Chloe and Rachel are definitely bastards but in no way is a shitty best friend more of a villain that dudes who literally drug and abduct women 💀💀
It’s sad, in a way. The developers of this game did seem interested in actually wanting to tell a story, and I believe that they had the best intent in mind. But it’s clear that no one on the staff had any kind of serious writing chops or general education of writing, and that ends up destroying a lot of the half decent ideas that could have been explored. But the cynic in me wonders if this is just the same situation as the first game: People, namely a lot of LGBT folks who are desperate for actual representation, who look past the games many, many , MANY flaws simply because it has that element in it. And game critics, notoriously known for being generally insecure about their jobs, often flock to games that pretend to have some significant meaning, even if the meaning is shallow or forced down the throat of the audience.
You're close. Poor writers like them pander to immature people who are desperate for representation, i.e. fictional characters with my race, shape, or sexual preference to validate me. It's also the key reason Rachel's trysts with Frank and Jefferson were left unexplored. Can't show a lesbian relationship as unhealthy, or a bi girl as sleeping around, because it would supposedly make LGBTQ folks look bad and cause accusations of--gasp--homophobia! Noes, can't have that!
@@RanMouri82 And these people are more into seeing themselves than looking more into other places. Even though there isn't a lot, many mediums over the years either have LGBT representation or something that the LGBT community would understand (Golden Girls is a good example as it has an episode that talks about aids. Dorothy mentions that aids is not a bad person disease to Rose). Also most of these people who want to be represented are wanting things that are niche audience not for the mainstream audience as they try to push in comics and stuff. There is category for LGBT stuff but they ignore it.
@@RanMouri82 as someone part of the lgbt+ community I hate that line of thinking so much. We have the same problems in relationships as everyone else. Just treat the characters like you would any other, their identity should just be something they happen to be
I’m pretty sure what happened is that they saw Blue is the Warmest Colour and wanted to make a game out of it but didn’t have the rights. So they stole concepts from Twin Peaks and Donny Darko to make some form of interactive experience and made a lazy game
@@RanMouri82 OMG You know what's one of by biggest peeves with bad GBTQ writing? When one gay character has a friend they fall in love with, their friend is conveniently also gay, and they also fall in love with them. Why this peeves me? because, just cos one person is gay and they crush on / fall in love with another person, DOESN'T mean that said other person is also gay!
I have no idea how you accidentally make every major character have Borderline Personally Disorder, but god damn these writers pulled it off perfectly. This town must consume half of the state's SSRI prescriptions.
I find that the people who fawn over this series and love it a lot really didn't pay attention past the very top of the surface, this just really proves that even further.
@Harmony It's an interactive movie that paints itself as giving you a say in how the story goes but then instead railroads you into their bland and badly written narrative full of plot holes, conflicting characterization and contrivances. At least other games that have a badly written story might have the benefit of having at least fun gameplay, here you don't even get that. People who enjoy this only do so because they threat it like a popcorn flick where you shut your brain off for 2 hours and just enjoy the ride, and that's totally fine, the problem arises when some of these people pretend that this game is actually well written and engaging when it's not.
@Harmony it’s not “overanalysing”. Video games, much like movies and books, have so much potential to not just be entertaining, but to tell meaningful and heartfelt stories. Video games are art, and while some people just enjoy art on a surface level others like to look at it objectively and tap into its potential. It’s something they’re passionate about and the effort put into something you’re passionate about is never wasted.
