Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Gaming and Hardware Forum' started by CT Phipps, Jun 29, 2017.
Welll it's on PC and even a toaster can run it.
I'm about to do my Life is Strange review for my blog. I *WANT* to give it a 10 out of 10 but the ending makes me think I should do 9/10.
Curse you NMA! You've made me too picky.
@CT Phipps I wonder why nobody passed this in the score argument.
On the topic, I have played all of LiS. I did like it (though the 'teen' dialogue got annoying at times) and thought the time-travel mechanic was pretty nice.
Didn't like the ending though. It reminded me way too much of a bad Telltale game where your choices ultimately don't matter, some parts of the plot seemed to be left hanging (i.e the possibility of Rachel having powers like Max based on how people compared the time-travelling Max and Rachel) and the whole thing felt like a cop-out.
As for the prequel, I'm worried that the developers may fall for the same trap bad Telltale games fall for like adding more gimmicks rather than improving the writing (like Telltale's Batman, though I can't comment on the new season since I've been mostly ignoring it).
I actually agree the ending is the worst part of it.
Perhaps the first time I've agreed with @CerberusGate
It's doubly so because I'd like to continue stories with these characters and their powers which the ending slams a massive door shut on.
Of the ending I also dislike the ugly deterministic message it sends "Don't try to do anything outside your role, just stand down and it will solve itself, if you don't you are destroying the natural order". Really stupid all around, makes the game feel pointless and you seemingly got your time powers for no reason whatsoever other than learning to know you role and staying down.
Yes, that is stupid all round. I'm debating doing an essay on the ending when I'm done with the review.
l liked it. It's like reality raining on everyone's parade, being an utter dick to everyone hoping for a nice "Wowzers Max you saved us all!" ending. It's either causality or chaos.
I think I would have made it so there was no way to prevent the storm and have Max's powers as a consequence of the weirdness going on, not the cause.
In other words, there was no way to stop the apocalypse but maybe you could save SOME if not everyone.
Meh, that's basically a reversal of the whole point, which is that messing with time has dire consequences. You can either save Chloe and live with the literal Butterfly effect, or let nature take its course and Chloe dies.
Kind of a waste of time to make a story where the message is "messing with time travel is dangerous" like wow game. Next time I rewind time irl I am gonna take that into account. Thnx for looking after me.
It's an interesting twist, isn't it?
Dunno, basically every second time-travel story is all about "Change time, you can make it better". It's nice to see a slightly more pragmatic view on it.
I'm more confused as to how it's Chloe's fault the storm shows up. Like, the Butterfly Effect is Event A leads to Event B through small micro-events that build up. But Chloe living, how does that lead to a water spout forming? This is more like if Death from Final Destination threw a temper tantrum.
The only time travel story where changing the past results in something positive is the first back to the future. Stories about "you can't change the past!" Are the most common type of time travel story.
It's a stupid point, though. "You can't turn back the clock" is a poor lesson when you have the literal power to do so. It's like saying, "You shouldn't destroy the whales or aliens will kill us."
It's as bad an ending as Fallout 3 before the DLC.
"Yes, sacrifice yourself versus doing the smart thing and sending in Fawkes."
There's also Quantum Leap.
Oh and Terminator.
To me, "You can't change the past" is a useful lesson only if the person is obsessed with changing the past while Max only wants to change the past BECAUSE SHE CAN.
Like I said, I only feel this way because I liked the characters and wanted to see more of them. I also feel like the story didn't remotely "earn" the lesson it's trying to preach.
I burnt out on it, but plan to go back and beat it. They really banked on you liking Chloe.
The whole "the storm is cuz Chloe didn't die. Hella deep, wowzers" felt like a tacked on eending they had to go with because of time constraints (irony). She just kinda blurts it out at the end out of nowhere and both accept it as true. Very sloppy.
It felt like that was the plot to me from the start. I didn't know that was how it would end but it seemed like that was the uber deep message they felt was important. Yeah, writers I saw The Butterfly Effect thanks.