Very cool analysis. I am still speechless till this day about the Daichi bad end. Kinda glad they added it though, sometimes neutrality is not the best option.
I'm guessing that Egaltarian route is pretty much looked down on by Hinako is probably some thought about genuine personality. It's likely an scary thought to have a part of your personal character rewritten, even with good intentions. Though what you said that it wouldn't be mind control, and you're right about that, but could ya imagine a version of yourself that does stuff all the time your present self doesn't necessarily agree with? I think that's why it clashes so much with what she had done. Yeah, she put herself at risk, but it was her decision. It's a line of hypocrisy, but layered, as it begs the question of free will to an individual. We as humans do tons of things we dislike, but we do them because it is our will to do so, both with circumstances causing us to do so or as something minor as different tastes. This is a great video, and now I wanna replay DeSu 1 and 2 lol.
I can somewhat understand this line of reasoning, but I still stand by my criticism because when talking about freedom and making your own choice, it’s important to consider all the people who aren’t given the opportunity to make choices period. It kind of reads as Hinako being hyper privileged if she’s against people being compelled to help others instead of choosing to do it themselves, especially if she’s in favor of people being helped. It’s kind of like a rich person who donates to some charities but pushes for policies that allow the rich to hoard wealth. As for imagining a version of myself doing things my present self disagrees with; I would certainly be opposed to that, but that’s because I’d be doing something my current self disagrees with. I don’t think I’d mind becoming a version of myself that does things I think are good. I hope that didn’t come off as harsh because I appreciate the feedback and I’m glad you liked the video.
@@Hobbit_Optimist Yeah, it's all fine, I don't really see it as harsh as I'm not really defending Hinako, but just seeing why possibly she comes off like that. It's definitely important to consider that the group is still at the end of the day is entrusted with the world altering decision that many are frankly voiceless and is subject to their whims at that given moment.
I wonder if they're trying to say something with the binary opposition they set up between a utopian socialist character who presumably should be read as from Japan's Brazilian immigrant community and a hierarchical elitist who's literally called Yamato - can be a normal name in Japan, sure, but when contrasted against someone coded as not Japanese the name seems much more loaded.
That’s interesting. It might be even more loaded than you think because, while I didn’t put it in the video, Yamato has some lines about returning Japan to it’s shining glory.
@@Hobbit_Optimist Sure, which makes sense, because that's what the cultural idea of "Yamato" is in Japanese culture, whether it's the old name for Japan, the very idealized feudal period of the Yamato Court, or the (old?) name for the majority ethnic group in Japan. You couldn't really give him a name that indicated more emphatically that "THIS IS A COMMENT ON AN ASPECT OF THE JAPANESE NATIONAL CHARACTER", it would be like calling a British character "Albion" or "Arthur" or something, or, less directly, giving an American character a surname like "Washington" or "Mayflower". The contrast is also interesting given the strained view that parts of the Japanese majority has of the Brazilian immigrant communities that live there. The difficult part to reconcile is that this is a much thornier and more interesting political point for the game to make than the very equivocal, quietist main thrust of the story can really accommodate!
Love long Devil Survivor videos, a favorite series of mine because while I love the set-up and themes of SMT, nothing delivers more on them than these two. The usually inexcusable Law and Chaos become much more human here, even when you disagree. I used to hate Neutral bias as well but I've come to accept it with the conclusion that it represents the game developers desire to encourage people playing their games to believe in reality--because ultimately alignments are supernatural. The players put down the game and cannot avoid the reality of "Neutral" in this context. Of course, the games are an escape that offers literal wish fulfilment at times, so a natural tension and alienation is formed with the player as a result. Here is to hoping that DS3, if we get it. will be a step up on the execution of its predessors.
Quick correction: "the strong should rule and dominate the weak" does indeed rely on violence. Violence is how strength is demonstrsted. Violence is the cornerstone of a "might makes right" worldview
Its been over 10 years since then and I still think Joe and Ronaldo make some of the better arguments against hierarchies and gradualism that I've seen in the medium (not a high bar, but still). Yet, the best that characters can do in response is to just... End the conversation. It gives the impression that the writers knew which route was the best as presented, but couldn't openly acknowledge it.
I'll be honest, I hadn't actually done the neutral route until I got the footage for the video and the way that conversation ended just blew my mind. It's not like it would've been better if Daichi countered with "sure, but is that worth fighting your friends?" as that just brings back the false pacifism problem but to just say the people who just gave a very calm and rationale defense of their beliefs can't be reasoned with is insane.
I find it really funny how much more I love this game over DS1 despite this game's many tiny flaws, it's my still 3rd favorite RPG. I feel the same way about DS2 like how i feel about Fire Emblem Engage. I'll be the first one to tell someone they should probably play DS1. Gameplay aside, i think DS1 does most things better. My two issues with the plot is: I really think the route split should of happened day 5 because i feel day 6 doesn't flow properly. And the route that leads up to the unfortunate thing that is the Tri-Arc in Record Record Breaker should of been Daichi's "bad end" . Im not an expert on writing but I feel these would be better served.
Damn I wish I watched this and your DS1 vid sooner. DS 1 and 2 Remakes are some of my favorites games ever, and I love philosophy and all stuff SMT. I have a few counter-points. Nothing major, but, I gotta stick up for my two favorite Chaos Reps, Naoya and Yamato. I’ll start with Yamato because he is actually in the game this vid is talking about. He has one of the most logical Chaos Endings in the series, and if you look at the world they make from a very Optimistic POV, as well as do SLIGHT, EVER SO SLIGHT extrapolations, you may see a much better ending then before. In the World of Merit, there are a LOT of ways the world can develop. In fact, I think that what we see in the beginning might simply be the growing pains of a POTENTIAL Utopia. What I mean is; if humanity is now focused on finding the best people to lead it, as well as the best people to fulfill ALL sociological niches, the negative things we see are completely incongruent with that idea. I see your argument and I raise the video “Not Created Equal - Elitism in My Hero Academia” by Explenation Point. My thought is that in a society that is built off of struggle to be the best… the best at WHAT tho? Surely being leader isn’t something everyone wants, or everyone should expect to want? In fact, I think of Yamato’s ending as essentially being a seed that becomes My Hero Academia; Demons Edition. In his video, essentially, he breaks down why the MHA society both makes sense and while has a lot of problems, is overall a good world even though it’s centered around elitism. The vid is amazing, but basically, it’s saying “Go out and fulfill a niche that you can enjoy.” People are going to be born able to do things or are going to develop skills that make them BETTER at some things then others. And in an elitist/meritocratic society, those differences will be lauded and praised as well as expanded upon. I don’t want to spoil the entire video, but safe to say, this is an ideal that I find semi-realistic. Minus the super powers of coarse. But anyway- Yamato strictly wants a world where those who have ability and worth are given the chance to rise up and be better, and THOSE People will create a service that is better then anyone else’s. What I’m saying is; in Yamato’s society, I see it only improving from where we see it at his ending. It only CAN, by the very nature of itself. It wants the best. And the best will desire the best in ALL THINGS. Which means the best housing, the best medicine, the best… everything. And they would make that the norm, because by the nature of being a leader who works for the betterment of the society, they will know that the society can only improve through pushing others who deserve it up. Now, this will probably take a little while- but I see it as an eventuality. As long as humanity’s end goal is to progress and better itself, then logic dictates that they will get to a state where it’s only logical to make sure everyone who is atleast TRYING to help is given a solid standard of living. Yamato may not be able to see it, but his ideals actually are incredibly inclusive once you add in all the different things needed for a society to function. In his world, as long as you try and be the best, you will always have a place. Because it’s illogical to let the ‘weak’ die. TLDR; I think in its most optimistic form, Yamato’s ending is one where the Lower Class only exists for people who REALLY ARE lazy and useless, while anyone who is trying their best will be a part of a large and prosperous middle class who enjoys the benefits of the High Classes products; stable leadership, stable food supply, ect. It’s kinda optimistic, I will admit… but I like Optimism. If Yamato’s world IS based off of facts and logic, then logically, humanity will be put first. My argument is basically that a system that raises up the weak to be strong is the most logical meritocracy there can be. As for Naoya… well, I love him because is his character, as well as I love his ending because I see the potential in it. In the 8th day… It’s SUPPOSED to be a “Hard Mode for Good Ending” or “Easy Mode for Bad Ending”. Trying to frame itself as showing restraint is hard, but will create a moral victory, while exerting your power is intoxicating and can give you nothing but a material victory. We even see it at the very end; the Good Ending has the MC focus on the mission of taking down the Tyrannical God in order to free humanity because they love humanity. While the Evil Ending..? Abel doesn’t even go into the DEMON WORLD. They focus on conquering humanity and denying God The Earth. I see these endings as far from perfect… but also still really good for what their ideas are, even if they were not executed that well… I like them more for what they COULD have been. Evil could have been a fucking POWER TRIP, where you decimate the people coming after you, leaving them battered and bruised, without comps, and then killing ONE of them in front of the others, having them “tell the others”, until they fight and destroy Metatron, having to fight all the party members who aren’t siding with you in the lead up to it instead of during the battle. Then? Make Metatron a BITCH. Have Abel awaken to being Fully Realized at the start of the fight, letting you take command of Belial and Belder as two extra Party Members. I want to make it feel like I AM a demon. I want Metatron to be a joke. The final loose end that just needs to be tied up. On the other hand, make being good a struggle. Have the angels side with whatever force they can to fulfill their mission. Have the group be framed for murders, and make them ACTUALLY TRY AND SHOW THAT THEY ARE BEING MERCIFUL, and that it’s for humanity’s benefit. Then, the final battle isn’t a cake walk, but it’s not terribly hard either. And when you finish, then you basically get the ending. This is kinda how I feel the game is TRYING to be, but, just doesn’t quite get there. Anyway, those are my thoughts.
Being optimistic is nice and all but there’s still one fundamental issue even in this best case scenario for Yamato’s ending: who decides what makes someone “better?” Yamato can talk a big game about wanting only the best of the best but who is he to decide what that is? Merit is a trickier to define term than you might think, at least how he and most other people I see use it. Merit often has an implication of someone being the most worthy or putting in the most effort. Like I said in the video and as some comments have pointed out, merit can be used as a dogwhistle to justify already existing hierarchies. In the video I pointed out how he’s against family ties even though he’s only so powerful because of the privileges that came with being a hotsuin. I’ll admit I haven’t seen the video you mentioned since I’m not a MHA fan, but it seems to be working on a framework that a struggle to be the best is the way things are/have to be but this isn’t necessarily the case. The premise that human nature is fundamentally driven by conflict is similar to what I had to say about innovation. While conflict can be a part of human nature, it is far from the only part. One of the few neutral messages in this game I actually agree with is that both Ronaldo and Yamato insist the world they want to create are more natural to what humans should be when that’s not really the case. Human nature is a malleable thing that can be incredibly inconsistent. To say human nature is x is almost never an unbiased statement, but an ideological statement for what humans should be like, and this isn’t to say all ideologies are wrong or bad, but that more arguments need to be provided for them to hold any weight. To connect this to what you were saying, elitist societies usually don’t make very good arguments for why they should have the people at the top. You can say some people are better at some things but peoples skills aren’t developed in a vacuum. Someones ability to gain political power isn’t about how hard they try, it’s at least as determined by ones background and connections. What I’m getting at is that even if you want to follow the philosophy of specialization and that not everyone can be good at everything, you’d still need to make the case for why an elite or hierarchy should exist at all. Why, for example, should people in jps get getter access to a secure place to sleep than farmers who make the food people need to survive, or why should yamato be the one who gets to decide you and your friends are more worthy than Ronaldo and his rioters. While Yamato does eventually recognize Ronaldo’s strength, he spends the majority of the game opposing him for ideological and political reasons. He cares more about getting rid of an obstacle than enabling people who can keep humanity alive. At the end of the day I can’t see how any theoretical advantages Yamato’s world would create, if it creates any at all, would be better than a world of equality, where people help each other out an ensure a good quality of life for all rather than those society has deemed “worthy.” Side note: towards the end you mentioned that the lower class would only be people who truly are lazy but I want to challenge that premise. Even if Yamato’s world only screwed over the “truly lazy” can we say people like that deserve to be screwed over? Even if someone is a lazy worthless piece of shit does that mean they deserve to be lower class? Maybe I’m just one such loser but I don’t think people who are lazy, or depressed and don’t have the energy to be passionate or excel in something should be left behind in favor of privileging people who are nebulously defined as the best. Tl;dr: Yamato’s world is based on what he calls worthiness and the idea that people can be labeled as unworthy to even receive basic resources like food is bad, I think. I hope you don’t take this as like, a personal attack or anything. I just wanted to respond to your ideas that I’m sure you’re not alone in having.
@@Hobbit_Optimist oh no, thanks for the response so soon! And I agree. That doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy this idea I have cooked up. I will argue that the video is probably my best defense here and trying to summarize a 30 minute video by a professional TH-cam-Analyst in the form of purely text is REALLY hard- But to summarize as best I can, in MHA, 80% or more of the population has a super power, but these powers are either inherited or are completely random, and most of the time are a mixture of your parents quirks, though no one can control what they get. The MC has no quirk, and as such represents someone with a terrible handicap that would make it so it is impossible to be a Hero, which is what he has always wanted to do. Long story short, he meets All-Might, and instead of saying “You are worthless, go jump off a bridge,” he says; “It is completely impossible for you to be a hero. So try being a police officer or a detective. There are plenty of jobs where people without powerful quirks or without quirks at all can be good at.” In MHA, Hero’s are Celebrities, Crime Fighters, Humanitarian Aid, Fire Fighters, and basically anything that they are registered that they can help with. Even in the hero world, there are different avenues. And then there are jobs NOT focused around being a hero. My comparison is that being in the role of “leadership” is being a Hero. Something that is super rare, needing people who are extraordinarily and strong. So that’s like, what, 1% of the total population, MAYBE..? What about plumbers, or farmers, or anything like that. A society needs these sorts of things. And a society that is focused on getting nothing but the best would then develop ways for these jobs to be done better. The Leadership would, by definition, serve the people, because that’s the most effective way to run or society, if the vast majority is happy. I guess my logic kinda runs on the fact that I believe that kindness is logical. That you stand more to gain from giving people the tools to rise up rather then keeping them down. And even if Yamato’s world’s government isn’t perfect, the will of humanity will OVERTHROW that government, as that is now the will of humanity. I am NOT arguing this as a way of life we should be striving for, other then helping people become the best they we can be in what they want to do of course- but the ending has more merits if you believe kindness and helping others is logical, and that a meritocracy is trying to maximize logic and usefulness in the society.
@@Hobbit_Optimist Yamato is very willing to yield to someone that proves themselves better than him, its one of the reasons why he joins you on the True Neutral Route to kill Polaris. So with that in mind, Yamato's vision of the world seems more or less fair, in the dictionary definition sort of fair. So it could be argued that even in his world, if you prove that your ideals are better than his, then he will step down and aid you instead. Merit in this instance could be summed up as "skill" or "ability", That's why while Fumi is not physically able she's still very respected because of her skills and intelligence. Although, she might not be qualified to take in the reins in anything other than her field if she is shown to not be fit for it.
I love Devil Survivor 2 making me genuinely consider if neutrality was the "best" option. Entirely through Joe, who isn't even the leader of their faction. He doesn't outright say that neutrality is wrong, in fact he sort of agrees with it. But the main problem isn't what it's doing. It's how quickly it CAN do it. Humanity can change, but not everyone has the time to see the good in it. To see ANY real change. Honestly, as time has went on, and neutrality is still one of the most pushed points in SMT, this remains to be the greatest argument against it. That it's not a bad stance, but that it's a stance that only favors the future, not today.
I love DS2 so much but youre right, the neut pals are running around like chickens without its head. No plan no nothing. Wish youd talk about the septentrion arc too
7:20 this is one of the many reasons why you feel like a savior instead of a survivor. Everyone in this game sucks your dick at the drop of a hat. I get the appeal of the B-movie tone and awareness, but this just lacks the amazing atmosphere/tension of the first game. This game should've been called Devil Savior.
This game's plot was fascinatingly clumsy how it approached what were genuinely interesting questions handled by writers who lacked the range to discuss them. Even viewing JPs as fighting on the front lines doesn't even hold much water considering Yamato was ultimately seizing government resources with the goal of rebuilding the world into his hierarchy. If you're one of the people he dismissed, you're still going to die at the hands of the new society. The aliens ultimately don't matter if you're being "saved" by someone who is creating a violent society designed to kill you anyway. Given how Yamato and his supporters talk about how people they've declared "weak" will and should be eliminated and that said actions will better society, it's clear he's advocating for eugenics. The game never really brings up what that means about disabled people, among others. The game keeps misusing the concept of "merit" but his ideology is closer to eugenics. Even one of his earliest fate events establishes he believes some people have an inherent worth and can't just hard work their way out of thing, and even if he did believe that, he never contends with things like disability. Joe even points this out in how Yamato defines worth purely in terms of how useful someone is in a capitalistic context. That all makes the neutral faction's both-sidesing even more disgusting considering Ronaldo is using violence…in resistance to a group of people advocating to rewrite the world to enforce magical eugenics. They really try to act like "fighting friends is wrong" when several of your "friends" literally are saying that it's natural to kill off "weak" people and that they're worthless. The idea that systems of inequality would disappear is laughable considering that eugenics is a core belief and weapon of pretty much every fascist society rooted in the idea of purity and some kind of hierarchical structure like white supremacy, the idea of a master race of some kind. Yamato's society is inherently violent in how the elimination of undesirables is a feature, not a bug. Even if people aren't actively encouraging individual fights, the forced poverty and starvation is still a form of violence. I think that the analysis here would benefit from that because Rand's ideology is also very violent. The society is designed to be violent even if individual people are discouraged from pointless fighting. Devil Survivor 2 has the constant theme that arguing and disagreement itself is inherently immoral, that maintaining a status quo is more important than any actual ideological conflict, which act as little more than interpersonal disagreements according to the game. The game doesn't really understand the ideological perspectives they're touching on since the law route is basically "socialism/communism as explained by someone who knows nothing about those perspectives" considering they use a bunch of common wrong talking points against them. Merit and equality aren't in conflict and there's an entire history of intentionally weaponizing "merit" to maintain an unequal power structure.
Your point on disability is interesting and almost certainly correct. I can’t recall a single time disability related issues are brought up and it’s easy to draw conclusions of what Yamato would believe. I imagine if disability was brought up as a talking point, Yamato would likely say the same thing he says about social barriers; that people can still get ahead in spite of those and that people who can are worthy and those who can’t are not. Would that be incredibly stupid and show a misunderstanding of how disabilities work? Of course but most of what Yamato believes doesn’t gel well with reality anyway. I did likely go easy on his ending and said that while it was bad it wasn’t as extreme as fascism. I partially said that because some of his beliefs by the end of the game, even in his own route, aren’t fully in line with fascist ideologies, even though fascists would love the world he’s trying to create, and that what he personally believes holds very little significance. In the beginning Yamato assumed all the people he gathered were already the cream of the crop, and that everyone not in his organization was worthless, but by the end he realizes that many of the people he deemed worthless are more capable than jps personnel and thinks they deserve to be as high as they can get, even if that includes dethroning him; telling Polaris if someone were to overthrow him that would be fine and good since he’d no longer be the most qualified. Does that ultimately matter? Outside of semantics probably not. Ig what separates Yamato from other fascists to me is that when a fascist says they think the “best” should be at the top of society, they’re obviously saying that as a proxy for themselves, whereas Yamato doesn’t care who’s at the top as long as the answer is whoever’s the best. Ie he believes in the concept of hierarchy itself rather than a specific hierarchy where people have places they’re “supposed” to occupy.
Ronaldo is closer in his talking points to actual fascists (Mussolini, etc). Only flowery. Yamato is an aristocrat. Of course you are going to act bleeding heart and apologetic towards socialists because you sympathise with symbols they represent, but they got the general idea of collectivists and progressivsts pretty correct with Ronaldo. As for Yamato his perfect world has nothing to do with fascism, or anything like that, its purely aristocracy devoid of ideology. Combine his society of merit with inherent worth, and you get the fact that in his world your merit and your position is dictated by your inherent worth, without much social barriers. Kinda like medieval or ancient aristocracy where mch of social constructs werent conceived yet.
to me the equalitarian faction's issue is more about how people can realistically live in a "parasitarian" way if they arent skilled enough to help in some way, not even in something small, while a medic or a teacher busts their ass for them. the whole "innovation can happen without competition" falls on its face the moment people feel they need nothing more and get complacent with whats around, which is the way someone very capable would think overall, sure, with polaris intervention this people can still thrive without complacency, but still, certain breakthrouhs or thoughts lines wouldnt occur at all, or would occur in a very delayed moment, at the end of the day, 10 people trying to find the cure for cancer faster than the others will make those people that cant wait 10 more years wait less. it all comes down on how utopic an egalitarian world is, it boils down to take away people's freedom for the sake of the greater good...which funnily enough also ends on what i call "preying on the strong", equality in reality always drags people from the upper class to the equal class, and most of the times, the equal class is somewhere around middle low class there is a rather peculiar point i'd like to put forward, in every fight you have vs ronaldo's faction, the moment ronaldo (or all the leaders) are defeated, the rest of the people retreat...notice how without divine entity intervention the whole "we work for the benefit of everyone" falls apart dont get me wrong, the goal is the best out of all "3" and in theory its the best ending, the issue, and prob the reason why neutral is the "best" and canon ending instead of law, is how utopic or invasive egalitarism is, too good to be true if you will, which is prob the reason why people would be against Ronaldo at the end of the day, is a SMT game, this ones are notorious for showing utopian or extremist ideologies, most of the times, chaos is "evil for the sake of long term sustainability and growth", law is "good, but is so intrusive that makes/forces people behave in unnatural ways" and neutral is "FUCK NO TAKE ME THE FUCK BACK" now, as for both of the kill polaris endings, the daichi one is moronic but wants to show something similar to law ending, but in a more "we work together im time of crisis" saiduq's i have to hardly disagree with your points, humans used to be able to live without modern equipment, the new world would basically inherit whatever knowledge the cast has and go from there, a new game+ with low achivement points if you will, can only transfer 4 demons, the auction and mitama fusion lol great video, very nuanced talk and that puts everything in the table, i think ot lacks seeing more of ronaldo's route flaws, but overall didnt seem like calling it "objectively better"
I'm sure you didn't intend for it to come across this way but referring to people as parasites (or living in a "parasitarian" way) is kind of dehumanizing, especially if their issue is not being skilled enough to help. Your example that people will grow complacent if their needs are met still works on an assumption of humans as fundamentally selfish. Something I don't think I explicitly said in the video but is an interesting idea the game has in its subtext is that human nature is not one consistent thing; people who say otherwise are usually doing so as a rhetorical strategy to sell their ideology. Both Ronaldo and Yamato think their ideologies are more in line with human nature (or what it "should" be) when it can't be boiled down so simply. Humans aren't inherently kind or cruel, but the plans each character has for Polaris pushes humanity in one direction or another. In a world where people are compassionate, their own needs being met isn't the only important thing. To use your example of trying to cure cancer, if cancer still needs to be cured then working towards solving it would be something people can contribute to in their own ways, even if that was is just easing the burden of the people most likely to be able to do so. Your criticism of egalitarian societies feels a bit to close to assuming life is a zero sum game where there are winners and losers. I don't know how else to read your statement on people from the upper classes being dragged down; does the existence of an upper class not fundamentally require inequality? How can one be upper if they're not above someone? Especially important when most people who are rich and powerful were born into rich circumstances and benefit from political and historical privileges. Combining your statements about parasites from earlier with the idea of "preying on the strong" ignores the reality that no one can go their whole life without relying on others. Everyone receives help at some point in their lives and I think we shouldn't dehumanize those who need it at later points in their life (again, I'm sure you didn't intend it that way but calling people parasites in this context makes it sound like they only deserve help if they can prove their worth, which assumes they are unable or incapable of), or assume those who help them are being exploited ("preyed upon".) To be clear about the point about human nature not inherently being one thing, this is intended by the game as a criticism of Ronaldo and ties into your point on people acting in unnatural ways but it goes both ways. Human nature isn't only compassionate or competitive, but is both of those things. Therefore Ronaldo and Yamato's endings aren't making humanity something its not, its choosing to value one over the other which is ideological but I don't think its necessarily wrong to value compassion more.
I feel like the thing that's underlooked about Ronaldo's ending is that it's inhernetly hypocritical, and it's not just cause of Ronaldo's actions in the game. Yamato's route is based on the idea that the strong should have control over the weak, and yet Ronaldo, through the strength of the party, is the one who is allowed to manipulate the nature of all of humanity? The irony of a world where humans are not allowed to be inconsiderate or selfish is that it BECOMES a hollow meritocracy. You would do the role you're most capable of doing, and for a lot of people, since it's a world with no real economy, police force etc, would be...nothing. Would it be considered unkind to invest in your art form for example, if that diverts attention away from people who are better at it than you? If a theatre performance is happening, and two people want a role, who would get it? Would you get an endless cycle of people offering the other person the role? Would it just be the person who is best suited to the role? The existential issue about Ronaldo's route isn't about competition, it's about conflict. What would be the point of anything if there's no drive? Where would our inspiration come from? Doctors don't just become doctors because they're just the nicest alturistic people in the world. Sure, it can be for good intentions, maybe even the main intent, but at the end of the day, it's a stressful challenging but well respected and well paying job. What about media like movies and games? Much of art derives from life's ups and downs. It's gives as a different perspective into the realities of our world and often stay with us because of the meaning it has. Why would a populace programmed to be considerate and kind want to go see Saving Private Ryan? Why would they see anything? There's no escapism or meaning to be found when life is already 'perfect'. The purpose of existence would ultimately to just be to survive; to grow up, find a mate, have children and die. I'm honestly surprised about the lack of pushback on this ending as many other fictions have explored the idea of 'forced utopia' before, from the Matrix to Honkai Impact. If you could put all of humanity into a dream world where everyone is happy, the general perspective towards it is one where happiness without context is ultimately meaningless, it's suffering that makes life actually worth living, it's what makes acts of kindness and alturism so powerful and meaningfuil. Ronaldo's is even worse than the typical example, because most of the time, there is usually some objective reality outside of the paradise to contrast with. With Ronaldo, people would be reprogrammed and you would never know it. it's downright horrifying, all because a few people in Japan got to decide the fate of humanity.
DS seems to be atlus going "fine give them what they want" "Can we have a Law route with out tongue in cheek hypocrisy and genocide?" Fine, Kingdom of Saints. "Can we have a Chaos ending that is not fuck you got mine?" Fine, Despot Ending "Can we have a game where being neutral is not automatically best for humanity?" Fine, DS2 (and SJ: Redux) Now let me put my wish out there : Can we get a game with story/characters quality of DS1 with DS2 gameplay improvements.
What I find interesting is that Ronaldo and Yamato's endings aren't too dissimilar. Both seek equity (albeit within limit for Yamato); everybody gets the resources that they need to excel. Demons aside (I seriously didn't remember that part), the only real difference is that one is content with being cold in the name of progress. Neither could work without a shift in human nature... which is really the main issue with Yamato's world. Ronaldo's world wouldn't hold us back if we're kinder anyways, as most of our stagnation, destruction, ... in the real world is due to malice. Pettiness, greed, etc. are all things that have no place in Yamato's world but they wouldn't in Ronaldo's either. I'd still prefer Yamato's world over the one we live in though.
ngl I'd be siding with Yamato. A world of Merit means I merely have to better myself to better my situation. Given human nature, humans would focus on self improvement with such heavy incentive. With that the amount of resources increases. The useless would have less than those who are useful, but due to the richness that comes from that even the useless within a world of merit would live better than those within a world where you can't ever get ahead. Of course, I like Alcor the most. But given the focus of this video, I'd say Yamato is far and away the better choice.
One cool detail I noticed about Devil Survivor 2 is how Ronaldo (the law rep) breaks the law to help the poor, while Yamato Hotsuin (the chaos rep) tries to use his incompetent faction to establish a meritocracy. It's like poetry they rhyme. Game is still a philosophical failure largely but hey small W's!111!!!!11!
38:12 lmaooooooooooooo well it is "forced equality thing" since it is not a matter of changing the world but of human nature - what does it matter if the world is now a better place when you are not yourself and would not be able to experience it as yourself? same with meritocracy actually, that end does the exact same thing, they are pretty much equal in my eyes for real, what is the difference between "naturally changing human nature" (what do you even mean by naturally. editing people is not natural 😭) and brainwashing i guess i am a fucking neutral then orz
40:50 I don't consider human nature perfect, but I do consider the forced alteration of of it through Polaris as evil. There's no reason these points had to be joined with "and" as if implying they're mutually exclusive with the idea that human nature is imperfect and *should* be altered; which isn't me claiming you stated that, but where I believe is where your bias towards the Egalitarian ending showed most. As a result, I do not particularly agree with either Yamato or Ronaldo's ideologies. I do think of an ideal world in the sense that people are fundamentally good and want to find peace, but also human nature itself is fundamentally flawed, hence why they even are able to come to these opposite stances on how the world should be even though they aren't truly mutually exclusive except when their representatives in this game are trying to shape the world into mutually exclusive extremes. Which is to say, the world wouldn't even be in this dire a state if not for Polaris forcing it down to the wire, and thus Ronaldo and Yamato are ultimately opportunistically trying to change the world into their personal ideal place. Hinako has a point I will agree on: I wouldn't mind going a bit out of my way to help a stranger, but the level I'd be willing to go to for them is absolutely not the same I would for a friend. Based on Ronaldo's model, I would agree to become someone willing to extend that helping hand in equal measure and I simply refuse. Call me an individualist, maybe, but that's not in and of itself a bad thing and I don't like how your phrasing implies that only individualists would object to having their underlying values rewritten. After all, it's not like everyone else in the world is consenting to this change (or Yamato's, or Saiduq's). Hence, the Neutrals are essentially saying, even if badly argumented, that this whole thing sucks and is absurdly unfair to everyone and nobody should be playing god with the world...which goes in the wrong direction if you go the bad way of neutral. There's a reason Record Breaker's Triangulum Arc acts like the real canon ending to the Septentrione arc is a mix of Neutral and Saiduq, like you mentioned in your video when discussing how Saiduq could've been handled: we get rid of Polaris, the asshat who made this into a problem to begin with and go back to the world as it was so humanity can continue figuring itself out, but now Saiduq, a being who believes in the potential of humanity, is put in charge so he can watch and probably guide us gently from afar rather than imperiously like Polaris did. It's just that it's evident that the literal powers that be have it out for us so we have to find a different solution anyway! Overall, I actually quite like this video review. I clicked out of sheer curiosity since I naively wasn't expecting much from a low view video but you surprised me with your nuanced understanding of the characters and their ideologies, showing that you put a lot of thought into it. I'm a bit perplexed you're evidently using Record Breaker footage but dont speak of the Triangulum Arc, but I guess it makes sense because in practice it leans a lot more into the cast themselves as a comrade-slash-friend group who ultimately bonded through a trial by fire, rather than representatives of potential directions for humanity to develop into (even though thats what Ronaldo low-key does if you follow his logic in Triangulum Arc)
While I understand where you're coming from, I think you missed a few crucial points. The most important point being that you seem to mix up the in universe means the characters use to seek change and the message the game is promoting. I think it would be naive to say the game would be completely ok with either an egalitarian or meritocratic world as long as friends didn't fight or a higher power didn't decide on it. Like I said at the end of the video: in real life there are no magical gods controlling everything and even before verbalizing opposition against either group on "pacifistic" or anti-divinity grounds, the neutrals are shown to already disapprove of both ideologies. Rather than opposing egalitarianism and meritocracy because they rely on the divine, they're against the divine because it enables these ideologies. That's why the "true" ending of base devil survivor 2 still relies on Polaris. The "we should only rely on us humans to change" argument only comes up to sidestep the morality of what both groups want, like I pointed out when going over Saiduq's ending. Plenty of other games, especially smt games, have messages about how controlling people against their will is bad; but I don't think that's the angle they were initially going for in desu2. Hell the game isn't even saying ideologues like Ronaldo and Yamato are fundamentally opportunistic bad people (you're meant to sympathize with them.) The message the game wants to give is that macro-level change is bad and we should only worry about what we, as individuals, can change in our personal lives. This is why I come down on individualism. The game relies on individualistic thinking to sidestep social issues that, even if they don't go in depth on, are clearly interested in exploring. If they didn't have anything to say on these issues they wouldn't have made the Yamato-Ronaldo conflict in the first place. They could've just made it a bunch of your friends vs a god that wants humanity dead.
wonderful video that expressed all of my ideological criticisms of desu2 especially the daichi endings and the depiction of ronaldo's ending as a bad one + discussed a lot of ideas that i didn't consider :) i've always thought the politics of desu2 were very questionable and i'm glad someone made an entertaining and clear video essay on it! ignore my display name
Still very much in the beginning of the video but what do you mean by "...letting you keep control of a JP's base after you go against them"... letting? You're one of, if not the most powerful Demon Tamers at that point. Tf they gonna do to stop you? They were barely handling the rioters, Yamato knows just kicking everyone out isn't an option. That goes for the other factions too, everyone is OP and JP's is not full of elites.
When I played this game for the first time I went with Yamato. I didn't want to go with Daichi since I thought that current world maybe good for us it isn't for everyone else. I didn't go with Ronaldo since I found him to be extreme hypocrite. He wanted to make a utopia where everyone is equal but he would leave people from JP to die if it wasn't for the protagonist. If everyone is eaqual why would they deserve to die? But the thing that made me hate him was him killing Makoto. I really like her and she was the most conflicted about siding with Yamato instead of him. Alcor's also seemed to me to be a secret one so I ignored it. Yamato through out the entire game remained true to his ideals. I also found the world were talented and competent people are the ones in charge very appealing. But the fact that he, Makoto and Fumi were among my favourites could just mean that it was character bias. (There's also Keita but since I was physical and you have 4 party limit I didn't use him at all.) And among other "The strog shall rule" ending in the series this one seemed resonable. DS series is probably the only one that didn't make me go neutral since I went with Kingdom of Saints in the first one. And it also could have been a character bias towards Amane.
Unpopular opinion, the turn order display sucks/is useless. How does it help when turns appear later than shown because there's some random and unforeseeable delay? Doesn't help much for strategizing AT ALL.
It's... not unforseeable? Every action takes a different amount of time, the time taken is communicated well enough. Enemies screwing up your delay is part of what you need to strategize for. Devil Survivor 2 obscures the Speed stat for some reason but it's still pretty clear
coming back to say that whoever thought putting keita as a "leader" in yamato's world is so idiotic....... yamato literally wants to get rid of people like keita. his competitive spirit is there but that's it. ds2 really could've been so much more than it is. i hope we get another low-budget experimental era of megaten... maybe soul hackers 2 started it but that sold dog💩 so idk
He doesn’t want to get rid of people like Keita. Keita is obsessive talented in combat and as a demon user if anything it’s mokoto who doesn’t belong because asides from her loyalty there are several over jips employees who do the same thing as her our main cast has people more exceptional not as devil summoners but even in other fields like Fumi who can summon mutilple demons at once and basically runs all the tech at jips as well being a great researcher. Everyone is else fits their moral belief they side with except mokoto she is more in line with Ronaldo than Yamato.
You know a neutral route is going to be something awful when the rep is basically Yosuke Hanamura 2 (or yet another Masou Inaba expy, but those games don't exist). Like at least Strange Journey in it's deconstruction of "neutral = good" still had a cool representative. Always up for a Devil Survivor 2 critique, especially with how much of a drop in quality it was from the first.
What? Have you played Strange Journey? Strange Journey is THE biggest case of Neutral = Good. In that game, the Law and Chaos endings are super extreme and unpleasant. Neutral is flatly, almost unarguably the only good outcome. It's very black and white.
@@Blarglesnarfe Have you played Strange Journey!? You do realize that Humanity is the Netural Option right? You do realize that the hammer in the idea how much they suck right? In fact the reason the game existed is because of their issues.
A f*cking neutral here, i only playes the ds games once and i ussually go for neutral good ending if exists (i think they usually give you the biggest boss or the most human ending) I admit that in this game the neutral route is very weak, and now i learn how the ronaldo route goes, i think is better now Not gonna lie, if the chaos ending lets you kill god i would go for that
The Neutrals could be told that if they punched their friend once they could cure cancer and they still wouldn't do it.
Yes! Truer words have never been Spoken bestie
“Fighting your friends is wrong to matter what” you’ll understand even if I have to beat it into you
Or they could be just as bad or Worst than the Angels or Demons. Just look at Strange Journey or the "Golden" Neutral Ending In SMT 5.
Very cool analysis. I am still speechless till this day about the Daichi bad end. Kinda glad they added it though, sometimes neutrality is not the best option.
I'm guessing that Egaltarian route is pretty much looked down on by Hinako is probably some thought about genuine personality. It's likely an scary thought to have a part of your personal character rewritten, even with good intentions. Though what you said that it wouldn't be mind control, and you're right about that, but could ya imagine a version of yourself that does stuff all the time your present self doesn't necessarily agree with? I think that's why it clashes so much with what she had done. Yeah, she put herself at risk, but it was her decision. It's a line of hypocrisy, but layered, as it begs the question of free will to an individual. We as humans do tons of things we dislike, but we do them because it is our will to do so, both with circumstances causing us to do so or as something minor as different tastes.
This is a great video, and now I wanna replay DeSu 1 and 2 lol.
I can somewhat understand this line of reasoning, but I still stand by my criticism because when talking about freedom and making your own choice, it’s important to consider all the people who aren’t given the opportunity to make choices period. It kind of reads as Hinako being hyper privileged if she’s against people being compelled to help others instead of choosing to do it themselves, especially if she’s in favor of people being helped. It’s kind of like a rich person who donates to some charities but pushes for policies that allow the rich to hoard wealth.
As for imagining a version of myself doing things my present self disagrees with; I would certainly be opposed to that, but that’s because I’d be doing something my current self disagrees with. I don’t think I’d mind becoming a version of myself that does things I think are good.
I hope that didn’t come off as harsh because I appreciate the feedback and I’m glad you liked the video.
@@Hobbit_Optimist Yeah, it's all fine, I don't really see it as harsh as I'm not really defending Hinako, but just seeing why possibly she comes off like that. It's definitely important to consider that the group is still at the end of the day is entrusted with the world altering decision that many are frankly voiceless and is subject to their whims at that given moment.
Amazing video and easy sub for me!! I never had much interest in the DS games before your videos but now I'm extremely excited to try them
I wonder if they're trying to say something with the binary opposition they set up between a utopian socialist character who presumably should be read as from Japan's Brazilian immigrant community and a hierarchical elitist who's literally called Yamato - can be a normal name in Japan, sure, but when contrasted against someone coded as not Japanese the name seems much more loaded.
That’s interesting. It might be even more loaded than you think because, while I didn’t put it in the video, Yamato has some lines about returning Japan to it’s shining glory.
@@Hobbit_Optimist Sure, which makes sense, because that's what the cultural idea of "Yamato" is in Japanese culture, whether it's the old name for Japan, the very idealized feudal period of the Yamato Court, or the (old?) name for the majority ethnic group in Japan. You couldn't really give him a name that indicated more emphatically that "THIS IS A COMMENT ON AN ASPECT OF THE JAPANESE NATIONAL CHARACTER", it would be like calling a British character "Albion" or "Arthur" or something, or, less directly, giving an American character a surname like "Washington" or "Mayflower". The contrast is also interesting given the strained view that parts of the Japanese majority has of the Brazilian immigrant communities that live there.
The difficult part to reconcile is that this is a much thornier and more interesting political point for the game to make than the very equivocal, quietist main thrust of the story can really accommodate!
Love long Devil Survivor videos, a favorite series of mine because while I love the set-up and themes of SMT, nothing delivers more on them than these two. The usually inexcusable Law and Chaos become much more human here, even when you disagree. I used to hate Neutral bias as well but I've come to accept it with the conclusion that it represents the game developers desire to encourage people playing their games to believe in reality--because ultimately alignments are supernatural. The players put down the game and cannot avoid the reality of "Neutral" in this context. Of course, the games are an escape that offers literal wish fulfilment at times, so a natural tension and alienation is formed with the player as a result. Here is to hoping that DS3, if we get it. will be a step up on the execution of its predessors.
you actually did exceptionally well on this one, holy shit I'm rooting for you even more you take off
Quick correction: "the strong should rule and dominate the weak" does indeed rely on violence. Violence is how strength is demonstrsted. Violence is the cornerstone of a "might makes right" worldview
Its been over 10 years since then and I still think Joe and Ronaldo make some of the better arguments against hierarchies and gradualism that I've seen in the medium (not a high bar, but still). Yet, the best that characters can do in response is to just... End the conversation. It gives the impression that the writers knew which route was the best as presented, but couldn't openly acknowledge it.
I'll be honest, I hadn't actually done the neutral route until I got the footage for the video and the way that conversation ended just blew my mind. It's not like it would've been better if Daichi countered with "sure, but is that worth fighting your friends?" as that just brings back the false pacifism problem but to just say the people who just gave a very calm and rationale defense of their beliefs can't be reasoned with is insane.
I find it really funny how much more I love this game over DS1 despite this game's many tiny flaws, it's my still 3rd favorite RPG. I feel the same way about DS2 like how i feel about Fire Emblem Engage.
I'll be the first one to tell someone they should probably play DS1. Gameplay aside, i think DS1 does most things better.
My two issues with the plot is: I really think the route split should of happened day 5 because i feel day 6 doesn't flow properly. And the route that leads up to the unfortunate thing that is the Tri-Arc in Record Record Breaker should of been Daichi's "bad end" . Im not an expert on writing but I feel these would be better served.
This is a very good video essay. Subbed and I hope you also do one for SMT IV Apocalypse.
nice
Just the other day I saw a video that called Saiduk's ending the best of all smt ending, and then I see your take. Huh, the duality of man. Neat
great video!
Damn I wish I watched this and your DS1 vid sooner. DS 1 and 2 Remakes are some of my favorites games ever, and I love philosophy and all stuff SMT.
I have a few counter-points. Nothing major, but, I gotta stick up for my two favorite Chaos Reps, Naoya and Yamato.
I’ll start with Yamato because he is actually in the game this vid is talking about. He has one of the most logical Chaos Endings in the series, and if you look at the world they make from a very Optimistic POV, as well as do SLIGHT, EVER SO SLIGHT extrapolations, you may see a much better ending then before.
In the World of Merit, there are a LOT of ways the world can develop. In fact, I think that what we see in the beginning might simply be the growing pains of a POTENTIAL Utopia. What I mean is; if humanity is now focused on finding the best people to lead it, as well as the best people to fulfill ALL sociological niches, the negative things we see are completely incongruent with that idea.
I see your argument and I raise the video “Not Created Equal - Elitism in My Hero Academia” by Explenation Point. My thought is that in a society that is built off of struggle to be the best… the best at WHAT tho? Surely being leader isn’t something everyone wants, or everyone should expect to want? In fact, I think of Yamato’s ending as essentially being a seed that becomes My Hero Academia; Demons Edition.
In his video, essentially, he breaks down why the MHA society both makes sense and while has a lot of problems, is overall a good world even though it’s centered around elitism.
The vid is amazing, but basically, it’s saying “Go out and fulfill a niche that you can enjoy.” People are going to be born able to do things or are going to develop skills that make them BETTER at some things then others. And in an elitist/meritocratic society, those differences will be lauded and praised as well as expanded upon. I don’t want to spoil the entire video, but safe to say, this is an ideal that I find semi-realistic. Minus the super powers of coarse. But anyway- Yamato strictly wants a world where those who have ability and worth are given the chance to rise up and be better, and THOSE People will create a service that is better then anyone else’s.
What I’m saying is; in Yamato’s society, I see it only improving from where we see it at his ending. It only CAN, by the very nature of itself. It wants the best. And the best will desire the best in ALL THINGS. Which means the best housing, the best medicine, the best… everything. And they would make that the norm, because by the nature of being a leader who works for the betterment of the society, they will know that the society can only improve through pushing others who deserve it up.
Now, this will probably take a little while- but I see it as an eventuality. As long as humanity’s end goal is to progress and better itself, then logic dictates that they will get to a state where it’s only logical to make sure everyone who is atleast TRYING to help is given a solid standard of living. Yamato may not be able to see it, but his ideals actually are incredibly inclusive once you add in all the different things needed for a society to function. In his world, as long as you try and be the best, you will always have a place. Because it’s illogical to let the ‘weak’ die.
TLDR; I think in its most optimistic form, Yamato’s ending is one where the Lower Class only exists for people who REALLY ARE lazy and useless, while anyone who is trying their best will be a part of a large and prosperous middle class who enjoys the benefits of the High Classes products; stable leadership, stable food supply, ect.
It’s kinda optimistic, I will admit… but I like Optimism. If Yamato’s world IS based off of facts and logic, then logically, humanity will be put first. My argument is basically that a system that raises up the weak to be strong is the most logical meritocracy there can be.
As for Naoya… well, I love him because is his character, as well as I love his ending because I see the potential in it.
In the 8th day… It’s SUPPOSED to be a “Hard Mode for Good Ending” or “Easy Mode for Bad Ending”. Trying to frame itself as showing restraint is hard, but will create a moral victory, while exerting your power is intoxicating and can give you nothing but a material victory.
We even see it at the very end; the Good Ending has the MC focus on the mission of taking down the Tyrannical God in order to free humanity because they love humanity. While the Evil Ending..? Abel doesn’t even go into the DEMON WORLD. They focus on conquering humanity and denying God The Earth.
I see these endings as far from perfect… but also still really good for what their ideas are, even if they were not executed that well…
I like them more for what they COULD have been.
Evil could have been a fucking POWER TRIP, where you decimate the people coming after you, leaving them battered and bruised, without comps, and then killing ONE of them in front of the others, having them “tell the others”, until they fight and destroy Metatron, having to fight all the party members who aren’t siding with you in the lead up to it instead of during the battle. Then? Make Metatron a BITCH. Have Abel awaken to being Fully Realized at the start of the fight, letting you take command of Belial and Belder as two extra Party Members. I want to make it feel like I AM a demon. I want Metatron to be a joke. The final loose end that just needs to be tied up.
On the other hand, make being good a struggle. Have the angels side with whatever force they can to fulfill their mission. Have the group be framed for murders, and make them ACTUALLY TRY AND SHOW THAT THEY ARE BEING MERCIFUL, and that it’s for humanity’s benefit. Then, the final battle isn’t a cake walk, but it’s not terribly hard either. And when you finish, then you basically get the ending.
This is kinda how I feel the game is TRYING to be, but, just doesn’t quite get there.
Anyway, those are my thoughts.
Being optimistic is nice and all but there’s still one fundamental issue even in this best case scenario for Yamato’s ending: who decides what makes someone “better?” Yamato can talk a big game about wanting only the best of the best but who is he to decide what that is? Merit is a trickier to define term than you might think, at least how he and most other people I see use it. Merit often has an implication of someone being the most worthy or putting in the most effort. Like I said in the video and as some comments have pointed out, merit can be used as a dogwhistle to justify already existing hierarchies. In the video I pointed out how he’s against family ties even though he’s only so powerful because of the privileges that came with being a hotsuin. I’ll admit I haven’t seen the video you mentioned since I’m not a MHA fan, but it seems to be working on a framework that a struggle to be the best is the way things are/have to be but this isn’t necessarily the case.
The premise that human nature is fundamentally driven by conflict is similar to what I had to say about innovation. While conflict can be a part of human nature, it is far from the only part. One of the few neutral messages in this game I actually agree with is that both Ronaldo and Yamato insist the world they want to create are more natural to what humans should be when that’s not really the case. Human nature is a malleable thing that can be incredibly inconsistent. To say human nature is x is almost never an unbiased statement, but an ideological statement for what humans should be like, and this isn’t to say all ideologies are wrong or bad, but that more arguments need to be provided for them to hold any weight.
To connect this to what you were saying, elitist societies usually don’t make very good arguments for why they should have the people at the top. You can say some people are better at some things but peoples skills aren’t developed in a vacuum. Someones ability to gain political power isn’t about how hard they try, it’s at least as determined by ones background and connections. What I’m getting at is that even if you want to follow the philosophy of specialization and that not everyone can be good at everything, you’d still need to make the case for why an elite or hierarchy should exist at all. Why, for example, should people in jps get getter access to a secure place to sleep than farmers who make the food people need to survive, or why should yamato be the one who gets to decide you and your friends are more worthy than Ronaldo and his rioters. While Yamato does eventually recognize Ronaldo’s strength, he spends the majority of the game opposing him for ideological and political reasons. He cares more about getting rid of an obstacle than enabling people who can keep humanity alive.
At the end of the day I can’t see how any theoretical advantages Yamato’s world would create, if it creates any at all, would be better than a world of equality, where people help each other out an ensure a good quality of life for all rather than those society has deemed “worthy.”
Side note: towards the end you mentioned that the lower class would only be people who truly are lazy but I want to challenge that premise. Even if Yamato’s world only screwed over the “truly lazy” can we say people like that deserve to be screwed over? Even if someone is a lazy worthless piece of shit does that mean they deserve to be lower class? Maybe I’m just one such loser but I don’t think people who are lazy, or depressed and don’t have the energy to be passionate or excel in something should be left behind in favor of privileging people who are nebulously defined as the best.
Tl;dr: Yamato’s world is based on what he calls worthiness and the idea that people can be labeled as unworthy to even receive basic resources like food is bad, I think.
I hope you don’t take this as like, a personal attack or anything. I just wanted to respond to your ideas that I’m sure you’re not alone in having.
@@Hobbit_Optimist oh no, thanks for the response so soon! And I agree. That doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy this idea I have cooked up.
I will argue that the video is probably my best defense here and trying to summarize a 30 minute video by a professional TH-cam-Analyst in the form of purely text is REALLY hard-
But to summarize as best I can, in MHA, 80% or more of the population has a super power, but these powers are either inherited or are completely random, and most of the time are a mixture of your parents quirks, though no one can control what they get.
The MC has no quirk, and as such represents someone with a terrible handicap that would make it so it is impossible to be a Hero, which is what he has always wanted to do. Long story short, he meets All-Might, and instead of saying “You are worthless, go jump off a bridge,” he says; “It is completely impossible for you to be a hero. So try being a police officer or a detective. There are plenty of jobs where people without powerful quirks or without quirks at all can be good at.”
In MHA, Hero’s are Celebrities, Crime Fighters, Humanitarian Aid, Fire Fighters, and basically anything that they are registered that they can help with. Even in the hero world, there are different avenues. And then there are jobs NOT focused around being a hero.
My comparison is that being in the role of “leadership” is being a Hero. Something that is super rare, needing people who are extraordinarily and strong. So that’s like, what, 1% of the total population, MAYBE..? What about plumbers, or farmers, or anything like that. A society needs these sorts of things. And a society that is focused on getting nothing but the best would then develop ways for these jobs to be done better.
The Leadership would, by definition, serve the people, because that’s the most effective way to run or society, if the vast majority is happy.
I guess my logic kinda runs on the fact that I believe that kindness is logical. That you stand more to gain from giving people the tools to rise up rather then keeping them down.
And even if Yamato’s world’s government isn’t perfect, the will of humanity will OVERTHROW that government, as that is now the will of humanity.
I am NOT arguing this as a way of life we should be striving for, other then helping people become the best they we can be in what they want to do of course- but the ending has more merits if you believe kindness and helping others is logical, and that a meritocracy is trying to maximize logic and usefulness in the society.
@@Hobbit_Optimist Yamato is very willing to yield to someone that proves themselves better than him, its one of the reasons why he joins you on the True Neutral Route to kill Polaris.
So with that in mind, Yamato's vision of the world seems more or less fair, in the dictionary definition sort of fair. So it could be argued that even in his world, if you prove that your ideals are better than his, then he will step down and aid you instead.
Merit in this instance could be summed up as "skill" or "ability", That's why while Fumi is not physically able she's still very respected because of her skills and intelligence. Although, she might not be qualified to take in the reins in anything other than her field if she is shown to not be fit for it.
Very good video!! Well put analysys
Hope you gettin better.
Take your time
We're gonna wait for you next video.
You really got this!
Good video, better than I expected
Unironically kami shit
This is great
I love Devil Survivor 2 making me genuinely consider if neutrality was the "best" option. Entirely through Joe, who isn't even the leader of their faction. He doesn't outright say that neutrality is wrong, in fact he sort of agrees with it. But the main problem isn't what it's doing. It's how quickly it CAN do it. Humanity can change, but not everyone has the time to see the good in it. To see ANY real change. Honestly, as time has went on, and neutrality is still one of the most pushed points in SMT, this remains to be the greatest argument against it. That it's not a bad stance, but that it's a stance that only favors the future, not today.
I love DS2 so much but youre right, the neut pals are running around like chickens without its head. No plan no nothing.
Wish youd talk about the septentrion arc too
Super great viceo
I love both Devil Survivor games. I still listen to the music sometimes, especially "Sunset". We NEED a third game, please!!!
7:20 this is one of the many reasons why you feel like a savior instead of a survivor. Everyone in this game sucks your dick at the drop of a hat. I get the appeal of the B-movie tone and awareness, but this just lacks the amazing atmosphere/tension of the first game. This game should've been called Devil Savior.
1:07:23 “Nuh uh”
This game's plot was fascinatingly clumsy how it approached what were genuinely interesting questions handled by writers who lacked the range to discuss them.
Even viewing JPs as fighting on the front lines doesn't even hold much water considering Yamato was ultimately seizing government resources with the goal of rebuilding the world into his hierarchy. If you're one of the people he dismissed, you're still going to die at the hands of the new society. The aliens ultimately don't matter if you're being "saved" by someone who is creating a violent society designed to kill you anyway.
Given how Yamato and his supporters talk about how people they've declared "weak" will and should be eliminated and that said actions will better society, it's clear he's advocating for eugenics. The game never really brings up what that means about disabled people, among others. The game keeps misusing the concept of "merit" but his ideology is closer to eugenics. Even one of his earliest fate events establishes he believes some people have an inherent worth and can't just hard work their way out of thing, and even if he did believe that, he never contends with things like disability. Joe even points this out in how Yamato defines worth purely in terms of how useful someone is in a capitalistic context.
That all makes the neutral faction's both-sidesing even more disgusting considering Ronaldo is using violence…in resistance to a group of people advocating to rewrite the world to enforce magical eugenics. They really try to act like "fighting friends is wrong" when several of your "friends" literally are saying that it's natural to kill off "weak" people and that they're worthless.
The idea that systems of inequality would disappear is laughable considering that eugenics is a core belief and weapon of pretty much every fascist society rooted in the idea of purity and some kind of hierarchical structure like white supremacy, the idea of a master race of some kind.
Yamato's society is inherently violent in how the elimination of undesirables is a feature, not a bug. Even if people aren't actively encouraging individual fights, the forced poverty and starvation is still a form of violence. I think that the analysis here would benefit from that because Rand's ideology is also very violent. The society is designed to be violent even if individual people are discouraged from pointless fighting.
Devil Survivor 2 has the constant theme that arguing and disagreement itself is inherently immoral, that maintaining a status quo is more important than any actual ideological conflict, which act as little more than interpersonal disagreements according to the game.
The game doesn't really understand the ideological perspectives they're touching on since the law route is basically "socialism/communism as explained by someone who knows nothing about those perspectives" considering they use a bunch of common wrong talking points against them. Merit and equality aren't in conflict and there's an entire history of intentionally weaponizing "merit" to maintain an unequal power structure.
Your point on disability is interesting and almost certainly correct. I can’t recall a single time disability related issues are brought up and it’s easy to draw conclusions of what Yamato would believe.
I imagine if disability was brought up as a talking point, Yamato would likely say the same thing he says about social barriers; that people can still get ahead in spite of those and that people who can are worthy and those who can’t are not. Would that be incredibly stupid and show a misunderstanding of how disabilities work? Of course but most of what Yamato believes doesn’t gel well with reality anyway.
I did likely go easy on his ending and said that while it was bad it wasn’t as extreme as fascism. I partially said that because some of his beliefs by the end of the game, even in his own route, aren’t fully in line with fascist ideologies, even though fascists would love the world he’s trying to create, and that what he personally believes holds very little significance. In the beginning Yamato assumed all the people he gathered were already the cream of the crop, and that everyone not in his organization was worthless, but by the end he realizes that many of the people he deemed worthless are more capable than jps personnel and thinks they deserve to be as high as they can get, even if that includes dethroning him; telling Polaris if someone were to overthrow him that would be fine and good since he’d no longer be the most qualified. Does that ultimately matter? Outside of semantics probably not.
Ig what separates Yamato from other fascists to me is that when a fascist says they think the “best” should be at the top of society, they’re obviously saying that as a proxy for themselves, whereas Yamato doesn’t care who’s at the top as long as the answer is whoever’s the best. Ie he believes in the concept of hierarchy itself rather than a specific hierarchy where people have places they’re “supposed” to occupy.
Ronaldo is closer in his talking points to actual fascists (Mussolini, etc). Only flowery. Yamato is an aristocrat. Of course you are going to act bleeding heart and apologetic towards socialists because you sympathise with symbols they represent, but they got the general idea of collectivists and progressivsts pretty correct with Ronaldo. As for Yamato his perfect world has nothing to do with fascism, or anything like that, its purely aristocracy devoid of ideology. Combine his society of merit with inherent worth, and you get the fact that in his world your merit and your position is dictated by your inherent worth, without much social barriers. Kinda like medieval or ancient aristocracy where mch of social constructs werent conceived yet.
to me the equalitarian faction's issue is more about how people can realistically live in a "parasitarian" way if they arent skilled enough to help in some way, not even in something small, while a medic or a teacher busts their ass for them.
the whole "innovation can happen without competition" falls on its face the moment people feel they need nothing more and get complacent with whats around, which is the way someone very capable would think overall, sure, with polaris intervention this people can still thrive without complacency, but still, certain breakthrouhs or thoughts lines wouldnt occur at all, or would occur in a very delayed moment, at the end of the day, 10 people trying to find the cure for cancer faster than the others will make those people that cant wait 10 more years wait less.
it all comes down on how utopic an egalitarian world is, it boils down to take away people's freedom for the sake of the greater good...which funnily enough also ends on what i call "preying on the strong", equality in reality always drags people from the upper class to the equal class, and most of the times, the equal class is somewhere around middle low class
there is a rather peculiar point i'd like to put forward, in every fight you have vs ronaldo's faction, the moment ronaldo (or all the leaders) are defeated, the rest of the people retreat...notice how without divine entity intervention the whole "we work for the benefit of everyone" falls apart
dont get me wrong, the goal is the best out of all "3" and in theory its the best ending, the issue, and prob the reason why neutral is the "best" and canon ending instead of law, is how utopic or invasive egalitarism is, too good to be true if you will, which is prob the reason why people would be against Ronaldo
at the end of the day, is a SMT game, this ones are notorious for showing utopian or extremist ideologies, most of the times, chaos is "evil for the sake of long term sustainability and growth", law is "good, but is so intrusive that makes/forces people behave in unnatural ways" and neutral is "FUCK NO TAKE ME THE FUCK BACK"
now, as for both of the kill polaris endings, the daichi one is moronic but wants to show something similar to law ending, but in a more "we work together im time of crisis"
saiduq's i have to hardly disagree with your points, humans used to be able to live without modern equipment, the new world would basically inherit whatever knowledge the cast has and go from there, a new game+ with low achivement points if you will, can only transfer 4 demons, the auction and mitama fusion lol
great video, very nuanced talk and that puts everything in the table, i think ot lacks seeing more of ronaldo's route flaws, but overall didnt seem like calling it "objectively better"
I'm sure you didn't intend for it to come across this way but referring to people as parasites (or living in a "parasitarian" way) is kind of dehumanizing, especially if their issue is not being skilled enough to help. Your example that people will grow complacent if their needs are met still works on an assumption of humans as fundamentally selfish.
Something I don't think I explicitly said in the video but is an interesting idea the game has in its subtext is that human nature is not one consistent thing; people who say otherwise are usually doing so as a rhetorical strategy to sell their ideology. Both Ronaldo and Yamato think their ideologies are more in line with human nature (or what it "should" be) when it can't be boiled down so simply. Humans aren't inherently kind or cruel, but the plans each character has for Polaris pushes humanity in one direction or another. In a world where people are compassionate, their own needs being met isn't the only important thing. To use your example of trying to cure cancer, if cancer still needs to be cured then working towards solving it would be something people can contribute to in their own ways, even if that was is just easing the burden of the people most likely to be able to do so.
Your criticism of egalitarian societies feels a bit to close to assuming life is a zero sum game where there are winners and losers. I don't know how else to read your statement on people from the upper classes being dragged down; does the existence of an upper class not fundamentally require inequality? How can one be upper if they're not above someone? Especially important when most people who are rich and powerful were born into rich circumstances and benefit from political and historical privileges. Combining your statements about parasites from earlier with the idea of "preying on the strong" ignores the reality that no one can go their whole life without relying on others. Everyone receives help at some point in their lives and I think we shouldn't dehumanize those who need it at later points in their life (again, I'm sure you didn't intend it that way but calling people parasites in this context makes it sound like they only deserve help if they can prove their worth, which assumes they are unable or incapable of), or assume those who help them are being exploited ("preyed upon".)
To be clear about the point about human nature not inherently being one thing, this is intended by the game as a criticism of Ronaldo and ties into your point on people acting in unnatural ways but it goes both ways. Human nature isn't only compassionate or competitive, but is both of those things. Therefore Ronaldo and Yamato's endings aren't making humanity something its not, its choosing to value one over the other which is ideological but I don't think its necessarily wrong to value compassion more.
I feel like the thing that's underlooked about Ronaldo's ending is that it's inhernetly hypocritical, and it's not just cause of Ronaldo's actions in the game.
Yamato's route is based on the idea that the strong should have control over the weak, and yet Ronaldo, through the strength of the party, is the one who is allowed to manipulate the nature of all of humanity? The irony of a world where humans are not allowed to be inconsiderate or selfish is that it BECOMES a hollow meritocracy. You would do the role you're most capable of doing, and for a lot of people, since it's a world with no real economy, police force etc, would be...nothing. Would it be considered unkind to invest in your art form for example, if that diverts attention away from people who are better at it than you? If a theatre performance is happening, and two people want a role, who would get it? Would you get an endless cycle of people offering the other person the role? Would it just be the person who is best suited to the role?
The existential issue about Ronaldo's route isn't about competition, it's about conflict. What would be the point of anything if there's no drive? Where would our inspiration come from? Doctors don't just become doctors because they're just the nicest alturistic people in the world. Sure, it can be for good intentions, maybe even the main intent, but at the end of the day, it's a stressful challenging but well respected and well paying job. What about media like movies and games? Much of art derives from life's ups and downs. It's gives as a different perspective into the realities of our world and often stay with us because of the meaning it has. Why would a populace programmed to be considerate and kind want to go see Saving Private Ryan? Why would they see anything? There's no escapism or meaning to be found when life is already 'perfect'. The purpose of existence would ultimately to just be to survive; to grow up, find a mate, have children and die.
I'm honestly surprised about the lack of pushback on this ending as many other fictions have explored the idea of 'forced utopia' before, from the Matrix to Honkai Impact. If you could put all of humanity into a dream world where everyone is happy, the general perspective towards it is one where happiness without context is ultimately meaningless, it's suffering that makes life actually worth living, it's what makes acts of kindness and alturism so powerful and meaningfuil. Ronaldo's is even worse than the typical example, because most of the time, there is usually some objective reality outside of the paradise to contrast with. With Ronaldo, people would be reprogrammed and you would never know it. it's downright horrifying, all because a few people in Japan got to decide the fate of humanity.
Great vid
DS seems to be atlus going "fine give them what they want"
"Can we have a Law route with out tongue in cheek hypocrisy and genocide?" Fine, Kingdom of Saints.
"Can we have a Chaos ending that is not fuck you got mine?" Fine, Despot Ending
"Can we have a game where being neutral is not automatically best for humanity?" Fine, DS2 (and SJ: Redux)
Now let me put my wish out there : Can we get a game with story/characters quality of DS1 with DS2 gameplay improvements.
Can we have a game where being neutral is not automatically best for humanity?" Fine, DS2 (and SJ: Redux)
Smt 2: am I a joke to you?
@@Warchief-te9jj Put it on a software that is not older than 90% of fans then we might get somewhere.
@@ancientgearsynchro the age of the software is irrelevant
What I find interesting is that Ronaldo and Yamato's endings aren't too dissimilar. Both seek equity (albeit within limit for Yamato); everybody gets the resources that they need to excel. Demons aside (I seriously didn't remember that part), the only real difference is that one is content with being cold in the name of progress. Neither could work without a shift in human nature... which is really the main issue with Yamato's world. Ronaldo's world wouldn't hold us back if we're kinder anyways, as most of our stagnation, destruction, ... in the real world is due to malice. Pettiness, greed, etc. are all things that have no place in Yamato's world but they wouldn't in Ronaldo's either. I'd still prefer Yamato's world over the one we live in though.
ngl I'd be siding with Yamato. A world of Merit means I merely have to better myself to better my situation. Given human nature, humans would focus on self improvement with such heavy incentive. With that the amount of resources increases. The useless would have less than those who are useful, but due to the richness that comes from that even the useless within a world of merit would live better than those within a world where you can't ever get ahead.
Of course, I like Alcor the most. But given the focus of this video, I'd say Yamato is far and away the better choice.
One cool detail I noticed about Devil Survivor 2 is how Ronaldo (the law rep) breaks the law to help the poor, while Yamato Hotsuin (the chaos rep) tries to use his incompetent faction to establish a meritocracy. It's like poetry they rhyme.
Game is still a philosophical failure largely but hey small W's!111!!!!11!
38:12 lmaooooooooooooo
well it is "forced equality thing" since it is not a matter of changing the world but of human nature - what does it matter if the world is now a better place when you are not yourself and would not be able to experience it as yourself? same with meritocracy actually, that end does the exact same thing, they are pretty much equal in my eyes
for real, what is the difference between "naturally changing human nature" (what do you even mean by naturally. editing people is not natural 😭) and brainwashing
i guess i am a fucking neutral then orz
NEUTRAL SPOTTED! MERITOCRACY CANNON FIRE!
@@CorrinQuest nooooooooooo not the meritocracy cannon pleaseeee i'm just a little neutral i have 1 agi nOOOOOO
40:50
I don't consider human nature perfect, but I do consider the forced alteration of of it through Polaris as evil. There's no reason these points had to be joined with "and" as if implying they're mutually exclusive with the idea that human nature is imperfect and *should* be altered; which isn't me claiming you stated that, but where I believe is where your bias towards the Egalitarian ending showed most.
As a result, I do not particularly agree with either Yamato or Ronaldo's ideologies. I do think of an ideal world in the sense that people are fundamentally good and want to find peace, but also human nature itself is fundamentally flawed, hence why they even are able to come to these opposite stances on how the world should be even though they aren't truly mutually exclusive except when their representatives in this game are trying to shape the world into mutually exclusive extremes. Which is to say, the world wouldn't even be in this dire a state if not for Polaris forcing it down to the wire, and thus Ronaldo and Yamato are ultimately opportunistically trying to change the world into their personal ideal place.
Hinako has a point I will agree on: I wouldn't mind going a bit out of my way to help a stranger, but the level I'd be willing to go to for them is absolutely not the same I would for a friend. Based on Ronaldo's model, I would agree to become someone willing to extend that helping hand in equal measure and I simply refuse. Call me an individualist, maybe, but that's not in and of itself a bad thing and I don't like how your phrasing implies that only individualists would object to having their underlying values rewritten. After all, it's not like everyone else in the world is consenting to this change (or Yamato's, or Saiduq's). Hence, the Neutrals are essentially saying, even if badly argumented, that this whole thing sucks and is absurdly unfair to everyone and nobody should be playing god with the world...which goes in the wrong direction if you go the bad way of neutral.
There's a reason Record Breaker's Triangulum Arc acts like the real canon ending to the Septentrione arc is a mix of Neutral and Saiduq, like you mentioned in your video when discussing how Saiduq could've been handled: we get rid of Polaris, the asshat who made this into a problem to begin with and go back to the world as it was so humanity can continue figuring itself out, but now Saiduq, a being who believes in the potential of humanity, is put in charge so he can watch and probably guide us gently from afar rather than imperiously like Polaris did. It's just that it's evident that the literal powers that be have it out for us so we have to find a different solution anyway!
Overall, I actually quite like this video review. I clicked out of sheer curiosity since I naively wasn't expecting much from a low view video but you surprised me with your nuanced understanding of the characters and their ideologies, showing that you put a lot of thought into it. I'm a bit perplexed you're evidently using Record Breaker footage but dont speak of the Triangulum Arc, but I guess it makes sense because in practice it leans a lot more into the cast themselves as a comrade-slash-friend group who ultimately bonded through a trial by fire, rather than representatives of potential directions for humanity to develop into (even though thats what Ronaldo low-key does if you follow his logic in Triangulum Arc)
While I understand where you're coming from, I think you missed a few crucial points. The most important point being that you seem to mix up the in universe means the characters use to seek change and the message the game is promoting. I think it would be naive to say the game would be completely ok with either an egalitarian or meritocratic world as long as friends didn't fight or a higher power didn't decide on it.
Like I said at the end of the video: in real life there are no magical gods controlling everything and even before verbalizing opposition against either group on "pacifistic" or anti-divinity grounds, the neutrals are shown to already disapprove of both ideologies. Rather than opposing egalitarianism and meritocracy because they rely on the divine, they're against the divine because it enables these ideologies. That's why the "true" ending of base devil survivor 2 still relies on Polaris. The "we should only rely on us humans to change" argument only comes up to sidestep the morality of what both groups want, like I pointed out when going over Saiduq's ending.
Plenty of other games, especially smt games, have messages about how controlling people against their will is bad; but I don't think that's the angle they were initially going for in desu2. Hell the game isn't even saying ideologues like Ronaldo and Yamato are fundamentally opportunistic bad people (you're meant to sympathize with them.) The message the game wants to give is that macro-level change is bad and we should only worry about what we, as individuals, can change in our personal lives. This is why I come down on individualism. The game relies on individualistic thinking to sidestep social issues that, even if they don't go in depth on, are clearly interested in exploring. If they didn't have anything to say on these issues they wouldn't have made the Yamato-Ronaldo conflict in the first place. They could've just made it a bunch of your friends vs a god that wants humanity dead.
wonderful video that expressed all of my ideological criticisms of desu2 especially the daichi endings and the depiction of ronaldo's ending as a bad one + discussed a lot of ideas that i didn't consider :) i've always thought the politics of desu2 were very questionable and i'm glad someone made an entertaining and clear video essay on it! ignore my display name
Still very much in the beginning of the video but what do you mean by "...letting you keep control of a JP's base after you go against them"... letting? You're one of, if not the most powerful Demon Tamers at that point. Tf they gonna do to stop you? They were barely handling the rioters, Yamato knows just kicking everyone out isn't an option. That goes for the other factions too, everyone is OP and JP's is not full of elites.
When I played this game for the first time I went with Yamato. I didn't want to go with Daichi since I thought that current world maybe good for us it isn't for everyone else. I didn't go with Ronaldo since I found him to be extreme hypocrite. He wanted to make a utopia where everyone is equal but he would leave people from JP to die if it wasn't for the protagonist. If everyone is eaqual why would they deserve to die? But the thing that made me hate him was him killing Makoto. I really like her and she was the most conflicted about siding with Yamato instead of him. Alcor's also seemed to me to be a secret one so I ignored it. Yamato through out the entire game remained true to his ideals. I also found the world were talented and competent people are the ones in charge very appealing. But the fact that he, Makoto and Fumi were among my favourites could just mean that it was character bias. (There's also Keita but since I was physical and you have 4 party limit I didn't use him at all.) And among other "The strog shall rule" ending in the series this one seemed resonable. DS series is probably the only one that didn't make me go neutral since I went with Kingdom of Saints in the first one. And it also could have been a character bias towards Amane.
Joe is the goat
21:12 its me
Link download pls 🙏
Unpopular opinion, the turn order display sucks/is useless. How does it help when turns appear later than shown because there's some random and unforeseeable delay? Doesn't help much for strategizing AT ALL.
It's... not unforseeable? Every action takes a different amount of time, the time taken is communicated well enough. Enemies screwing up your delay is part of what you need to strategize for. Devil Survivor 2 obscures the Speed stat for some reason but it's still pretty clear
damm i only get 150 point rip otome my key playter team
coming back to say that whoever thought putting keita as a "leader" in yamato's world is so idiotic....... yamato literally wants to get rid of people like keita. his competitive spirit is there but that's it. ds2 really could've been so much more than it is. i hope we get another low-budget experimental era of megaten... maybe soul hackers 2 started it but that sold dog💩 so idk
He doesn’t want to get rid of people like Keita. Keita is obsessive talented in combat and as a demon user if anything it’s mokoto who doesn’t belong because asides from her loyalty there are several over jips employees who do the same thing as her our main cast has people more exceptional not as devil summoners but even in other fields like Fumi who can summon mutilple demons at once and basically runs all the tech at jips as well being a great researcher. Everyone is else fits their moral belief they side with except mokoto she is more in line with Ronaldo than Yamato.
You know a neutral route is going to be something awful when the rep is basically Yosuke Hanamura 2 (or yet another Masou Inaba expy, but those games don't exist). Like at least Strange Journey in it's deconstruction of "neutral = good" still had a cool representative. Always up for a Devil Survivor 2 critique, especially with how much of a drop in quality it was from the first.
Who? On both Characters.
What? Have you played Strange Journey? Strange Journey is THE biggest case of Neutral = Good. In that game, the Law and Chaos endings are super extreme and unpleasant. Neutral is flatly, almost unarguably the only good outcome. It's very black and white.
@@Blarglesnarfe Have you played Strange Journey!? You do realize that Humanity is the Netural Option right? You do realize that the hammer in the idea how much they suck right? In fact the reason the game existed is because of their issues.
A f*cking neutral here, i only playes the ds games once and i ussually go for neutral good ending if exists (i think they usually give you the biggest boss or the most human ending)
I admit that in this game the neutral route is very weak, and now i learn how the ronaldo route goes, i think is better now
Not gonna lie, if the chaos ending lets you kill god i would go for that
Smh fake fan! Hasn’t even played the original version, only the (far inferior) 3ds remakes! Just another L for Hobbit
💃 *promosm*
I just finished this game and i loved it its way better than ds 1 and joe and jungo are some of my favourite megaten characters
Ah, a kindred spirit