1. The real sin at the teen party is the bitch didn't know Edgar Allan Poe. 2. Also, what friends does Jodie have when she turns emo/goth? She can say she lived on the base and doesn't [really] see people her age during the teen party. 3. Why does the game try to make Jodie a victim of Aiden's powers? He has only helped her throughout every part of her life, keeps saving her from assholes, can make money come out from ATMs so she won't be homeless, and saves her from other ghosts. He may be a troll at times, but he is not a total asshole. 4. Dialogue options have no impact whatsoever on cutscenes. There is no change. 5. You can fail every QTE and the story will go on. There are no consequences whatsoever. 6. The over use of that QTE mechanic pisses me off.
16:19, wait a minute, does this mean that Ethan Mars killed Willem Dafoe's family? because that simultaneously is the most believable and unbelievable thing about this story.
@Martijn Abelskamp You're a moron lol. Look up "white savior trope" and you'll know what he was talking about with Jodie coming into native american issues and becoming the hero. It's a pretty common trope in media, you don't know what the hell you're talking about whatsoever.
Extra ding for the fact that Willem Dafoe obviously didn't bother to find out anything about Kirsten before sending Jodie off to her birthday party, and wasted a rare, antique book of poetry on her.
She's obviously in highschool and not ONCE heard the name Edgar Allen Poe. Hell I even noticed an easter egg in fallout 4 that was about one of his books.
Same here ! I couldn't stand the game trying to shove him in my throat as the designated love interest when really he was not ... so i just ended up making him lose an eye. OOPS !
No. He was introduced extremely badly and then he was all over the place. If the story wanted me to like him, maybe have him be sympathetic when he takes Jodie to the CIA. Horribly written. He would turn so quickly from good to bad.
@DOAMA Bro...it has nothing to do with race. It probs have to do with Ryan tricking her and using her multiple times, but still claiming he loves her. Or maybe how much of an asshole he was in the beginning. For example when she has a panic attack because of the bar incident when they have a heated makeout and he just leaves instead of trying to help or do anything. She was crying on her bed and he was like "oh okay, bye then" Yea Jay was sort of a dick in the beginning, but also he had some stranger in his house trying to get herself killed. He respected her way more than freaking Ryan did. Omg I just remembered example 2. When you're sitting in the snow after escaping from the underwater base, if you say you don't love him he gets annoyed and says "I've never met a more pigheaded person." Just because you don't love him. Like brah....come onn
@WillFanofMany Idk man, you make some okay points, but I feel like if you have to say "he only tricked her once!" It's not the best relationship to choose.
Hitler is probably in heaven anyways. I believe god would of approved of Hitler, if you've ever read a bible, and if not all he had to do was ask forgiveness before he died. Thats why I would like to go to hell, from what I've been taught, people like mlk, Ghandi and the good people who try to spread peace are the ones who go to hell.
I'd also like to point out that when Willem Dafoe's character shot himself, he was wearing what the game described as a portable entity containment field. It prevents spectral entities from passing through it. However, immediately after he commits suicide, his soul is happily reunited with his family. How the hell did his soul escape his corporeal form when it's still wearing the containment field belt?
You forgot another sin. By the game's own admission, all spirits go to the same place. There is no retribution for anything terrible done, ever. So Hitler is walking beside Martin Luther King Jr telling him how he almost saved the world from the jews, and every cold blooded psychopathic murder can laugh at his victims to their face.
Annie Trinity *1. Psychopathy is a disorder; we just don't understand that much about it yet.* It was a statement for flavor. *2. By your own admission, Hitler thought he was saving the world. So people should be punished for being wrong about the moral conclusions they came to? Do you think you won't/shouldn't be punished for your morality? How do you know yours are the right ones? After all, if I was god, I'd be giving you the stink eye for suggesting two wrongs make a right* First off, I'm Christian. I believe by default you deserve punishment. Secondly, regardless of what Hitler THOUGHT he was doing, he KNEW he was killing millions, and not only that, he was TORTURING them. You know, lets ask you the same question. Let's say a guy gets a girl drunk and has sex with her, should he be punished? Well, HE thought they were having a good time. Oh, wait, she was drunk and had no say in the matter and the law classifies it as Rape and would arrest him upon hearing about it. What you think you do and what you're really doing make little difference to anything. Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse for breaking it, likewise being morally ignorant isn't an excuse for being a horrible person. This is why we say "Children can be cruel." because children are morally ignorant, regardless, they can still be terrible people. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you legitimately trying to defend Hitler? *3. Does retribution against Hitler unkill the Jews? Would it necessarily teach him the error of his ways, assuming that for that to happen, he would have to renounce the worldview that caused him to think what he was doing was right? Is inflicting suffering really the way you want to convince someone that they were wrong about something? Seems like having MLK there to say "What the hell is wrong with you?" might actually be more effective* So what you're saying is that all actions, regardless of how moral or unmoral, should go unpunished because retribution doesn't change what happened? A man who rapes little children should get away with it because his punishment doesn't unrape the children?A racist murder shouldn't be sentenced to jail because racism is general ignorance, and he should go off perfectly untouched because his punishment doesn't unmurder that black man he killed. Retribution isn't meant to bring anyone back, or correct a wrong, it's MEANT to bring justice to those who need it. It's why we would still arrests those two individuals, regardless of their mental state, put them on trial and find appropriate punishments. The very definition of the word is punishment for breaking laws or committing wrong. The logic behind your argument is something we threw out long ago, as a species. If you believe that there shouldn't be any form of retribution for such actions, you're calling for Anarchy which has no rules or consequences for actions done. Which is stupid for many reasons, and any movie from the 80's should be a 'decent' explanation as to why. But here, let me give an example of why that is terrible here. Let's say I just killed your family, your friends, their families, with a little bit of rape and torture and used your skills as mounts on my wall. I stripped away everything. I took your future away from you, any chance of joy you had, any peace your family and your friends families had, and I dragged them into a six foot deep ditch where no one who loves them will ever see them again. Then let's say, I die. How? Oh, nothing really. I died in my sleep. I passed away peacefully, while others suffered until their end and some. That is a messed up scenario by any rational human's definition. And then, once I'm dead, I can go back and meet all of the people I screwed over, and talk about what it felt like to kill them, to force them down, to watch them suffer. Oh, and let's not forget that the game makes it clear that spirits can still remember things and feel. SO that's all coming back to them and I'm just spending eternity reminding them of an absolutely horrible experience. They probably fear me now, forever. What a glorious day it would be for not having to deal with any form of retribution. I could say to them not to be sad, because their lives were meaningless anyway and at least I got some joy out of taking them. That is the universe this game takes place in, and that's the universe you're arguing for. An afterlife with no retribution is backwards as can be. Let's make another scenario. Say, a little boy got bullied to death. He was, at most, 8. The bigger, stronger, and 'smarter', 16 year old kids didn't think they'd kill him. But he's dead now. And they're just walking around school with no consequence. They don't even feel sorry. Again, that is messed up. The kid was killed because of them and he gets NO justice done for him. He gets to rot in the ground, and watch his family cry over his death while the boys who did it are probably laughing about it. They were never caught, and they go on to live long and happy lives until they pass away, fondly remembered as being gentle, kind, people. Except to that kid they murdered. And the other people they murdered along the way that they got away with. But that's what you're arguing for. A spiritual plane lack of retribution for the wrongful actions done. Ever. *What Hitler did was horrible, but he's dead now.* And? *If we try to make someone suffer beyond the point where we've gotten them to stop doing the bad thing that they were doing, we threaten to slingshot into a mirror image of the mentality that we opposed.* First off, Hitler being punished for killing millions is not a slingshot into committing another Holocaust. An appropriate punishment for inappropriate action is something that any logical society would have. And since the spirit world is typically drawn with rules of it's own in media, it would be logical to assume that it too is a society. Do you honestly believe ANY of things you are saying? *The holocaust happened because Germans tried to make the Jews pay for ruining the economy. I know that's not a perfect parallel to what you said, but it's still important to remember that antisemitism didn't just fall out of the sky, that people were starving in the streets after WWI and if THAT suffering was preventable, the people were angry and eager to make whoever they thought was responsible suffer back* What does it matter where the hate came from? I can end up hating someone for the most legit reason, but that doesn't give me moral or legal right to kill them or their entire family. *Yes, "an eye for an eye" is a cliche, but as long as it's one I see people forgetting, I'm going to keep saying it; nothing good has ever started with "X has to pay for what they did"... even if it's Hitler.* The saying Eye for an Eye and Tooth for a Tooth, which is the full phrase mind you, was started to deal justice. WE STILL use that logic in OUR legal system. The definition of the term means to find an appropriately equal punishment for an inappropriate action. It's a basic definition of Justice. Even Buddhists believe that the morally and legally wrong actions you commit get you sent to a place where you're eaten by Dogs and forced to swallow boiling metal and other punishments until you've reached the appropriate point of suffering to which your have paid off. This concept is not new, it is in every day life and it's a basic block of Justice Vs Lawlessness To be honest, this post is the most asinine thing I've ever seen. It appears you don't understand the point of justice and what it means for retribution to be taken or forgotten. Justice, by essence, is moral. Research ethical implications of an immoral world and that's what you're asking for.
*1. Psychopathy is a disorder; we just don't understand that much about it yet.* It was a statement for flavor. Well that might be ok that it's a throwaway line for you, but it's a pretty crucial point to my argument. My dad was bipolar and he did some horribly abusive shit to me and my mom. I don't really forgive him for what he did in the sense that I'd ever trust him again, and I'm definitely glad he's gone from my life, but all my life I was told I shouldn't want him punished because he was sick, and you know what? The people who told me that were right. And I don't see how or where to draw the line between the people we deem "mentally ill" and the people we deem "just sort of evil". We are our brains; the brain gets damaged, and people's personalities change. Wildly. Knowing what we know about neurology, I can't believe in free will, so I'm coming from the position that a bad person is the victim of a deformed or improperly functioning brain. What I'm trying to preach here is moral humility, that anyone would do a horrible thing under certain circumstances, especially if we expand those variables of circumstance to brain chemistry. And in that case, the whole idea of punishment just seems pretty damn pointless to me; it just adds to the sum total of misery that resulted from an event. If a bear ate someone, pointing out how slowly and painfully the person died isn't an argument for wanting to get "retribution" on the bear. It's still a fucking bear, a wild animal, and that's all humans are. Sometimes we are able to be more civilized, but when that fails and someone or something gets hurt, it's just another kind of natural disaster. 2. By your own admission, Hitler thought he was saving the world. So people should be punished for being wrong about the moral conclusions they came to? Do you think you won't/shouldn't be punished for your morality? How do you know yours are the right ones? After all, if I was god, I'd be giving you the stink eye for suggesting two wrongs make a right First off, I'm Christian. I believe by default you deserve punishment. Ok, well if you're alluding to god sending people to hell because of original sin, then God has tortured way more Jews than Hitler, so your whole argument kind of becomes hypocritical. But you didn't harp on that point, so I won't either. Besides, without any sort of elaboration on that thought, I can't really assume anything about what you meant by that. Secondly, regardless of what Hitler THOUGHT he was doing, he KNEW he was killing millions, and not only that, he was TORTURING them. Where the line is for the ends justifying the means is a moral question like any other. Supposedly good historical figures get innocents killed all the time. Lots of good shit we enjoy now came at the price of horrible shit in the past. You can condemn those prices and say that it would be better America wasn't here than that be built on the backs of slaves and dead "Indians", but others would disagree with you. It's a line that sits at different points for different people, and taking an extreme stance on that subjective matter doesn't change the fact that it's subjective. It doesn't matter that Hitler KNEW he was torturing people if the idea of torture didn't evoke the same reaction in his mind as it would in a healthy person. You know, lets ask you the same question. Let's say a guy gets a girl drunk and has sex with her, should he be punished? Well, HE thought they were having a good time. Oh, wait, she was drunk and had no say in the matter and the law classifies it as Rape and would arrest him upon hearing about it. I feel like you're not actually picturing a guy who thought they were having a good time, and instead thinking of a douchebag who lies about what he thought was going on. If a man was with a girl who was drunk out of her mind, and no one had ever explained the lines of consent in the context of inebriation, and the fact that she was barely responsive was legitimately not sending any red flags that it might be time to leave her in bed for the night, he wasn't trying to take advantage of her. There are conversations in the morning where the girl is freaking out because she doesn't know where she is and the guy is seriously surprised that she doesn't remember him or what they did. The fact that someone needed to educate him before he could put two and two together that "No sisly bab, um uf fur anysing" is not the same as "Yes, I'm sure about this, let's do it" just means he's a dumbass, and we're all stupid to some degree. I'd still say the police should get involved because a rape did occur in the sense that a woman got fucked without consenting and it needs to be sorted out, but any sane person would say he deserves mercy because he didn't know any better. The question is does ANYONE know any better than what they actually end up doing. The whole "ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking it" thing isn't because we're expected to be psychic about the collective social morality, it's because we don't have a way to be sure if they legitimately were ignorant. What you think you do and what you're really doing make little difference to anything. Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse for breaking it, likewise being morally ignorant isn't an excuse for being a horrible person. This is why we say "Children can be cruel." because children are morally ignorant, regardless, they can still be terrible people. I agree, for the most part, but that seems to counter your own argument considering we DON'T punish children as harshly as adults specifically BECAUSE we expect them not to know any better. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you legitimately trying to defend Hitler? I'm trying to show that when morality isn't as cut-and-dry as it would be comforting to think, when the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and your good intentions can be just as easily wrong as anyone else's, the idea of wanting revenge comes from a position of arrogance. I loathe this idea that others should suffer for their misjudgments because it implies that you could never make a mistake that badly. Everyone throughout history has thought that they were the enlightened generation, finally free of the foolishness that caused other cultures from other times to commit atrocities, including the woman who saw to it that her house slaves were good to her children, including the man who kissed his wife goodbye before going off to work in the SS, including the doctor who diligently treated the asylum patient's "androphilia". A hundred years from now, you will be a monster too, and so will I, and history students of the future will gawk at our behavior and wonder how we could be so blind to an immoral behavior it hasn't even occurred to us might be immoral yet. And should we be punished for what we do? No! Because we don't know better! Because it hasn't even crossed our minds that what we're doing is wrong! You know why Hitler is evil? The real reason? It's because he lost. It's because he died and didn't get to write the history books for your school of how he saved the Aryan race from the greedy Jews and the violent blacks. You know how I know this? Because you used Hitler to make your original point at all. Stalin killed more, and with far more questionable motives, but you picked Hitler because Stalin isn't an icon of evil like Hitler is. Culture over reality. Moses killed 3,000 Levites, men women and children, and granted that's not many compared to Hitler or Stalin's millions, but it's still a genocide. And yet Moses is painted as a hero, an icon of holiness and a fitting protagonist for children's films. And the numbers don't matter, because when confronted about this, apologists don't say "well, he didn't kill THAT many", no, they say "He had to do it, they were evil" and that's EXACTLY what you and I would have been told growing up in an alternate reality where the Axis won the war, and how dare anybody say that the entire nation of Germany swallowed that story, but you're such a freaking genius you couldn't possibly fall for it too? We are IDIOTS bumbling around in the dark trying to find an ideal moral code that might not even exist; what the hell makes us qualified to decide who suffers? 3. Does retribution against Hitler unkill the Jews? Would it necessarily teach him the error of his ways, assuming that for that to happen, he would have to renounce the worldview that caused him to think what he was doing was right? Is inflicting suffering really the way you want to convince someone that they were wrong about something? Seems like having MLK there to say "What the hell is wrong with you?" might actually be more effective So what you're saying is that all actions, regardless of how moral or unmoral, should go unpunished because retribution doesn't change what happened? A man who rapes little children should get away with it because his punishment doesn't unrape the children?A racist murder shouldn't be sentenced to jail because racism is general ignorance, and he should go off perfectly untouched because his punishment doesn't unmurder that black man he killed. No, those people should absolutely go to jail because jail is a tool to keep future harm from happening. I'm not proposing we let these people roam free; I'm saying for someone that deeply believes black people need to die, having them be in pain doesn't change their mind; they've already come to an extreme conclusion because something is extremely wrong with them. What we need to do is recognize that they're probably ill and address why they thought it was right to do what they did. That's how we make dangerous people into NOT dangerous people, instead of having them rot in jail because our simian brain that still assumes an oversimplified model of malicious intent wants to see that. Retribution isn't meant to bring anyone back, or correct a wrong, it's MEANT to bring justice to those who need it. And again, how you came to the conclusion that someone "needs justice" is based on... It's why we would still arrests those two individuals, regardless of their mental state, put them on trial and find appropriate punishments. "Regardless of mental state" huh? So if I put PCP in your drink, and you shot five people while under the influence of a mental state-altering substance, you're still a bad person? What if instead of going crazy from taking a pill, you went crazy from NOT taking one? What if you were a violent psychotic that was living as a perfectly functional member of society thanks to medication, but one day you're pills got mixed up? What if you're poor and couldn't afford a psychiatrist to diagnose you or the medication needed to keep you functioning? What if you live in a crude age of medicine where those pills could help you, had they been invented yet? I don't know how to handle a situation where a person is that unreliable with not being a threat to themselves or others; locking them away might be necessary to keep everyone else safe. What I do know is they're not this boogeyman that woke up and said "I think I'll be evil today" and hurting them does jack shit to keep the problem from repeating. The very definition of the word is punishment for breaking laws or committing wrong. And that's why I hate justice. I'm not even going to argue with you about whether that's an official definition, because from what I've seen, "justice" means whatever the hell anyone wants it to mean. And usually, there's not much explaining on the front of how there's a difference from a dolled up version of "revenge when enough people want it" That's one thing I do really respect about you (that and you are actually pretty articulate and address the points I made; honestly, you're the most reasonable person I've debated in quite a while, I actually feel like I'm talking to a peer for once) you used the word "retribution" instead of "justice"; I don't AGREE with what you're talking about, but at least you're being direct. I much prefer to say I support "closure", that the legal system is there to ensure that someone who was able to harm others is no longer able to, and that the victims are compensated for their loses as best they can be, including getting counseling. But this idea that the people who hurt others need to be hurt back to make the victims feel better, whether that's effective or not, is incredibly primitive, a product of our monkey brains that evolved an exaggerated defense mechanism against possible threats from within the tribe. Before we had medicine, this illusion of malicious intent and a kneejerk reaction to SMASH! SMASH! SMASH! KILL IT! SHOW NO MERCY! to a member of the group that might hurt us or our babies was all we had to survive. But it doesn't mesh with the realities of the human condition that we have today. The logic behind your argument is something we threw out long ago, as a species. If you believe that there shouldn't be any form of retribution for such actions, you're calling for Anarchy which has no rules or consequences for actions done. Which is stupid for many reasons, and any movie from the 80's should be a 'decent' explanation as to why. I think I've already been pretty thorough with why "retribution or anarchy" is a false dichotomy. But here, let me give an example of why that is terrible here. Let's say I just killed your family, your friends, their families, with a little bit of rape and torture and used your skills as mounts on my wall. I stripped away everything. I took your future away from you, any chance of joy you had, any peace your family and your friends families had, and I dragged them into a six foot deep ditch where no one who loves them will ever see them again. You know how I was just talking about not giving into your simian brain? Yeah, don't waste your breath with this graphic diatribe; I try not to base my stances on appeals to emotion. Then let's say, I die. How? Oh, nothing really. I died in my sleep. I passed away peacefully, while others suffered until their end and some. That is a messed up scenario by any rational human's definition. Yes, it is messed up, because me and my family are dead. But what, were you supposed to die screaming because that's how I died? Yes, I would be angry at you if that happened, but before you start talking about "rational human", are you suggesting that it's irrational to try to look past your rage? And then, once I'm dead, I can go back and meet all of the people I screwed over, and talk about what it felt like to kill them, to force them down, to watch them suffer. Oh, and let's not forget that the game makes it clear that spirits can still remember things and feel. SO that's all coming back to them and I'm just spending eternity reminding them of an absolutely horrible experience. They probably fear me now, forever. Yeah, no, I never said I liked the game or its depiction of the afterlife. I totally agree you should keep an offender far far away from their victims. Again, I never want to see my father again, but that doesn't change the fact that if I went to heaven and heard he was in hell for his treatment of me, I'd say to god, "Couldn't you have just NOT made him bipolar?" And even with no god to make him bipolar, he didn't choose to go nuts, he wasn't even aware he was going nuts. What a glorious day it would be for not having to deal with any form of retribution. I could say to them not to be sad, because their lives were meaningless anyway and at least I got some joy out of taking them. That is the universe this game takes place in, and that's the universe you're arguing for. An afterlife with no retribution is backwards as can be. Let's make another scenario. Say, a little boy got bullied to death. He was, at most, 8. The bigger, stronger, and 'smarter', 16 year old kids didn't think they'd kill him. But he's dead now. And they're just walking around school with no consequence. They don't even feel sorry. Again, that is messed up. The kid was killed because of them and he gets NO justice done for him. He gets to rot in the ground, and watch his family cry over his death while the boys who did it are probably laughing about it. They were never caught, and they go on to live long and happy lives until they pass away, fondly remembered as being gentle, kind, people. Ah yes, the bullying scenario, an interesting study in the inconsistencies in our society's standards of free will and mental health. So a boy can be not responsible for his own death because of the environmental pressures he was saddled with? Inability to get away from the people harassing him (or maybe it just didn't occur to him to try to get away), lack of access to adults who would help him (or maybe there would be, but he didn't get an adult), and for some reason of the mindset where the disapproval of these older children is the end of the world, a flawed perception of reality. Do I think it's this boy's own damn fault he's dead? No. I've been depressed, I've been suicidal; when life seems that awful, you start contemplating extreme measures. But (assuming it was a gun for proverbial reasons) if it's not his fault that he was the one who literally pulled the trigger and left his family to grieve, why does the buck NOT stop at him, but DOES stop at the next hand over? If we can accept anyone who would take their own life isn't thinking clearly, why is it so hard to keep in mind that someone who would gleefully drive another to suicide probably has even MORE screws loose? Because it's not about facts, it's not about how these teenagers were motivated by THEIR background, it's because someone wanting to die is an emotionally confusing situation to respond to, but someone wanting to kill gets a nice, clean disgust reaction out of us so there's no impetus to look at the moral ambiguity. And that's what you're trying to appeal to. I already told you that doesn't work on me; stop it. Except to that kid they murdered. And the other people they murdered along the way that they got away with. But that's what you're arguing for. A spiritual plane lack of retribution for the wrongful actions done. Ever. What Hitler did was horrible, but he's dead now. And? If we try to make someone suffer beyond the point where we've gotten them to stop doing the bad thing that they were doing, we threaten to slingshot into a mirror image of the mentality that we opposed. First off, Hitler being punished for killing millions is not a slingshot into committing another Holocaust. An appropriate punishment for inappropriate action is something that any logical society would have. Don't you think allegedly driving the German economy into the ground is an inappropriate action? Of course, the Jews didn't actually ruin the economy, but that's sure what was the narrative in the country at the time. In Hitler's mind, he was punishing the Jews for what they did. I'm not suggesting trying to punish Hitler is going to lead to a holocaust; that wouldn't even make any sense, he's dead. But if we look at history, "they need to be punished" is almost always the justification for fucking somebody over, sometimes when they don't deserve it. And since the spirit world is typically drawn with rules of it's own in media, it would be logical to assume that it too is a society. Do you honestly believe ANY of things you are saying? The holocaust happened because Germans tried to make the Jews pay for ruining the economy. I know that's not a perfect parallel to what you said, but it's still important to remember that antisemitism didn't just fall out of the sky, that people were starving in the streets after WWI and if THAT suffering was preventable, the people were angry and eager to make whoever they thought was responsible suffer back What does it matter where the hate came from? I can end up hating someone for the most legit reason, but that doesn't give me moral or legal right to kill them or their entire family. No? Then what's all this talk of punishment from the last 85 paragraphs? Yes, "an eye for an eye" is a cliche, but as long as it's one I see people forgetting, I'm going to keep saying it; nothing good has ever started with "X has to pay for what they did"... even if it's Hitler. The saying Eye for an Eye and Tooth for a Tooth, which is the full phrase mind you, was started to deal justice. Yes, and then someone added that "makes the whole world blind" part to point out why that school of thought is silly and even dangerous. WE STILL use that logic in OUR legal system. The definition of the term means to find an appropriately equal punishment for an inappropriate action. It's a basic definition of Justice. Are you trying to appeal to authority here by saying "this is the way we do things"? Because I'm not persuaded by that either. Even Buddhists believe that the morally and legally wrong actions you commit get you sent to a place where you're eaten by Dogs and forced to swallow boiling metal and other punishments until you've reached the appropriate point of suffering to which your have paid off. Oh, good to know Buddhism endorses this shit too, too bad I'm not a Buddhist so I don't really give a damn about what they believe. How many seconds of swallowing boiling metal equals one dead Jew, by the way? See this is my problem, you keep talking about proportionality in punishment, but whenever you get specific, the stuff you allude to is rather over-the-top in its cruelty , and to me that says that you've got this bloodthirsty streak almost as disturbing as the psychopaths you're trying to scare me away from. And that's cool, I do too, but I recognize that what I want to see happen isn't the same as what SHOULD happen. Speaking of religion, I know I said I was going to let the whole "I'm a Christian" thing slide, but wasn't there something about turning the other cheek emphasized in your religion? This concept is not new, it is in every day life and it's a basic block of Justice Vs Lawlessness Yes, false dichotomies can often have long lifespans. Slavery was a part of every day life too until it wasn't. The appeals to authority, don't do it. Not impressed by tradition. To be honest, this post is the most asinine thing I've ever seen. It appears you don't understand the point of justice Well you got that part right and what it means for retribution to be taken or forgotten. Justice, by essence, is moral. Research ethical implications of an immoral world and that's what you're asking for. Your final paragraph, replace "justice" with "rubbing peanut butter on your forehead" and you'll see what I see with this summary. It appears I don't understand the point of rubbing peanut butter on my forehead. Maybe that's not because I'm stupid, maybe it's because everyone I've seen TRY to explain the importance of rubbing peanut butter on yourself only ends up exposing their own biases, making a bad argument, and furthering my suspicion that there is no point. Rubbing peanut butter on your forehead, in essence, is moral. That's just an assertion. I'm not automatically immoral or advocating immorality by saying "maybe we don't need to rub peanut butter on our heads". And you can switch anything out with peanut butter and make it sound silly, but I'm doing it here because justice is such a buzzword, and I think it's necessary to separate your sentence from the connotations of the concept you're invoking to get anyone listening to really try and take a step back and look through the eyes of someone who doesn't accept the premise that concept X is even important. "Ethical implications of an immoral society" seems redundantly self-explanatory, and I don't know how or why you expect me to research that, but that was just your closer so I won't linger on it, I just found it kind of an odd way to end things.
I'm not sure If this is completely true but I think all the murderers and sinners turn into those red and black monster things that you have to fight and their souls are lost forever
Savion Smith According to the game, those are 'tortured souls' people who couldn't let the past go. So no, they're not murders or sinners, they're just the games version of a poltergeist.
i love how fast those teens turned on page and how they just turn evil for no reason other then "drama" also no teen in this day and age would use "witch" as an insult.
I like watching gamesins and cinemasins as a writer, makes me try to patch up my story to avoid any cliches and plotholes. It's a lot harder than I thought it would be though lol.
the worst mistake in my opinion was that Nathan gave jodie to a family to raise her to be stable emotionally and told the parents she has powers, but the father acts like he don`t understand whats going on with her and call her a monster and stuff, which is the exact opposite of what Nathan claims. another one when Nathan sends jodie to a party, he should research the people he is sending her to and make sure they don`t know anything about her powers, and give her a gift suitable for the person having the party. also preventing her from going outside and keeping her locked up..., seeing all this makes me think he want to make her emotionally unstable and not what he claims he want
I originally left these comments on GCN's video, but you did a better more thorough job to spite this one being shorter and having less sins, so you deserve these notes more: You missed a sin for that manipulative garbage of killing off the mom. Yeah it's later explained that the neuro acid whatever the hell that is causes lasting brain damage, but to the player at the time and by extension Jodie, it looks like she's just being drugged. "It's too late" is not enough to go to "ok, guess you gotta die then" There could have been a legitimately sad sequence where Jodie puts herself in danger by taking her mother with her, spending weeks taking care of this liability even though she's on the run. And it slowly sinks in that her mom's not sobering up. Nope! "It's too late" one cliched line that explains nothing; "Boo hoo, I killed my mommy" Also you didn't sin that the insignia of the Asian military base is a fucking dragon? What, was there no room for a panda banging a gong made out of noodles? I'm aware there probably are some government insignias of some Asian countries that involve dragons, but I still think it's more likely the thought process was, "What would an Asian organization put on their flag?" Yeah, this game is racist. Not ridiculously so, but part of clocking out when writing the side characters is using stereotypes as a crutch. How many times does a black character say some variation of "Damn girl!"? And you realize the Navajo are an actual people, right? You can't just write in whatever ancestral spirit magic chanting bullshit you want on top of an actual culture. Maybe there is some research this is based on, but again, it's still hack-tastic. Revenge against the white man, why else would a Native American try to summon a ghost? It's not hateful racist, it's just stupid the same way the rest of the game is stupid.
I think you're seeing sexism where there isn't any. Ok, good point that all the government officials are male; I didn't pick that up. Let me rephrase: You're seeing feminist-brand misandry where there isn't any. David Cage isn't a feminist; if you asked him if he was interested in trying to be PC, he'd probably say that only a Playstation or XBox could handle his graphics. I see this growing trend of dumbasses on the internet blaming everything on feminism. I'm aware that third-wave feminism is far from perfect, but this is NOT an example of that; bad women's rights spokesfigures like Anita Sarkeesian would probably bitch about this game fifty ways to Sunday as badly as you are. This is one reason I still support feminism to spite its flaws: because comments like these are evidence that a woman can't just be a woman in the media; if something stupid happens to have a female protagonist, it can't just suck because it sucks; there has to be a political agenda to blame. Is this game sexist against men? Yeah, sure; they're 2 dimensional assholes that only look to brutalize or exploit. But that's because whoever wrote this garbage didn't bother 2 seconds on writing the background characters and relied on stereotypes to fill his "stuff happening" quota. How do I know this? Because with writing this pretentious and over-the-top, if they wanted to have a "girl power" message, don't you think it would be WAY more in your face?
+Annie Trinity There's always a political agenda. If the game prominently features male protagonists, we cry sexism and the feminazis (extremist feminists, for those who are unfamiliar with the term) start going out of their way to shame it and say how it only reinforces x and y and z stereotypes. If the game prominently features female protagonists, and especially if the antagonists are prominently male, we cry "feminist bullshit lame ass story", etc. etc. Who the fuck cares whether it's sexist to either gender tbh? It's a game. It's not like it's a man trying to rape you (since all male antagonists are apparently rapists??? There, sexism against men!), nor is it telling you to go to the kitchen to make a sandwich (sexism against women!). And frankly, it doesn't count as an 'ism' unless it is coming in the way of one of your rights. For instance, a woman/man being discriminated/stereotyped in real life is not okay under any circumstance. A woman/man being discriminated/stereotyped in a game, particularly a game aimed at adults, what difference does it make? We all know it's fictional. And now some people would tell me, "but even if children aren't allowed to play it, they're still going to find ways to expose themselves to the content", to which I will say that then we might as well stop having sex altogether, because watching two people (or more) fuck is clearly an A-rated activity, and yet in most family homes there is a very big chance that your 6 year-old will walk in and ask why daddy is hurting mommy, and then be told some kind of fib about grown-up play or some other bullshit so they don't have to awkwardly explain what sex is to their kid, or why they shouldn't do it for another 12 years. So I repeat, who the fuck cares? Keep politics out of my games and just play and like/hate on the thing for what it is, thank you! (and that isn't directed at you specifically, Annie, but at the world as a whole!)
Also when Stan is ambushed outside of the store, if you try to summon Aiden and make him do the job, Jodie states that he's too weak to do so. The only logical explanation of him being exhausted is Jodie's own poor condition at the moment and yet she fights these guys off with no problem. It's just another lazy method on forcing the player to do certain things in order for plot to go on.... If Aiden beat them up back then, Jodie wouldn't end up in the hospital after player manages to escape from the burning building, as they'd have no need to take personal revenge on her.
I know I'm late and all but there's one thing (which I think has never been explained) that bothered me while playing this game. In that chapter where you're visiting Jodie's mother in the hospital, you can explore the other hospital rooms as Aiden. If you enter the first or the second one (I forgot which one) there's a guy who suddenly stands up and starts screaming 'Aiden, I know you're here, I can see you' (or something like this)
I'm English and literally never heard someone use the word "nutter" in that context. I thought you were nuts - yes I thought you were a nutter - sure I thought you were nutter - no
I feel like any normal person, even if they are assholes, would allow Ellen Pages character into a party and find out she's pretty cool, be amazed at her powers, and even if they didn't, wouldn't immediately start trash talking about how she's weird, and how her gifts crappy, and would just complain about it later to themselves or on social media in order to not hurt her feelings Only the cast out, asshole, spends too much time on the Internet, druggie guys Not to be sexist Just that guys would do it to other guys and I'm more comparing Ellen page to any random person with the same powers and same attributes
oh boy! (cracks knuckles) AFTERMARKET SINS *(while some in game ones) 1. at 17:43 never in the history of firearms has an RPG or non-anti tank missile ever fucking beeped repeatedly. 2. Emotion emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions. 3. Ellen Page actually attempted post launch of both this game and Last of Us to create a suit about the theft of her likeness even after the first deboggle. 4. Reddit would really have made you happy a while ago Dartigan, biggest fuss was over leaked "nude" pics from the game uncensored with no modest towel rack. 5. Ms page doesn't understand the Streisand effect. 6. big budget "indie'' game 7. Ellen Page play the same apathetic character and Willem Dafoe as a stereotype villain....again.... 8. yet another game where an entire team work very hard on a project and 1 jackass takes nearly all the credit. 9. Only Sony and Quantic Dream had a lawsuit against them for the nude shower scene deboggle. Cage no where to be found... thought this was HIS game. 10. Yet another title that is the first in its line and has a subtitle 11.Emotion emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions. 12. For a game that was entirely mo-capped (and I'm sure I'm not the only one to say this) any animation outside of cutscene drop in quality by a long shot and makes the actor look very stiff. 13. SPIKE nominated Dafoe and Page for best voice actors of the year.... 14. QTEs died with Resident Evil 4 and that's where they need to peacefully rest. Quit digging them up gaming industry! 15. I'm fairly certain this title falls into the "not really a game" category with gone home and the rest of the estranged indie titles that are basically interactive movies. 16. This game got so many bullshit nominations I'm not sure if the budget went into the actual game or to pay of "creative peers". 17. Sony actually tried to silence controversy about this game. 18. This game actually sold well... I've lost some of my faith in the gaming community.
To be fair, I think Ellen Page and William Dafoe did a pretty good job in their roles. But of course it's a David Cage game, so your acting skills can only do much until the poor writing speaks for itself. That being said, I like David Cage "games". Sure they're practically just movies with QTE's, but his writing is so bad and bizarre it's actually pretty entertaining. Also most movies can only last to around 2-3 hours max (Unless it's a pretentious art game that has you watch a person sleeping for 7 hours straight). Games can go on for so much longer, which means we can have much more entertaining David Cage writing.
David Cage obviously want to make movies instead of games, so why doesn't he? His games barely have ny gameplay, they are just "Press the right button to activate cutscene".
Who cares what people define as games or movies or interactive experiences? The same could be said for visual novels and other genres with minimal gameplay.
The bigger sin in that scene where the Lady freaks out over child Jodie's powers and Aiden knocking shit over is that, if you choose to not knock over anything, the lady STILL freaks out and dramatic music kicks in as if you're being a terror.
"It's alway two people who have no chemistry and no reason to bang that end up banging" THANK YOU. THIS HAPPEN IN ALL FCKING GAMES. IT DRIVES ME CRAZY!
Well, yeah, but it also kind of perfectly sums up my parents' marriage, so it's not entirely unrealistic. Mind you, they did also get divorced in spectacularly acrimonious fashion, but still... absolutely zero chemistry, and they spent two years dating, six years married, and produced two kids, so there had to be some banging going on.
I watched a chronological play through of this game and had no idea it presented like this. Story was hard enough to follow as it was I can’t believe they really had this so far out of order
_"No one who has ever played this game has chosen to leave and not take revenge. Shouldn't even be an option."_ I enjoyed the Super Best Friends screaming, "REVENGE!", too much to agree with this one. It is the best button prompt ever. I know most Americans don't pay that much attention to international politics but I would expect someone in the freaking CIA to pay at least a LITTLE attention to it. I would have sinned the fact that Jodi didn't know the guy was democratically elected until the news told her. I get that Ryan didn't tell her but by that point in her life the CIA isn''t holding her hostage on base anymore. She has an apartment in a normal building and has access to information in the outside world. The game expects me to believe CIA agents are told to be good at math but not to pay attention to international politics? Regarding the birth, even if it wouldn't make sense in general it makes sense in this specific situation where the woman in question has: helped heal a man going through withdrawal, was able to help the pregnant lady know her baby was still OK, let a man talk to his dead wife and saved the same man from getting beaten up by thugs. She's only known Jodi a week but she was pretty damn helpful during that week. I would still sin Jodi not using her ghost powers to help Tuesday deal with the labor pain. If she was able to help the other guy with his pain why wouldn't it have worked here?
Contrary to popular belief, US Citizens do pay attention, especially someone who is going to be dropped into a conflict as an agent. Don't let stupid games or movies be your guide on how other people in other countries operate.
@@kingpickle3712 _"especially someone who is going to be dropped into a conflict as an agent"_ Well yes, that's my point. It didn't make sense for her to not already know.
I think Ethan caused the crash of that guys family. I mean in heavy rain there is a point where cars are dodging u driving on the wrong side of the road
If you would choose the chronological mode of the story then all of the time gaps and discrepancies would be retconned. You would know who Ryan is, you would understand Jodi’s childhood and almost everything that is wrong.
You missed the sin where the game kept pushing at Aiden being some perv love interest (I don't know what to call it?) only to be like, nope he's the brother! I'm not trying to put things together to say that the game developers did either. It's been awhile since I've seen this game, but there were just times in the game where I thought "is the ghost supposed to be in love with her or??? I don't get it" I can't be the only one who originally thought this before they threw the "ooooOOO~ it's her twin brother who died at birth~" cliche. Which tbh only made the jealous/pervy moments a tad creepier.
What? If anything, seeing Aiden's actions make more sense knowing that he's her stillborn twin brother. He cares deeply about Jodie, and is willing to risk his own existence to protect her(when fighting the entities, for example). I never once got the impression that he had some kind of romantic interest in Jodie, it just felt like a sibling connection that made a whole lot of sense once it was revealed.
The actor who plays Ryan is so gorgeous. It's a shame he wasn't introduced properly as a love interest. Instead he was aggressive with Jodie at first cause she was a sulky teenager. There seemed to be nothing to bridge the gap from disliking to fancying her.
The broken timeline confused me so much. I watched Cry and Pewds play it and I had NO idea what was going on lol. It's such a waste how beautiful the graphics are compared to the shitty story
The joke of taking away sins whenever Jodie/Ellen is in underwear is a bit bad taste for a story game where you're suposed to be relating to the characters, not drooling after them. But maybe that's just me..?
So you gave this game a sin for everyone speaking Farsi in Somalia..but they aren't speaking fasi it sounds like they are speaking Arabic or a language close to Arabic. Which would be accurate because Arabic is an official lang of Somalia and so is Somali which is very similar to Arabic, seeing as it comes from Arabic
If Heavy Rain and Beyond: Two Souls happens on the same universe, that means that supernatural forces are real in Heavy Rain. Why David Cage tried so hard to make it like there is no supernatural forces on Heavy Rain!?
"This SWAT car drove ten feet from a parked position into a hunting store then explodes like Michael Bay blessed it" This one was perfect! I'm still laughing xD
Lmao, what is it with the hatred towards payphones ? As hard to believe as it sounds, there is still some people that don't have a cellphone and use the payphones. There is still some left where I live.
It's because of the cliche that makes no sense considering the modern setting of the story. It's like those movies when the character has a cellphone and there's ALWAYS a problem of sorts? Well, it seems that in order to drive the plot forward, there's always a pay phone. That's how I interpreted it.
Great video, as always! I'll never understand how David Cage's poorly written, interactive-movie garbage could pass off as video games. There is one thing I want to point out that you got wrong, though: the Middle Eastern guy's clothing, while traditional, has actually nothing to do with Islam per se, but rather the Arabian _culture_ of countries bordering the Persian Gulf. It's very easy to confuse cultural customs in the Middle East with religious ones.
Because people find his games "different". Nowadays Death Starnding had a similar effect, it's a incredibly bad game, but because there was an attempt at being different, some people let that pass. And the money comes from these people.
I love games like this. Is he over the top sometimes and do things lack logic at times? Sure. But I felt a lot of emotional connection to the characters and Jodie was so well fleshed out you can really feel her pain. That's the mark of a good game. Just because it's not some random shoot em up doesn't mean it doesn't have great value. I thoroughly enjoyed the game and I wish there was a sequel.
23:30 or sin 151 about Aiden typing his name on the computer. as someone who has dealt with security clearances and once held a top secret clearance, the need to know can trump clearance level. so its possible that the list was anyone who was authorized regardless of clearance.
I loved this game, just decided to play it without knowing much about it other than it's reviews weren't too bad but I really enjoyed it, not what I was expecting at all
i actually chose the leave option. it fit the characterization of her character the way i was playing her before this chapter. It helps make the story better than what it is so that down the road during a certain part in the story, the change to aggressiveness from her adds much more and a more emotional feeling toward the change.
Well, for the baby, you DO need a blanket ; babies cannot regulate their temperature the first few days of their lives, they need to be warm as quickly as possible. I believe hot water is for cleaning the newborn (its mandatory I guess, I mean, its not a matter of life and death? I might be wrong). As a mother, I can confirm the blanket at least, but I'm no doctor so lol
isnt it kind of immature to retract likes for things like a character smoking a joint and a pregnant woman being naked from the waist down while giving birth? js.
sin 45: actually, that's one of the more believable combat possibilities - she's got years of US Special Forces training and she's only facing 2:1 unarmed odds against comparatively undertrained police officers. The only issue is that her body double clearly isn't as built as you'd expect for a US Special Forces commando.
Not even close. Even well-trained tiny women cannot hold up against other well-trained men much less a group of them. Cops do not fight on top of trains because it's literally impossible and stupid. The scene is soo stupid that it made me want to stick my head through a wall.
@@kingpickle3712 If they were even training or relatively close, I'd agree with you but the skill differential between your average police officer and a special forces agent is huge.
@@forgottenfamily Training has nothing to do with anything. Multiple semitrained people with an ounce of intelligence can overcome a tiny teen with "special forces" training. I spent 20 years in the military and almost made it into a field that requires advanced training, I assure you that the girl in the game wouldn't even come close. You can't have anyone with special forces training make that many stupid decisions especially when it comes to fighting.
I've got another sin, when Jodie is homeless, she "sees" the baby of that woman. But it's in no position to be born in the natural way. The head should be facing down. If it were to be born the way is lay in her belly as they showed in de game, the baby would not live, he would most likely drown, or choke to death.
The events being out of order only makes sense if you choose to live at the end. She explains that her memories are blending together, and it's like they're all "happening at the same time".
Hmmm, a girl with a buzzcut that doesn't speak with telekinetic powers is found just outside the local woods in a small town with a cool police chief while being pursued by the government, and it turns out that she grew up in a lab where monsters were released through a portal to another dimension that only she has the power to defeat, so she has to go into the lab and close the portal. Hmmmm. I've never heard that one before
I just need to sin you for a second just for picking the Jay ending. That is probably the most boring. Personal preference- 1. Tuesday 2. Alone 3. Beyond 4. Ryan 5. Jay Yeah I hated both the love interests.
+TalkingToMyself I liked the Tuesday ending the best as well since the homeless chapter is one of my faves and I loved the characters. It realla drew me in emotionally. As for the love interests: I really saw no reason for Jodie to fall in love with Jay as they never came across as being awefully close nor emotionally involved with each other, though I still liked him way better than Ryan. Ryan was just a complete douche who used her most of the time, imo, so I really disliked him and enjoyed breaking his heart in the game, as some kind of revenge (yes, I know I'm evil...).
I know I've commented on this vid in the past, but it's popped up in my recommended so I decided to watch it again. I wonder if this guy ever realized the doors are jammed because Aiden is keeping them closed. Except maybe in the few situations it's locked or the phantoms are keeping them closed. You know, ghosty antics.
I had to pause the video because I was laughing so hard when you said the game was David cages revenge fantasy. I can just picture him sitting down and making a game based off people that bully him. It's hilarious to me. XD
One thing could've saved this game. One thing. STANDS!!! "JoJo's Bizarre Adventure: Beyond 2 Souls" Jodie Joestar, or JoJo Stand: Aiden (Based on the band) Power A Speed C Range B Durability A Precision B Developmental Potential D
13:47 Says it isn't a sin, but forgets and makes it one anyway. *ding* Also, gotta appreciate how you remove sin counters of any brief nude moments in a subtle, perverted fashion.
17:18 what the kid spoke was not Farsi. I don't know where you got that information but he was speaking broken Arabic which is a completely different language. you missed the mark on so many points that I don't even know where to begin.
He looks like he is. Also, I could swear that the guitar Jodie plays on is the same as the one that guy plays on when Markus is picking up the paint in the beginning.
That revenge scene against the dumbass kids is the best scene in the game. Aside from that, I'll take Heavy Rain any day over Beyond. Even then, I don't play Heavy Rain that much anymore! So... extra sin for Beyond! *DING*
" william dafoe could be playing jesus and i'd still think he was the bad guy"
This is funny cuz dafoe actually did play jesus LOL
That's what I thought too. :D
I liked Dafoe all game and thought he did a great job. I was upset when the game tried making him a bad guy...or an anti-hero
@Dolfy Hissler Christians?
"there was a firefight!"
They did him like they always do Willam Defoe, by making him a sympathetic villain
13:45
"...This isn't a sin by the way..."
*Proceeds to sneakily add sin without the sound effect*
Fr
Beyond: Two Fahrenheit Rain
Beyond: Death Stranding
set in detroit
Beyond: Heavy Fahnrenheit Become Human
Sorry didn’t know someone already made that joke
Become: Two Farenheit Rain
1. The real sin at the teen party is the bitch didn't know Edgar Allan Poe.
2. Also, what friends does Jodie have when she turns emo/goth? She can say she lived on the base and doesn't [really] see people her age during the teen party.
3. Why does the game try to make Jodie a victim of Aiden's powers? He has only helped her throughout every part of her life, keeps saving her from assholes, can make money come out from ATMs so she won't be homeless, and saves her from other ghosts. He may be a troll at times, but he is not a total asshole.
4. Dialogue options have no impact whatsoever on cutscenes. There is no change.
5. You can fail every QTE and the story will go on. There are no consequences whatsoever.
6. The over use of that QTE mechanic pisses me off.
Salem Wilfong "game over are a failure of game design" David Cage
***** Having no consequences for failing a portion of the game takes away the thrill of playing a game.
Salem Wilfong say that to him
***** What's his e-mail?
Salem Wilfong I don't know, sorry.
"Or you could start at the beginning where it actually began"...HAHAHAHA!!!
You can play the game chronologically.
KonbanwaJapan was the redux chapters in the ps3 version or was it ps4 only?
TheDalinkwent or you could just shut the fuck up!
Dylan Coetzer funnily enough, the same can be said for you!
Dylan Coetzer I am a PERSON I had to like both of your comments. Lol
These two comments somehow represent a form of art, in a way.
"You're US cops, you're good at shooting unarmed people" =))))))))))
+Blazer I get the feeling that the cops play these games to learn how NOT shooting first and asking questions later gets you killed.
dan henry yea, because they meet people with control over astral entities every they! XD
+Blazer But where is the lie?
Ah yes, but you see, Jodie is white.
ooo damn
9:00 do you realize what this means? Aiden is the reason Ethan Mars has blackouts and wakes up with an origami figure
Good point XDDD
Oh boy. Ok we need more games to combine and maybe we can explain every single thing
Inmehmeh theory that I saw while playing heavy ran: I saw a Jodie model
Does this mean that the AI's from Fahrenheit were from the Infraworld?
Inmehmeh Ho-ly shit. That makes WAY too much sense.
"No one who has ever played this game has chosen to leave and not take revenge. Shouldn't even be an option."
... I chose to leave. >.>
I chose revenge but left when I realised I could set stuff on fire. The mom didn't deserve her house burnt down because she had a shitty daughter
+Isobel Blanchard Actually its kind of her fault, if she educated her better, she would not turn into a little biaatch.
+Kakeyo Silverton I chose to leave...for the achievement. XD
+Kakeyo Silverton I chose to leave...for the achievement. XD
I just became Carrie and tried to burn them all....
16:19, wait a minute, does this mean that Ethan Mars killed Willem Dafoe's family? because that simultaneously is the most believable and unbelievable thing about this story.
I don't think he crashed into any cars but that's an excellent theory
Lee Anderson Its Now my headcanon.
Wow, I remembered that Ethan ran into police cars, and a lot more others probably.
Coincidence?
"...like Michael Bay blessed it"
Dude, I'd subscribe if i hadn't done it already. These lines are golden.
That kid is not speaking Farsi, It is more likely an Arabic dialect . I know because Farsi is my mother tongue . So one sin for you .
and i confirm this because Arabic is my mother tongue and I understood everything he said
Also Somalians do speak Arabic. that's another sin for u @Dartigan
i know right
@Martijn Abelskamp - What are you even blabbing about?
@Martijn Abelskamp You're a moron lol. Look up "white savior trope" and you'll know what he was talking about with Jodie coming into native american issues and becoming the hero. It's a pretty common trope in media, you don't know what the hell you're talking about whatsoever.
Extra ding for the fact that Willem Dafoe obviously didn't bother to find out anything about Kirsten before sending Jodie off to her birthday party, and wasted a rare, antique book of poetry on her.
"Next time, I'll kill everyone"
"You did kill everyone. This is literally the only guy you left alive." LMFAO I can't breathe
You don't disappoint ever. It's always fun to watch your videos.
Thanks Muhammad. Glad you enjoy them so much. And thanks for commenting so often.
Dartigan Edit your "About" section of Google+ because the information there is false.
Dartigan seriously cinemasins should bring on to his team
She's obviously in highschool and not ONCE heard the name Edgar Allen Poe. Hell I even noticed an easter egg in fallout 4 that was about one of his books.
I thought the F4 reference was to HP Lovecraft.
Was I the only one that hated Ryan. XD I was a A-hole to F'ing Ryan through out the game. I hated that guy.
Same here ! I couldn't stand the game trying to shove him in my throat as the designated love interest when really he was not ... so i just ended up making him lose an eye. OOPS !
Same. Every chance I got I rejected or screwed him over. :)
No. He was introduced extremely badly and then he was all over the place. If the story wanted me to like him, maybe have him be sympathetic when he takes Jodie to the CIA. Horribly written. He would turn so quickly from good to bad.
huntress01 yeah....Ryan is a douchebag!
i let ryan get tortured after we were caught on the submarine meanwhile i was eating apple jacks i was hoping he would get killed
Still prefer the Navaho guy over Ryan.
@DOAMA Bro...it has nothing to do with race. It probs have to do with Ryan tricking her and using her multiple times, but still claiming he loves her. Or maybe how much of an asshole he was in the beginning. For example when she has a panic attack because of the bar incident when they have a heated makeout and he just leaves instead of trying to help or do anything. She was crying on her bed and he was like "oh okay, bye then"
Yea Jay was sort of a dick in the beginning, but also he had some stranger in his house trying to get herself killed. He respected her way more than freaking Ryan did. Omg I just remembered example 2. When you're sitting in the snow after escaping from the underwater base, if you say you don't love him he gets annoyed and says "I've never met a more pigheaded person." Just because you don't love him. Like brah....come onn
@WillFanofMany Idk man, you make some okay points, but I feel like if you have to say "he only tricked her once!" It's not the best relationship to choose.
Hitler is probably in heaven anyways. I believe god would of approved of Hitler, if you've ever read a bible, and if not all he had to do was ask forgiveness before he died. Thats why I would like to go to hell, from what I've been taught, people like mlk, Ghandi and the good people who try to spread peace are the ones who go to hell.
I'd also like to point out that when Willem Dafoe's character shot himself, he was wearing what the game described as a portable entity containment field. It prevents spectral entities from passing through it.
However, immediately after he commits suicide, his soul is happily reunited with his family. How the hell did his soul escape his corporeal form when it's still wearing the containment field belt?
By travelling inside the bullet out of it.
You forgot another sin. By the game's own admission, all spirits go to the same place. There is no retribution for anything terrible done, ever. So Hitler is walking beside Martin Luther King Jr telling him how he almost saved the world from the jews, and every cold blooded psychopathic murder can laugh at his victims to their face.
TheBlackKnightGamer TRUE
Annie Trinity *1. Psychopathy is a disorder; we just don't understand that much about it yet.*
It was a statement for flavor.
*2. By your own admission, Hitler thought he was saving the world. So people should be punished for being wrong about the moral conclusions they came to? Do you think you won't/shouldn't be punished for your morality? How do you know yours are the right ones? After all, if I was god, I'd be giving you the stink eye for suggesting two wrongs make a right*
First off, I'm Christian. I believe by default you deserve punishment. Secondly, regardless of what Hitler THOUGHT he was doing, he KNEW he was killing millions, and not only that, he was TORTURING them. You know, lets ask you the same question. Let's say a guy gets a girl drunk and has sex with her, should he be punished? Well, HE thought they were having a good time. Oh, wait, she was drunk and had no say in the matter and the law classifies it as Rape and would arrest him upon hearing about it.
What you think you do and what you're really doing make little difference to anything. Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse for breaking it, likewise being morally ignorant isn't an excuse for being a horrible person. This is why we say "Children can be cruel." because children are morally ignorant, regardless, they can still be terrible people.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you legitimately trying to defend Hitler?
*3. Does retribution against Hitler unkill the Jews? Would it necessarily teach him the error of his ways, assuming that for that to happen, he would have to renounce the worldview that caused him to think what he was doing was right? Is inflicting suffering really the way you want to convince someone that they were wrong about something? Seems like having MLK there to say "What the hell is wrong with you?" might actually be more effective*
So what you're saying is that all actions, regardless of how moral or unmoral, should go unpunished because retribution doesn't change what happened? A man who rapes little children should get away with it because his punishment doesn't unrape the children?A racist murder shouldn't be sentenced to jail because racism is general ignorance, and he should go off perfectly untouched because his punishment doesn't unmurder that black man he killed.
Retribution isn't meant to bring anyone back, or correct a wrong, it's MEANT to bring justice to those who need it. It's why we would still arrests those two individuals, regardless of their mental state, put them on trial and find appropriate punishments. The very definition of the word is punishment for breaking laws or committing wrong.
The logic behind your argument is something we threw out long ago, as a species. If you believe that there shouldn't be any form of retribution for such actions, you're calling for Anarchy which has no rules or consequences for actions done. Which is stupid for many reasons, and any movie from the 80's should be a 'decent' explanation as to why.
But here, let me give an example of why that is terrible here. Let's say I just killed your family, your friends, their families, with a little bit of rape and torture and used your skills as mounts on my wall. I stripped away everything. I took your future away from you, any chance of joy you had, any peace your family and your friends families had, and I dragged them into a six foot deep ditch where no one who loves them will ever see them again.
Then let's say, I die. How? Oh, nothing really. I died in my sleep. I passed away peacefully, while others suffered until their end and some. That is a messed up scenario by any rational human's definition. And then, once I'm dead, I can go back and meet all of the people I screwed over, and talk about what it felt like to kill them, to force them down, to watch them suffer. Oh, and let's not forget that the game makes it clear that spirits can still remember things and feel. SO that's all coming back to them and I'm just spending eternity reminding them of an absolutely horrible experience. They probably fear me now, forever.
What a glorious day it would be for not having to deal with any form of retribution. I could say to them not to be sad, because their lives were meaningless anyway and at least I got some joy out of taking them.
That is the universe this game takes place in, and that's the universe you're arguing for. An afterlife with no retribution is backwards as can be.
Let's make another scenario. Say, a little boy got bullied to death. He was, at most, 8. The bigger, stronger, and 'smarter', 16 year old kids didn't think they'd kill him. But he's dead now. And they're just walking around school with no consequence. They don't even feel sorry. Again, that is messed up. The kid was killed because of them and he gets NO justice done for him. He gets to rot in the ground, and watch his family cry over his death while the boys who did it are probably laughing about it. They were never caught, and they go on to live long and happy lives until they pass away, fondly remembered as being gentle, kind, people.
Except to that kid they murdered. And the other people they murdered along the way that they got away with.
But that's what you're arguing for. A spiritual plane lack of retribution for the wrongful actions done. Ever.
*What Hitler did was horrible, but he's dead now.*
And?
*If we try to make someone suffer beyond the point where we've gotten them to stop doing the bad thing that they were doing, we threaten to slingshot into a mirror image of the mentality that we opposed.*
First off, Hitler being punished for killing millions is not a slingshot into committing another Holocaust. An appropriate punishment for inappropriate action is something that any logical society would have. And since the spirit world is typically drawn with rules of it's own in media, it would be logical to assume that it too is a society. Do you honestly believe ANY of things you are saying?
*The holocaust happened because Germans tried to make the Jews pay for ruining the economy. I know that's not a perfect parallel to what you said, but it's still important to remember that antisemitism didn't just fall out of the sky, that people were starving in the streets after WWI and if THAT suffering was preventable, the people were angry and eager to make whoever they thought was responsible suffer back*
What does it matter where the hate came from? I can end up hating someone for the most legit reason, but that doesn't give me moral or legal right to kill them or their entire family.
*Yes, "an eye for an eye" is a cliche, but as long as it's one I see people forgetting, I'm going to keep saying it; nothing good has ever started with "X has to pay for what they did"... even if it's Hitler.*
The saying Eye for an Eye and Tooth for a Tooth, which is the full phrase mind you, was started to deal justice. WE STILL use that logic in OUR legal system. The definition of the term means to find an appropriately equal punishment for an inappropriate action. It's a basic definition of Justice.
Even Buddhists believe that the morally and legally wrong actions you commit get you sent to a place where you're eaten by Dogs and forced to swallow boiling metal and other punishments until you've reached the appropriate point of suffering to which your have paid off. This concept is not new, it is in every day life and it's a basic block of Justice Vs Lawlessness
To be honest, this post is the most asinine thing I've ever seen. It appears you don't understand the point of justice and what it means for retribution to be taken or forgotten. Justice, by essence, is moral. Research ethical implications of an immoral world and that's what you're asking for.
*1. Psychopathy is a disorder; we just don't understand that much about it yet.*
It was a statement for flavor.
Well that might be ok that it's a throwaway line for you, but it's a pretty crucial point to my argument. My dad was bipolar and he did some horribly abusive shit to me and my mom. I don't really forgive him for what he did in the sense that I'd ever trust him again, and I'm definitely glad he's gone from my life, but all my life I was told I shouldn't want him punished because he was sick, and you know what? The people who told me that were right. And I don't see how or where to draw the line between the people we deem "mentally ill" and the people we deem "just sort of evil". We are our brains; the brain gets damaged, and people's personalities change. Wildly. Knowing what we know about neurology, I can't believe in free will, so I'm coming from the position that a bad person is the victim of a deformed or improperly functioning brain. What I'm trying to preach here is moral humility, that anyone would do a horrible thing under certain circumstances, especially if we expand those variables of circumstance to brain chemistry. And in that case, the whole idea of punishment just seems pretty damn pointless to me; it just adds to the sum total of misery that resulted from an event. If a bear ate someone, pointing out how slowly and painfully the person died isn't an argument for wanting to get "retribution" on the bear. It's still a fucking bear, a wild animal, and that's all humans are. Sometimes we are able to be more civilized, but when that fails and someone or something gets hurt, it's just another kind of natural disaster.
2. By your own admission, Hitler thought he was saving the world. So people should be punished for being wrong about the moral conclusions they came to? Do you think you won't/shouldn't be punished for your morality? How do you know yours are the right ones? After all, if I was god, I'd be giving you the stink eye for suggesting two wrongs make a right
First off, I'm Christian. I believe by default you deserve punishment.
Ok, well if you're alluding to god sending people to hell because of original sin, then God has tortured way more Jews than Hitler, so your whole argument kind of becomes hypocritical. But you didn't harp on that point, so I won't either. Besides, without any sort of elaboration on that thought, I can't really assume anything about what you meant by that.
Secondly, regardless of what Hitler THOUGHT he was doing, he KNEW he was killing millions, and not only that, he was TORTURING them.
Where the line is for the ends justifying the means is a moral question like any other. Supposedly good historical figures get innocents killed all the time. Lots of good shit we enjoy now came at the price of horrible shit in the past. You can condemn those prices and say that it would be better America wasn't here than that be built on the backs of slaves and dead "Indians", but others would disagree with you. It's a line that sits at different points for different people, and taking an extreme stance on that subjective matter doesn't change the fact that it's subjective. It doesn't matter that Hitler KNEW he was torturing people if the idea of torture didn't evoke the same reaction in his mind as it would in a healthy person.
You know, lets ask you the same question. Let's say a guy gets a girl drunk and has sex with her, should he be punished? Well, HE thought they were having a good time. Oh, wait, she was drunk and had no say in the matter and the law classifies it as Rape and would arrest him upon hearing about it.
I feel like you're not actually picturing a guy who thought they were having a good time, and instead thinking of a douchebag who lies about what he thought was going on. If a man was with a girl who was drunk out of her mind, and no one had ever explained the lines of consent in the context of inebriation, and the fact that she was barely responsive was legitimately not sending any red flags that it might be time to leave her in bed for the night, he wasn't trying to take advantage of her. There are conversations in the morning where the girl is freaking out because she doesn't know where she is and the guy is seriously surprised that she doesn't remember him or what they did. The fact that someone needed to educate him before he could put two and two together that "No sisly bab, um uf fur anysing" is not the same as "Yes, I'm sure about this, let's do it" just means he's a dumbass, and we're all stupid to some degree. I'd still say the police should get involved because a rape did occur in the sense that a woman got fucked without consenting and it needs to be sorted out, but any sane person would say he deserves mercy because he didn't know any better. The question is does ANYONE know any better than what they actually end up doing. The whole "ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking it" thing isn't because we're expected to be psychic about the collective social morality, it's because we don't have a way to be sure if they legitimately were ignorant.
What you think you do and what you're really doing make little difference to anything. Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse for breaking it, likewise being morally ignorant isn't an excuse for being a horrible person. This is why we say "Children can be cruel." because children are morally ignorant, regardless, they can still be terrible people.
I agree, for the most part, but that seems to counter your own argument considering we DON'T punish children as harshly as adults specifically BECAUSE we expect them not to know any better.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you legitimately trying to defend Hitler?
I'm trying to show that when morality isn't as cut-and-dry as it would be comforting to think, when the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and your good intentions can be just as easily wrong as anyone else's, the idea of wanting revenge comes from a position of arrogance. I loathe this idea that others should suffer for their misjudgments because it implies that you could never make a mistake that badly. Everyone throughout history has thought that they were the enlightened generation, finally free of the foolishness that caused other cultures from other times to commit atrocities, including the woman who saw to it that her house slaves were good to her children, including the man who kissed his wife goodbye before going off to work in the SS, including the doctor who diligently treated the asylum patient's "androphilia". A hundred years from now, you will be a monster too, and so will I, and history students of the future will gawk at our behavior and wonder how we could be so blind to an immoral behavior it hasn't even occurred to us might be immoral yet. And should we be punished for what we do? No! Because we don't know better! Because it hasn't even crossed our minds that what we're doing is wrong!
You know why Hitler is evil? The real reason? It's because he lost. It's because he died and didn't get to write the history books for your school of how he saved the Aryan race from the greedy Jews and the violent blacks. You know how I know this? Because you used Hitler to make your original point at all. Stalin killed more, and with far more questionable motives, but you picked Hitler because Stalin isn't an icon of evil like Hitler is. Culture over reality. Moses killed 3,000 Levites, men women and children, and granted that's not many compared to Hitler or Stalin's millions, but it's still a genocide. And yet Moses is painted as a hero, an icon of holiness and a fitting protagonist for children's films. And the numbers don't matter, because when confronted about this, apologists don't say "well, he didn't kill THAT many", no, they say "He had to do it, they were evil" and that's EXACTLY what you and I would have been told growing up in an alternate reality where the Axis won the war, and how dare anybody say that the entire nation of Germany swallowed that story, but you're such a freaking genius you couldn't possibly fall for it too?
We are IDIOTS bumbling around in the dark trying to find an ideal moral code that might not even exist; what the hell makes us qualified to decide who suffers?
3. Does retribution against Hitler unkill the Jews? Would it necessarily teach him the error of his ways, assuming that for that to happen, he would have to renounce the worldview that caused him to think what he was doing was right? Is inflicting suffering really the way you want to convince someone that they were wrong about something? Seems like having MLK there to say "What the hell is wrong with you?" might actually be more effective
So what you're saying is that all actions, regardless of how moral or unmoral, should go unpunished because retribution doesn't change what happened? A man who rapes little children should get away with it because his punishment doesn't unrape the children?A racist murder shouldn't be sentenced to jail because racism is general ignorance, and he should go off perfectly untouched because his punishment doesn't unmurder that black man he killed.
No, those people should absolutely go to jail because jail is a tool to keep future harm from happening. I'm not proposing we let these people roam free; I'm saying for someone that deeply believes black people need to die, having them be in pain doesn't change their mind; they've already come to an extreme conclusion because something is extremely wrong with them. What we need to do is recognize that they're probably ill and address why they thought it was right to do what they did. That's how we make dangerous people into NOT dangerous people, instead of having them rot in jail because our simian brain that still assumes an oversimplified model of malicious intent wants to see that.
Retribution isn't meant to bring anyone back, or correct a wrong, it's MEANT to bring justice to those who need it.
And again, how you came to the conclusion that someone "needs justice" is based on...
It's why we would still arrests those two individuals, regardless of their mental state, put them on trial and find appropriate punishments.
"Regardless of mental state" huh? So if I put PCP in your drink, and you shot five people while under the influence of a mental state-altering substance, you're still a bad person? What if instead of going crazy from taking a pill, you went crazy from NOT taking one? What if you were a violent psychotic that was living as a perfectly functional member of society thanks to medication, but one day you're pills got mixed up? What if you're poor and couldn't afford a psychiatrist to diagnose you or the medication needed to keep you functioning? What if you live in a crude age of medicine where those pills could help you, had they been invented yet? I don't know how to handle a situation where a person is that unreliable with not being a threat to themselves or others; locking them away might be necessary to keep everyone else safe. What I do know is they're not this boogeyman that woke up and said "I think I'll be evil today" and hurting them does jack shit to keep the problem from repeating.
The very definition of the word is punishment for breaking laws or committing wrong.
And that's why I hate justice. I'm not even going to argue with you about whether that's an official definition, because from what I've seen, "justice" means whatever the hell anyone wants it to mean. And usually, there's not much explaining on the front of how there's a difference from a dolled up version of "revenge when enough people want it" That's one thing I do really respect about you (that and you are actually pretty articulate and address the points I made; honestly, you're the most reasonable person I've debated in quite a while, I actually feel like I'm talking to a peer for once) you used the word "retribution" instead of "justice"; I don't AGREE with what you're talking about, but at least you're being direct. I much prefer to say I support "closure", that the legal system is there to ensure that someone who was able to harm others is no longer able to, and that the victims are compensated for their loses as best they can be, including getting counseling.
But this idea that the people who hurt others need to be hurt back to make the victims feel better, whether that's effective or not, is incredibly primitive, a product of our monkey brains that evolved an exaggerated defense mechanism against possible threats from within the tribe. Before we had medicine, this illusion of malicious intent and a kneejerk reaction to SMASH! SMASH! SMASH! KILL IT! SHOW NO MERCY! to a member of the group that might hurt us or our babies was all we had to survive. But it doesn't mesh with the realities of the human condition that we have today.
The logic behind your argument is something we threw out long ago, as a species. If you believe that there shouldn't be any form of retribution for such actions, you're calling for Anarchy which has no rules or consequences for actions done. Which is stupid for many reasons, and any movie from the 80's should be a 'decent' explanation as to why.
I think I've already been pretty thorough with why "retribution or anarchy" is a false dichotomy.
But here, let me give an example of why that is terrible here. Let's say I just killed your family, your friends, their families, with a little bit of rape and torture and used your skills as mounts on my wall. I stripped away everything. I took your future away from you, any chance of joy you had, any peace your family and your friends families had, and I dragged them into a six foot deep ditch where no one who loves them will ever see them again.
You know how I was just talking about not giving into your simian brain? Yeah, don't waste your breath with this graphic diatribe; I try not to base my stances on appeals to emotion.
Then let's say, I die. How? Oh, nothing really. I died in my sleep. I passed away peacefully, while others suffered until their end and some. That is a messed up scenario by any rational human's definition.
Yes, it is messed up, because me and my family are dead. But what, were you supposed to die screaming because that's how I died? Yes, I would be angry at you if that happened, but before you start talking about "rational human", are you suggesting that it's irrational to try to look past your rage?
And then, once I'm dead, I can go back and meet all of the people I screwed over, and talk about what it felt like to kill them, to force them down, to watch them suffer. Oh, and let's not forget that the game makes it clear that spirits can still remember things and feel. SO that's all coming back to them and I'm just spending eternity reminding them of an absolutely horrible experience. They probably fear me now, forever.
Yeah, no, I never said I liked the game or its depiction of the afterlife. I totally agree you should keep an offender far far away from their victims. Again, I never want to see my father again, but that doesn't change the fact that if I went to heaven and heard he was in hell for his treatment of me, I'd say to god, "Couldn't you have just NOT made him bipolar?" And even with no god to make him bipolar, he didn't choose to go nuts, he wasn't even aware he was going nuts.
What a glorious day it would be for not having to deal with any form of retribution. I could say to them not to be sad, because their lives were meaningless anyway and at least I got some joy out of taking them.
That is the universe this game takes place in, and that's the universe you're arguing for. An afterlife with no retribution is backwards as can be.
Let's make another scenario. Say, a little boy got bullied to death. He was, at most, 8. The bigger, stronger, and 'smarter', 16 year old kids didn't think they'd kill him. But he's dead now. And they're just walking around school with no consequence. They don't even feel sorry. Again, that is messed up. The kid was killed because of them and he gets NO justice done for him. He gets to rot in the ground, and watch his family cry over his death while the boys who did it are probably laughing about it. They were never caught, and they go on to live long and happy lives until they pass away, fondly remembered as being gentle, kind, people.
Ah yes, the bullying scenario, an interesting study in the inconsistencies in our society's standards of free will and mental health. So a boy can be not responsible for his own death because of the environmental pressures he was saddled with? Inability to get away from the people harassing him (or maybe it just didn't occur to him to try to get away), lack of access to adults who would help him (or maybe there would be, but he didn't get an adult), and for some reason of the mindset where the disapproval of these older children is the end of the world, a flawed perception of reality. Do I think it's this boy's own damn fault he's dead? No. I've been depressed, I've been suicidal; when life seems that awful, you start contemplating extreme measures. But (assuming it was a gun for proverbial reasons) if it's not his fault that he was the one who literally pulled the trigger and left his family to grieve, why does the buck NOT stop at him, but DOES stop at the next hand over? If we can accept anyone who would take their own life isn't thinking clearly, why is it so hard to keep in mind that someone who would gleefully drive another to suicide probably has even MORE screws loose? Because it's not about facts, it's not about how these teenagers were motivated by THEIR background, it's because someone wanting to die is an emotionally confusing situation to respond to, but someone wanting to kill gets a nice, clean disgust reaction out of us so there's no impetus to look at the moral ambiguity. And that's what you're trying to appeal to. I already told you that doesn't work on me; stop it.
Except to that kid they murdered. And the other people they murdered along the way that they got away with.
But that's what you're arguing for. A spiritual plane lack of retribution for the wrongful actions done. Ever.
What Hitler did was horrible, but he's dead now.
And?
If we try to make someone suffer beyond the point where we've gotten them to stop doing the bad thing that they were doing, we threaten to slingshot into a mirror image of the mentality that we opposed.
First off, Hitler being punished for killing millions is not a slingshot into committing another Holocaust. An appropriate punishment for inappropriate action is something that any logical society would have.
Don't you think allegedly driving the German economy into the ground is an inappropriate action? Of course, the Jews didn't actually ruin the economy, but that's sure what was the narrative in the country at the time. In Hitler's mind, he was punishing the Jews for what they did. I'm not suggesting trying to punish Hitler is going to lead to a holocaust; that wouldn't even make any sense, he's dead. But if we look at history, "they need to be punished" is almost always the justification for fucking somebody over, sometimes when they don't deserve it.
And since the spirit world is typically drawn with rules of it's own in media, it would be logical to assume that it too is a society. Do you honestly believe ANY of things you are saying?
The holocaust happened because Germans tried to make the Jews pay for ruining the economy. I know that's not a perfect parallel to what you said, but it's still important to remember that antisemitism didn't just fall out of the sky, that people were starving in the streets after WWI and if THAT suffering was preventable, the people were angry and eager to make whoever they thought was responsible suffer back
What does it matter where the hate came from? I can end up hating someone for the most legit reason, but that doesn't give me moral or legal right to kill them or their entire family.
No? Then what's all this talk of punishment from the last 85 paragraphs?
Yes, "an eye for an eye" is a cliche, but as long as it's one I see people forgetting, I'm going to keep saying it; nothing good has ever started with "X has to pay for what they did"... even if it's Hitler.
The saying Eye for an Eye and Tooth for a Tooth, which is the full phrase mind you, was started to deal justice.
Yes, and then someone added that "makes the whole world blind" part to point out why that school of thought is silly and even dangerous.
WE STILL use that logic in OUR legal system. The definition of the term means to find an appropriately equal punishment for an inappropriate action. It's a basic definition of Justice.
Are you trying to appeal to authority here by saying "this is the way we do things"? Because I'm not persuaded by that either.
Even Buddhists believe that the morally and legally wrong actions you commit get you sent to a place where you're eaten by Dogs and forced to swallow boiling metal and other punishments until you've reached the appropriate point of suffering to which your have paid off.
Oh, good to know Buddhism endorses this shit too, too bad I'm not a Buddhist so I don't really give a damn about what they believe. How many seconds of swallowing boiling metal equals one dead Jew, by the way? See this is my problem, you keep talking about proportionality in punishment, but whenever you get specific, the stuff you allude to is rather over-the-top in its cruelty , and to me that says that you've got this bloodthirsty streak almost as disturbing as the psychopaths you're trying to scare me away from. And that's cool, I do too, but I recognize that what I want to see happen isn't the same as what SHOULD happen. Speaking of religion, I know I said I was going to let the whole "I'm a Christian" thing slide, but wasn't there something about turning the other cheek emphasized in your religion?
This concept is not new, it is in every day life and it's a basic block of Justice Vs Lawlessness
Yes, false dichotomies can often have long lifespans. Slavery was a part of every day life too until it wasn't. The appeals to authority, don't do it. Not impressed by tradition.
To be honest, this post is the most asinine thing I've ever seen. It appears you don't understand the point of justice
Well you got that part right
and what it means for retribution to be taken or forgotten. Justice, by essence, is moral. Research ethical implications of an immoral world and that's what you're asking for.
Your final paragraph, replace "justice" with "rubbing peanut butter on your forehead" and you'll see what I see with this summary.
It appears I don't understand the point of rubbing peanut butter on my forehead. Maybe that's not because I'm stupid, maybe it's because everyone I've seen TRY to explain the importance of rubbing peanut butter on yourself only ends up exposing their own biases, making a bad argument, and furthering my suspicion that there is no point. Rubbing peanut butter on your forehead, in essence, is moral. That's just an assertion. I'm not automatically immoral or advocating immorality by saying "maybe we don't need to rub peanut butter on our heads". And you can switch anything out with peanut butter and make it sound silly, but I'm doing it here because justice is such a buzzword, and I think it's necessary to separate your sentence from the connotations of the concept you're invoking to get anyone listening to really try and take a step back and look through the eyes of someone who doesn't accept the premise that concept X is even important. "Ethical implications of an immoral society" seems redundantly self-explanatory, and I don't know how or why you expect me to research that, but that was just your closer so I won't linger on it, I just found it kind of an odd way to end things.
I'm not sure If this is completely true but I think all the murderers and sinners turn into those red and black monster things that you have to fight and their souls are lost forever
Savion Smith According to the game, those are 'tortured souls' people who couldn't let the past go. So no, they're not murders or sinners, they're just the games version of a poltergeist.
i love how fast those teens turned on page and how they just turn evil for no reason other then "drama" also no teen in this day and age would use "witch" as an insult.
I like watching gamesins and cinemasins as a writer, makes me try to patch up my story to avoid any cliches and plotholes. It's a lot harder than I thought it would be though lol.
"You're US cops, you're good at shooting unarmed people" I actually lost it when he said that one 🤣
I feel like David Cage could actually be GOOD if he had someone to rein him in on projects.
All he needs is someone to say "no David, you've done that before"
+Isobel Blanchard or "no david that makes ni sense" and "no david that is too weird"
Mike Wichmann Or just "No David"
David Cage should get his source material from good old books and things like that so that he keeps himself from doing dumb shit.
Yeah. Dude needs to workshop his ideas.
"You're US cops, you're great at shooting unarmed people"
Best line NA
These are really well done man. Can't wait for more!
the worst mistake in my opinion was that Nathan gave jodie to a family to raise her to be stable emotionally and told the parents she has powers, but the father acts like he don`t understand whats going on with her and call her a monster and stuff, which is the exact opposite of what Nathan claims. another one when Nathan sends jodie to a party, he should research the people he is sending her to and make sure they don`t know anything about her powers, and give her a gift suitable for the person having the party. also preventing her from going outside and keeping her locked up..., seeing all this makes me think he want to make her emotionally unstable and not what he claims he want
I originally left these comments on GCN's video, but you did a better more thorough job to spite this one being shorter and having less sins, so you deserve these notes more:
You missed a sin for that manipulative garbage of killing off the mom. Yeah it's later explained that the neuro acid whatever the hell that is causes lasting brain damage, but to the player at the time and by extension Jodie, it looks like she's just being drugged. "It's too late" is not enough to go to "ok, guess you gotta die then" There could have been a legitimately sad sequence where Jodie puts herself in danger by taking her mother with her, spending weeks taking care of this liability even though she's on the run. And it slowly sinks in that her mom's not sobering up. Nope! "It's too late" one cliched line that explains nothing; "Boo hoo, I killed my mommy"
Also you didn't sin that the insignia of the Asian military base is a fucking dragon? What, was there no room for a panda banging a gong made out of noodles? I'm aware there probably are some government insignias of some Asian countries that involve dragons, but I still think it's more likely the thought process was, "What would an Asian organization put on their flag?" Yeah, this game is racist. Not ridiculously so, but part of clocking out when writing the side characters is using stereotypes as a crutch. How many times does a black character say some variation of "Damn girl!"? And you realize the Navajo are an actual people, right? You can't just write in whatever ancestral spirit magic chanting bullshit you want on top of an actual culture. Maybe there is some research this is based on, but again, it's still hack-tastic. Revenge against the white man, why else would a Native American try to summon a ghost? It's not hateful racist, it's just stupid the same way the rest of the game is stupid.
Annie Trinity That line about a "panda banging a gong made out of noodles", that's a great line and I wish I had thought of it.
I think you're seeing sexism where there isn't any. Ok, good point that all the government officials are male; I didn't pick that up. Let me rephrase: You're seeing feminist-brand misandry where there isn't any. David Cage isn't a feminist; if you asked him if he was interested in trying to be PC, he'd probably say that only a Playstation or XBox could handle his graphics. I see this growing trend of dumbasses on the internet blaming everything on feminism. I'm aware that third-wave feminism is far from perfect, but this is NOT an example of that; bad women's rights spokesfigures like Anita Sarkeesian would probably bitch about this game fifty ways to Sunday as badly as you are. This is one reason I still support feminism to spite its flaws: because comments like these are evidence that a woman can't just be a woman in the media; if something stupid happens to have a female protagonist, it can't just suck because it sucks; there has to be a political agenda to blame. Is this game sexist against men? Yeah, sure; they're 2 dimensional assholes that only look to brutalize or exploit. But that's because whoever wrote this garbage didn't bother 2 seconds on writing the background characters and relied on stereotypes to fill his "stuff happening" quota. How do I know this? Because with writing this pretentious and over-the-top, if they wanted to have a "girl power" message, don't you think it would be WAY more in your face?
+Annie Trinity There's always a political agenda. If the game prominently features male protagonists, we cry sexism and the feminazis (extremist feminists, for those who are unfamiliar with the term) start going out of their way to shame it and say how it only reinforces x and y and z stereotypes.
If the game prominently features female protagonists, and especially if the antagonists are prominently male, we cry "feminist bullshit lame ass story", etc. etc.
Who the fuck cares whether it's sexist to either gender tbh? It's a game. It's not like it's a man trying to rape you (since all male antagonists are apparently rapists??? There, sexism against men!), nor is it telling you to go to the kitchen to make a sandwich (sexism against women!).
And frankly, it doesn't count as an 'ism' unless it is coming in the way of one of your rights. For instance, a woman/man being discriminated/stereotyped in real life is not okay under any circumstance.
A woman/man being discriminated/stereotyped in a game, particularly a game aimed at adults, what difference does it make? We all know it's fictional.
And now some people would tell me, "but even if children aren't allowed to play it, they're still going to find ways to expose themselves to the content", to which I will say that then we might as well stop having sex altogether, because watching two people (or more) fuck is clearly an A-rated activity, and yet in most family homes there is a very big chance that your 6 year-old will walk in and ask why daddy is hurting mommy, and then be told some kind of fib about grown-up play or some other bullshit so they don't have to awkwardly explain what sex is to their kid, or why they shouldn't do it for another 12 years.
So I repeat, who the fuck cares? Keep politics out of my games and just play and like/hate on the thing for what it is, thank you!
(and that isn't directed at you specifically, Annie, but at the world as a whole!)
+Annie Trinity You'd be good at game sins... o.O
Then how about you support my Portal 2 request, which can be found in this CS.
11:38 That looks like Todd from Detroit: Become Human
Its the same voice actor
Was just thinking that
He lived long enough to buy a child Android XD
That IS Todd from Detroit: Become Human😂
TheRealParasyte same actor. Oh, and the homeless guy, Stan, also has the same actor as Perkins from DBH.
It's funny because Willem Dafoe did play Jesus in that one movie
Which one
The Last Temptation of Christ.
Rick Steve did he turn out being a bad guy?
*splashes*
Rick Steve ?
Also when Stan is ambushed outside of the store, if you try to summon Aiden and make him do the job, Jodie states that he's too weak to do so. The only logical explanation of him being exhausted is Jodie's own poor condition at the moment and yet she fights these guys off with no problem.
It's just another lazy method on forcing the player to do certain things in order for plot to go on.... If Aiden beat them up back then, Jodie wouldn't end up in the hospital after player manages to escape from the burning building, as they'd have no need to take personal revenge on her.
I know I'm late and all but there's one thing (which I think has never been explained) that bothered me while playing this game. In that chapter where you're visiting Jodie's mother in the hospital, you can explore the other hospital rooms as Aiden. If you enter the first or the second one (I forgot which one) there's a guy who suddenly stands up and starts screaming 'Aiden, I know you're here, I can see you' (or something like this)
I'm English and literally never heard someone use the word "nutter" in that context.
I thought you were nuts - yes
I thought you were a nutter - sure
I thought you were nutter - no
Phrase B is probably what the host meant.
Isn't a nutter a person who cums?
I feel like any normal person, even if they are assholes, would allow Ellen Pages character into a party and find out she's pretty cool, be amazed at her powers, and even if they didn't, wouldn't immediately start trash talking about how she's weird, and how her gifts crappy, and would just complain about it later to themselves or on social media in order to not hurt her feelings
Only the cast out, asshole, spends too much time on the Internet, druggie guys
Not to be sexist
Just that guys would do it to other guys and I'm more comparing Ellen page to any random person with the same powers and same attributes
That RPG that Somali guy shoots made a beeping sound, as though it's locking on, but RPGs don't lock on in real life
These whole evil plans about stopping death is stupid
Death is necessary or else we'll all run out of resources faster than we already are
+MooshroomGaming if there was no death then it wouldn't matter now would it?
Damn!..... thats deep
like the mooshroom/ BenMasscott pic
"William Dafoe studied to play William Dafoe for this one."
Man, you really don't need more than five minutes to deliver, do you?
oh boy! (cracks knuckles)
AFTERMARKET SINS *(while some in game ones)
1. at 17:43 never in the history of firearms has an RPG or non-anti tank missile ever fucking beeped repeatedly.
2. Emotion emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions.
3. Ellen Page actually attempted post launch of both this game and Last of Us to create a suit about the theft of her likeness even after the first deboggle.
4. Reddit would really have made you happy a while ago Dartigan, biggest fuss was over leaked "nude" pics from the game uncensored with no modest towel rack.
5. Ms page doesn't understand the Streisand effect.
6. big budget "indie'' game
7. Ellen Page play the same apathetic character and Willem Dafoe as a stereotype villain....again....
8. yet another game where an entire team work very hard on a project and 1 jackass takes nearly all the credit.
9. Only Sony and Quantic Dream had a lawsuit against them for the nude shower scene deboggle. Cage no where to be found... thought this was HIS game.
10. Yet another title that is the first in its line and has a subtitle
11.Emotion emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions emotions.
12. For a game that was entirely mo-capped (and I'm sure I'm not the only one to say this) any animation outside of cutscene drop in quality by a long shot and makes the actor look very stiff.
13. SPIKE nominated Dafoe and Page for best voice actors of the year....
14. QTEs died with Resident Evil 4 and that's where they need to peacefully rest. Quit digging them up gaming industry!
15. I'm fairly certain this title falls into the "not really a game" category with gone home and the rest of the estranged indie titles that are basically interactive movies.
16. This game got so many bullshit nominations I'm not sure if the budget went into the actual game or to pay of "creative peers".
17. Sony actually tried to silence controversy about this game.
18. This game actually sold well... I've lost some of my faith in the gaming community.
I'm willing to wager that David Cage will eventually start putting his name in game titles like Sid Meier of civilization fame.
yeah, but I'm hoping to see him have a Phil Fish-esqe melt down over a critic like Total Biscuit or Ben Croshaw belittle one of his games.
To be fair, I think Ellen Page and William Dafoe did a pretty good job in their roles. But of course it's a David Cage game, so your acting skills can only do much until the poor writing speaks for itself.
That being said, I like David Cage "games". Sure they're practically just movies with QTE's, but his writing is so bad and bizarre it's actually pretty entertaining. Also most movies can only last to around 2-3 hours max (Unless it's a pretentious art game that has you watch a person sleeping for 7 hours straight). Games can go on for so much longer, which means we can have much more entertaining David Cage writing.
I'm sorry. I read your comment in the voice of a whiterun guard...
Ulfsson Corfesson your not alone in that
I was under the impression that Aiden's door jamming abilities were a passive ability that he has when he's fucking shit up.
David Cage obviously want to make movies instead of games, so why doesn't he? His games barely have ny gameplay, they are just "Press the right button to activate cutscene".
His games would actually make half decent movies.
Because no one would buy his screenplays?
Who cares what people define as games or movies or interactive experiences? The same could be said for visual novels and other genres with minimal gameplay.
@@themaxtails No one would care if his games were actually worth a damn.
The bigger sin in that scene where the Lady freaks out over child Jodie's powers and Aiden knocking shit over is that, if you choose to not knock over anything, the lady STILL freaks out and dramatic music kicks in as if you're being a terror.
"It's alway two people who have no chemistry and no reason to bang that end up banging" THANK YOU. THIS HAPPEN IN ALL FCKING GAMES. IT DRIVES ME CRAZY!
Well, yeah, but it also kind of perfectly sums up my parents' marriage, so it's not entirely unrealistic.
Mind you, they did also get divorced in spectacularly acrimonious fashion, but still... absolutely zero chemistry, and they spent two years dating, six years married, and produced two kids, so there had to be some banging going on.
You say that as if it only happens to games 😅
Sex has nothing to do with chemistry... Biological urge
I watched a chronological play through of this game and had no idea it presented like this. Story was hard enough to follow as it was I can’t believe they really had this so far out of order
Totally saw this one coming. I mean, I expected it would eventually pop up. Loved it, good video.
Know I just need to do Heavy Rain and Nomad Soul and I'll have done all of the David Cage games.
Looking forward to both!
CHRISPLAYER 95 He is.
_"No one who has ever played this game has chosen to leave and not take revenge. Shouldn't even be an option."_
I enjoyed the Super Best Friends screaming, "REVENGE!", too much to agree with this one. It is the best button prompt ever.
I know most Americans don't pay that much attention to international politics but I would expect someone in the freaking CIA to pay at least a LITTLE attention to it. I would have sinned the fact that Jodi didn't know the guy was democratically elected until the news told her. I get that Ryan didn't tell her but by that point in her life the CIA isn''t holding her hostage on base anymore. She has an apartment in a normal building and has access to information in the outside world. The game expects me to believe CIA agents are told to be good at math but not to pay attention to international politics?
Regarding the birth, even if it wouldn't make sense in general it makes sense in this specific situation where the woman in question has: helped heal a man going through withdrawal, was able to help the pregnant lady know her baby was still OK, let a man talk to his dead wife and saved the same man from getting beaten up by thugs. She's only known Jodi a week but she was pretty damn helpful during that week.
I would still sin Jodi not using her ghost powers to help Tuesday deal with the labor pain. If she was able to help the other guy with his pain why wouldn't it have worked here?
Contrary to popular belief, US Citizens do pay attention, especially someone who is going to be dropped into a conflict as an agent. Don't let stupid games or movies be your guide on how other people in other countries operate.
@@kingpickle3712 _"especially someone who is going to be dropped into a conflict as an agent"_ Well yes, that's my point. It didn't make sense for her to not already know.
"You're US soldiers, you're good at shooting unarmed people"
Dare I say it... Shots fired.
I think Ethan caused the crash of that guys family. I mean in heavy rain there is a point where cars are dodging u driving on the wrong side of the road
If you would choose the chronological mode of the story then all of the time gaps and discrepancies would be retconned. You would know who Ryan is, you would understand Jodi’s childhood and almost everything that is wrong.
This game makes you wonder if David Cage has a fetish for jammed doors...
Love how he said the ghost in the shower wasn't a sin, but still counted it without the "ding".
You missed the sin where the game kept pushing at Aiden being some perv love interest (I don't know what to call it?) only to be like, nope he's the brother! I'm not trying to put things together to say that the game developers did either. It's been awhile since I've seen this game, but there were just times in the game where I thought "is the ghost supposed to be in love with her or??? I don't get it" I can't be the only one who originally thought this before they threw the "ooooOOO~ it's her twin brother who died at birth~" cliche. Which tbh only made the jealous/pervy moments a tad creepier.
Smiley Tree agreed. It was a stupid plot twist.
What? If anything, seeing Aiden's actions make more sense knowing that he's her stillborn twin brother. He cares deeply about Jodie, and is willing to risk his own existence to protect her(when fighting the entities, for example). I never once got the impression that he had some kind of romantic interest in Jodie, it just felt like a sibling connection that made a whole lot of sense once it was revealed.
minus one sin for every time you spelled Willem Dafoe wrong
The actor who plays Ryan is so gorgeous. It's a shame he wasn't introduced properly as a love interest. Instead he was aggressive with Jodie at first cause she was a sulky teenager. There seemed to be nothing to bridge the gap from disliking to fancying her.
The broken timeline confused me so much. I watched Cry and Pewds play it and I had NO idea what was going on lol. It's such a waste how beautiful the graphics are compared to the shitty story
Also "Navaho"
+Snozzberries the story was good only not good organized
Twenty One Pilots was a Mistake Yeah they were aiming to make an unorganized story, perhaps flashbacks and stuff.
Twenty One Pilots was a Mistake says the guy with a shitty life!!
Twenty One Pilots was a Mistake that's why i played it in chronological order, it's MUCH less confusing.
The joke of taking away sins whenever Jodie/Ellen is in underwear is a bit bad taste for a story game where you're suposed to be relating to the characters, not drooling after them. But maybe that's just me..?
So you gave this game a sin for everyone speaking Farsi in Somalia..but they aren't speaking fasi it sounds like they are speaking Arabic or a language close to Arabic. Which would be accurate because Arabic is an official lang of Somalia and so is Somali which is very similar to Arabic, seeing as it comes from Arabic
That's like asking a native english speaker to tell the difference between Mandarin and Cantonese.
@@MachineMan-mj4gj lmao thanks for reviving this 5 years later. Didn't at all remember posting this.
They are speaking Arabic but Quantic chose the dumbest accent
I know it cus I lhave lived in an Arab country
"you're U.S. cops, you're good at shooting unarmed people"
lmao
call me a fucking boy scout, but I didn't smoke, drink, or take revenge in that level. Jodie just seemed too timid/better than that
I didn't play this game myself but you're right she just doesn't seem like a real rebel.
5:43 wrong!! Every train I've ever been on shakes more than Shakira's hips.
Tanis Please Send Help ha-ha-ha-ha!!
Her hips don't lie
If Heavy Rain and Beyond: Two Souls happens on the same universe, that means that supernatural forces are real in Heavy Rain. Why David Cage tried so hard to make it like there is no supernatural forces on Heavy Rain!?
Yeah, he could have left the psychic connection in which gave an explanation for Ethan's blackouts.
It's better that way, tbh. At least for that game.
21:12
WHAT?!
THAT DISGUISE ACTUALLY WORKED?!
For me they were caught immediately and I was super accepting of that
Now that stranger things is a show, jodie reminds me a lot of Eleven.
kenzie tøp That's insulting to Eleven.
It did but Eleven is much better written and actually has chemistry with other characters that feels authentic instead of forced for emotion.
"This SWAT car drove ten feet from a parked position into a hunting store then explodes like Michael Bay blessed it" This one was perfect! I'm still laughing xD
Lmao, what is it with the hatred towards payphones ? As hard to believe as it sounds, there is still some people that don't have a cellphone and use the payphones. There is still some left where I live.
GameDjeenie Tru-that!
It's because of the cliche that makes no sense considering the modern setting of the story.
It's like those movies when the character has a cellphone and there's ALWAYS a problem of sorts?
Well, it seems that in order to drive the plot forward, there's always a pay phone. That's how I interpreted it.
Great video, as always! I'll never understand how David Cage's poorly written, interactive-movie garbage could pass off as video games. There is one thing I want to point out that you got wrong, though: the Middle Eastern guy's clothing, while traditional, has actually nothing to do with Islam per se, but rather the Arabian _culture_ of countries bordering the Persian Gulf. It's very easy to confuse cultural customs in the Middle East with religious ones.
Because people find his games "different". Nowadays Death Starnding had a similar effect, it's a incredibly bad game, but because there was an attempt at being different, some people let that pass. And the money comes from these people.
I love games like this. Is he over the top sometimes and do things lack logic at times? Sure. But I felt a lot of emotional connection to the characters and Jodie was so well fleshed out you can really feel her pain. That's the mark of a good game. Just because it's not some random shoot em up doesn't mean it doesn't have great value. I thoroughly enjoyed the game and I wish there was a sequel.
23:30 or sin 151 about Aiden typing his name on the computer. as someone who has dealt with security clearances and once held a top secret clearance, the need to know can trump clearance level. so its possible that the list was anyone who was authorized regardless of clearance.
I feel like I'm the only one who actually likes this game
Sasha Millar I love it
Love it!
I loved this game, just decided to play it without knowing much about it other than it's reviews weren't too bad but I really enjoyed it, not what I was expecting at all
Sasha Millar no i also love this game
i recognize the flaws but still like it
i actually chose the leave option. it fit the characterization of her character the way i was playing her before this chapter. It helps make the story better than what it is so that down the road during a certain part in the story, the change to aggressiveness from her adds much more and a more emotional feeling toward the change.
Well, for the baby, you DO need a blanket ; babies cannot regulate their temperature the first few days of their lives, they need to be warm as quickly as possible. I believe hot water is for cleaning the newborn (its mandatory I guess, I mean, its not a matter of life and death? I might be wrong). As a mother, I can confirm the blanket at least, but I'm no doctor so lol
Isn't William DaFoe Green Goblin in the first Spiderman movie?
Edward Richtofen yes he is =)
***** ok
yea he is Norman osborn the green goblin
You mean the BEST Spiderman movie.
11:42 he looks like Alice's father in detroit become human
I just realized the guy who tries to rape Jodie at the pool table is Todd from Detroit... lol
Everything Wrong with Game Sins -- You spelled Willem Dafoe wrong.
isnt it kind of immature to retract likes for things like a character smoking a joint and a pregnant woman being naked from the waist down while giving birth? js.
sin 45: actually, that's one of the more believable combat possibilities - she's got years of US Special Forces training and she's only facing 2:1 unarmed odds against comparatively undertrained police officers. The only issue is that her body double clearly isn't as built as you'd expect for a US Special Forces commando.
sin 47: she's white
Her whole character and body was unbelievable tbh. Who the fuck would send such a tiny damsel to Kurkujistan to kill Alqaeda? Seriously lol.
Not even close. Even well-trained tiny women cannot hold up against other well-trained men much less a group of them. Cops do not fight on top of trains because it's literally impossible and stupid. The scene is soo stupid that it made me want to stick my head through a wall.
@@kingpickle3712 If they were even training or relatively close, I'd agree with you but the skill differential between your average police officer and a special forces agent is huge.
@@forgottenfamily Training has nothing to do with anything. Multiple semitrained people with an ounce of intelligence can overcome a tiny teen with "special forces" training. I spent 20 years in the military and almost made it into a field that requires advanced training, I assure you that the girl in the game wouldn't even come close. You can't have anyone with special forces training make that many stupid decisions especially when it comes to fighting.
I've got another sin, when Jodie is homeless, she "sees" the baby of that woman. But it's in no position to be born in the natural way. The head should be facing down. If it were to be born the way is lay in her belly as they showed in de game, the baby would not live, he would most likely drown, or choke to death.
The events being out of order only makes sense if you choose to live at the end. She explains that her memories are blending together, and it's like they're all "happening at the same time".
I have found another reason why william dafoe will always be a villan.
His last name is literly the foe
What I find funny is that at the beginning of the video you said William Defoe always turns out to be the villain.
And he does.
Also Ryan is 38 years old and Jodie is 20 when the date scene happens (she's 18 when Ryan takes Jodie away).
Hmmm, a girl with a buzzcut that doesn't speak with telekinetic powers is found just outside the local woods in a small town with a cool police chief while being pursued by the government, and it turns out that she grew up in a lab where monsters were released through a portal to another dimension that only she has the power to defeat, so she has to go into the lab and close the portal. Hmmmm. I've never heard that one before
Not to mention the evil head scientist dude, and the girls mother who was made braindead because she wanted to see her daughter
And her nose bleeds when she uses her powers, and also develops a father daughter relationship with said evil head scientist dude
I just need to sin you for a second just for picking the Jay ending. That is probably the most boring. Personal preference-
1. Tuesday
2. Alone
3. Beyond
4. Ryan
5. Jay
Yeah I hated both the love interests.
TalkingToMyself
The love interest endings were lazy.
I'm not all for the Alone ending, but I can't decide between Tuesday and Beyond.
+Female Scout I think the beyond ending is completely pointless. She will go there eventually when she dies. So the option is always there.
+TalkingToMyself I liked the Tuesday ending the best as well since the homeless chapter is one of my faves and I loved the characters. It realla drew me in emotionally. As for the love interests: I really saw no reason for Jodie to fall in love with Jay as they never came across as being awefully close nor emotionally involved with each other, though I still liked him way better than Ryan. Ryan was just a complete douche who used her most of the time, imo, so I really disliked him and enjoyed breaking his heart in the game, as some kind of revenge (yes, I know I'm evil...).
When she was in the restroom at the party she locked the door yet that one chick just burst in.
I know I've commented on this vid in the past, but it's popped up in my recommended so I decided to watch it again. I wonder if this guy ever realized the doors are jammed because Aiden is keeping them closed. Except maybe in the few situations it's locked or the phantoms are keeping them closed. You know, ghosty antics.
I had to pause the video because I was laughing so hard when you said the game was David cages revenge fantasy. I can just picture him sitting down and making a game based off people that bully him. It's hilarious to me. XD
Lots of people make stories like that. Naruto for example. Not exactly a bad thing.
One thing could've saved this game. One thing. STANDS!!!
"JoJo's Bizarre Adventure: Beyond 2 Souls"
Jodie Joestar, or JoJo
Stand: Aiden (Based on the band)
Power A
Speed C
Range B
Durability A
Precision B
Developmental Potential D
bait4sale9001 Stands are cool,but cannot fix the shitty plot.
It's not like JoJo's have the most consistant plot in existance anyway.
8:33 Funny enough, this movie was shown at the Tribeca Film Festival.
13:47
Says it isn't a sin, but forgets and makes it one anyway. *ding*
Also, gotta appreciate how you remove sin counters of any brief nude moments in a subtle, perverted fashion.
17:18 what the kid spoke was not Farsi. I don't know where you got that information but he was speaking broken Arabic which is a completely different language. you missed the mark on so many points that I don't even know where to begin.
Okay, when David Cage's best game is Heavy Rain, you know there's a problem.
soulbreaker2 what’s wrong with heavy rain?
13:44 "This isn't a sin, by the way."
*Proceeds to add a sin to the counter anyway*
When she said “I’ll kill everyone”, she clearly meant the entire CIA, not just the people you saw
The scientist that went to kill Jodie look like Gmod ragdolls.
11:42 Is that the Dad from Detroit?
He looks like he is. Also, I could swear that the guitar Jodie plays on is the same as the one that guy plays on when Markus is picking up the paint in the beginning.
@@Fred2303 yep, same actor he played Todd in Dbh
Fun fact: if the war with the entities is considered actual war, Ryan just earned a death sentence for assaulting a superior.
Door locked even when Aiden isn't holding it. Clearly one of the biggest sins,.
“No one has ever chosen leave option at the party before, shouldn’t be an option.”
Me: I want to know your location
Mind if I point out cymbals=/=symbols?
Why is it that in david cage games the swat team captain is the only member of the swat who doesn't weae any sort of headwear
That revenge scene against the dumbass kids is the best scene in the game. Aside from that, I'll take Heavy Rain any day over Beyond. Even then, I don't play Heavy Rain that much anymore! So... extra sin for Beyond! *DING*
The Insane Penguin not like you haven't ever committed a sin!
11:45 am I the only one who noticed that that is the dad from Detroit Become Human?
"White savoir" is where I lost it. Lmao
Has any one else noticed that the guy who attempts to violate Jodie at the bar is the exact same guy who owns Kara and Alice in Detroit: Become Human?