Been a fan of your fics for YEARS. I was just telling my friend how despite how much I read fics I never actually love them, with some of your fics (especially TMA) as the exception. Felt the need to reread some of them and saw you reblogged some ISAT fanart. So. Any thoughts on ISAT you'd like to share?
Hope you have a wonderful day!! So happy I found your fics again!!
I avoided answering this for a while because I was trying to think of a way to cohesively and coherently vocalize my thoughts on In Stars and Time. I have given up because I don't want to hold everybody here all day and I have accepted that my thoughts are just pterodactyl screeching.
I love it so much. I have so much to say on it. It drove me bonkers for like a week straight. I have AUs. It's absolute Megbait. They're just a little Snufkin and they're having the worst experience of anybody's life. Ludonarratives my fucking beloved.
I am going to talk about the prologue.
The prologue is such a fascinating experience. You crack open the game and immediately begin checking off all of the little genre boxes: mage, warrior, researcher, you're the rogue...some little kid who's there for some reason...alright, you know the score. You're in yet another indie Earthbound RPG, these are your generic characters, let's get the ball rolling.
Except then you realize that these characters are people. You feel instantly how you've entered the game at its last dungeon, at the end of the adventure. They have their own in-jokes, histories, backgrounds, adventures. They get along well and they're obviously close, but not in a twee or unrealistic way. They have so much chemistry and spirit and life. I fell in love with them so quickly.
But Sif doesn't. Sif kind of hates them, because they will not stop saying the same damn thing. They walk the same paths, do the same things, make the same jokes, expect Sif to say the same lines. They keep referencing a Sif we do not see, with jokes we never see him make and heroic personality he never shows - they reference a Sif who is dead - and Sif can't handle that, so he kills them too.
They become only an exercise in tedious frustration. Sif button mashes through their dialogue, Sif mindlessly clicks the same dialogue options, Sif skips through the tutorial, Sif blows through the puzzles. Sif turns their world into a video game. Sif is playing a generic RPG. Sif forgets their names. They are no longer people with in-jokes, histories, backgrounds, adventures. They're the mage, the warrior, the researcher, and...some random kid.
I did not understand the Kid's presence at first. I had no idea what they contributed to the game. They didn't do anything. As a party member in a video game, they're a bit useless. Why is the Kid there?
Because Sif's life isn't a video game. Because the kid isn't 'the kid'. They're Bonnie. Bonnie, who the party loves. Why is Bonnie there? Because they love them. There is no room for Bonnie in the boring RPG that Sif is playing. And then you realize that Sif is wrong, and that they've lost something extremely important, and that they'll never escape without it.
Watching the prologue before watching ISAT gave ISAT the most unique air of dread and horror, because you crack open ISAT and you see the person Sif used to be. You realize that Sif used to be a person. Sif used to be the person who made jokes, who gave real smiles, who interacted with the world as if they are a part of it. And you know you are sitting down to watch Sif lose everything that made them a person, to lose everything that made them a member of this world, and turn them into a character in a video game who doesn't understand the point of Bonnie at all.
At the climax of the game, when the others realize that something is deeply wrong and that Sif physically cannot tell them, they realize that there is nothing they can do. So Bonnie declares snacktime. And for the first time they have snacktime.
What is snacktime? Classic JRPGs don't have snacktime. There's literally no point to a snacktime - not in a video game, and not in Sif's terrible life. It's not fixing this, because nothing can fix this. But Bonnie gives Sif a cookie and Sif eats it.
It's meaningless. It's a cutscene. It didn't save Sif and it didn't change a thing. It will make no difference in the end.
But it did make the difference. It made all of the difference in the world. Bonnie is a character who you really don't understand the point of before you realize that Bonnie was the entire point.
ISAT is about comfort media. Why do we play the same video games over and over again? Why do we avoid watching the finale of our favorite shows? What is truly comforting: a story with no conflict, or a story where you always know what is about to happen? Do you want to live in a scary, uncontrollable world, or do you want to play Stardew Valley? Do you want a person or a character?
When I beat Earthbound for the first time (and if you don't know, the prologue/ISAT battle system is just Mother) and watched the ending cutscene where the characters part ways and say goodbye...I felt a little bit sad. I wanted them to be together forever. But that's something only characters could ever be.
51 notes
·
View notes
I still do not understand people using terms like “gatekeep” and “police” to just mean someone not validating your view or practice.
I guess it’s easier to say “you can’t gatekeep who counts as a witch” than “the history of the term is complex and varies by culture so what might not count by one definition does count by another and it’s worth being respectful of that.”
It’s easier to say “you can’t police correspondences” than “
But the tendency toward likening a lack of validation to materially violent acts is not pro-community. It normalizes heightened emotional responses to mere disagreement which is a hinderance to communication. Reactivity is an obstacle to collaboration - a building block of community.
And so often I’ve seen this get applied to anyone who doesn’t have the most expansive view of language which in turn trends a group toward a type of relativism that is neither realistic nor helpful. Truths can be known. Words can mean things. When definitions change, it’s worth evaluating the cost benefit.
Inclusivity to the point of meaninglessness is not a virtue. It is okay for people to not fit a given criteria even if they want to be included. It’s okay for actions to not fit a given criteria even if people want them to count.
The continued elevation of feelings over material and spiritual realities is very frustrating. I’m tired of the pendulum swinging, the black and white thinking. I understand coming out of a culture of “feelings don’t matter” or “validation doesn’t matter” and the damage that can entail. But healthy answer to that isn’t “validation matters a ton” or “feelings should be centered”. It’s feelings and validation should be considered in addition to other factors like material conditions.
41 notes
·
View notes
a bit of thinking out loud on my part but i’ve been thinking for a while know about constantly slamming stuff for “bad writing”, more in the sense of “no one talks like that” or “this sentence was so badly worded” more than “it didn’t make sense in the end” as if it’s a deal breaker makes me think that we really moved too far away from suspension of disbelief and not wanting to just, fill in the steps kind of?
Like, i’m thinking about how ff7cc has some of the cringiest dialogues i could think of and some characterizations suffer a lot from that. When i don’t play the game for a long time, i’m always coming back to it and laugh at how they overuse “protect your honor”, or everything about Loveless, and stuff like that.
but when i want to seriously play the game too, i want to give the game a benefit of a doubt. Of, okay, i find it ridiculous but you’re taking it seriously, so i’m going to try to take it as seriously as possible. What are you doing to do with that.
And thanks to that i think i can properly experience some of the more visceral elements of the game, despite how much of its emotional core resting on this specific idea that i find cringe.
And it’s just like, idk, i think constantly wanting something to be really well written and getting rid of the cringe completely is kind of trapping yourself into an echo chamber where you’ll only get to hear the same old things. Eventually to experience new things it’s good to go into horizons that you’d consider cringe and try to see if there’s something you can get out of it, if you take it as seriously as ever. And sometimes cringe is unfiltered sincerity, which has its place especially in emotional story telling.
I kinda feel like there’s an overuse of “wanting realism” in stories (again “real people don’t talk like that”), that it’s easy to just close yourself from anything slightly challenging what you’re willing to accept as realistic.
in a way i’m just refusing to think “realism” is the same thing as “immersive” and if something is unrealistic to me, i don’t think it specifically breaks immersion and i care much more about immersion than realism. But even so, Immersion often comes with just, accepting what the story wants you to accept as normal. you have to do some work as the person receiving the story for it to work.
Feels stilted and boring and it’s kinda sad how often i see it brought up that “bad writing” in term of, clumsy sentence structure and stuff, can take someone out of something this badly.
I guess it’s just to each their sensibilities but, how dull....
5 notes
·
View notes