#flawed analysis
Text
(Image by -dead_slender- from r/Doom)
Remember when i tried analyzing different iterations of Doom's demons?
I thought about doing the same for the weapons, even if there's things that are either too obvious or easy to miss.
There's obvious things like D3 giving most of them reloading or 2016/Eternal adding alt fires but also less known things like the recently leaked D64 early sprites, the SSG in D64 having a pushback, D64 chainsaw being faster, D3ROE Xbox gives the pistol a lantern, 2016’s Plasma Rifle having a bit more damage/less ammo useage than Eternal’s or how some Plasma projectile/Rockets may have smaller radius than in older iterations.
(There's also the upgrades in 2016/Eternal to make things more complicated... i hope i don't think i'll have to mention Mighty Doom's upgrades or very specific RPG stuff)
And while the demons post was mostly D1/2 originating stuff, i made the weapons based post also include stuff like grenades or machine/chainguns and “rail gun” esque guns.
(And the Unmaker vs Unmaykr)
Probably because “modern” weapons having iterations is a bit more likely than later demons having more iterations.
Because “adding enough good info” is a focus, i’d obviously try to look for other people’s analysis and prespectives just for the sake of adding the right info.
Another thing is “honorable mentions” like the unused Doom rifles mentioned in the assault rifle section, Holy Water Pistol and Eternal’s cut pistol, 2016 MP’s Grenade Launcher and other “rail-gun” esque guns or even the sniper rifle in D2RPG.
Anyway, let's see how much trivia i can add:
Fists:
Doomguy's hands always had their own slot and were basic melee attacks, with Berserk giving a damage boost and lasting until the level ends.
He had brass knuckles in his left hand but people forget this.
(And despite being silent, they still alert enemies)
D3's fists are kinda similar but Berserk makes them more devastating (Pretty sure they even lock the player into this, while making you faster and invulnerable) and are temporary while you hear screams and have a weird blurry thing in your vision.
And the D3 marine's hands are naked (While the RoE engineer gets his hands decomposed by the Artifact lol).
2016/Eternal make them a dedicated button (One has a generic "gun butt" animation and the other finally uses a fist) and Berserk is obviously more devastating.
The main thing here is the Glory Kill mechanic and Eternal then adds in the Blood Punch.
Eternal's default fist is weak but it's still strong enough to break cracks in walls i guess.
I think in early versions of Doom, there could've been a knife but we all know about the rifle bayonet blades.
Honorable mention? Even D3's flash light was kind of a melee weapon.
And of course: Doomguy is left handed (Or actually uses both hands).
Chainsaw:
Starts off as a basic "brrrrr" melee weapon (Which doesn't have a "knockback" effect on killed enemies like other weapons do) that can kinda stunlock enemies.
In vanilla Doom, i think the Chainsaw replaces the Fist unless you pick up Berserk (Please don't tell me this is another Mandela effect situation).
D64's is faster and has a unique double blade design (And eventually the Doom Hunter carries a tribute to it).
D3 is almost like the classic in 3D (And from what i recall, was devastating).
2016/Eternal make it rely on fuel tanks and instakill enemies for ammo pickups with cool animations, though Eternal also gives it one rechargeable pip for the sake of fodder enemies.
But there's different levels of how much fuel is required based on enemy categories.
Almost every 2016 enemy can be chainsawed but Eternal prevents chainsaw use over super heavies, bosses and most ambient except Tentacles.
(They also make it tied to a dedicated button)
In D2RPG, you could use this to destroy corpses for stuff and the previous RPG game had an axe.
Honorable mentions? Crucible and Sentinel Hammer kinda.
Pistol:
Doom's starter weapon, which is serviceable enough until you find other/enough weapons.
In D3 it was alright since i'm pretty sure it had seperate bullet ammo from the Assault Rifle and Chaingun (Each had their own ammo i think?).
Xbox version of RoE also attachs a lantern to it.
2016 makes it a unique laser gun with infinite ammo whose shots can be charged and upgraded to deal more damage (And the MP had another laser pistol but red).
Eternal had its pistol cut, even thought it has a cool "repeater"-like fire that made it seem satisfying.
Honorable mention: The Holy Water Pistol from D2RPG which scares most demons, can be refilled from some water sources and can even heal the player.
Assault Rifle/Machinegun:
From the iconic box art, to Doomguy and Zombieman's sprites to the unused variations of rifles in the alpha/beta versions, this idea was destined for Doom.
D3 finally had an assault rifle and it was alright, even had an ammo counter screen and a sound effect/signal/feedback for when ammo in a clip is low.
2016 adds one that sort of fills the classic Chaingun role and can be upgraded with Micro Missiles (Whose no-reload upgrade makes a great combo with the Rich Get Richer rune) and Tactical Scope (Whose upgrades are more damage, faster movement and piercing enemies).
As for Eternal's Heavy Cannon: Percision Bolt can lead to explosive headshots and its Micro Missiles will obviously have more damage/less time based stuff but even Heavy Cannon kills lead to a temporary Micro Missible buff with Primary Charger).
Honorable mention? I think 2016's files has an unused Nail-gun somewhere, as a cut weapon.
Also, the Burst Rifle/Repeater from 2016 MP.
Visually? Heavy Cannon is red and looks huge but D3 has the tiny screen counting ammo.
Chaingun:
Its design was probably inspired by the similar weapon in Wolfenstein 3D and it took until D3 for the Assault Rifle to become the basic bullet firing weapon while the "Chaingun" becomes more akin to what Quake 2 introduced.
In the classics, it's a basic fast firing weapon whose first shot or two can be accurate, hence why people use it to snipe enemies or shootable switches.
Though naturally, it gets less accurate the further you are from your targets.
D3 added both reloading and a wind up mechanic (Both being present seems a bit too much but at least the damage it delt was fine).
2016 still has wind up but it kinda shoots within that part, while Eternal gets rid of it (Though in E3 2019, i think it still had wind down after firing) and paints its bullets blue for fun.
2016 has the Gatling Rotator (Which can be upgraded to be incendiary i think) while Eternal has the Energy Shield.
Mobile Turret is 3 barrels in 2016 and 4 in Eternal (And Eternal's version can be upgraded to let you move faster).
Ammo is technically required to use Eternal CG's Energy Shield, but it's cool that this feature can even become a projectile.
Visuals, the Eternal chaingun looks like it shoots energy but the 64 one also has those holes in the barrels and shot blue first.
Combat Shotgun:
In early sprites, the end of the barrel had a "thick ring" like thing around it.
A basic weapon that seems to be consistent.
D64 has no proper reloading animation.
D3's iteration is infamous for its spread and damage output.
2016 is recovered from the cancelled Doom 4.
Its alt fires are the explosive shot (When fully upgraded, there's cluster bombs it seems) and Charged Burst (When fully upgraded, if you succeed on this triple fire then the next fire will deal more damage i guess).
Eternal replaces these with the Sticky Bomb (Its capacity is later increased to 5) and Full Auto (It can reach a point where it makes enemies drop shells and increase movement speed).
Eternal SG's Full Auto could've had a "Rapid Hit Scale" feature.
I like how Eternal's design is more "honest" about its alt fires.
Super Shotgun:
In pre-release versions, there's an unused design that even had a frame similar to one of the base SG's reloading frames.
Classic SSG has vertical spread while base SG doesn't.
RoE brings back the SSG which was absent from the main game and i guess it was alright, sort of compensating for the main SG (And because the SSG's workings, it's like one of the few weapons that technically has no "reloading").
Eternal's is obviously the most unique one, from its Sentinel design to the meathook (And its Flaming Hook upgrade).
2016 looked out of place in a setting with very advanced tech, which is a contrast to older SSG's fitting the low tech aspect of Doom's future.
And 2016 could've also been upgraded to shoot really fast and penetrate enemies that even the "shoot one shell at a time" mode of firing becomes OP.
Meanwhile, D64's kinda had a pushback effect on you and again, no proper reloading animation.
And i guess the PS1 port made it look ugly but then the Final Doom PS1 port fixed it.
Rocket Launcher:
In some early versions, there was an unused sprite for a sideways "missile launcher".
The classic RL fired in a fast enough pace and later versions fire rockets in a slower speed.
In some cases, you can "rocket jump" to push yourself to a different place but then there's the infinite height stuff to consider (For better or worse, depending on the situation).
In vanilla Doom, if you use the wallrun bug to outrun your rockets, they go through you.
D64's RL can also kinda push the player back like the SSG in the same game.
I also think D64's rockets spawn a bit differently from the player compared to the D1/2 version.
2016 is slow but introduces Lock-On Burst and Remote Detonation.
One can be upgraded to reach multitargeting and the other can make detonated rockets drop pieces of sharpnel and even not destroy the rockets in this mode.
For Eternal's versions: One gets feedback to indicate proximity and can falter enemies, while the other also has a multitarget sort of thing.
I think Lock-On Burst also has differences in each game, where one has rockets deal less damage but the other doesn't.
Eternal's RL also has the projectile coming from the RL's model itself, which i think was discovered by BloodShot9001 in a video.
Eternal's is the most unique visually because of its Cultist/open chamber design and even its rockets have a different skin compared to the ones in the rocket ammo pickup.
I think Eternal also has a smaller radius for its rocket projectile compared to classsic Doom.
Grenades:
I like the look of D3 grenades because of how low-tech they look.
They have the typical "bounce of walls/floors but instantly explode when touching enemies" idea as expected.
They also have a bit of a timer so you can throw them a little later to time your attacks.
(I think they're based off Q2 grenades)
2016's Frag Grenade looks a bit more like a sci-fi M67 but it works as a side item and it can slap enemies before exploding.
And Inventory items can recharge, even if there's still pickups.
Eternal's Frag Grenades are sphere shaped (Which means different physics) and can be used without interruption thanks to the shoulder based Equipment Launcher.
Upgrades include decreased cooldown, faltering effect, making enemies drop scatter bombs and a double fire before recharge.
Honorable mention: The Grenade Launcher from 2016 multiplayer.
And i guess all those other inventory items in both games (MP included) and the fact that Eternal has an unused double Equip Launcher upgrade.
Plasma Rifle:
In early versions, it could shot green stuff instead of blue.
The classic one kinda stands out because of the "recoil" frame that blocks you from shooting when you stop firing.
With how this weapon changed over time, there's the subtle difference between the speed of the projectiles being fired and how fast the projectiles travel.
This might be why people think that in 2016/Eternal it deals less damage even if i'm pretty sure both these recent versions added a subtle splash damage on enemies (And Eternal makes them visually pop).
2016's PR has a faster fire rate than Eternal's, bigger maximum capacity and might do more damage.
2016 PR has a Stun Bomb and Eternal has the Microwave Beam, which was originally going to let you heat up more than one enemy at once.
(Though i think the same beam can hurt another enemy while focused on one you locked it on)
I like how Eternal's Heat Blast can heat up projectiles after use but i think 2016's Heat Blast had a 360 radius damage around the player, so i kinda like that too.
Eternal's Heat Blast also has different levels of power depending on how much you charge it up.
Also note how in some games, projectiles look shiny but in others look like bubbles or something: Do people care about these specific visual differences?
D64's was slower and had an energy tube that made noise while D3's looked weird i guess.
Ballista/Gauss Cannon:
One's a UAC creation and the other is of Sentinel origin, but both are like Doom's take on the Quake rail-gun (There's also 2 other weapons like this in 2016's multiplayer).
Also: Gauss/Ballista jumping is a thing.
People say the Gauss cannon feels more powerfull but to be fair, the Ballista has more unique alt fires.
Both Gauss cannon alt fires feel like "wait until the shot deals more damage and some upgrades enable faster movement" while Arbalist is an exploding dart (Can be upgraded to let you fire the next one in less time) and Destroyer Blade is a powerfull horizontal spread projectile (Its upgrades are pretty much "more damage" and also a bit of falter on enemies).
Honorable mention? D2RPG had a sniper rifle which could deal great damage with headshots but would also wobble around for added difficulty.
BFG9000:
The iconic big gun with the funny name and based off toys (Like some of the others).
Originally meant to shoot "Christmas Lights" that bounced off ceilings/floors, it instead shoots a green projectile that does damage while an invisible tracer system is activated from the player's view and enemies are hit by it if the player is aimed at where the projectile hits.
All this time, this iconic weapon was more of a weird silent shotgun.
Its design also displays 2 things in the upper back area that make it seem like you have to attach it to your shoulders.
D64's variation looks different and is slightly slower but still mostly the same.
D3 redesigns the weapon not just visually but also mechanically, with one example being having unique ammo instead of plasma cells.
And its projectiles have proximity damaging tendrils taken from Quake 2.
You can also not only reload it but charge its projectile, though if you charge for too long, the weapon can explode and kill you.
(There's also the electric chip inside the projectile and the Sabaoth)
2016 simplifies what D3 introduced and gives it its own dedicated button, so it's more of a "panic button" sort of thing.
And its design is clearly inspired by the 2005 movie.
(I think 2016's BFG was originally going to have mods like the other weapons, like a flamethrower attack or the BFG10K from Quake 3)
Eternal's iteration looks different (And is now part of the weapon wheel) but it's still mostly there.
Something i thought about was how you never really see the front of the "classic" style BFG except in D2RPG, That one Symbiote Doomguy doll, Fallout 4's Creation Club Doom thing and i guess Rage 2.
Honorable mention? 2016 multiplayer's Tesla Rocket and i guess the BFG grenade from Doom VFR.
Unmaker/Unmaykr:
One from Hell, the other from Urdak.
And one also uses cell ammo while the other shares ammo with the BFG.
Unmaker starts off weak but is upgraded to fire faster and more shots (Same keys used to shut down those portals in the Mother Demon's stage) while the Unmaykr is already the way it is but requires Empyrean keys from Slayer Gate arenas.
Unmaker is actually hitscan so its "projectiles" are just a visual effect.
I think the reason why the Unmaykr isn't as liked is because of the arena format with mobile enemies, whereas the Unmaker is still part of the classic format where enemies aren't as mobile/smart and because of D64's encounters, a fully upgraded Unmaker can surpass the BFG9000.
(But in situations with less space for the BFG tendrils and some encounters with super heavies, you might end up giving the Unmaykr a chance)
And the Unmaker is blatantly Hellish while the Unmaykr looks like another sci-fi gun because of Urdak's aesthetic: If Urdak had more to its theme or if Doom has a different type of Heaven, i guess this weapon could've looked even more "Christian" than the Holy Water Pistol.
Honorable mention? 2016 MP's reaper i guess.
And also the Dark Claw from the Doom Bible.
Of course, never forget the original Unmaker from the same document that was supposed to hurt pure demons the most, former humans the least and cybernetic demons partially.
Edit: It's also worth mentioning that "Unmaker" is a name from the Doom bible while in the D64 files, the gun is called something akin to "Laser gun" and there's a screenshot of early D64 and a leaked sprite that suggest an early design of the weapon: Which looks like a flamethrower somehow.
Soul Cube:
Because it also shows up in D2RPG and has a different design in it (Is it from the same lore? I dunno).
But does it heal you in D2RPG? I also dunno lol.
Honorable mentions? I guess the Siphon Grenade from 2016 and the RoE Artifact.
Extinguisher:
Yes it was in 2 games: DRPG and Doom VFR and in both it's used to put out fires.
Though in DRPG it's part of the arsenal and in VFR it's used like once i think.
Anyway:
This didn't turn out as good as the demons one, because weapons are a different area.
There's still areas/data i overlooked like ammo pickups amount and how the player automatically switches to another gun in certain cases.
Or stuff outright wrong and misremembered.
Maybe i could update this post to add more info, who knows.
As far as resources go:
BloodShot9001
DOOMGUY BOT
Decino
Doomwiki
UnderTheMayo
elysiumgaming2866
tsiripas
IDrinkLava
#doom#blog#flawed analysis#analysis#weapon#id software#classic doom#doom 64#doom 3#doom eternal#doom 2016#opinions#trivia#long post#doom rpg
11 notes
·
View notes
Text
So normal about Jon being like I don’t remember what you looked like but the man who let you die is going to suffer for what he did to you. If only Sasha coulda seen that.
So normal about Jon being like you died hating me and wanting me dead but I’m still gonna make sure this man knows I’m ending him in your name. Sure wish Tim coulda seen that.
So normal about the fact that everyone believed Jon was losing his humanity but no one got to see the ways his love and compassion for the people he lost or who hurt him drove him to that final moment.
So normal about the fact that even after everything Jonah’s done to Jon, the only person he never thinks to get justice for is himself.
#same energy as Jon diving into the buried to save the woman who tried to kill him#for all his flaws Jon’s a good person at his core#he just wholeheartedly believes he deserves to be hated so he never even tries to explain himself#analysis#istg every time I post one of these I get closer to writing a full dissertation on this guy#tma#the magnus archives#jon sims#jonathan sims#tim stoker#tma 200#sasha james#jonah magnus
5K notes
·
View notes
Text
Dang it guys
we only ever talked about HALF of why these scenes were a big deal, like I just realized this today and my heart is going insane.
It’s not just that Crowley’s pissed at Gabriel for treating who he thinks as Aziraphale this way, the last thing he says to the people about to kill him is a benign and peaceful wish to see them again.
And like- this is Crowley trying to replicate Aziraphale to a T. So he legitimately just sees him as this endless well of compassion, someone who is always warm and accepting. It’s not just their friendship throughout the years, he remembers Aziraphale’s kindness on the Eastern Gate. When the angel had absolutely no reason to trust this random demon who just slithered up next to him. Crowley knows that he’s loved. Maybe not like that quite yet (although he’d be very wrong), but he knows that around his friend he’s always welcome and safe.
And Aziraphale?
Well he just thinks Crowley’s the coolest fucker alive, like he is laying it in THICK and enjoying every second. Listen to that charisma, look at that smirk. These are traits that are typically only appreciated in the context of how good it makes Crowley at tempting, a job he hates. But Aziraphale doesn’t see someone manipulative or regard this persona as signs of his “demonic nature”, he just sees Crowley. Someone charming, fun loving, and cute.
This is when we get to know precisely why they love each other, what exactly they see in the other.
edit: this is now my most popular post, good work team, lol
#when someone adores you for all the things others misunderstand or see as flaws#*prolonged scream*#something something mimicry is the deepest form of flattery#good omens#ineffable husbands#Azirphale#crowley#meta#analysis#the body swap#episode 6#season 1#biceratops
15K notes
·
View notes
Text
I think one of the big takeaways from having a post abt intracommunity transmisogyny get some notes outside my little bubble of mutuals who understand feminism is that most people on this site? Fundamentally do not grasp how intersections with misogyny function. When trans women talk about trans men having male privilege, we are very importantly not implying here that they are treated perfectly by all of society. As with all groups of oppressed men, many of their privileges are heavily curtailed by wider societal oppression on the basis of transness, or homosexuality, or color, etc etc. What this does not do is cancel out their ability to wield misogyny against those who exist within the same oppressed groups. Black feminists have long discussed how black men are still capable of and actively benefit from misogynoir, even though they are also oppressed by racist society. In the same vein, trans men suffering transphobic oppression does not mean that they cannot and do not benefit from transmisogyny within queer and trans spaces. These are truths that are not actually at odds unless you have a deeply skewed conception of intersectional feminism (which most of these people do).
#sorry its so fucking long lmao#transandrophobia guys have been in my notes exposing their deeply flawed ''analysis'' for like 2 weeks now
3K notes
·
View notes
Text
Bad is such such SUCH a good father but his self-sacrificial nature has definitely rubbed off on his children and it’s fascinating to see him struggle with that.
Bad, about Pomme being willing to die for Richarlyson: “I understand the sentiment because I would sacrifice myself for any of you. But you shouldn’t do it unless- Uh. It shouldn’t be something you rush into. (Reading Pomme’s sign) ‘Only when I have no choice’ … Okay… I’ll just make sure you never get the opportunity then.”
This is one of the most fascinating lines from q!Bad tonight in my opinion because you can literally hear him realize, in REAL TIME, how unhealthy his mindset is once it’s applied to anyone other than himself. He hears his own voice out of the mouths of his children and he hates it - but in trying to dissuade them, he stutters, because he still doesn’t think it’s wrong. He starts to tell Pomme “you shouldn’t do it unless-” and then cuts himself off because he doesn’t want Pomme to sacrifice herself at all, actually. Buuuuut he still believes self-sacrificial behavior is okay and so he can’t actually say “never sacrifice yourself.”
So instead he has to say “it shouldn’t be the first option” and Pomme replies with “only if I have no choice” which he clearly doesn’t like either but what can he say? ‘No, that’s wrong too’?
No. He can’t say that. Because if he’s teaching his kids that sacrificing themselves is never worth it and will hurt the people around them, then what does that mean for him?
So he just accepts it and settles for “Oh but I’ll make sure you never have to make that choice” which is obviously NOT the correct response to your child telling you they’re willing to die for any reason… but he can’t quite make himself say anything else, or he risks having to seriously re-evaluate the value of his own life. The flippant way in which he treats his health and safety in comparison to others has influenced his kids negatively, whether he likes it or not.
#and hes one of#if not the best#parent(s) on the island#but he has his flaws#his own trauma that unconsciously leaks out and unintentionally influences his kids#it’s just fascinating#qsmp#qsmp liveblog#qsmp badboyhalo#q!bbh character analysis#sorry I got silly with it#oops#haven’t done one of these in a while
465 notes
·
View notes
Note
I just read your rant about zukka and it made me think what if zuko’s obsession with sokka has to do with the fact that sokka in some ways encompasses some of the traits that have been forced on Zuko since he was young like the whole killing without mercy or remorse and the need for control and the strategic thinking. But Sokka uses these skills no to try and rule the world but to help aang stop Ozai. I haven’t watched atla in a while but your analyses help me realize a lot of details that I missed about it was he characters
yeah i’ve talked before about how sokka and azula being so similar must be kind of a mindfuck for zuko because sokka has “a killer instinct that’s just so fire nation” but also he’s literally friends with the bald baby pacifist monk avatar who says shit like “do you think we could’ve been friends too?” and so zuko clearly has no idea what to think. like he and azula were both indoctrinated into this world that valued certain traits and dogmas over others (ie, sokka’s over aang’s) and so azula sees sokka as more of a threat.
it’s funny because obviously sokka and zuko’s first encounter is sokka getting his ass handed to him by a guy who doesn’t even care that he’s in his way, but also that scheme is pretty immediately disrupted by sokka’s boomerang. and then the next time they meet, sokka has actually spent time training under someone (instead of fumbling around in the dark by himself) and can now hold his own far better. and every single encounter after that sees sokka not only rising to zuko’s level, but surpassing him, fighting him, foiling his plans, advocating to leave him for dead, ignoring him, dismissing him.
even at the western air temple, sokka is the liaison who welcomes him into the group (the designated “leadership” role comes with more responsibilities than simply assassinating assassins), but he also makes it pretty clear that he doesn’t care for or trust zuko throughout “the firebending masters,” even if his manner of bullying is far less overtly malicious than katara’s. and yet, zuko cannot discount him. zuko saw him kill combustion man. zuko understands his value to the group. zuko recognizes that quality he and azula share. zuko may have had an advantage over him the first time they met, but it sure didn’t last long. if azula and zuko have anything in common, it’s a mutual respect for sokka.
like, sokka is the only member of the gaang’s name azula actually says (aang is “the avatar,” katara is “peasant,” toph is [insert blind joke here], and suki is “my favorite prisoner”) and on the day of black sun, she elects to distract sokka first and foremost knowing that he’s their “leader.” and she does clearly respect him more than most people do because she can see herself in him (at least to some extent, i don’t think either of them are actually insightful enough to realize how deep that connection truly goes) and thus can recognize his worth as someone who is in a similar position, albeit on the opposite side.
zuko does say and aang and katara’s names (and appa’s), but sokka’s name is the first he says, and it’s really the only name he uses as a mode of address. and the matter of naming is clearly important to royal heirs, who are defined by their names and titles. we see that especially when zuko confuses ursa’s “remember who you are” with “remember your ancestry,” declaring who he is not as internal identity, but as title. to afford someone the respect of addressing them by name is to implicitly demonstrate respect for them.
this is further demonstrated by the fact that unlike “you just had to pick up the glowing egg” zuko of just an episode prior, zuko really does follow sokka’s leadership and places his complete faith in his abilities. there’s no complaining or backseat driving or undermining of his intentions, which is genuinely anomalous for zuko, who generally refuses to listen to anyone about anything (unless he’s being actively scared into submission, and even then he’s stood up to ozai multiple times). he’s not outspoken in these episodes, however. he is downright docile. and it’s because he genuinely believes sokka to be his superior. which isn’t to say that sokka isn’t better than he is, but like. aang is too and he doesn’t take his knowledge into account! because aang doesn’t represent the values that zuko strove to embody his entire life.
what’s more, i would imagine there’s something kind of satisfying, if not downright intriguing, about knowing someone who basically is what you aspire to be, who you were told you must be your entire life, and seeing that he is just. absolutely fucking miserable. like azula is also miserable, but zuko doesn’t know that (yet), because she hides it better. but sokka is genuinely suicidal (especially in these episodes). meeting this idealized standard of perfection you have always failed to reach and realizing that whatever standards you once (recently) held yourself to are actually deeply unfulfilling. that sokka isn’t “perfect,” that he actually considers himself a failure. and the fact that when he does fail, he considers it the end of the world because he never built up the resilience one gets from being a normal person who doesn’t always succeed on their first try. and zuko’s like “finally, something i have that he doesn’t: intimate knowledge of what it’s like to constantly fail and underperform and disappoint people!”
zuko is really perfectly equipped to support sokka in this situation, because he idolizes him enough to provide him with the unconditional support sokka feels fundamentally undeserving of, and also understands sokka’s misery enough to give him actually meaningful advice when it matters. what’s interesting about how zuko feels about sokka is that it’s not just about uncritically putting him on a pedestal for being Nice Azula or whatever, it’s also about zuko’s genuine desire to help sokka and protect him.
yue inhabits the martyr role that sokka has always envisioned himself in, suki establishes herself as someone who is equally capable of protecting him and he can her, and zuko risks his life to support sokka on his crazy suicide mission, when sokka was so intent on going it alone because he wasn’t thinking clearly didn’t want anyone else to get hurt. sokka doesn’t need someone who treats him like an irreproachable god. in fact, i think sokka would hate nothing more than having a sycophant. he needs someone who understands that he is fallible and vulnerable and needs help like any human being does, and respects and trusts and admires him anyway.
zuko doesn’t have the capacity to recognize azula’s insecurities and shortcomings, or the desire to help her, but he does for sokka. because he never felt like he was in a position where he had to compete for something against him. he’s not trying to usurp sokka’s role as “leader” (except for whatever was going on in “sozin’s comet,” but that’s for another post) and is happy to simply follow him, in a way that is genuinely uncharacteristic for him.
and you can say that it’s because zuko is gay and stupid (which wouldn’t be wrong, per se), but it’s also because sokka embodies everything zuko ever thought he had to be. and it’s because sokka doesn’t even care. it’s the recognition that one person’s idealized model of behavior is another’s burden. that if zuko had been “perfect” like sokka, he never would’ve gained the wisdom to accept defeat and not let it deter him. perfect like azula, who, like sokka, shatters in the face of failure.
zuko says as much in “the siege of the north,” and again in “the western air temple.” the fact that he isn’t a prodigy, the fact that he “had to struggle and fight” to achieve what little he has, is “what made me who i am.” so he’ll respect sokka, of course, because sokka is who he wished for so long that he could be. but he’ll also support sokka, because he has just enough distance from the situation to recognize that he’s not an island (even if sokka himself is convinced that he must be). so it’s not obsession, per se, nor is it simply uncritical admiration that confuses excellence for infallibility. it’s unconditional support born of understanding, a sort of empathy. it’s devotion.
#xxzavier42#asks#sokka#zuko#azula#sokkaxzuko#azula&sokka#azula&zuko#analysis#at some point i gotta stop saying ‘whoops i wrote way more than i thought i would!!! teehee’#and recognize that this is simply my modus operandi#i love to ramble …. lol#also when i call sokka the ‘leader’ its with the caveat that I think the designation of leadership is kind of flawed#but that’s definitely how azula and zuko see it#and in the most traditional sense that’s what he is#but not always.#i need to finish and post my essay on katara and sokka gifted kidism….#anyway. zucchini good 👍🏼
164 notes
·
View notes
Text
Making sense of love for love's sake: the game
Despite all the things i absolutely adore about how the plot unravels and expands in love by love's sake, upon first watch, there's some things i couldn't piece together, which @lurkingshan echoes in their post:
'The way the author was messing with Myungha and forcing cruel choices on him really does not track with a desire to help him find happiness.'
And to preface, this is not something i fully get yet either. I think i'll need a good month and a sizeable reading list of relevant resources to understand just what/who this author/sunbae is and what his role is and how he is associated with myungha. But as always with the best shows for meta (aka bad buddy), as a plot unfolds, you can always find a better understanding by looking backwards and re-contextualising what you've already seen. so i watched ep 1, specifically the scene between myungha and his sunbae at the bar. And i will talk about how everything said in this scene has a whole new meaning now we know the full story, but for now i wanna focus on that question that they keep coming back to; "Then... will you change it for him?".
When you watch the show for the first time, your brain follows the simplest, most obvious version of the story you're being told, one where myungha has been pulled into the world of his sunbae's novel that's being turned into a game and given the opportunity to fix the thing he didn't like about it; making yeowoon happy, and thus you just think the rules of the game are imposed by the author, and so when these cruel choices first come up, you see them as the difficult roadblocks that are nevertheless necessary to any kind of game, forcing the player to make an impossible choice so that the game can continue in a certain direction and its only after that you learn whether it was the right choice or not, or there is no right choice, it simply changes the game you are playing.
And when its revealed what this game actually is, at first i tried to interpret these cruel choices, namely the choice between yeonwoon and myungha's grandma, and at best i could come up with the concept of this being a choice between staying stuck to the past aka choosing his grandma, even though he knows that choice doesn't mean she's safe bc he knows the future where he loses here, its an inevitability, but thats the small happiness he knew before it was taken away and thus that happiness is known and safe, theres no risk, versus choosing to pursue a new happiness, a love of yeowoon and thus himself, which he doesn't know, he hasn't experienced yet, and could be risky. Its a happiness that isn't guaranteed like his grandma, but its a happiness that looks to the future and has hope in it that he can find a new happiness to pursue despite what has happened in his past.
And that fits nice, okayish. But then i watched ep 1 and heard that question "Then... will you change it for him?" And watching through the rest of the eps, we come back to this scene at the bar and each time we get a new run up to the author asking this question, either new dialogue is added or we hear a different piece of the conversation entirely. It starts at the beginning of ep 1 as:
"Because Cha Yeowoon is the only one who's miserable."
"It can't be helped that some people's lives are like that"
"The fact that some people are destined to live that kind of life is what's vile."
Then a bit later in ep 1 we go back and its expanded.
"It can't be helped that some people's lives are like that"
"The fact that some people are destined to live that kind of life is what's vile."
"Why? Do you think you'd write it differently?"
"Yes, definately. Someone like Cha Yeowoon, or someone like me with an awful life, can also be happy."
And then all the way on in ep 6, we get this new dialogue.
"I don't like talking about destiny."
"Why?"
"Because it means everything is predestined."
"Then do you not believe in fate?"
"Fate and destiny are the same. My grandma likes to say that. She said life is like a written book, and how you'll live and die are written in it. (...)I don't like things like this. Even if fate is already destined, I think it can still be changed. Otherwise, there's no point in trying."
"Really? Then Myungha..."
And while we don't hear the author ask the same question, I feel like him getting cut off like that insinuates that the conversation leads to that same ending point. All that is to say, every time we hear this question being asked, its like we learn more and more about what this whole thing is, what the game is, what myungha is saying he will do by agreeing to do what the author asks. And every time, we see myungha being more defiant against the idea of yeowoon being resigned to his miserable ending. He starts off thinking that kind of life is destined, and while it's miserable, its not something he can fight. Then he says he'd want to write the story differently, bc yeowoon, or even him, could be happy. He challenges the idea that yeowoon, and thus himself, is fated to be miserable, and opens up the possibility for happiness for them both, but doesn't yet have the means or resolve to do it, its like he knows its possible on a fundamental level, but doesn't see it as something he can actually achieve. But then we circle back to the idea of destiny and books, both of which came up in the previous quote, and seems incredibly pertinent seen as this whole thing is about a novel this author has written. Myungha talks about how he hates the idea that life is a book where everything written is predestined to happen, from the moment you live to the moment you die. He says "Even if fate is already destined, I think it can still be changed. Otherwise, there's no point in trying." That vile way of life he described before that he said was destined, he is now saying it can be changed, and that possibility is now something he's holding onto, its what he sees hope in so that he can keep trying, bc now he finally is trying, he has the resolve, he's trying to realise this thing, this impossibility of rewriting the life he thought was destined through the way he loves yeowoon.
And coming back to those cruel choices, given this fresh context, it made me think. bc this isn't actually a game that myungha has been put into where the rules are dictated by an author completely separate from him. He said himself, he'd rewrite it, he'd change things for yeowoon. And when you start to think of it less as him fighting against a rigid, removed system and more like him being a character in a story he is trying to rewrite himself, that has both the author and his own limitations, or just his own if you're in the school of thought that the author is some figment or part of myungha himself or his conciousness, then you can start to see where these cruel choices might come from. They could be myungha, the author making edits to this new story, imposing his own doubts and limitations on himself. When he says he has to pick between Yeowoon and his grandma, what if that's the new author myungha seeing this story unfold and thinking no this isn't right, he can't have it all, i'm not deserving of this much happiness.
And what makes me like this idea even more is that when we get that second choice between ending after 14 days or getting 100 days back at the cost of resetting Yeowoon's affection to 0, that whole conversation happens in what I think the bar actually is which is this frozen moment in time where myungha is in the water with this extension of a voice in his head that is talking through these things. That conversation in itself needs its own post, but when you look at it both as a decision to break up or not or a decision to hold onto life or not, you can see how the author is just this soundboard relaying the decisions myungha is going through in his head. The author's voice is his own, weighing up his decisions. And if he is the author here, it only reinforces that the person making the rules of this game is him. You can even extend it further to the idea of the debuffs, where he puts in place this thing that makes it so he causes harm to yeowoon when he's around, and its only by garnering affection that he can prevent it. He gives himself a reason from the get go to stay away from yeowoon and reason it as him doing it for yeowoon's safety, when in fact the only way to make yeowoon safe is to increase his affection, which he can only do by being near him. Its a system that at first gives myungha a reason to stay away aka not like himself, but ultimately says the only way you're going to make yeowoon like you, or the only way you can like yourself, is if you accept risk. And that in itself screams to me of a myungha writing in these game systems that are trying to encourage his own-self love while falling at the hurdle of his own lack of self-worth.
The idea is still messy in my head even for me, but i just really like the idea that myungha could be trying to fix this thing both as a character and game master, and that both these versions of him have these flaws that manifest in their different ways to cause the events we see. It kinda is the definition of being your own worst enemy, the idea that in order to work towards loving yourself, the biggest obstacle you have to encounter is yourself, bc we are the ones holding ourselves back, making all these rules that make it harder to like ourselves and pursue our own happiness. The voices in our head telling us that we aren't good enough and aren't deserving are our own, and while the things that happen to us can inform what they say, we're the one's reinforcing those words. And what this show teaches us is that, if we're the one holding that pen all along, we can choose to change what those words are. If we make the rules, you don't have to create a game with concrete ultimatums, you can create a game where rules don't control you. Instead, you make the decisions, and you can make the ones that make you happy.
#wow look at me writing actual kinda thought out meta#also something something about how the pen being in his pocket wasnt a pen given to him by the author its a pen that was his the whole time#look even if this isnt the right interpretation as intended by the author i just kinda adore this headcanon ive come up with and i cant wai#to rewatch the show again through this lens and see if it holds up#i just adore the idea of this whole thing being this manifestation of a flawed doubtful person trying to navigate through their own messy#nonsensical thoughts to find their own happiness#bc yes thats what triggered me thinking of this whole thing. me seeing that post and thinking yeah that doesnt make sense7#but then again when you tell yourself things an put your own mental blocks in the way they dont make sense either but you still have to fin#the ways to work around them in order to find happiness#like those things dont go away we just find the loopholes or the ways to overcome them that mean we can be happy#the game is your own mind - deal with your own existential crisis as you wish#anyway this is only part 1 in what i hope will be a very extensive meta analysis of this show - stay tuned#love for love's sake
195 notes
·
View notes
Text
I love how kinda shit Tina is with kids it's incredible to me. like she thinks the eggs are adorable and fawns all over them but when it comes to like practical stuff she slips up a lot and freaks about the responsibility. When she's unprepared she's super awkward like when she first met em she spent most of her time overthinking and panicking. Or during the date when Richas started playing pretend with her and Bagi, Bagi adapted pretty quick but Tina had some trouble playing along. And she's hyper aware of to. Shes very insecure about her parenting abilities and swears up and down that her first meeting with Empanda was a garbage fire. She is, however, determined to do better. Shes actively trying to become a better parent and is holding herself to it. I just really like that she's not immediately settling into being a mother. Not everyone immediately acclimates to parenthood and it fits super well for her character.
#it just CTINE GYAHHHH#shes super duper insecure and cctina plays it so well#no way the woman who files down her horns and lies constantly abt her identity bcs of how ashamed of it she is would immediately be#the 'perfect mother'#not to mention the expectation for women being that their 'maternal instincts' kick in immediately and make up for any character flaws#and the expectation for mother to become their primary identity#IDUNNO i love her complexities shes babygirl 2 mr#<*2 me#tinakitten#q!tina#qsmp tag#smp analysis
212 notes
·
View notes
Text
along with the "was Chuuya or Oda more important to Dazai" debates (stupid question, why compare the impact of completely different relationships), I often see arguing over who was worst or better for him.
Putting aside for a moment that these are little imaginary guys in a fantasy setting that are vehicles for the story and themes and therefore their words and actions and their consequences are all meant to carry the story and themes, so applying 1:1 real-life logic is meaningless,
It's both. It's both, it's both it's always both. This is Bungou Stray Dogs, things are always messy and good things come from from the worst situations and good intentions create horrible dilemmas and things are unfair and people make mistakes and there is always love and perseverance and growth anyway.
Meeting Chuuya and having to fight through the events of Fifteen together gave Dazai the slightest drive to keep going, even if his reasoning ("to witness death from up close") was dubious.
Chuuya in Storm Bringer saw Dazai as a reflection of all his doubts and weaknesses. That hallucination in the lab, "you're like me, your birth was a mistake"? Those are Chuuya's insecurities projected on Dazai's passiveness that Chuuya can't stand. Dazai to Chuuya is what happens when you give up and stop fighting, and so Chuuya tends to see Dazai in a grimmer light, make a bigger monster out of him than he really is.
But Chuuya also serves as Dazai's wake up call (cue Dead Apple soundtrack) and keeps him from slipping too far. Yes Chuuya punched Dazai square in the face, but it was because Dazai was seeing an ally's death as an opportunity for him instead of a death. And it worked! Because Dazai then got into action not 2 days later to start on ending the conflict that had already been ongoing for over 2 months!
Meanwhile, in the world of death Dazai put himself into, Oda's single most important principle was not to kill. And he was such a strange man, near-impossible to guess, simply because he was so uniquely weird, even a bit stupid at times, which made him interesting to be around. He became a good friend (yes friend, not mentor or guardian) that always remained non-judgmental and asked almost nothing of the genius boy.
But Oda also saw himself as someone unworthy of criticizing anyone else. He had many thoughts about Dazai's behaviour and how he saw he was hurting, but wouldn't consider himself as someone who could do something about it. So he said nothing and did nothing while Dazai self-destructed. But he cared! When Dazai provoques the Mimic soldier into shooting him, Oda is scared! He just thinks he has no right to step in Dazai's head like that, and they come to an impasse.
And his last words. They may sound harsh, and really, they are, but they came from his own experience and were meant to force Dazai to reconsider his choices right now. It was the first time Oda spoke out on Dazai's issues, and he had limited time. No, there isn't gonna be a magic solution that will fix him one day. The time Oda was the most content was when he was taking care of the kids, that's why losing them was so hard. Saving people feels good and keeps you going. So he told Dazai to go do that, or things would only get worse. He knows his friend better than anyone else, and his friend suffers the same aimless life he was trying to escape himself.
Chuuya and Oda were both people Dazai found interesting and dragged into the mafia with him. They were both among the few people that weren't intimidated by his high mafia profile. They both involuntarily fed into his self-destruction, and they both did things that saved him in the long run. They both helped and destroyed him in different ways on their own time and it was messy and sometimes good and sometimes bad...
... but it's always both.
#oof i needed that off my chest#everyone is flawed and everyone is trying. also they are CHARACTERS and their actions' consequences are relative#bsd#bungo stray dogs#bungou stray dogs#bsd analysis#bsd meta#bsd dazai#bsd dazai osamu#bsd chuuya#bsd nakahara chuuya#bsd oda#bsd odasaku#bsd oda sakunosuke#apparently i talk sometimes
310 notes
·
View notes
Text
q!Bad is not normal right now.
he is getting super tunnel vision obsessed on killing way more than he would normally- this is Mr. “I have a B plan for my B plan’s B plan” which he always did on the island. always the most overprepared. now in purgatory he’s been rushing in with barely a plan?? strange.
he is making purposeful choices to get more kills in situations where doing so wouldn’t be a good idea, and making himself out to be the prime enemy, to the detriment of himself and even to the detriment of his team. this has been causing ghosties to freak out.
q!bad insisting to q!pac today that he is going to continue going absolutely cutthroat merciless on everyone, even his closest friends. because the eggs will die if he doesn’t…
It’s been 5 days of me watching this happening, and it’s become sooo obvious that this is not normal behavior for the character. something is very wrong with him and it’s getting worse. cc!bad is doing a great job roleplaying a character who is actively losing their mind and becoming a murderous monster on a rampage.
^ this was only my strong speculation- and then cc!bad liked this tweet:
yeah that’s a confirmation :)
#qsmp#qsmp badboyhalo#heheheheheheheheh#but fr though#it must be so hard to rp tunnel vision and purposeful flawed choices when you’re Such a good player normally#like it’s going against your entire regular playstyle#that’s impressive#qsmp purgatory#qsmp character analysis#text post
380 notes
·
View notes
Text
One of the things that always really fascinated me about Sakura's character is how manipulative she is.
I was rewatching the anime with my partner because it was their first time, and when Sakura finds Sasuke to beg him not to go to Orochimaru, my partner said that they were a little disappointed that romance was emphasized in that scene over friendship, and I said, "You know, I think Sakura would have told Sasuke she loved him whether she did or didn't. She knows that he cares about her. I think Sakura would say anything she had to to get him to stay."
And the most obvious example of this is when she does that exact thing to Naruto before the Five Kage Summit, lying about having feelings for him in order to save him, and that scene is what I was referencing when I made the comment, but throughout the course of the anime, there are several other moments where Sakura either outright lies and cons or uses her feelings as a weapon to get her way.
She does it right when Team 7 is formed, when Naruto plays the eraser prank on Kakashi. Her inner monologue shows that she thinks it's hilarious, but instead she puts up this facade. She berates Naruto because she thinks it'll make her appear cooler to Sasuke, and she tells Kakashi that she told Naruto not to do it and that she would never do something like that because she wants to portray herself as not only superior to Naruto but as the good one, the innocent one, the one who can do no wrong.
She does it to Sai, Kiba, and Lee when she knocks them unconscious so that she can go kill Sasuke by herself. She does it when tells Sasuke that she wants to join him so that she can get close to him. She does it again when, at the end of the war, she begs Sasuke one last time. She even does it in Sasuke Retsuden when she cons Penjira at cards and reveals that she's been doing the same to Tsunade for years. And these are just off the top of my head, I'm sure there's more.
Basically I'm saying that everyone should consider themselves lucky that Sakura's on Konoha's side because if she was the one with the villain arc? She'd be ruthless.
#like imagine if Sakura wanted to kill Naruto#she'd get in close to him by telling him she wanted to come home and he'd be so happy#and she'd put her fist through his heart#sasuke could never#to be very clear I adore Sakura to pieces and I love her for her character flaws#so using this post as an excuse to bash her or her relationships with naruto and/or sasuke isn't welcome#naruto#sakura haruno#sakura#sasuke#naru#team 7#mine#meta analysis
296 notes
·
View notes
Text
i think the thing that makes people mischaracterize and completely miss the point of chara is that theyre written to be two very different things concurrently that dont really mesh together.
from what we know concretely about chara as a character, they were a very mentally ill child and complicated person who simultaneously hurt and helped people around them, who held both a lot of love and hate in their heart. they are fairly vague but also have specific character traits such as liking chocolate and filling up water glasses to the brim to maximize efficiency. they take speaking patterns from toriel and an interest in gardening from asgore. if you believe in the narrachara theory, they even have a character arc that changes depending on the route you take. they are inarguably a character who haunts the narrative due to their decisions in life having lead to tragedy that shapes the very plot of the game inextricably; and arguably a character that haunts the narrative and shapes the story much more literally in being a conscious force and companion that accompanies our journey.
at the same time, chara isnt treated as a character at all and is instead a meta-narrative device meant to act as an in-universe player stand-in. in this way chara isnt actually a person with character traits, but a vehicle for toby to provide commentary about the people who play video games. they are a concept that represents the state of thoughtless exp grinding. in the no mercy route their main purpose is to be a reflection of you and your mindset, even more directly than flowey. the reason theyre named after you is because, for a number of aspects in the game, they are supposed to be you; with no notable separation like there is with frisk.
this problem also heavily applies to frisk, for who there is an effort to separate their identity from yours at the end of the pacifist route but who still ends up with no real character traits of their own. people compensate for this by using black-and-white thinking; which results both in assigning frisk and chara a sort of "good-and-evil" dichotomy leading to their early fan interpretations, and in thinking that frisk and chara can only be either fully fleshed out characters or mindless player inserts leading to people favouring option one and basically ignoring the player as a concept except to occasionally use it as a generic big bad.
i think toby prioritized meta-textual implications over actual textual characterization for the human characters in undertale. this left chara as a character feeling unclear, unfocused, and incongruent due to them trying to be several things at once with no real through-line; and frisk as a character feeling practically non-existent outside of being a vessel. there are effectively two different charas in undertale, the character and the plot device, which makes it hard to talk about them as one consistent whole. i think this is why in tobys second game hes been putting such a focus on kris as a character and their separation from the player, as to improve on what he didnt properly touch on in undertale.
#undertale#chara dreemurr#frisk#btw i love chara to death they are super important to me but i think its necessary to acknowledge that their character writing is flawed#and i think undertale is a beautifully written masterpiece but that doesnt mean everything was handled perfectly#especially since it was written by basically just one man working on his first major project#analysis
331 notes
·
View notes
Note
Do you have any SDV hot takes?
Boy do I ever Anon! Thank you for giving me the chance to get on my soapbox about this.
Shane doesn't relapse when he is happily married to the Farmer. The popular "relapse" interpretation is based on faulty assumptions about what substance abuse recovery is supposed to look like and flat-out misreadings of the text of the game.
Shane doesn't "start" drinking again: he never stops, just reduces the amount he drinks. (Unless we are supposed to interpret the phrase "cut back" in the 7 Heart Event as meaning "quit” or "gave up” for some reason. Or if we ignore the new 1.6 dialogue about him drinking less after his 6 Heart event.)
Shane's mess is not a consequence of uncontrolled drinking, but a consequence of his depression and possible under-managed ADHD. His room at Marnie's remains exactly as messy when he's in recovery as it is when he's spiraling, so the drinking has no effect on his cleanliness.
”Okay,” you might say, “but he still shouldn’t drink, and he should pick up his room.” And sure, yeah. Ideally we should all do the same. But that’s not always a fair or realistic expectation for everyone. Not everyone can quit their addictions or bad habits cold turkey. Not everyone is going to be the model citizen. That doesn’t mean they can’t live happy lives. That doesn’t mean they don’t have value. That doesn’t mean Shane doesn’t have value.
So instead of complaining about the ways that Shane fails to measure up to typical adult standards, it may be more productive to ask: is he happy? Is he doing okay?
By any reasonable measure, a married Shane is living his best possible life. He‘s surprised and delighted to be your trophy husband. He doesn’t have to worry about taking a soul-sucking job or struggling with unemployment. His drinking isn’t causing him any problems, and if he can’t keep his personal space clean, at least he doesn’t let his mess spread to the rest of the house. He has his own little coop for Charlie and it’s just adorable to watch him bounce her up and down. He actually makes time for Jas.
I am not requiring everyone to love Shane the way he is written, or to make space in their farmhouse for him. But please, have realistic expectations for the character that exists. And do make friends with him. He gives you an OP recipe and access to blue chickens!
#My other hot take is that people shouldn’t install mods that “fix” NPC character flaws#Yeah it bothers me too when Penny pushes George’s wheelchair without consent or when Clint gets on his “Nice Guy” hobbyhorse#But CA gave these characters flaws for a reason#Flaws add interest and depth to characters#Instead of knee jerk rejecting my discomfort with the character’s bad behavior#I can sit with it and reflect on my own behavior and values#And I can recognize the worth even in characters who don’t share my values#Or who don’t change and grow in the “right” way#After all I’m not gonna share all your values#Or always change and grow the way I ought to#But we all gotta live together and give each other a little grace#Anywho those are my hot takes#Thank you for your time#shane stardew valley#stardew valley#media analysis#media criticism#media literacy
90 notes
·
View notes
Text
Edwin Payne is a dweeb who gives terrible weak comebacks, who can be unnecessarily petty, or overly smug, who is inordinately pleased with himself when wearing detective gear and using scientific gear, the thought never crossing his mind that he might not look as cool as he thinks he does, who carries a continual and utter absolute delight at acting like the characters he loved to read about, who was enthralled by his magazine detective and adventure stories and who wears a similar smile when he sits on the bed watching Scooby Doo with Niko, 'these detectives are terribly clever,' whose board game collection is mostly variations of Clue, who requires payment (because any good detective is worth some kind of payment) but whose idea of payment is whatever interesting object the client offers to add to his collection, who has encyclopedic intelligence he clearly dedicated hours to learning, who has a particular way of acting and speaking like everything is of vital importance, because to him, it is.
#dead boy detectives#edwin payne#charles rowland#niko sasaki#crystal palace#dead boy detective agency#Edwin is a legitimate nerd#I get serious 1960s Peter Parker vibes from him#he reads the equivalent of comic books instead of hanging out with other people of course he would absolutely love cartoons#he's not good at fighting but excellent at running#chooses to only wear extremely proper and practical clothes unless he's very relaxed or stressed#of course he likes being a dead boy detective it's literally what he spent all his time reading#when he's being overly smug and self-important he reminds me of Peter Parker on Venom in Spider-Man 3#like he thinks he's owning the floor but literally nobody else gets that impression#but then there's other moments where he's - not exactly intimidating but also someone you can't ignore#and he's so passionate about his detective work#just some thoughts#character analysis#he definitely has flaws#but he is also an incredible nerd#twilight-zoned-out#I can definitely see how the original character was supposed to be 12#but it still works how they did it#his height would definitely not work if he was 12 lol#he liked detectives so now he is a detective#it had to be said
58 notes
·
View notes
Text
WHEN TH. THE DETAILS. THE PARALLELSSSS. izuru getting the cut on his face to demonstrate that he does still have an error margin in combat and that hes not entirely perfect and can still get hurt. him getting the cut in the exact same place hajime did to demonstrate that he will never entirely rid himself of the unshakably flawed imperfect and human nature of his past identity no matter how many lobotomies he GETS UGHHHHHHHGGGGGG
#I LOVE CHARACTER ANALYSIS!!!!!! I LOVE ENGLISH CLASS I LOVE NUANCE AND CHARACTER FLAWS AND PARALLELS!!!!!!!!!!!!!#hajime hinata#ko’s danganronpa ramblings#izuru kamukura#dr3 despair arc#sdr2#danganronpa spoilers
196 notes
·
View notes
Text
I'm not the biggest fan of Oda, as many here already know. That comes from the INCREDIBLE disconnect between the fandom version of him as opposed to the canon. I see often on Twitter, Reddit, Youtube, etc etc. this treatment of Oda as some great force of pure good, and furthermore this scene as a grand bit of final wisdom. So right now, let's talk about his death scene.
The anime puts it like this:
"You told me you might find a reason to live if you lived in a world of violence and bloodshed. [...] You won't find it. You must know that already. Whether you're on the side who kills people or the side that saves people, nothing beyond what you would expect will appear. Nothing in this world can fill that lonely hole you have. You will wander the darkness for eternity. [...] Be on the side that saves people. If both sides are the same to you, become a good man. Save the weak, and protect the orphans. Neither good nor evil means much to you, I know... but that'd make you at least a bit better."
And the light novel puts it like this:
"You told me if you put yourself in a world
of violence and bloodshed, you might be able to find a
reason to live… [...] You won't find it. [...] You should know that. Whether you're on the side that
takes lives or the side that saves them, nothing beyond
your own expectations will happen. Nothing in this world
can fill the hole that is your loneliness. You will wander the
darkness for eternity. [...] Be on the side that saves people. [...] If
both sides are the same, then choose to become a good
person. Save the weak, protect the orphaned. You might
not see a great difference between right and wrong, but…
saving others is something just a bit more wonderful."
I want to break down what bothers me in these. This portion especially.
You told me you might find a reason to live if you lived in a world of violence and bloodshed. [...] You won't find it. You must know that already. Whether you're on the side who kills people or the side that saves people, nothing beyond what you would expect will appear. Nothing in this world can fill that lonely hole you have. You will wander the darkness for eternity.
You told me if you put yourself in a world
of violence and bloodshed, you might be able to find a
reason to live… [...] You won't find it. [...] You should know that. Whether you're on the side that
takes lives or the side that saves them, nothing beyond
your own expectations will happen. Nothing in this world
can fill the hole that is your loneliness. You will wander the
darkness for eternity.
I think we often forget that Dazai is still a suicidal teen in Dark Era, and that he's one that's held on to the hope he'd find something for all this time. I dont disagree with the fact he must know he won't find anything in the mafia already. But Oda misunderstands a lot of fundamental parts of Dazai, which lead to this scene being devastating.
Whether you're on the side who kills people or the side that saves people, nothing beyond what you would expect will appear.
Whether you're on the side that
takes lives or the side that saves them, nothing beyond
your own expectations will happen.
The thing is, Dazai DOES find things he doesn't expect. He meets Chuuya and Chuuya surprises him! He meets Oda and Ango and they fascinate him!! He meets Kunikida and Ranpo and everyone else and he finds them interesting!!! He gets proven wrong, he gets surprised, he has NEVER been infallible. And he's incredibly hopeful too, as stated earlier. He held on to the hope he'd find something for the past 3 years despite how horrible of an environment the mafia was for him, and he still tried his hardest to save Oda. To tell him that not only would he never find anything here, but anywhere else he goes? It's kind of.... well, shitty.
And there's another thing about this line I have to point out, something from a couple pages earlier.
"But he's different. He's sharp-witted with a mind like a
steel trap. And he's just a child—a sobbing child abandoned
in the darkness of a world far emptier than the one we're
seeing."
"He was too smart for his own good. That was why he
was always alone. The reason why Ango and I were able to
be by his side was that we understood the solitude that surrounded him, and we never stepped inside it no matter how close we stood."
Oda believes that it's Dazai's intelligence that isolates him. While this is true, it's only true to an extent. Look at Ranpo, who was also isolated because of his intelligence. He doesn't stay that way, despite not having any peers. Ranpo found his place with Fukuzawa at the agency, and there was nothing stopping Dazai from also finding his own.
Nothing in this world can fill that lonely hole you have. You will wander the darkness for eternity.
Nothing in this world
can fill the hole that is your loneliness. You will wander the
darkness for eternity.
And I don't know how to explain this to people, but telling an emotionally distressed teenager that he's going to be lonely forever is, erm, kind of bad? Especially when the person he thinks understands him the most is like... dying in his arms.
Oda tried to help Dazai in his final moments, I'm not trying to discredit that. He gave Dazai his advice and Dazai chose to take it, because he knew Oda was speaking from his own experiences. But Oda's words were still harmful to him, regardless of how well meaning they were.
#bsdrewatch2023#my one bsd analysis long post wahoo#sorry for the haterism im fed up with can do no wrong angel fandom odasaku#give me flawed oda!!!#dont get me wrong guys i love this scene but i love it a) BECAUSE IT *IS* DEVASTATING#and b) because dazai choosing a better life for himself is really beautiful to me#but the entire oda was a shining light in the mafia and he guided dazai with his goodness in these final moments narrative IRKS ME#SO MUCH#so here we go :)#caps cw#longer post#long post
65 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
angie-fluffy-cuffs
Hold my beer!
myharulove
Harukinha
andrewbrumble
Textos Para Ti
andresete13
andresete's corner
its-foodparadise
Untitled