#pathologic is a game with a really interesting plot and story

[clownkiwi]

yesss, people are talking about pathologic in my recent polls post, just as intended

[numerousracoons]

My husband! He’s here. And he lives rent-free in my subconscious (pretty impressive considering the economy)- I have arguably too many thoughts on this man, spinning him in my head like a microwave does food.

I love this man so much but the thing I’ve really sunk my teeth into is his relationship to the theatre/‘this is a play’ aspect of Pathologic Classic.

It’s very much unique to his route and it carries so many implications for this man to actually just fully be aware than none of this shit is ‘real’.

Obviously, a personal favourite part of this is Daniil and Mark’s immortal (pun intended) beef with one another- these guys absolutely HATE one another, low key want the other dead or gone (Mark says he’s glad Daniil will be leaving and Daniil tells Mark that if he could’ve, he would’ve killed him in the Day 12 convo, which is in of itself just an entirely wild conversation)- but also they also make jokes to each other about what their lines are supposed to be and the set design and the theatre because they’re the only ones aware of the play meta - truely the most frenemies to ever frenemy.

But in a serious light Daniil figuring out the play is actually such an interesting aspect to his character and I’ve yet to see anyone else really dig into it.

Because while Mark Immortal talking about the theatre to Daniil is him essentially breaking character (in the other two routes he places no indication about the true nature of the theatre, implying his character’s role is that of an actual theatre director with weird, maybe kinda prophetic, plays), this isn’t The Bachelor’s actor breaking character and talking as the actor’s true self, but pretty blatantly Daniil Dankovsky The Character becoming aware of the play and that’s kinda wild.

And it holds so many implications to how his character acts in regard to fate and free will. Like The Powers That Be, while there’s absolutely an argument that Daniil’s denial in regards to being a toy of the Powers could just be him attempting to deal with the eldritch horror of it all, I think there’s pretty good reason to argue that it actually has to do with his somewhat meta-awareness (of the play).

While Daniil acknowledges that his character is a toy in the narrative, it could be argued that he knows he isn’t REALLY a toy, because this aspect is part of a play’s plot rather than the actual reality of him being an actor in a play. Which to me fits fairly well into his pre-established character trait of seeking the truth, The Bachelor doesn’t seem the type to actively attempt to deny reality when presented with evidence, no matter how discomforting it may be, so I feel as though his insistence to the developers of not being a toy is less so denial and more so him telling (what he perceives to be) the theatre troupe that he knows the toy storyline isn’t real- that he’s aware he’s in a play.

It also, interestingly enough, supports his ideas surrounding fighting the concept of inevitability and his disbelief in anything that claims otherwise (such as the Mistresses’ claimed clairvoyance abilities which heavy imply that the future is set in stone enough that it can been ‘seen’)- as Mark directly tells the Bachelor that the script hasn’t been written yet, and is dependent on his actions, alongside with the Bone Stake Lot quest in which Mark tells Daniil that he isn’t the one who made that set, it was the other characters who did that- ultimately supporting Daniil’s concepts of free will and the ability to ‘defeat’ things deemed by others to be inevitable (like death and fate).

(Also, speaking of the game developers, I 100% interpret the in-character Bachelor lines as him attempting to interact with the developers as though they are normal tragedians and executors. Because Daniil knows there is a layer of reality above the story (the theatre), and that’s what the tragedians and executors hint to and know, but he isn’t aware of the actual reality of it all being a video game. He thinks they’re like Mark Immortal, aware of the play, but in actuality they’re above that.)

But back to Mark Immortal and Daniil Dankovsky’s relationship, I find it really interesting how Mark approaches Daniil being meta aware, because on the one hand, he is joking around with Daniil, for example his Day 12 convo:

And then only a few lines later (after Daniil starts bringing up Mark’s involvement in his fate):

Which kind of blatantly shows that while Mark thinks that Daniil knowing is fun, he’s also fully aware that this was not his intention and would be annoying to deal with long term because of what Daniil could do with that knowledge.

[shara-dee]

Absolutely controversial review on 'Heatwaves' freshly out of the oven

okay, so this book is FUCKING INSANE.

and I don't mean it necessarily good.

I told someone in my comment section that I'm more or less positive about this book, but at the time I only reached the middle of the book and, well...

Let me lay out the facts first.

This book features:

• Pathological Altruism and God's Complex of Alex Chen

• Steph carrying the only brain cell

• Sapphic Drama™

• Many many flashbacks of Chen Family trauma

• Shit load of political drama

• And the equal amount of Daddy Issues

• A couple references both to Steph's Story and True Colors

• Immaculate voice acting from Erika Mori (this woman has range)

• Me, feeling sorry for Steph every chapter

Ahem. Now more in-depth and, as I hope, more coherent thoughts about Heatwaves. As was agreed between me and @areyouintogirlsorwhat, who listened to me yelling about it, I would describe this book as:

Shit happened. And also unhappened.

Let me just tell that, coming from me, as Alex and Steph are my dearest, I had a REALLY hard time with Alex in this book. A huge chunk of book is just Alex trying to understand that she doesn't need to overuse her powers to help people and- Well. It took her many pages to understand that even though all the events happen within only 2 days. It was really intense.

As for the setting, we enter Barbazal, a small town in Colorado, where we are just mashed into a big ass election drama. Yeah, election. Big Sigh. Actually super boring exposition and I didn't care much about most of the characters there, except some and pretty much in the end.

God knows, I was busy internally screaming at Alex.

Alex is. A lot in this book. And the worst thing, I can believe that canonically she would became a person from this book. I try to avoid spoilers as much as I can. But let's just say. SHE NEEDED TO STOP AND THINK FOR LITERALLY A SECOND AND THEN THIS BOOK WOULDN'T HAVE HALF OF ITS DRAMA.

Steph though? Is absolutely great. When I said she carries the only braincell out of the two of them I meant it. I was really feeling for her the whole book with how patient she was with Alez and how much she allowed her to do, still being at her side the whole time. And I mean it when I say that sometimes Alex could use Steph's angrier side.

Okay, I'm feeling like I'm too bitter about this book.

Actually it has so much potential. It makes a great job exploring Alex's character, her flaws, her thoughts, her powers, her overall feelings towards things. And I love how many flashbacks of her we have in book. Erika's voice breaking each time she says 'Dad', Alex always wondering how things could've been for her... She actually has character growth going on in this book. And it fills in some empty spaces the game has left. So even if I have a strong opinion about her certain choices, I really like how controversial she was there, because in the end it still makes her a really deep imperfect protagonist.

I didn't really care for the plot until it became super intense and insane. I thought I was going to explode reading the 16-18 chapters, because it had so much going on.

But, well, it still was an enjoyable experience nonetheless, BIG THANKS to Erika Mori who voiced it, I don't think I would've enjoyed it as much if it wasn't for her mad acting skills. Her acting as Steph is actually the cutest thing.

So yeah. My honest opinion? A solid 7/10 for me, but again, Erika makes me biased.

The plot is not really interesting, I suggest buying the audiobook specifically to hear Alex expressing all her emotions in character, really compensates for all the dubious shit she does.

I still would've bought it, even if I knew how much I would scream.

However, if you're not a big fan of Alex, I don't think you would like this book. If you want to read this book purely for Chenrich, I also think you will disappointed because even though they are still there, being cuties, their relationship is only a 25% of the book. And yes, again, there're many controversial things going on, so if you have hard time reading your fav making shitty decisions, maybe you should spare yourself.

Thank you for reading this review, will be happy to hear your thoughts if you read the book or if you have any questions and don't mind spoilers.

[katherinakaina]

🧡🖤💀

for pathologic ofc

🧡: What is a popular (serious) theory you disagree with?

I have a hard time assessing what is popular. As far as I can tell, anything you’d call a theory is rather unpopular around here. Most people just go with the text and take all the characters at their word. Which honestly baffles me, because the game warns you every chance it gets that everybody’s lying to you all the time.

For example, most people seem to think Aglaya is sincerely in love with Artemy or the player. And, strictly speaking, it doesn’t really change anything whether her feelings are genuine or she’s just manipulating either him or you directly. BUT I feel strongly that her being a master manipulator and all around heartless bitch makes for a better character. Maybe I just find love and affection less interesting than cunning and ambition – especially in women. But when a character is introduced like ‘oh, she’s devilishly smart, she’ll achieve her goals no matter what, she’ll make you do her bidding and you won’t even know it, every thought you have in your head was planted there by her on purpose’ I am going to assume she had you all fooled, sorry.

🖤: Which character is not as morally good as everyone else seems to think?

Lara Ravel. She has a very particular brand of darkness that nobody seems to be talking about. Her deal is that she wants to be a good person. That’s why she always tries to sign up for all these humanitarian efforts like House of the Living, Isolation Ward, testing medicine, working at the Hospital or having water delivered to her house in p2. She romanticizes the idea of being a hero, a beacon of light, of giving away everything she can. “Lara reads too much classic literature” as Daniil puts it. The problem is, she tries. Doesn’t actually go through with any of it. Because she’s a coward.

Bachelor: Are you that afraid of death?

Lara Ravel: Utterly…

She says this on day 10. After you’ve seen her trying to involve herself in events and put herself in danger so many times. After she talks big talk about how she’d totally go and kill Alexander Block. And yet she always lets the circumstances stop her. And now you know why.

Is this too understandable to be a moral failing? People seem to think worse about Daniil for even considering fleeing the town. Or maybe you are mad at us americans for not going against armed police more often to stop a genocide. Or at russians for not overthrowing our warmongering regime yet. Whatever it is, sometimes people should risk their lives. Extraordinary things won’t be achieved without extraordinary effort.

Anyway, I think Lara is my favourite bound. I honestly want to write a separate post about her, especially her p2 story, because it has interesting things added there. Her story is probably the most well written in general, thematically consistent and human. And just plain relatable. We all wish we were Danill Dankovsky. But we all are Lara Ravel. Too afraid of death to make anything of our lives.

💀: If you had to choose one major character to die, who would you choose?

If you think about it, it’s a bit of a plot hole that Aglaya doesn’t try to get rid of all the humbles to make the Changeling's ending impossible. She can’t just execute them without being too obvious about it, but she can plot and scheme to make that happen. Like, what if it was her who gave that gun to Anna on day 9? Would be fun if one of them actually died as the result of this whole thing or even all three of them. Something like that.

[cienie-isengardu]

Mortal Kombat 1 goes out of its way to make Bi-Han as unlikable as possible. We are not meant to think that he had a point at all, and that he is 100% in the wrong, and that's not even going into his betrayal and murder by inaction. Not only that, he is also making a complete 180 from his previous timeline counterparts. Before, he was a traditionalist and technophobe. Now, he is going against tradition, and is embracing technology. Why do you think NRS made these decisions?

In all honest, I don’t have any reasonable idea why NRS would even want to mess up Bi-Han so badly in the first place, especially since

A) the Sub-Zero brotherhood is part of the lore since second game came out (1993) and literally three decades have passed since that day 

B) Mileena, Tanya, Reiko, Baraka, Syzoth, Rain and arguably Sindel get much better treatment despite their previously well established ties to the villainous side of the story while alive Bi-Han was, game-wise, barely explored by narrative

and above everything else, C) Bi-Han’s death is one of the most impactful deaths in MK lore, as it greatly influenced the history and character development of both Kuai Liang and Hanzo Hasashi while also introduced another emotional conflict between younger Sub-Zero and Noob Saibot - and for this to work, Bi-Han and Kuai Liang’s brotherhood needed to be something special in the first place. 

Assassin Bi-Han not necessarily needed to be a good man to be a good brother but there is enough tie-in material to get the point he was not inherently evil (if anything, the pathological upbringing he was forced in is to be blamed). I’m glad MK1!Sub-Zero wasn’t killed yet I still wonder how the hell NRS decided to not take advantage of brotherhood that is one of major foundations of the fan-favorite Kuai Liang’s character and instead twisted not only Bi-Han but also Kuai Liang & Hanzo Hasashi into the new take that is frankly, frustrating at best for a long-time fans of Sub-Zero brothers and Lin Kuei. All NRS needed to do was to give us literally a few minutes of  the Lin Kuei brothers’ close bond, then devastate us with Bi-Han’s death, then devastate Kuai Liang & Smoke’s life by bringing evil Noob Saibot and that would be a solid ground for upcoming games for years, instead of shattered brotherhood that so far lead to nowhere, as Bi-Han was sidelines right away after the supposed “plot twist” and all interesting points about Lin Kuei’s servitude comes mainly from intro dialogues because story mode seems afraid to acknowledge Sub-Zero’s frustration on the main. 

I suspect the studio's choice may be about balancing the events and family drama, as bitter brotherhood vs sweet sisterhood, but really, it feels so unfair and frustrating it was done at such Sub-Zero’s expense, especially as MK1!Bi-Han seems to me like a weird mix of Frost & Noob more than his original character even was. What is ironic, considering the fact that original Bi-Han was a Lin Kuei that wanted (and would do so, if he killed Shang Tsung) to retire from assassin life and the oldest Mortal Kombat comics presented him as pretty honorable man that even saved the Earthrealm at the cost of his own life. 

But sure, let’s fuck up the Lin Kuei, it is not like previous games let them have anything nice for too long anyway.

[wearepaladin]

Patho questions! 2, 3, and...hmm, I think you played P2 first if I remember right, but I'd still be interested in hearing if you have any thoughts on 8, the Powers That Be. Or 9, Rat Prophet.

2: Wildest theory I'd defend? Man, Pathologic's plot is so canonically wild that I'm hard pressed to think of a theory that feels like a stretch. We've got multiple universes/timelines divided by both character we're playing and which game we're playing, under various layers of what is real vs what isn't, and whether reality really matters in the face of our choices. The consistent theme I think is that it's all about managing what we can and cannot do against death, whether we really are the healers, parts in a play, toys in a children's game, or the players seeing through the healer's eyes, it's all about wrestling to find out what we can and cannot do to change things, and the inevitability of sacrifice as a result. What are we willing to give away in the face of change, and what does it say about us? 3: Favorite Nameless/Minor NPC Hmm. Maybe the first Herb Bride we meet in Patho2, the one who carries the skull of a bull that many townsfolk are running in terror at the sight of. I think it's the first of the Kin (outside of Artemy's dreams) we meet in the game, and while she doesn't understand what the ruckus is about, Artemy can warn her that even if she's not doing anything wrong with carrying a skull (which might somehow be her skull?) around, she might get in trouble by appearing so strange to the humans. The next day, all we find of her is a child playing with the skull, no mention of what her fate is. 8. How did you react to the Powers That Be: You're right, since my first time was Patho2, my reaction to them was a bit understated vs first time players who discovered them in game 1, but I think ultimately they're another level of the layer cake of metaphor the game operates on. There's the Kin and the Earth, the Town, the Kains and their utopian creations, the Theater and Immortel, The Powers that be and Us, the players who see all of this through the eyes of the characters, and prod them to react a certain way in the face of all this. 9.Who/What do you think the Rat Prophet is?

The Rat Prophet is a concession of the Theater to answer the problem of Death. If we die in the game, the Prophet appears, and the more times we die, a tumorous structure it calls its house manifests as we grow weaker and weaker. Because, in a story where the problem of death is so very paramount, us being to come back from it is a concession to the medium, that we are playing a game and operating on videogame rules. And every appearance of the Prophet is sort of spotlight on this problem of Death, how it should be definite, but with the growing influence of the Prophet, its influence is held back at the cost of things becoming Wrong in multiple ways. For the player, you grow weak, and lose the ability to embrace others or worse, opening the door to an ending where all your eforts are for naught. For the rest of the world, a building sized tumor shows up in reality, you have the option of silencing screaming ghosts into some strange void, and other strange things, and yet, because it is ultimately a concession to the medium, the Rat Prophet is ultimately a child or small person in a mask, fulfilling their role in the story.

[katabay]

Do you think it's more interesting if a character knows what genre they re in or if they don't know what genre they re in

it really depends on if the story itself is enjoyable or interesting; I enjoy both of these structures with no real preference for one over the other because they provide different kinds experiences, and it depends on the overall plot or genre. it’s like salt and sugar, they do different things to the recipe. sometime a dish is in severe need of garlic and no amount of salt can save it.

like, Alan Wake is one of my favorite games, and Pathologic plays with both sides of this, and I love a tragedy-adventure where people think they’re in one thing and it’s clear this is something else, but these structures also have the potentially to be unforgivably fucking boring to me if the characters or story isn’t interesting.

[silenthillmutual]

this isn't an argument that lynch is like infallible so i hope no one takes it that way, more that i can see the twin peaks vibes in pathologic's whole deal and i can certainly see where they would want a bombshell blonde character and i think eva's in-game existence is interesting but her 'character concept' quotes on the wiki are truly horrendous. i think even comparing her to a hitchcock blonde is pushing it (though some of hitchcock's characters are kinda shallow imo; some of hitchcock's work feels like the characters exist to serve a story, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, i just tend to prefer character-driven to plot-driven stories) and also highlights just how little whoever wrote that actually thinks about women. which is such a shame bc pathologic has some really, really interesting women in it.

it’s funny that eva is compared to a david lynch character bc i can see where there were going for laura palmer w her but the design document quotes for poor eva on the wiki are some of the most misogynist things i’ve ever seen written.

[hustlerose]

i think oblivion’s “leveling problem” is actually kinda cool. i think if it was done intentionally by a modern indie dev, ppl would be calling it a brilliant subversion of traditional rpg mechanics, which builds and plays out over dozens of hours. i think the experience of playing an rpg that gets more difficult and hostile over time is weirdly cool and interesting. and it’s a shame that it’s seen as this irredeemable flaw, that only exists so gamers can bitch about it online. i’d go so far as to say that if you play the game according to “optimal leveling” guides, you’re missing out

if you play the dlcs after the main questline, it ties up the narrative and ludonarrative threads in a nice neat bow. see, you are never really the main character in oblivion’s main quest, you’re just the messenger. you’re constantly doing things so that martin can move the plot forward. sure, you’re a hero, you save the world. you do tons of heroic shit. you charge headlong into oblivion to save kvatch and bruma. and for awhile, everyone knows your name. but martin is the dragonborn. when mehrunes dagon shows up, it’s martin who faces him in the final battle, while you just stand there. that’s what the world remembers. most of your heroics are only yours to remember

so you find yourself facing increasingly impossible odds, on a quest you won’t be remembered for. isnt it fitting that during all that, you feel the world is turning more and more hostile toward you? that everything is out of your control? i think it makes sense that the rpg loop of killing monsters and getting loot eventually takes its toll on you. as you progress, it only gets less satisfying. you finish the main quest, and you still keep doing it, even when it starts to hurt. you might ask yourself, what’s the point of doing this anymore? and yeah, what is the point?

knights of the nine takes you a journey of transcendent spiritual healing. you learn to move on from these earthly things that have been grinding you down the past few in-game years. maybe there’s more to life than “adventure.” taking this path means becoming one with the gods. this questline involves one of the only quests in the whole game that asks you to not attack something. in the end, you lay some old spirits to rest and become one with the gods

shivering isles represents the opposite reaction to all this. if you play it after (or instead of) kotn, the narrative resolves with the pc accepting the futility and absurdity of their life, at the price of their sanity. and they ultimately succumb to ambition. this story also ends with you becoming “one with the gods,” but in a much darker way. just like martin mantled akatosh, you mantle sheogorath. and it brings you satisfaction. it feels good to be on equal footing with martin. you decide that power and progression have value. just look at what that turns you into

idk, i just think in an era where pathologic is getting serious love, i think oblivion has a place. not despite, but because of its “flaws.” i know oblivion is the haha ugly meme game. it’s bethesda’s awkward teen phase between the narrative genius of morrowind and the mechanical genius of skyrim. but i like it!!!!!!!! ok!!!!!!!!!!!! it can and should be judged on its own merits, as a single text with something valuable to say

[9th-nueves]

Hot take maybe? Pathologic Classic isn't hard. Like, at the very least in the current year, it's FAR from the hardest game i have ever played... which honestly begs the question of why is it so infamous for it's difficulty outside the fandom.

Just to preface, i ABSOLUTELY believe the game is made to "fuck with you". Like that's just a core design aspect, it throws curveballs at you when you least expect it to keep you on your toes... but also to create the illusion of difficulty. The narrative and ambience of the game emboldens the (somewhat lacking) mechanical aspects, in a way, into looking way harder than they are. But once you get past that (and the first day) the difficulty of the game drops significantly and only spikes suddenly in certain days thanks to special story beats.

And, like in most games with a time limit, i would say it's the time mechanic that completely rules over the difficulty of Pathologic.

You are told to keep track of the clock from the very start, and that's very sound advice on day 1: you wake in the morning, so you don't have the usual 24 hours, and yet you have to complete quite a few quests, get familiar with the Town (and the game), and start collecting resources. Naturally, it takes while, and most likely you'll end up with barely a few hours (or minutes) left at the end of the day.

But for the rest of the game? I always had extra time. Finished every side quest with far more extra time to spare than i should have, sometimes having to even pass the time sleeping (not necessarily because i was exhausted) to get the plot moving. This was more noticeable on my Haruspex route, which wholly allowed me to go wandering into the steppe to look for herbs and yet still have time to cross the entire town again to get to the lair and throw my stuff into the chest to go bartering.

And this might seem rather inconsequential in regards to the difficulty of the whole game, but i would say it's actually crucial.

If there's time, there's a way. Every single one of your necessities becomes FAR more manageable the moment you realize this, because with *all* that free time on my hands, i dug into all the trashcans, bartered my soul away with the kids, sold bartered stuff i didn't need to get money for food, broke into houses, etc etc. Not even infection gets that bad when you have the time to go looking for antibiotics and bandages: i spent the extra hours of one single day as the Haruspex and got my hands in 18 pills (among a bunch of other stuff).

My want to not "waste time" (as in going from point A to point B and getting a fence in the face for trying to take a short-cut) arose mostly for a need to not waste real time, because the game is snail-paced. I frankly got bored and tired of walking around that much, specially in days where quests weren't THAT interesting as to get me thinking about them for half an hour.

The only truly difficult days are the shorter ones. When Daniil got knocked out trying to enter the Abattoir and i opened the status menu in front of Block's face and saw it was 2 fucking PM, i panicked. When Artemy got ambushed in Rubin's door and thrown into an infected jail hours later, i panicked. These days, if you didn't play your cards right before, you are fucked. There's barely any time to get resources, and you can scramble to get them, but you are going to be getting really close to failing your quests— if not outright doing so.

And sure, i did panic —the game has been telling me that time is very much important and that is probably the intended reaction— but i wasn't, really, in any danger of either failing a task, dying of exhaustion, or starving. The previous days had already allowed me to gather enough resources that i could just sprint from NPC to NPC solving all the quests and finish them up before the end of the day. The surprise factor is very strong in shaping your perception of the difficulty, spiking it unpredictably, but if you spent the slower days taking care of your needs and learning the mechanics there isn't much to fear. Even death is rather inconsequential when you have quick-saving.

The difficulty of Pathologic classic is a weirdly tall tale which i would be very grateful if someone explained the origin of. Ironically it really made the game take me by surprise: i expected the mechanics to be uncompromising and to scrape by the skin of my teeth, but the real difficulty was not zoning out too much during the ten minute walks across town just in case a plague cloud jumped in my face and learning how to decipher what the fuck these people are saying. Nobody told me the game had this much walking involved.

[sanpape]

hey! hey caeley!! i have a qastion for u if u don’t mind. i see you posting about fear and hunger a lot and i’m like 👀 cuz i do be liking rpgs and i do be liking horror…. could you tell me more about it without any spoilers? like, a bit about the gameplay, story, whether i need to get the first one to play… i googled a bit but i’m already running into spoilers so i was wondering if you could help out here since it seems to be an interest of yours?

Oooo you've come to the right place, I could talk about these games for hours dbsjsj

I'll be breaking this question down into two parts because the first and second games are sort of different beasts that appeal to different sensibilities? (Idk if that makes any sense)

Fear and hunger

f&h1 is a dungeon crawler rpg set in medieval England(?), Centering around the eponymous Dungeons of Fear and Hunger.

There are four playable characters which sort of fit into the classic "adventuring party" setup (a knight, a mercenary, a dark priest and an outlander) all of which have different reasons for coming to the dungeons. They all have vastly different play styles and that combined with the fact that nearly all the items in the game are found through rng AND the fact that rooms in the dungeon are randomly generated mean two people's playthoughs can look extremely different.

Gameplay wise, f&h forces the player to manage an ever dwindling sanity and health meter whilst fighting off various monsters with a j-rpg boss battle amputation mechanic. (Really though, every fight in this game is just as capable of killing you as the next, nothing is safe.)

I personally can't speak too much about the plot of the first game because I've never actually played it. But without spoiling anything, all the player characters are in the dungeon to find a man called Le'garde, the head of a mercenary group called the knights of the midnight sun who's trying to ascend into godhood.

Everyone has varying motives with what they want to do to Le'garde once they find him, the knight wants to smooch him, the outlander wants to kill him, the dark priest wants to know why Le'garde gets to ascend to godhood and not HIM (the vastly cooler, sexier, more religious person), and the mercenary just wants to get some cash to feed his family (I guess? I'm not totally sure)

Fear and hunger: Termina

Termina is the sequel to f&h1. It's set 700 years after the first game in post WW2 Prague. Which is a wild jump in time and space. But anyway.

In termina, you play as one of 8 playable characters: A doctor, a journalist, a boxer, a botanist, an occultist, a runaway soldier, a mage and a mechanic. The game starts with the player on a train to the city of Prehevil after having weird dreams about the moon forcing them into a battle royale style death game over the course of 3 days. When the player awakens, they find that their train is stranded in the forest on the outskirts of town and that the other passengers have had the same dream. Just when things couldn't get worse, the players find that the towns people have been struck by some weird illness, causing them to mutate into... Well. Several things? It's a surprise.

Gameplay functions very similarly to the first game, except without the randomly generated rooms. In fact, termina is pretty much devoid of dungeons all together. It's mostly just exploring a really fucked up city. It's kind of like if pathologic and silent hill had a j-rpg baby.

General recomendations and closing thoughts

1) read up on the warnings before you play the game, I'm pretty desensitized to horror but these games don't pull any punches and some of the more triggering content makes them uh... Sort of hard to recomend? Which is a shame because if you can look past it, they're insanely fun.

2) don't be afraid to pull up a guide, sometimes it's worth getting a little spoiled over.

3) I personally don't think you need to play the first game if dungeon crawlers don't appeal to you, but that's just me.

4) if you haven't already, check out zuldim's video on the games. It's pretty much spoiler free and does a way better job of explaining what's going on with these games than I ever could. I haven't even scratched the surface of all the gods, rituals and religions this game basically runs on.

[doomsayings]

It’s interesting to judge the quality of a video game versus the quality of more traditional stories such as movies/tv because a central axis by which I judge the quality of a video game is ‘immersion’ which I find to be a bit ephemeral/subjective/personal (though of course is impacted by things like writing/visuals/sound/gameplay, any of which can disrupt immersion). Skyrim is one of those games where posthumously and in-retrospect it’s easy to see where it fails namely repeating quest structure and the limited scope of characters BUT the whole of it is still incredibly immersive to me. Versus other open world games that came out around the same era. I’m thinking about how dragon age inquisition had various big world maps but each one was so lifeless and also it had complex and intricate character lore but didn’t dive deep enough for it to have an impact (the failed orlais court intrigue plot for example). Though you can argue the level of writing quality is about the same? id still rather revisit skyrim over dai

There are some games that are just objectively well written and have good stories but also what is able to sell the story is how the game translates the story - pathologic is a good example where the structure of the game literally reflects the story it’s trying to tell in a really purposeful way and ir also has such a distinct ambiance and play style I found really immersive. The witcher is another game where I think people unanimously agree the writing is really good and the world fleshed out but I was often bought out of my immersion by certain little things and actually never got into it. I don’t know where I’m going with this actually I’m just navel-gazing about my taste. The real problem with dragon age inquisition was that solas was there

[permian-tropos]

a controversial patho fandom opinion I have (important disclaimer: me not liking thing is not the same as me not liking person who likes thing! I am not criticizing fans for their preferences) is that I don’t really like grouping daniil with the other “emissaries of the ptb” ie. aglaya and block, for a great number of reasons, but I think the overarching one is that I don’t think the second half of pathologic, starting with aglaya’s arrival, is as good as the first in any of the routes I know well. the best late plague content in the entire canon by my standards is marble nest, which has a missing aglaya and a dead block. harsh as it is to say it, it’s like the story gets so much better without them

I don’t think they are as sympathetic as daniil either, mostly because he isn’t a career state actor like they are, because his work at thanatica was always radical and seems pretty good for humankind, and because our grasp of why block and aglaya are unfavorites of the ptb is so much murkier. we literally do not know the things they did that made the state mad at them? and this is the first question you’d ask about why they have the storylines they do.

not to mention the most salient point you can make about them is that they don’t defy their roles in the slightest. the ptb want to both preserve the town and destroy it, and aglaya and block do exactly what they are supposed to do from each side of the argument. aglaya says “protecting the town as a constituent part of our country is vital” and block says “I’ll use this big gun how I was told to use it”. the most believable depiction of who they really are, to me, is in the p2 opening scene where aglaya is dismissive and racist to artemy now that he’s not useful to her, and block is like “idk man I am just following orders”

the plot in p2 about Block’s soldiers kidnapping him because they love him too much is… maybe just a glimpse of another route’s quests but in Haruspex it’s so confusing and out of left field and I struggle to care because it’s irrelevant to everything you’ve been caring about all game

as I said, my feelings mostly come from a mild disappointment that pathologic’s best moments are frontloaded. there are some late game quests related to the military occupation of the town that I love (bachelor go crazy uwu) but aglaya’s quests are disappointing and block is not the interesting part of the army related quests. even lara trying to kill him is stifled by his blandness because he has no strong reaction to it or never learns of it at all. it’s hard to hold these two characters up as equals to daniil and so with a heavy heart I must say: I don’t get the appeal of “emissary trio” content

if someone wants to say why they DO like that grouping I am all ears though! discussion welcome

[katherinakaina]

I like how people are reacting to this post about Hbomb's Pathologic video both in the reblogs and in separate posts. The most common response is along the lines of 'yeah, I guess it's fine, but after actually playing the game I disagree with it a lot'. Same. I got the wrong impression about Daniil and about how difficult it would be. I probably have a dozen minor nitpicks here and there but they are just that, nitpicks. It's a good video.

What is notable to me about people's responses is that in criticizing the work for being inaccurate they tend to be inaccurate about said work. I suppose it's just easy to forget things. But like... You don't have to invent things that are wrong about the video. It kinda undermines your point.

Like, you don't have to kill Lika? Okay. Hbomb never said you have to. Weird that you got that impression. He literally just compares it to other video games where killing children is not even possible. Pathologic on the other hand provides you with incentive. Lika's got a shmowder on him. At this point you have no idea how many shmowders and panaceas you will have. You can always grind for them. It's not a huge loss. But it is an incentive. One of the strongest ones in the game. Not to mention the gun, that is nice to be able to sell on the first day.

Selling guns is also easy. When you get used to it. You can not appreciate how outside the box and uncomfortable that would be for a first time player who was not told all these hacks.

Speaking of. Hbomb oversells the difficulty, that's true. But also he told me how to play the game. How can I really say that it would be as easy if I had to figure everything out on my own? For example, in all the video I watched before playing there was no instructions on how to manage your infection level properly. I found myself almost dying from the plague (the blacking out effects the game has when you approach high levels of infection are pretty cool though, I'm glad I saw them) before I pieced together the perfect formula for infinite health.

And even then he literally acknowledges that the game is easy if you know what you are doing. He just marvels at the fact that it has this reputation. And I think it has it not because it's difficult but because it's tedious. Especially in the Clara's route where you have to just look for Albino without clues? Ugh. I like did it once and then I just looked up the map. And then it was easy. But I cheated though! If you've beaten p1 without using playthrough guides or advice even once and you still think it was a breeze then I bet you are in the minority.

Also ADHD? Makes it more difficult to concentrate maybe? Stop telling people that they suck at the game (that they've beaten btw) just because they found it challenging. It's mean and probably ableist.

Speaking of Clara. He does not underestimate her route. He said it was really satisfying. He's the only person I know to this day who got her ending. Which you can disagree with but he is allowed an opinion and he clearly thought about it. What else do you need?

He doesn't simplify the story. He says the game has a rich plot worthy of a novel with the equivalent amount of words to read. Other than that he just doesn't talk about it at all almost. Which is a shame. I also would have liked a story deep dive more. But also... Would I? It was so interesting to play pathologic even with all the spoilers because it is basically a book pretending to be a game. It is at least a thousand pages tome. I'm glad I experienced it for myself.

There are probably more takes out there but I think I made my point. Hbomb exaggerated a lot of things for comedic effect and it may be annoying. But you don't need to do the same? Or maybe you do? Well, then you can understand why he did what he did.

[masterthespianduchovny]

Ted Lasso’s reputation as a wholesome, nice, feel good show at times comes at its expense. This isn’t the fault of TL, but rather:

1. People who literally judge or write the show off based on these three descriptors. They think they know exactly what the show is about and how it’s going to play out and they don’t.

2. People who literally watch the show yet don’t understand it. These past weeks I’ve come to understand that some people who’ve watched the show either miss/don’t comprehend things OR fundamentally don’t understand the show.

I’m unsure if this is some type of media illiteracy for the second point, but I literally had to break down how the show works to someone who was shitting on it. Don’t get me wrong, people are allowed to dislike the show. That doesn’t bother me. However, when your criticisms either come from a lack of knowledge or the inability to understand how the show is structured, there needs to be an intervention.

In my honest opinion, I don’t think the foundation of the show is comedy nor is it drama, the genre of the show is influenced by Ted’s emotional state. It’s labeled as comedy for all intents and purposes, but observe how the tone/genre of the show largely matches Ted’s highs and lows. Some may say that’s normal, but I think there is a nuance here that’s missing.

A fan or fans pointed out that this season isn’t funny and that’s because Ted isn’t funny (again, the show is mimicking Ted’s emotional state); most of his jokes do not land. He’s trying way to hard and not at all at times, which is intentional.

He’s overdoing it and people are saying it’s bad writing when, in fact, it’s very good writing. We see more and more how Ted is missing things, behaving oddly around the therapist, internalizing shit, etc AND refusing help aka avoiding Rebecca presumably. Something is wrong and only one person notices this and Ted tried to pretend he was fine.

This show has noticeably become darker, which typically doesn’t happen to alleged feel good comedies. When it does, it’s like an episode or two, but in the case of TL, it’s steadily been doing this season the first episode of season 2. Furthermore, it introduced many of these themes and plot lines on season 1.

The show has also made us re-examine many “funny” moments and assess if there is a different context behind what we believed we knew and saw.

The show for the most part has been very internally consistent because it’s never been bound by it’s genre.

It’s quite ironic and sad that one of the most repeated and (at times inappropriately used) iconic lines “be curious not judgmental” is only applied to assholes and shit behavior rather than super nice/people pleasers, such as Ted.

It reminds me of the poem “Not Waving But Drowning”, which I’ll copy and paste at the end. The title is essentially “on the tin”, but basically it’s about someone drowning and people not going to help because they thought this person was happy go lucky and waving at them. The person didn’t have any help while they were in a crisis because people missed the signs. Which pretty accurately describes what’s going on with others see Ted MINUS Rebecca.

Lastly, the show is an examination and deconstruction of niceness for better and worse. What does it mean to be nice? What drives people in how they treat others? It’s not saying niceness is the cure for everything and that it will fix us, it’s saying we should start with kindness. We should try to understand what’s going on and be sympathetic.

Hell, I don’t even think it’s saying everyone can be redeemed (aka Rupert as of now). It’s saying that when we try to be better people, not immediately give up on someone, and understand that other people have different experiences, that is something that can help us connect and understand one another better.

But we are all flawed and it takes accountability and hard work to right out wrongs. Not all is forgiven just because we see the error of our ways. We have to actively towards forgiveness not matter how hard.

What’s interesting about Ted is that he’s the catalyst behind this change in AFC Richmond, however, he’s one of the fundamentally misunderstood people on the show, which is intentional on his end. He hides what’s really going on with him because not even he wants to see it. His kindness is driven by genuineness, but also trauma from his dad’s death and bullying. It’s gotten so bad to the point that it’s pathological for him to be nice to the detriment of himself as he suppresses his own traumas.

People (un) intentionally use him and don’t reciprocate most of the time. To be fair to them, Ted wants it that way. Except they also aren’t paying attention. Yes, everyone has their own problems, but how is no one curious about the man who is always “happy” that just got a divorce and is separated from his kid most of the time? Who flat out admitted to that he took a job across the ocean for a sport he knew nothing about to give his wife space? Or that he had a panic attack during a major game?

At this point, Ted isn’t hiding his struggles all that well, yet only Rebecca realizes that he isn’t well.

Ironically, some fans use Ted Lasso as their feel good show all while overlooking what the show is trying to say about certain behaviors and relationships.

Although it takes nothing to be nice, don’t make others responsible for your happiness whether you are the giver or the receiver. It does no one any good.

Ted thinks helping others and avoiding his own problems will make him happy and it doesn’t. Even when his marriage was good, it was a band aid for his problems. As a result, he started unraveling because he wasn’t fixing things or fixing enough things and people.

The show is saying a lot and through subtext and nuance, which is being ignored because the show isn’t what people assumed it was. This show doesn’t exist to help people escape from their own problems and/or the pandemic. Like, it’s nice that it did for some, however, we have to allow the show to tell the story it wants to tell. They never misled anyone about the nature of the show.

On the other hand, the show has helped people who see parts of themselves in Ted and either want to get help or finally understand that some of their behavior are maladaptive and detrimental to themselves.

Some people are seeing what they want to see and projecting on the show (as they do many) and are criticizing TL for what it isn’t, rather than understanding what it is.

TL has many compelling things to say, but since it isn’t behaving how people want it to, they can’t engage meaningfully with the show, which is unfortunate.

——-

“Not waving but drowning”

Nobody heard him, the dead man,

But still he lay moaning:

I was much further out than you thought

And not waving but drowning.

Poor chap, he always loved larking

And now he’s dead

It must have been too cold for him his heart gave way,

They said.

Oh, no no no, it was too cold always

(Still the dead one lay moaning)

I was much too far out all my life

And not waving but drowning.

[go-go-devil]

🍊🍑🍍

🍊 Who’s a character you don’t write for that often, but keep meaning to write for more? (They’re so interesting! But maybe you have trouble pinning them down, or keep getting distracted by another blorbo…)

Somsnosa for sure! Out of all the characters in hylics I honestly feel she is the most developed in canon, at least personality-wise, and even still I can find a lot of little quirks of hers in both games that make me speculate on what her backstory was like.

I've actually had a few idea for fics with her as the pov character, but the first one I tried writing came to halt after I no longer cared for the ending I had envisioned for it. However, I am actually planning on writing a hylics lore ficlet from her perspective (like the ones I did for Smuldunde and Pongorma). Of course I need to battle the writer's block I'm under at the moment, but I know eventually I will prevail!

🍑 If you could make a connection between your favorite character and another work you care about (whether a crossover/fusion or a wonderfully “pretentious” literary reference) what would it be? How would it work?

You know what? I take this opportunity to confess this one crazy Pathologic crossover fic idea I had developed in the back of my mind but haven't tried writing down yet

It's basically a very loose adaption of the album Metropolis Pt. II: Scenes from a Memory, but with the cast and setting of patho. The core concept is a split between the past (when the games take place) and the present (modern times). Daniil Dankovsky, after experiencing a series of vivid nightmares, comes to the conclusion that he is in fact the reincarnation of Artemy Burakh. He is compelled to journey to the Town to solve the mystery of his past life's murder, and as the plot unravels we find out that many other characters have their own past lives and secrets they wish to solve (or try their damnedest to move on from)

The main thing that's keeping me from even finishing an outline is because as of now the story's just way too convoluted to be satisfying for me. Well, that + the length it would most likely be, and I'm not sure how many patho fans listen to Dream Theater lol

🍍 What kind of AUs do you like? Are there any AUs you hate or just generally have beef with?

Well I do always love roleswap au's of any kind, same with roadtrip ones on the more fluffy side of things. Admittedly I don't read a ton of fanfics and thus haven't had time to really have all of these specific fic tropes down, so I can't say I necessarily have "beef" with any personally. I guess high school and coffee shop au's simply because those premises sound boring to me