#(A story that handles this type of narrative better is Alice Isn't Dead.

[hiveswap]

I was cooking just now and i had a realisation about spn & my mom told me that i am overthinking it like 2 sentences in. While i was making her pancakes. Anyway i'm fucking fuming so this is a post now.

Supernatural could have been an amazing critique of the american dream, and it's so close to actually being that. Only if it didn't lose track of itself over the 15 years it was airing.

Sam and Dean, and hunters in general, don't get to have the american dream. They don't get to have an education, a family, white picket fence suburban house, ect. (That is something that is actually said out loud!!! They long to have normal lives. Who's overthinking what here??) this is because of the way they were raised, the things they have seen, and all of the things that want them dead constantly.

They know what lies on the other side of the american dream, they know all of the ways that it fails people, and this follows them home whenever they try to settle down.

A lot of these threats are based on figures from religion (demons, angels, ect.) Which is fitting because American christianity is fucking vicious against anything it hates. Being part of a group of people that is hated by christians makes people's life hell. Actively resisting the conservative fundamentalist ideology that the usa was built on? Oh boy.

This is also part of why the people reading certain characters as queer are so fucking right. Making them part of an actually marginalised group instead of using Hunters as a stand-in for one would have delivered this message much better.

[dayables]

I'm glad you liked my yttd ramble the other day hahsjshsj. And I have some more stuff to say because this game lives rent free in my head.

I love the writing and storytelling from kimi ga shine, I really do but I think the way the later half of the second main game is structured, from a narrative point of view is kinda misleading. The whole focus of the last bit, with the Kanna vs Shin argument is on Kanna. Shin feels unsure and ungrounded so he resorts to interrupting her and abandons his calculated and calm facade he had until that point, which makes sense in a character point of view because it shows how he reacts when he is truly cornered. But it doesn't make sense considering afterwards the game clearly wants you to vote him. Honestly after playing the logic route the first time, the emotion route feels like a fever dream. It's all unicorns and rainbows and is such a contrast to the other option I wonder why we even had a choice in the first place. Unless further down the line there is some type of plot twist where our hope and optimism in the emotion route is punished I don't see why the game pushes so hard to make us feel guilty of killing Kanna in the Shin route. Honestly, after playing a chapter 3 full of internal conflict from Sara and other characters reacting to the traumatic nature of their situation, they seem so naive in the emotion route, idk if I'm explaining myself well enough. Like we fall into this weird bit where they will "for sure make it out alive" and Sara is determined to "bring everyone to safety", everything is "totally gonna be okay" and it just seems so... off? It makes no sense for them to think that right now, especially not after a failed escape attempt and seeing the way the floormasters and dolls can interfere with the game like Gashu did. (And knowing that even if they can take off their collars they will just be killed for desobying the rules from Shin's death)

On Kanna's death "cut scene" Sara literally thinks, and I quote "We need Sou to escape... / I... chose logic... / The worst possible choice..." what???? literally how? The whole point of this choice is that no matter which one it will always be a morally grey answer, there isn't a right or wrong here because either way you're killing one of your allies. And going back to the way the second main game is structured: the focus is all on Kanna so having Shin's death be the final arch for his character seems a bit out of touch. If we wanted that to be his big finale, if he's the one we're supposed to listen to, then why isn't he the one speaking for the majority of the time? The end of the discussion part is all about Kanna, Kanna's sacrifice, her whole speech about Kai's values and hope to defy the game and escape as a group, Kanna's wish to save Sou and Sara like she couldn't save her sister. Then why is listening the Kanna the worst choice? I think they were going for a "double final arch" per say, so you could in fact choose any of the two endings and still have a satisfactory conclusion but why did they have to push so hard afterwards for Shin's death to be "the right choice?". If that's just Sara's guilt speaking why doesn't she feel the same way (or at least the tiniest bit remorseful) for Shin?

And I know it's another level to the whole logic vs emotion, you either get a more satisfying narrative or a happier one but I don't think it had to be that different you know? That and the way the two deaths are handled makes it clear (even if unintentionally) that Nankidai gives priority to the emotion route. And when you can see that to this degree it makes me wonder why is this even a choice in the first place?

In conclusion, I seriously hope the emotion vs logic route isn't the thing that leads the player to a good vs bad ending. Or at least that it isn't as predictable as it seems right now, because if we are doomed right from the moment we chose to save Shin... idk it seems like a cheaper alternative to just have "save the child" as the objectively better ending. And again, I would personally make it so that the whole hero trope, happy-go-lucky nature of the characters in the emotion route would crumble somewhere during the final chapter, they can still have a happy ending but at least make it so that there are some consequences for choosing Kanna over Shin, literally anything at all. Them being suddenly almost unfazed by the deaths of their past allies is so out there it seems completely out of character. Like you said, Sara's stress doesn't come only from Joe's death and Shin's existence, it comes from leading a group of people to almost certain death, why is that no longer a problem? And if the difference between saving Kanna or Shin is more world building and knowledge later on then that needs to be a bigger difference between the routes because right now it's just Kanna good, Shin bad.

Anyways this turned out super long again but I just have. a lot of thoughts. I really do like Nankidai's storytelling, he does a very good job at it but when it comes to this? I think he made some questionable choices, I hope it becomes less linear in the future.

:DDD 

Once again, this is my thoughts explained so well, so I’m going to expand with my thoughts :)

First off,   the game clearly wants you to vote him. is very true. Shin’s death is nearly too perfect. Happy ending, a character arc wrapped up in a bow, constant praise for killing Shin and an even happier next part. A fever dream is the perfect way to describe the emotional route after playing logic  first. Everything about it, seems so off. 

What tipped me off, what really tipped me off, was Kanna’s  reaction to We hin’s death. Especially when compared to Shin’s. Whether or not it’s healthy is debatable but it is at the very least co-dependant. Kanna was manipulated by Shin. Whether or not she cared for him the same way he cared for her* is up for debate. 

*(we don’t have nearly enough context for a clear cut on her motives for her actions in part 2. Shin seems to be more concerned about saving Kanna specifically, while Kanna wants to save everyone including Shin. This can be linked back to her feelings of worthless. Yes, Shin is special to her, she mentions him and Sara. However, if they had not gotten close, Kanna likely would have made the same choice) 

Kanna, almost didn’t seem to care that he died, that everyone else might die (from her own perception of what could happen). For someone who is wrecked by grief and death so much, she’s, just as happy as everyone else? It’s so out of character that she isn’t a teeny bit distressed. 

See, the oh so happy attitude, part can be played off to Sara no longer being swallowed by self-loathing over Joe. She believes she can do it, and that will drastically affect how the part plays out. Yes, that is not where all her issues stem from. But, even that small weight could make all the difference in those moments.  I’m okay with that because Sara is allowed to be unreliable. It’s the others reactions. Everyone is just like her. It’s so surreal how everyone seems have gotten their own Joe AI through someone's death?

The narrative actively pushes that choosing Kanna is the better thing to do logically, while killing Shin is foolish and a choice made from emotions. We are pushed to kill Kanna then rewarded when we save her. It’s all so jumbled. It’s all so wrong. Now from a story telling perspective, it is okay to reward us for listening to our hearts. My issue with the emotional route isn’t that it’s one big happy family, (because how much of that is Sara believing that?). It’s the concept it’s pushed to be better, happier and the ending you want.  

As you said: Why is killing Shin a choice if it’s so bad? 

Is it to give the player an illusion of choice? 

It makes the emotion route so fever dreamish after finishing the emotion route. So jumbled. It makes it less satisfying but I believe it is for a reason. 

Right now everything is too linear. We either have the most important player in this game dead, or against us. It’s not like the Reko/Alice choice. This was so major, so why is it so linear? 

It’s unnerving, how happy the game is when the exact same thing is happening but bleaker when you save Shin. 

It’s terrifying. Everything is the exact same, but it’s not. And it’s something i’ve seen no one else who played emotion first get. Because I don’t know if you can exactly grasp how unnerving their happiness is (I obviously didn’t play emotion first but I’ve never seen anyone point it out despite most of tumblr playing emotion first) at first.

I am terrified of the emotional route for their being nothing bad. Because they’re are bad things and good things. in the logic route. 

Why is one route so happy and the other realistic? Why Nankadai? Why? 

I have belief that this is purposeful. I believe a game that creates dread so easily (look at how we’re all terrified of main games, Midori, part 3b)  and horror (just look at the deaths) is not creating the terror unintentionally. Especially when it’s so easy to miss. 

The fact it can be taken down to Kanna good, Shin bad, is a build-up for a crash. This game built up Kai surviving longer than the first game so well and look at how that went. It takes one slip and the happiness of emotion crashes down like glass. The logic route does not need to end happier, but all Shin needs is a push and the bleakness of Logic cannot hold up. 

These routes are resting on a needle. It takes so many mistakes (more than can be made in a single route) to unintentionally put them there. 

There is a lot of room for this to go wrong. You’re right, it’s bad writing right now for the routes that are so linear to be so different. It’s worrying, jumbled and does not make sense. I agree with you! The choices here are questionable. ^^, I just believe these are purposeful, especially when we don’t know what’s coming next