Joel was never given a redemption (*Part II spoilz*) (Fan Creations)

by EffortlessFury @, Saturday, January 21, 2023, 21:38 (407 days ago) @ cheapLEY

Part II is one of the most masterfully executed experiences I’ve ever played, in terms of pacing and structure.

I get what you're saying here, but it's both right and wrong at the same time, IMO. In terms of how they wanted you to experience the arcs, and the emotions that would likely elicit initially, it was done properly. However, in terms of how palatable the concept would be received via said pacing and structure, and whether or not the emotions would continue to follow the arc they'd hoped for, I think the structure and pacing works against it.

It's sort of a catch-22 that comes with the story they were trying to tell. They wanted it to be difficult on an emotional level in that back half. They wanted to set you up to be the least prepared and willing to accept the back half. That was the challenge the game was putting forward at that point in time. The hope was that you would accept that challenge and ultimately begin to understand and see the full scope.

The issue is that some folks were not willing to accept that challenge and some folks didn't have a change of perspective even if they followed through. I'm sure the writers knew this was inevitable, and perhaps even common given the structure and pacing they chose, but the question is: was there a better way to pace and structure the game that still provides a similar emotional challenge, that may be less difficult to overcome but makes it easier for people to come around by the end? Which is more important? That more people see the truths behind the story even if it is less intense and less difficult for people to do so? Or that the difficulty in overcoming it is higher so that those who do overcome it need to have great perseverance and a more open mind?

I won't pretend to know what they wanted, nor what is the better of the options on the whole, but I will say that the way the story was structured and paced, I believe that it left a higher percentage of the audience who "got it" to already having been predisposed to, making it much more "preaching to the choir" than giving people a transformative experience. If the goal was to open more people's minds who might've been more closed to begin with, I believe this structure and pacing is the least effective way to do so.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread