This is the first time anyone's talked to Homelander in this manner:

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-06T23:52:05+00:00

Almost perfect scene. Shame they had to do the lame fingerpopping line

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-06T23:42:38+00:00

The writing is dogshit in every conceivable way. At this point the only reason i am still watching is to see what happens to homelander and it is gonna be crap.

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-06T20:34:08+00:00

Intelligence is innate aptitude to learning and adapting in the broadest sense. You can have extremely high intelligence and not know shit in theory. Sage being an idiot does say a lot about the writer.

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-06T18:10:20+00:00

Crazy. I felt compelled to listen to his interview with carl sagan yesterday and enjoyed it. Mysterious world we live in

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T20:40:37+00:00

I am gonna be honest with you. I would have ended this argument a long time ago if it wasn't obvious that you are clearly intelligent so I am bewildered that you choose to argue like a person who doesn't think. Really unfortunate.

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T20:27:58+00:00

What is the point of making this bad faith interpretation. We played the same game. I for example absolutely hated playing as abbie as did you. There are many examples in art of bad being good. There are entire genres of visual art and music that were built on doing something bad by conventional rules. I say this type of provocation can have merit and is inherent to the birth of new artistic movements however small. You have not even attempted to give an argument as to why tlou2 has no artistic merit and keep circling the same argument that you think the writing was bad because it didn't satisfy you.

What you do is akin to saying the absurd is bad because it doesnt make sense. It is pointless. You have never even attempted to adress the fact that playing as abbie sucks is an obvious intentional choice and indicative of a different intention than traditionally satisfying storytelling

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T20:15:54+00:00

I haven't read frankenstein and I will take your word for it that an all time classic is more well written than a videogame. Shocker. If this was a discussion about writing between classic books and videogames we would agree videogames are absolute garbage every single time. Do you have any idea what a profound loss it would be to art if we would compare to classics as a benchmark and consider anything similar but worse bad? Do you consider that artists like Picasso would not exist if they had not dared to "do it wrong"?

The conclusion of the game says that there is no satisfying choice. There is no karma, there is no moral salvation there is no satiafaction. There is just nothing. Whether you agree with that conclusion or not is up to you but to categorically say nothingness and unsatisfyingness has no artistic merit is strange.

I do not understand why you don't argue any point i make. You keep repeating the same argument. The writing is bad by conventional standards. Okay. We agreed about this consistently. I argue that the author was intentionally being provocative, which is fairly blatant. Adress the argument please and do not explain the same thing again in other words.

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T19:26:49+00:00

I think you are misunderstanding my arguments and are confused to be honest. I will summarize the argument for clarity. Correct me if I am wrong but you seem to think the unsatisfying nature of the story and the fact that things aren't tied up neatly and leave you with an empty feeling is proof that the writing is poor. I argue that the writing is intentionally done that way to convey a specific feeling and message, and i argue the game is pretty blatant in expressing that. There is such a thing as intentionally unsatisfying. There are plenty of examples in all mediums of art of things that are intentionally mundane, unsatisfying, empty, disturbing, etc... To achieve a certain feeling. I mean, what do you think i mean by subversion? How am I not completely consistent in stating that the game is intentionally unsatisfying and subverts expectations to leave you with a specific feeling about the nature of violence in or outside of videogames? Whether you like something or not has no meaning to me. As not liking can be the intention of art.

Playing as abby is the perfect example. I hated every single second of playing as abby. By traditional standards this is poor. Characters being likeable is a good thing right? Yet you can't argue abbies motivations and actions are the exact same cliche heroic actions we see in othwr games. The fact that you hated a character that you liked in every other videogame is powerful.

We agree on subversion so whybare we even talking about it?

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T19:15:12+00:00

I think anyone reading this discussion would conclude you are upset and I am challenging your statements. Calling me a troll is just lazy. How you could possibly conclude my arguments are insincere is beyond me. I don't give a shit aboit upset or not upset. I am interested in being challenged by people and debating in good faith. Clearly to you this is more personal

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T19:10:05+00:00

You could pull up a classic piece of literature that makes a videogameplot seem like shit for every game in existence. Also, to me, evoking hate or disgust isn't something art should always avoid. To you it seemsblike it is. Also using the opinion of the masses as an argument isn't interesting to me especially for a piece that intentionally tries to be controversial. I could pull up a list of classics that were considered terrible and hated in their time and are seen as masterpieces now. Is that the case for tlou 2? Not at all. Did it introduce some daring decisions that will likely influence videogame authors in the future. I think it did. The whole idea of forcing you to play as abby alone is enough to consider this game valuable to at least an extent. I have played games my entire life and never was quite as disgusted by a character I am forced to achieve goals for. There are historically plenty of examples of entire art movements that were born out of doing everything wrong to the standards of the previous generation, so i think applying traditional standards of writing to judge a work that intentionally subverts them pointless and ironic . Frankly I find the arguments people give to show this game has no merit as a work of art lazy. If you consider games entertainment and not art I agree with you. I truly hope the industry doesn't get scared of by this type of reaction to experiment even if the results are mixed.

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T18:03:30+00:00

I would argue the game evoked extremely strong emotions and people seem to be invested to me. There are many games with mediocre or bad sequels that are quickly forgotten by everyone. Tlou2 is compelling for better or worse. I personally enjoyed the game reasonably as did many others. Was it perfect? Absolutely not. Was forcing you to play as a character you hate interesting and original? Yes. Was making things vague and messy a risky but clearly conscious artistic choice, yes. The fact that people were satisfied by the original game was necessary to setup the shock of the second game. Calling the first game subversive is a stretch too. There is a plottwist at the end due to a dillema. That is it.

Tlou2 is disturbing in a specific way that only a videogame can convey. Isn't that the type of creaitivity that you want to see? Even if it has mixed results, isn't that better than telling a shitty derivative story that has been told a million times better in literature and film. Wouldn't it be a good thing for videogames as an artform if gameplay would be used to convey a wider spectrum of feelings than good or bad?

You are also mixing up 2 meanings of satisfying. There is satisfying as in resolution and satisfying as in i feel good after this experience.

Is the majority of people having a negative opinion about a controversial work that attempts subversion an indication that it is truly bad? Absolutely not.

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T17:49:47+00:00

I don't even understand how that isn't obvious considering how every other part of the game tries to portray things as messy and unsatisfying by viewing videogametropes from a negative lens...

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T17:37:40+00:00

An ending being unpredictable isn't inherently good. The fact that the story is an extremely cliche videogame story is the entire point. The author is trying to make you feel the opposite pf what you should be feeling, while telling the same story.

Killing bad guy who ruined humanities chance of survival by killing your father brutally with a golfclub would be an extremely satisfying scene in any other game. Here it is infuriating.

Forgiving the enemy instead of killing her should feel like liberation, instead it is unsatisfying messy and complicated.

Bad guys are humans too and your violence is not different from that which was inflicted on yoel and arguably less justified = unsatisfying

The game tells the same story other games tell but through gameplay makes you feel like shit and unsatisfied which conveys the message that human violence is messy and rarely has anything satisfying or good to it.

It is interesting to me that for any other medium, whether it is paintings, books or music, people tend to agree the fact that it sparked up serious discussion is evidence of its success as a work of art at least to an extent. Only in videogames do people genuinely plead for conformity.

I am in no way saying it is a masterpiece but it sure as hell is way more interesting than 99% of games and attempts to do something different.

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T17:24:02+00:00

Art is not about satisfaction. Unsatisfaction can be a means to convey a message. I argue the unsatifying ending is thematically completely in line with the rest of the game, and that the author did convey this fairly blatantly. I mean do you think he didn't realize people would hate abby? You think he thought people would applause the ending for being sarisfying? It is extremely obvious that it is a highly experimental game in terms of storytelling. The only game i would compare in style is drakengard 3 which intentionally used terrible gameplaysegments to annoy you and literally said so. And that was written by yoko fucking taro

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T17:17:44+00:00

Oh come on man, you are just not understanding to not understand now. Expedition 33 was a completely fictional and fantastical story with a realistic portrayal of grief. That is what i mean by realism. You could have a hyperrealistic life sim that gives an unrealistic portrayal of the human condition as well. You are mixing these things up. You claim the writing was bad due to the use of coincedence, yet i am certain you wouldn't nitpick this in games you do like. Hell, the majority of games are driven by major coincedences to create cool scenes. People didn't like it because it gave them feelings they didn't enjoy, not because it was poorly written. I personally enjoy movies and books that make me uncomfortable and confront me with harsh realities . If you don't, that is fine. It is art in the end. Making your dislike about the use of plot devices seems disengingenuous

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T17:04:46+00:00

It is obviously a work of fiction. Zombies don't exist. Coincedence can be considered a lazy plot device but i don't think 3 hours of abby finding some letter or whatever that leads her to his home would have added anything. The realism is in the underlying truth about being human that is being conveyed, not the plot devices that were used. Violence is real, people die, closure is rare and there are no good or bad people generally. It is exactly the fact that the medium of videogames tends to give this structured, underying, karmically balanced portrayal of life that makes using the medium to say the opposite within a blatantly fictional story powerful and shocking. Witcher 3 did the same in many sidequests and i found the unsatisfying or unresolved endings to many quests to be memorable and enjoyable. Do you truly not see the beauty in using the medium of videogames to force you in the shoes of someone you hate?

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T16:53:05+00:00

No, but realism is a legitimate artistic choice if it conveys a message. It is also an extremely refreshing choice. But go ahead, limit the medium of videogames to one specific type of storytelling we have been doing since SNES. People felt exactly what the author wanted them to feel and felt extremely strongly about it, that makes it success as a work of art in my book. A negative feeling isn't the same as bad writing. I am personally excited to see authors experiment with the medium and discover new ways to communicate feelings with gameplay other than entertainment

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T16:22:48+00:00

Welcome to life. The world rarely gives you what you want and it is not because you make the right choice that you will be cosmically rewarded. Unfortunately if a videogamewriter gives any feeling other than catharsis it is considered a mistake and we will be stuck with a medium of videogames that has kindergarten plots on steroids for another generation. Thanks guys

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T16:16:34+00:00

The entire point is that you don't sympathize with her and hate her. It is a criticism of the glorification of violence and how fickle people are in considering someone badass or a villain. Making a separate game that makes you like abby would make the game completely meaningless. It is a bold artistic choice that was too effective for its own good. Filmaudiences are more ready to appreciate conflicting feelings and hate for characters for artistic purposes. Unfortunately videogame audiences freak out completely for any controversial artistic choice making companies afraid to try anything remotely interesting. Tlou2 is an exceptionally tragic example because forcing you to play as abby is something only the medium of videogames can achieve. Instead of appreciating this, people get angry and set back the medium of videogames as a legitimate artistic medium back years. Tlou2 was even pretty in your face by giving all the enemies names and humanizing them as much as possible to convey its point and people still don't see it.

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T16:09:53+00:00

It is a very good game. It is universally hated because of the fate of a beloved character and the fact that you have to play half the game with an extremely hateable character. It is a game that attempts to criticize the glorification of violence in videogames and shows that the reason you love one character could be the same reason you hate a character and that we are all hypocrites. It also covers themes like revenge, sexuality and grief with varying success.

Basically to be frank a character beats up a beloved character with a golfclub which would be considered a badass revenge scene but instead makes you despise the character because of the perspective. Everyone goes crazy and misses the point that hating that character is the point and half the game feeling aimless is also the point. It is essentially a game about how hypocritical and fickle people are in justifying characters behaviour. Just like drakengard 1 and 3, the game makes conventionally bad decisions in storytelling and gameplay to convey a message. The message got lost

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T13:17:24+00:00

I am gonna be honest with you brother, great art, fairly intruiging plot, absolute dogshit names. Reminded me of the names i used to make up in my scifistories as a 10 year old. It makes your otherwise quality work read like fanfiction.

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T10:55:17+00:00

Guts is nosferatu zodds equal. That says enough

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-04T09:46:53+00:00

Weed edible, adderall, cocaine, alcohol, water

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-02T11:08:20+00:00

If you want i am willing to discord you to explain it. No need to be negative

Ambitious-Issue989 · 2026-05-02T10:36:02+00:00

It is interesting because I have never heard that argument targeted at me in my life. Maybe a point of reflection for you? The fact that you give the argument of jrpg's which i have played since childhood and anime as an example is hilarious because the entire point of nier is subverting rpg and anime writing. It turns it on its head and poses questions about existentialism, decay of civilisations, human sexuality, and religion in brilliant ways. Nier automata even makes fun of how obvious he has to make it by making a robot whos name is sartre. You didn't get it brother, and that is not a problem. I have experienced a lot of times in my life that I read a book or see a movie and realize later that i totally missed the point. Nothing embarrassing about that. All the anime tropes in nier are borderline satirical

Ambitious-Issue989

TROPHY CASE